Pro-Slavery Christians

During the mid-1800s, the United States was deeply divided over the issue of slavery, a schism that extended into its religious institutions. Several major Christian denominations, particularly in the South, not only accommodated but actively defended slavery, using biblical interpretations and theological arguments to justify the institution. The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), Methodist Episcopal Church, South (MEC,S), Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America (PCCSA), and Southern dioceses of the Episcopal Church were among the most prominent in this regard. Analysis of primary sources and historical accounts yields a comprehensive understanding of how these religious bodies reconciled their faith with the defense of human bondage.

The Southern Baptist Convention: Founding and Defense of Slavery

The Southern Baptist Convention, formed in 1845 in Augusta, Georgia, emerged from a split with Northern Baptists over the issue of slavery, specifically whether slaveholders could serve as missionaries. The SBC’s founding was a direct response to the Triennial Convention’s refusal to appoint a slaveholding missionary, which Southern Baptists viewed as an infringement on their rights. This schism was not merely administrative but deeply ideological, rooted in a theological defense of slavery as a divinely sanctioned institution.

One of the most influential figures in the SBC’s early history was Basil Manly Sr., a prominent Baptist pastor and educator. Manly, who helped found Furman University and served as president of the University of Alabama, was a vocal defender of slavery. In a letter to his son, Basil Manly Jr., on February 5, 1861, Manly expressed gratitude for living to see Southern secession, which he believed preserved the institution of slavery. His writings, preserved in the Basil Manly Papers, reveal a worldview that saw slavery as integral to Southern society and biblically justified. Manly argued that slavery was consistent with Christian principles, citing Old Testament examples of servitude and New Testament passages like Ephesians 6:5-9, which instructs slaves to obey their masters.

Another significant figure was James P. Boyce, one of the four founders of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS), established in 1859. Boyce, a slaveholder, defended slavery as a “white man’s government” in an 1865 speech at the South Carolina state constitutional convention, arguing that white political control was necessary to maintain social order. The SBTS’s 2018 report on its history explicitly acknowledges Boyce’s role in providing moral and spiritual justifications for slavery, denying systemic abuses like violence and rape.

Sermons and Publications

Sermons and denominational publications further entrenched the SBC’s pro-slavery stance. The Southern Baptist newspaper, published in Charleston, frequently featured articles defending slavery. An August 4, 1860, issue argued that slavery was a God-ordained institution, beneficial to both enslavers and the enslaved. Similarly, the Tennessee Baptist on January 12, 1861, published pieces justifying secession as a defense of slavery, aligning the SBC with the Confederate cause. These publications often framed slavery as a paternalistic system, claiming it civilized and Christianized enslaved Africans, a narrative that ignored the brutal realities of the institution.

The Proceedings of the Southern Baptist Convention from 1861 and 1863 are particularly telling. At the 1861 convention, the SBC pledged support to the Confederacy, substituting “Southern States of North America” for “United States” in its constitution. The 1863 meeting in Augusta, Georgia, included resolutions affirming the “noble” cause of the Confederacy, explicitly tied to the preservation of slavery. These documents reveal how the SBC integrated its religious mission with Southern nationalism, viewing slavery as a cornerstone of both.

Methodist Episcopal Church, South: A Schism Over Slavery

The Methodist Episcopal Church, South, formed in 1845 after a split with the Northern Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC), was another denomination that robustly defended slavery. The schism was precipitated by the 1844 General Conference’s decision to ask Bishop James O. Andrew, a slaveholder through his wife’s inheritance, to desist from his episcopal duties. Southern Methodists saw this as an attack on their regional identity and formed the MEC,S to protect their right to hold slaves.

James O. Andrew was a central figure in the Methodist split. His refusal to resign, backed by Southern delegates, underscored the denomination’s commitment to slavery. Andrew’s defense was rooted in the argument that slavery was a legal and socially accepted institution in the South, and the church should not interfere with civil law. His stance was echoed by other Southern Methodist leaders who framed slavery as a matter of personal and regional autonomy.

John H. Caldwell, a Methodist minister in Georgia, provides a nuanced case. In 1865, Caldwell preached sermons in Newnan, Georgia, decrying the abuses of slavery and suggesting that its destruction was divine judgment for Southern sins. However, his views were met with hostility, and the Georgia Conference of the MEC,S condemned his sermons, reassigning him to a less desirable circuit. Caldwell’s subsequent departure to the Northern MEC highlights the rigidity of the MEC,S’s pro-slavery stance, even post-emancipation.

Sermons and Publications

The Richmond Christian Advocate and North Carolina Christian Advocate were key platforms for pro-slavery rhetoric. An article in the Richmond Christian Advocate on May 2, 1861, defended slavery as a biblical institution, arguing that it was consistent with Christian paternalism. The North Carolina Christian Advocate on January 8, 1861, similarly supported secession as a means to preserve slavery, aligning the church with Confederate ideology. These publications often emphasized the duty of enslaved people to obey their masters, drawing on Colossians 3:22 and other scriptures, while portraying enslavers as benevolent stewards.

The Minutes of the Alabama Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South (December 1860) reveal the denomination’s institutional commitment to slavery. The conference passed resolutions affirming the church’s role in supporting Southern social structures, including slavery, and encouraged ministers to preach obedience to civil authorities. This stance was reinforced during the Civil War, as the MEC,S supplied chaplains to Confederate armies, with figures like John Berry McFerrin noting the spiritual revivals among soldiers, often framed as divine approval of the Southern cause.

Presbyterian Church: Theological Rigor and Slavery

The Presbyterian Church split in the 1830s and 1840s into Old School and New School factions, with the Southern branch forming the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America (PCCSA) by 1861. The PCCSA was explicit in its support for slavery, using rigorous theological arguments to defend it as a divine institution.

James Henley Thornwell, a leading Southern Presbyterian theologian, was perhaps the most articulate defender of slavery within the PCCSA. In his Fast Day Sermons (1860), Thornwell argued that slavery was a “divinely sanctioned” institution, rooted in the Bible’s recognition of servitude. He posited that slavery maintained social order and was a moral good, protecting the enslaved from barbarism. Thornwell’s sermon, “The Sin and the Curse; or The Union, the True Source of Disunion,” delivered in 1860, framed Northern abolitionism as a threat to biblical truth and Southern civilization.

Thomas Smyth, another prominent Presbyterian, echoed Thornwell’s views. In his 1861 sermon, “The Sin and the Curse,” Smyth argued that the Union’s dissolution was necessary to preserve slavery, which he saw as a biblical mandate. He claimed that Northern interference violated God’s design for social hierarchy.

Sermons and Publications

The Southern Presbyterian and Christian Observer were key outlets for pro-slavery theology. The December 15, 1860, issue of the Southern Presbyterian defended slavery as a biblical institution, citing Genesis 9:25-27 (the curse of Ham) as evidence of divine approval for racial subjugation. The Christian Observer on January 10, 1861, similarly supported secession as a defense of slavery, framing it as a Christian duty to resist Northern aggression.

The Minutes of the Synod of South Carolina (November 6, 1861) and the Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States (1861) explicitly endorsed the Confederate cause, linking it to the preservation of slavery. These documents reveal a denomination deeply invested in the Southern social order, with clergy like Thornwell and Smyth providing intellectual heft to the argument that slavery was God’s will.

Episcopal Church (Southern Dioceses): Tacit Support and Social Stability

The Episcopal Church did not formally split until the Civil War, but its Southern dioceses were generally supportive of slavery, emphasizing social stability over moral critique. Unlike the Baptists and Methodists, Episcopalians were less likely to produce fiery pro-slavery sermons, but their acquiescence reinforced the institution.

Leonidas Polk, a bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana, was a notable figure. A slaveholder and Confederate general, Polk embodied the Southern Episcopal alignment with the planter class. His writings, including pastoral letters, avoided direct condemnation of slavery, focusing instead on the church’s role in maintaining social order. Polk’s dual role as bishop and military leader underscored the church’s integration with Southern society.

Philip Slaughter, an Episcopal priest, delivered a sermon titled Coercion and Conciliation in 1861, preached in a Confederate camp in Virginia. Slaughter argued that slavery was a legitimate institution, sanctioned by scripture and necessary for Southern prosperity. He framed the Civil War as a defense of Christian civilization against Northern radicalism.

Sermons and Publications

The Journal of the Thirty-Fifth Annual Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Mississippi (April 1861) reflects the Southern dioceses’ stance. It endorsed the Confederate cause and implicitly supported slavery by advocating for the church’s role in upholding Southern institutions. While Episcopalian sermons were less explicit than those of Baptists or Methodists, their silence on slavery’s moral failings was a form of tacit approval, aligning with the planter elite’s interests.

Theological Arguments and Biblical Justifications

Across these denominations, the defense of slavery relied on a shared set of theological arguments. The most common was the appeal to biblical precedent, particularly Old Testament passages like Leviticus 25:44-46, which permits the ownership of slaves, and the curse of Ham (Genesis 9:25-27), interpreted as a justification for racial slavery. New Testament texts, such as Ephesians 6:5-9 and Colossians 3:22, were cited to emphasize the duty of slaves to obey their masters. These interpretations ignored countervailing scriptures, like Galatians 3:28, which declares equality in Christ.

Southern clergy also framed slavery as a paternalistic institution, arguing that it Christianized and civilized enslaved Africans. This narrative, evident in the writings of Manly, Thornwell, and Boyce, portrayed enslavers as benevolent stewards, a claim that glossed over the systemic violence and exploitation of slavery. The defense of secession further intertwined religious and political ideologies, with sermons and publications framing the Confederacy as a Christian nation defending God’s order against Northern abolitionism.

Dissenting Voices and Context

While these denominations were predominantly pro-slavery, dissenting voices existed. In the MEC,S, figures like John H. Caldwell challenged the institution, though they faced significant backlash. In the SBC, some border-state congregations were less enthusiastic about slavery, reflecting regional variations. The Episcopal Church’s national structure allowed for some Northern bishops to critique slavery, though Southern dioceses remained aligned with the planter class. These dissenters, however, were outliers in a region where economic dependence on slavery and cultural norms reinforced pro-slavery theology.

The broader socio-political context is crucial. The South’s economy relied heavily on enslaved labor, and the planter class held significant influence over religious institutions. Denominations like the SBC and MEC,S, with their roots among yeomen and planters, were particularly susceptible to these pressures. The Second Great Awakening, while fostering evangelical fervor, also reinforced hierarchical social structures in the South, as churches adapted their message to align with the interests of their congregants.

Lasting ImplicationsThe pro-slavery stances of these denominations had profound consequences. The SBC’s 1995 resolution apologizing for its role in slavery and racism acknowledged the “bitter harvest” reaped from its past. The SBTS’s 2018 report further detailed how its founders’ defense of slavery shaped the institution’s early history, with figures like Boyce and Manly advocating white supremacy well into Reconstruction. The MEC,S’s loss of African-American members post-emancipation, as they joined independent black denominations like the African Methodist Episcopal Church, reflects the alienation caused by its pro-slavery stance. The PCCSA and Southern Episcopalians, while less documented in later apologies, contributed to the Lost Cause ideology that perpetuated racial inequality.

Epilogue

The Southern Baptist Convention, Methodist Episcopal Church, South, Presbyterian Church in the Confederate States of America, and Southern Episcopal dioceses played significant roles in defending slavery in the mid-1800s, constructing a theological framework that portrayed slavery as biblically sanctioned and socially necessary with arguments were rooted in selective biblical interpretations and paternalistic rhetoric. The legacy of these stances persisted, shaping racial attitudes in the South and necessitating later reckonings.

Since 1865, the pro-slavery denominations have had varied fates. As of 2024 the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC). which viewed slavery as a cornerstone of both its religious mission and Southern nationalism, and didn’t apologize for it until 1995, had nearly 47,000 churches and roughly 12.7 million members (a decline from its peak of 16.3 million in 2006, though the rate of decline has slowed in recent years). The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the US, though it has faced recent declines and lost many African-American members post-emancipation to independent Black denominations like the African Methodist Episcopal Church.

The MEC,S, which merged into the Methodist Church in 1939 and later the United Methodist Church (UMC) in 1968, saw initial growth but lost nearly 75% of its 200,000 African-American members by 1866, contributing to the rise of the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church. As of 2024, the UMC had approximately 4.2 million members in the United States.

The PCCSA rejoined the Presbyterian Church in the US, which later merged into the Presbyterian Church (USA), with about 1.7 million members today but declining since the 1960s. Southern Episcopal dioceses, reintegrated into the Episcopal Church, had 1.5 million active members by 2023, also declining since the 1960s.

Today, some conservative Christian organizations, like PragerU, have been criticized for producing educational materials that critics, such as Harvard historian Annette Gordon-Reed, argue downplay the horrors of slavery. The Trump administration’s partnership with PragerU to create school curricula is an attempt to “whitewash history” under the guise of making white children feel better, suggesting a sanitized version of slavery’s legacy. While PragerU is not exclusively a Christian organization, its content often aligns with conservative Christian values and is used in some Christian educational settings.

There is a trend among some conservative Christian communities to reframe historical narratives, often citing biblical or moral arguments to downplay systemic racism. No prominent Christian pastors, theologians, or denominational leaders in 2025 are directly cited in available sources for explicitly whitewashing slavery. Instead, the issue appears more in political rhetoric, such as Trump’s August 2025 social media post criticizing the Smithsonian for focusing on slavery’s horrors, which some Christian conservatives echoed. This aligns with efforts by some Christian schools or homeschooling curricula to emphasize “positive” aspects of American history, potentially glossing over slavery’s brutality.