This blog contains the innermost thoughts, feelings, and interpretations of students at Columbus State University who are studying early African American literature.
Rev. Peck and Carlton differ on the importance of the Bible/Christianity to the slaves in very specific ways. Rev. Peck believes that there should definitely be slavery, but that the slaves should get the "gospel" as well. It is as if he is saying that if the slaves get the "gospel" then they will become better slaves. He also emphasizes the fact that the slaves have no rights, but that slave owners have power to do whatever they so choose. In this manner, Rev. Peck is saying that no man has rights but he has the power to treat the slaves however he chooses. Carlton on the other hand, believes that all men are equal. He repeatedly refers to the Declaration of Independence to emphasize the equality of all men, only to be disputed by Rev.Peck. Carlton was also not a big supporter of the Bible due to his following Rousseau but, Rev. Peck debates that by stating, "Nothing ever stood long against Christianity". In short, these men could not agree because Carlton followed his heart, while Rev. Peck was a "strong follower" of the Bible. One thing that stood out is how Carlton said he was not a big fan of the Bible or slavery, therefore he was not as contradictory as Rev. Peck. If Rev. Peck was such a Christian and wanted everyone to hear the "gospel", how could he not think every man is created equal. Georgiana, who is Rev. Peck's daughter actually agreed with Carlton. She mediates the disagreement by saying "that which is good does good, and that which is evil does evil" and ties it in with slavery being evil, thus basically saying what her father is doing is evil.(in my opinion)The main thing stated by Georgiana that summed up the argument was " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. This single passage of Scripture should cause us to have respect to the rights of the slave." Its funny how she uses quotes from the Bible to agree with Carlton who doesn't necessarily agree with the Bible, but yet her father is a strong believer of the Bible and she uses it to prove his way of thinking wrong. This entire passage just reveals the theme of hypocrisy that is presented in all of the narratives. Now something I found rather confusing is how did Carlton get the "right of man to his liberty" from Rev. Peck's initial statement. I thought that Rev. Peck was just stating that he was about to implement the slaves going to church and doing things his way. I'm guessing that Carlton took his statement as Rev. Peck trying to "mold" the slaves and make them think exactly the way he thinks therefore making them better slaves, which eliminates their natural rights as men. If anyone can understand what I am saying please give me some type of an explanation.
Reverend Peck thinks of himself as a good Christian man who owns slaves. Raised and educated in the North he feels superior to the southerners. It doesn't take long for him to fall into the practice of slavery. He thinks that he is doing the slaves a favor by keeping them well fed, well clothed, and not overworked; and he is feeding them the gospel because “the gospel is calculated to make mankind better, and none should be without it (76).” But the gospel that he is feeding the slaves is a gospel that preaches that slavery is God-ordained. This is not the true gospel as Georgiana points out.
Mr. Carlton is a visitor from the North who enters the picture with a fresh eye on slavery. He believes in the liberty of all men and the inalienable rights of all men, black or white. Carlton points out that his “conscience is his Bible” and only aims to do what is right.
Georgiana mediates their agreement by voicing her opinion that the “Bible was both the bulwark of Christianity and of liberty(78).” She goes on to speak boldly about the Bible not supporting slavery. Georgiana is a strong, educated young woman. W.W. Brown uses her to voice the abolitionist opinion of slavery and compare and contrast the evils of the peculiar institution. She is a strong woman because she stood up to her father's beliefs and challenged his authority. The Grimke sisters come to my mind when I think about Georgiana because they chose to leave their family when their views on slavery no longer matched their parents.
Reverend Peck thinks his slaves are superior to other non Christian slaves. After spending time on both Rev. Peck's plantation and that of another non-Christian slave holder's plantation, Mr Carlton sees no difference between the two types of slaves because they are both uneducated as to the real meaning of Christianity and education itself. Neither are better off and slavery has an even more sour taste to Carlton.
Now something I found rather confusing is how did Carlton get the "right of man to his liberty" from Rev. Peck's initial statement. I thought that Rev. Peck was just stating that he was about to implement the slaves going to church and doing things his way. I'm guessing that Carlton took his statement as Rev. Peck trying to "mold" the slaves and make them think exactly the way he thinks therefore making them better slaves, which eliminates their natural rights as men.
I understand what you are saying, and I think you get it. Peck, a typical paternalistic slaveowner has these religious plans for the slaves. Carlton is not religious and wonders if Peck has any concern at all for their natural rights.
Carlton and Reverend Peck differ on their views of the importance of the Bible mainly because Peck reads the Bible as condoning slavery and Carlton is not a Bible follower and is more concerned with the proper treatment of mankind. Peck considers himself a strong Christian and a strict Bible follower. I had a hard time trying to figure out exactly what he meant in his spiel about rights and wrongs, but what I think he is saying is that man does not have certain “natural rights” but is only allowed the rights given to him by God. Furthermore, he is only allowed these rights when he strictly obeys the Bible and fulfills his Christian duties. In Peck’s reading of the Bible, Blacks are not given the same rights as Whites, as Blacks are ordained to be slaves. He believes that Whites are fulfilling their Christian duty by treating their slaves well and preaching the Word to them, and Blacks do their duty by obeying their masters. Peck believes the Bible is important to the slaves because it shows them the proper way to behave and fulfill their duties as slaves. By teaching the slaves the Word of God, Peck is also fulfilling his duty as a good Christian slave owner. He tells Carlton, “I am one who looks after my people, in a moral, social, and religious point of view.” (80) In his mind he is doing right by God. Carlton concerns himself less with the teachings of the Bible and more with compassion for his fellow man, black or white. Carlton believes that all men are equal and all men have natural rights regardless of race. He uses the Declaration of Independence as defense for his argument, but is quickly shot down by Peck who points out that the Bible came long before the Declaration of Independence and is the ultimate guide. Carlton can not agree with slavery as he says, “my conscience is my Bible.” (78) Georgiana, like Carlton, disagrees with slavery, but uses the Bible as her defense against slavery. She reads the Bible in a different way from her father. She points out that whatever promotes the will of God must be good, and whatever goes against the will of God must be evil. She says, “whatever in its proper tendency and general effect destroys, abridges, or renders insecure, human welfare, is opposed to God’s will and is evil.” (79) Therefore, in Georgiana’s eyes, the Bible proves that slavery is evil, and goes against God’s will, and should be abolished. She also brings up the passage of the Bible which says, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” which in itself opposes the practice of slavery. Georgiana’s ideas succeed in touching her father’s heart and also in helping Carlton view Christianity differently. Georgiana’s reading of the Bible is a more acceptable form of Christianity for Carlton.
Rev. Peck and Carlton differ greatly on the idea of Christianity and the Bible with the slaves. While Carlton does not greatly value/support the importance of the Bible as Rev. Peck does, while they are feeding different purposes to their ideas, both men seem to believe greatly that religion is an important thing to teach to slaves. while Rev. Peck seems to display a personal view that while his slaves should be well fed and not overworked and fed the gospel just as much as the overseer, his intentions felt to be more of a purpose and means to keep the slaves content in their position and make himself feel better that the slaves weren't necessarily neglected the gospel. "The gospel is calculated to make mankind better and none should be without it," seems to show the sense that while all of mankind (including slaves) should be included when teaching the gospel, it is still with the intention of keeping every person in their designated station in life, not that all men are equal. Carlton on the other hand shows that he feels an abolitionist belief toward this situation and focuses more on the Declaration of Independence as means for his idea that all men are equal and that the Bible shouldn't be taken quite as seriously as Rev. Peck did. Georgiana's quote of the scripture "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" seems to give a main point to both sides of this situation in that she is using part of the scripture that Rev. Peck is so vehement about to agree with Carlton's view that all men are created equal." funny thing is that Rev. Peck seems to want to push her aside when simply commenting that she is an abolitionist. Although somewhat aside, I do find it interesting that in the beginning of the next chapter, Rev. Peck shows how he is very aware and looks down upon any person due to their specific class when talking about the poor whites and seems to classify them and the slaves almost together.
Reverend Peck and Carlton differ in their views on the Bible and Christianity because Reverend Peck could be considered religiously conservative, while Carlton is more a non-religious free thinker. Peck believed his "people" should be taught the teaching of Christianity because "The gospel is calculated to make mankind better, and none should be without it. Ironically, when Carlton asks him what his beliefs are on all men having liberty, he tries to justify slavery by saying there is no such thing as "natural rights"; even Adam and Eve had restrictions placed on what they could do.
In contrast,Carlton believes there is no difference between "black" and "white" liberty; the Connecticut constitution and the Declaration of Independence make no distinction, why should they? Unlike Reverend Peck, Carlton doesn't rely on the Bible for what he believes to be right or wrong. Instead he relies on his "heart and his conscience".
After hearing their arguments, Georgiana profoundly states that Christians should judge what is good or evil by what God says is right, according to his will written in the Bible. If it helps mankind then they are to promote it; but if it damages mankind, then that means it is against the will of God and they should not promote it. In conclusion, Georgiana believes God would not agree with condemning another human being to lifelong bondage, because a Christian is to love everyone. She ends her argument by saying, "True Christian love is of an enlarged, disinterested nature. It loves all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, without regard to colour or condition". Reverend Peck was very moved by the speech, although he disagreed, and Carlton began to view Christianity in another light.
First off, I must say that I am extremely upset at this chapter (okay so I was upset since I first started reading this material) but the first thing which came to my mind when I was reading what Mr. Peck had to say about servant submission for the glory of God and Christianity was Joi's comment made at the very beginnings of our class. Something about Christianity was shaped as a means to keep slaves in submission so that slave-owners could manipulate them in whatever/whichever way possible; hence, preventing an uprising of such peoples and the continuation of a perfectly good agricultural system. I say, bulls***! And for Mr. Peck to insist that natural rights were first limited to Adam and Eve (while in the garden of eden)then stripped away from them after "disobedience" is ludicrous and it supports the Religious theories regarding the promotion of slavery perfectly. Carlton, who I favored very well, decided to take it upon himself to avoid all Biblical theories which Peck brought up and relied more so upon the philosophical writings of great thinkers (i.e. Voltaire who was a man of Color ya'll) which supports that there is no difference between the liberties of both white and black men.
Upon Peck's foul argument considering the credibility of the Bible over that of the Declaration of Independence, I had to remind myself that all those claims are not written in the bible at all, and are, just as the "poor servants" were saying at the end of this chapter, a means to "try to fool de black people." Exactly Peck's point. And of course he was upset when his educated daughter put him in his place by defining Christianity with the famous line: "Thou shalt love they neighbor as thyself." This example of a white female sympathizing with the slave is common among the literature and arguments we have read in this class so it would make sense why the daughter wanted to catch her father in his wrongs.
Some one had to do it. I'm just disappointed that his sermons did not stop. I am however, content with the reaction the slaves had towards such teachings.
Reverend Peck and Carlton are on total ends of the spectrum when it comes to slave relations and religion. When I began to read the section about religion and its relation to slaves, I thought that Peck may have had a touch of abolitionist in him because he referred to his slaves as “people” rather than cattle. I thought that it was commendable of him to view his property as actual human beings and wanted to clothe, feed them, and give them the teachings of the bible. While I continued to read however, I became appalled when he spoke about the bible and its justifications for slavery. He says that the gospel should be used to make mankind better, but yet calls Adam and Eve condemned beings. He goes on to imply that Adam and Eve had human rights as long as they were in obedience to God’s wishes and wills. But when they disregard his wishes they disembarked on these rights and became savages?! So from my understanding, Adam and Eve are compared to his “people” whereas he is compared to God. In this scenario, his slaves will be treated well and lead a great life as long as they are obedient just as Adam and Eve did before they ate the apple. BUT if a slaves was to not follow his rules, they would become classified as dishonorable and therefore forfeit all human rights and be treated as such. Carlton on the flip side of things thinks that the ideas of his peer are outrageous. He is not as “holy” as Reverend Peck and insists on using his “heart as his guide and his conscience as his bible.” Carlton believes that all men are created equal no matter the skin color and they are subject to the same liberties. Carlton’s main belief is to do right by mankind. Whereas Reverend Peck uses references to the bible and the declaration on Independence to validate his ideas and beliefs about slavery and slave owners, Carlton uses his argument solely on morals. He feels that mankind should do on to others what they would want done to them. He believes that slavery is unfair and unmoral and states very bluntly that he can not see eye to eye with the reverend. I don’t feel that Carlton believes Christianity is important to the slaves because he does not even take Christianity serious himself. I think that he feels Christians are hypocrites by practicing one thing and doing the complete opposite. I think that he feels these Christians are manipulating the word of the bible to stimulate their own needs, and that is why he stresses that his conscience serves as his bible. As far as Georgiana’s role in the argument, I think she plays a significant part. For one, she disagrees with her father in front of a guest. This is an important event because at this time women rarely had a voice or say so in any type of conversation and for her to totally disagree with her father showed her independence and her will to stand up for what is right. My favorite passage in the section about her would be “I am a native of the south, I am of education and sympathy of the northerner.” With this she tells her father she is anti-slavery. I love how she throws the bible into play during her scene by saying that you should do on to you neighbor as you would want them to do onto you. I think by making such radical statements she is giving her father a run for his money and a lot to take into consideration.
John Peck is a Northern Southerner, and I'm sure that he still considers himself as such due to the fact that made a point of asking Carlton to brag about how well he treats his slaves as opposed to the Southerners. He also calls his slaves his people. He taught them the gospel in hopes that he was making their lives better as well as making them better human beings. He almost acts as if he believes that the slaves are as Adam and Eve; having only the rights that God gave them, and he almost has to reteach them of those rights,the rights that aren't inalienable, but God giving and nothing else, almost as if he was doing them a favor. I don't know he is completely for slavery, since they're his "people", but I'm sure was only against it in name, maybe to keep face in the North, and to his vistors. He seems to think that they shouldn't share the same rights as whites for the fact that they are/were ignorant of the word of God. He goes on to say "Our rights are there established (in the bible), but it is alyways in connection with their duties. Since slaves are the property, they should be treated as such, with the rights that their duties as property allows them.
Carlton was educated in the same manner as Peck, but stayed in the North. I think that gave him a different view on some things that at one time they could have agreed on, it's not the first time they've had this human rights decision because Peck says "again" when Carlton speaks of the "right of man to his liberty". Carlton is a follower of Rousseau, a French philosopher, who believed that a man doesn't start of good or bad, but is made that way by the society that they live in. The man is versed in French philosophy and knows the Declaration of Independence (which was influenced by the French Enlightenment movement). All of that gives Carlton the opinion of someone with a well rounded educationin matters other than the Bible.(Also, the irony of the two men battling about the rights of slaves and quoting the Declaration of Independence, and one of them holding the purchase papers of the mistress to the author of that very document, was not lost on me). Carlton doesn't see a problem with slaes and white men enjoying the same rights because his philosophy has been influenced and developed by outside forces (European forces at that). I'm sure he does have a knowledge of the Bible, but doesn't let it lead his life as Peak does; he finds that Enlightment philosophers more pleasing to his soul. He'd rather be free thinking in his opinions of right and wrong, and slavery in his eyes is a wrong because it conflicts with the slaves' rights as human beings.
Thats the main difference between their two views. Peck believes that slaves have only the rights that god gave them. Nothing more, nothing less. He thinks that by teaching them the gospel makes them more favorable in the eyes of God. Carlton believes that all men, no matter color or station, deserves the same rights as others. It's not their fault that they are, for a lack of a better word, uneducated about their rights; they know what they are told, and they are merely victims of a society that keeps their rights non existent.
Peck's daughter, Georgiana, having the opportunity to experience a northern education with the benefit of of a southern upbringing, could see both sides of the argument. She agress with her father on the duties of man to "produce, secure, and extend human welfare in order to be in God's good graces, but then she switches sides by adding that "to destroy, abrige, or render insecure human welfare is opposing God's will. She quotes a verse from the Bible, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself". By doing so, she gives fire to Carlton's agruement, using her father's Bible to in a way back up the opinion of a man that believes in reason and reason alone. She adds that that particular "passage of Scripture should cause us to have respet to the rights of the slaves." Peck probably was not very happy at the opinion his daughter expressed, but as his only child, she could do no wrong. I feel though, that both of the men in a way dismissed her opinion because nothing else of her argument was said, though it ended theirs.
Reverend Peck preaches the gospel of slave justifcation while Carlton accepts such a gospel, but rejects the source of it itself. Georgiana is the happy medium who sees Christianity as a very powerful weapon against slavery. Peck honestly percieves himself as a good wholesome man because of the treatment he gives his slaves. He's probably a heavy reader of The Old Testament. Peck seems to think it's okay to have slaves as long as you treat them in a Christian manner. Peck believes that his slaves are somehow "better off" because they're owned by a Christian and are superior to non-Christian slaves. Time and time again he invokes the Bible to justify slavery and goes into a long tirade about why slaves should be obedient and accept their lot in life.
Carlton has probably heard these arguments all his life and simply grown tired of the idea of Christianity period. I would see him as more of Deist given the authors he cites to have read and began his assertion of natural rights. Carlton argues for the freedom of the slave, but not with the tools of Christianity. He is not like many who would use the Bible as a rhetorical tool, but he simply rejects it all together. His belief is that without the Bible in the equation man would come to realize that it is wrong to own another human being.
Georgiana is by far the most courageous of the three characters because she's a woman who stepped into the debate of two men. Not just any two men though. It was her father and a friend. That in The South would have been unheard of. Yet, she offers up an argument far superior to both her father's and Carlton's. She uses Christianity to crush her father's argument for slavery. Carlton's way would always be ineffective in The South because a rejection of Christianity would never be looked at with any vigor. Georgiana is the true way to cut to the core of the hypocrisy of Southern arguments. Her father sees this and that is why he's so angered with her. His justification gospel is crushed by Bible quote from his daughter.
Love your neighbor as you love thyself. No one quote could so define the hypocrisy of Christian slavery as that.
Wow. This story only reinforces my personal views on how the bible was--once again--used to justify the mistreatment and oppression of others. Needless to say, I could relate and sympathize with Carlton, and I admired his courage in speaking out against it during an era Christianity was such a powerful force to be reckoned with. Mr. Peck represented the thinking of so many people of that time (and perhaps the thinking of many people today on some other current social issues ::ahem::) But I found it very typical of Mr. Peck to tell Carlton that the bible came first when Carlton tried to quote the Declaration of Independance to dismiss the idea of slavery. The Brown story made me wonder (as I always have) how and why African American people would ever want to adopt Christianity as a religion, given its demoralizing history in this country. I know it's all a matter of interpretation of the scriptures, as Mr. Peck, Carlton, and Georgiana clearly displayed. But nevertheless, the story still brought these nagging questions to my contemporary, 21st Century mind. I also found it interesting that Mr. Peck was originally from the North, then found himself in the South as a slave owner, whereas Carlton wasn't influenced by Southern thinking. I guess 'when in Rome, do as Romans do'? Again, it only reiforced my admiration of Carlton for sticking to his convictions.
Rev. Peck is the epitome of the BOBM (the Black Oppressor by Biblical Methods)! Rev. Peck represents the many people who used the logic that people of African decent are the descendants of Ham and will forever be cursed. This type of reasoning perpetuated the slave mentality, and sadly this is still taught today as a reason for the problems that Africans and African Americans deal with. Personally, I would not allow myself to feel as if I should have to pay for something Ham did (fifty levn) years ago.
Back to the subject at hand, Carlton sees the hypocrisy in Rev. Peck. He knows that the money from his southern white followers, and also his hard-working “people” will all be in jeopardy if he starts believing in this notion of the rights of a man. He can only treat his slaves better than most slave-owners, because he has too much to lose, and cannot denounce the institution altogether. It is my belief that he tries to do little things such as allowing his “people” to know the gospel, to ease his conscious just a bit. The problem lies in his blindness to see that these slaves, whom he calls “people”, are just that …people!
The reader can definitely see that Carlton is passionate with the issue of human rights and, though he uses secular sources to back him up, it is only because he know how the bible can be used out of context to the benefit of a person or a cause. Georgiana is the perfect mediator, because she presents s logical argument and uses the bible to back her up. She portrays a strong female character with upstanding moral values in which she is so passionate about that she even “disrespectfully” (if you can call it that) debates her father in the presence of another man.
Reverend Peck is the stereotypical white, Christian slaveholder. He uses his brand of Christianity to serve his purposes and justify his lifestyle. I thought it was interesting, and telling, that although he claimed slavery a God-ordained institution and had a considerable amount of theorizing on the subject to attempt to back his argument up, he had little in the way of actual quotes of scripture.
Carlton begins by being portrayed as the stereotypical "secular humanist". He does not honor the Bible, and instead draws his ideologies from great thinkers, as Cassondra pointed out. However, his heart is changed and softened by the gentle Georgiana. Georgiana seem to be the example that Brown agrees with most being that he has Carlton accept her value system in the end. Georgiana's arguments, unlike the Reverend's look to the scriptures, especially the teachings of Jesus to validate her arguments against slavery. I loved how she pointed out that "the acts of the professed friends of Christianity in the South do more to spread infidelity than the writings of all the atheists which have ever been published." Wow! To Carol, I would say this continues to be a problem in present times and that their are many that pervert the Bible to their own means and for their own agendas. The reason I think many African-Americans have retained the Christian religion is that they have been able to reject the doctrines that are man-made while not rejecting Christianity, turning as Dr. Lape said, to the Bible and performing a "literary criticism" so to speak on what they had been fed by their masters. Georigiana eloquently states "If the Bible sanctions slavery, then it misrepresents the character of God." With these kind of statements she is able to persuade Carlton to her line of thinking, but sadly not her stubborn father.
13 comments:
Rev. Peck and Carlton differ on the importance of the Bible/Christianity to the slaves in very specific ways. Rev. Peck believes that there should definitely be slavery, but that the slaves should get the "gospel" as well. It is as if he is saying that if the slaves get the "gospel" then they will become better slaves. He also emphasizes the fact that the slaves have no rights, but that slave owners have power to do whatever they so choose. In this manner, Rev. Peck is saying that no man has rights but he has the power to treat the slaves however he chooses. Carlton on the other hand, believes that all men are equal. He repeatedly refers to the Declaration of Independence to emphasize the equality of all men, only to be disputed by Rev.Peck. Carlton was also not a big supporter of the Bible due to his following Rousseau but, Rev. Peck debates that by stating, "Nothing ever stood long against Christianity". In short, these men could not agree because Carlton followed his heart, while Rev. Peck was a "strong follower" of the Bible. One thing that stood out is how Carlton said he was not a big fan of the Bible or slavery, therefore he was not as contradictory as Rev. Peck. If Rev. Peck was such a Christian and wanted everyone to hear the "gospel", how could he not think every man is created equal. Georgiana, who is Rev. Peck's daughter actually agreed with Carlton. She mediates the disagreement by saying "that which is good does good, and that which is evil does evil" and ties it in with slavery being evil, thus basically saying what her father is doing is evil.(in my opinion)The main thing stated by Georgiana that summed up the argument was " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. This single passage of Scripture should cause us to have respect to the rights of the slave." Its funny how she uses quotes from the Bible to agree with Carlton who doesn't necessarily agree with the Bible, but yet her father is a strong believer of the Bible and she uses it to prove his way of thinking wrong. This entire passage just reveals the theme of hypocrisy that is presented in all of the narratives. Now something I found rather confusing is how did Carlton get the "right of man to his liberty" from Rev. Peck's initial statement. I thought that Rev. Peck was just stating that he was about to implement the slaves going to church and doing things his way. I'm guessing that Carlton took his statement as Rev. Peck trying to "mold" the slaves and make them think exactly the way he thinks therefore making them better slaves, which eliminates their natural rights as men. If anyone can understand what I am saying please give me some type of an explanation.
Reverend Peck thinks of himself as a good Christian man who owns slaves. Raised and educated in the North he feels superior to the southerners. It doesn't take long for him to fall into the practice of slavery. He thinks that he is doing the slaves a favor by keeping them well fed, well clothed, and not overworked; and he is feeding them the gospel because “the gospel is calculated to make mankind better, and none should be without it (76).” But the gospel that he is feeding the slaves is a gospel that preaches that slavery is God-ordained. This is not the true gospel as Georgiana points out.
Mr. Carlton is a visitor from the North who enters the picture with a fresh eye on slavery. He believes in the liberty of all men and the inalienable rights of all men, black or white. Carlton points out that his “conscience is his Bible” and only aims to do what is right.
Georgiana mediates their agreement by voicing her opinion that the “Bible was both the bulwark of Christianity and of liberty(78).” She goes on to speak boldly about the Bible not supporting slavery. Georgiana is a strong, educated young woman. W.W. Brown uses her to voice the abolitionist opinion of slavery and compare and contrast the evils of the peculiar institution. She is a strong woman because she stood up to her father's beliefs and challenged his authority. The Grimke sisters come to my mind when I think about Georgiana because they chose to leave their family when their views on slavery no longer matched their parents.
Reverend Peck thinks his slaves are superior to other non Christian slaves. After spending time on both Rev. Peck's plantation and that of another non-Christian slave holder's plantation, Mr Carlton sees no difference between the two types of slaves because they are both uneducated as to the real meaning of Christianity and education itself. Neither are better off and slavery has an even more sour taste to Carlton.
Arlena asked --
Now something I found rather confusing is how did Carlton get the "right of man to his liberty" from Rev. Peck's initial statement. I thought that Rev. Peck was just stating that he was about to implement the slaves going to church and doing things his way. I'm guessing that Carlton took his statement as Rev. Peck trying to "mold" the slaves and make them think exactly the way he thinks therefore making them better slaves, which eliminates their natural rights as men.
I understand what you are saying, and I think you get it. Peck, a typical paternalistic slaveowner has these religious plans for the slaves. Carlton is not religious and wonders if Peck has any concern at all for their natural rights.
Carlton and Reverend Peck differ on their views of the importance of the Bible mainly because Peck reads the Bible as condoning slavery and Carlton is not a Bible follower and is more concerned with the proper treatment of mankind.
Peck considers himself a strong Christian and a strict Bible follower. I had a hard time trying to figure out exactly what he meant in his spiel about rights and wrongs, but what I think he is saying is that man does not have certain “natural rights” but is only allowed the rights given to him by God. Furthermore, he is only allowed these rights when he strictly obeys the Bible and fulfills his Christian duties. In Peck’s reading of the Bible, Blacks are not given the same rights as Whites, as Blacks are ordained to be slaves. He believes that Whites are fulfilling their Christian duty by treating their slaves well and preaching the Word to them, and Blacks do their duty by obeying their masters. Peck believes the Bible is important to the slaves because it shows them the proper way to behave and fulfill their duties as slaves. By teaching the slaves the Word of God, Peck is also fulfilling his duty as a good Christian slave owner. He tells Carlton, “I am one who looks after my people, in a moral, social, and religious point of view.” (80) In his mind he is doing right by God.
Carlton concerns himself less with the teachings of the Bible and more with compassion for his fellow man, black or white. Carlton believes that all men are equal and all men have natural rights regardless of race. He uses the Declaration of Independence as defense for his argument, but is quickly shot down by Peck who points out that the Bible came long before the Declaration of Independence and is the ultimate guide. Carlton can not agree with slavery as he says, “my conscience is my Bible.” (78)
Georgiana, like Carlton, disagrees with slavery, but uses the Bible as her defense against slavery. She reads the Bible in a different way from her father. She points out that whatever promotes the will of God must be good, and whatever goes against the will of God must be evil. She says, “whatever in its proper tendency and general effect destroys, abridges, or renders insecure, human welfare, is opposed to God’s will and is evil.” (79) Therefore, in Georgiana’s eyes, the Bible proves that slavery is evil, and goes against God’s will, and should be abolished. She also brings up the passage of the Bible which says, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” which in itself opposes the practice of slavery. Georgiana’s ideas succeed in touching her father’s heart and also in helping Carlton view Christianity differently. Georgiana’s reading of the Bible is a more acceptable form of Christianity for Carlton.
Rev. Peck and Carlton differ greatly on the idea of Christianity and the Bible with the slaves. While Carlton does not greatly value/support the importance of the Bible as Rev. Peck does, while they are feeding different purposes to their ideas, both men seem to believe greatly that religion is an important thing to teach to slaves. while Rev. Peck seems to display a personal view that while his slaves should be well fed and not overworked and fed the gospel just as much as the overseer, his intentions felt to be more of a purpose and means to keep the slaves content in their position and make himself feel better that the slaves weren't necessarily neglected the gospel. "The gospel is calculated to make mankind better and none should be without it," seems to show the sense that while all of mankind (including slaves) should be included when teaching the gospel, it is still with the intention of keeping every person in their designated station in life, not that all men are equal. Carlton on the other hand shows that he feels an abolitionist belief toward this situation and focuses more on the Declaration of Independence as means for his idea that all men are equal and that the Bible shouldn't be taken quite as seriously as Rev. Peck did.
Georgiana's quote of the scripture "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" seems to give a main point to both sides of this situation in that she is using part of the scripture that Rev. Peck is so vehement about to agree with Carlton's view that all men are created equal." funny thing is that Rev. Peck seems to want to push her aside when simply commenting that she is an abolitionist.
Although somewhat aside, I do find it interesting that in the beginning of the next chapter, Rev. Peck shows how he is very aware and looks down upon any person due to their specific class when talking about the poor whites and seems to classify them and the slaves almost together.
Reverend Peck and Carlton differ in their views on the Bible and Christianity because Reverend Peck could be considered religiously conservative, while Carlton is more a non-religious free thinker. Peck believed his "people" should be taught the teaching of Christianity because "The gospel is calculated to make mankind better, and none should be without it. Ironically, when Carlton asks him what his beliefs are on all men having liberty, he tries to justify slavery by saying there is no such thing as "natural rights"; even Adam and Eve had restrictions placed on what they could do.
In contrast,Carlton believes there is no difference between "black" and "white" liberty; the Connecticut constitution and the Declaration of Independence make no distinction, why should they? Unlike Reverend Peck, Carlton doesn't rely on the Bible for what he believes to be right or wrong. Instead he relies on his "heart and his conscience".
After hearing their arguments, Georgiana profoundly states that Christians should judge what is good or evil by what God says is right, according to his will written in the Bible. If it helps mankind then they are to promote it; but if it damages mankind, then that means it is against the will of God and they should not promote it. In conclusion, Georgiana believes God would not agree with condemning another human being to lifelong bondage, because a Christian is to love everyone. She ends her argument by saying, "True Christian love is of an enlarged, disinterested nature. It loves all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, without regard to colour or condition". Reverend Peck was very moved by the speech, although he disagreed, and Carlton began to view Christianity in another light.
First off, I must say that I am extremely upset at this chapter (okay so I was upset since I first started reading this material) but the first thing which came to my mind when I was reading what Mr. Peck had to say about servant submission for the glory of God and Christianity was Joi's comment made at the very beginnings of our class. Something about Christianity was shaped as a means to keep slaves in submission so that slave-owners could manipulate them in whatever/whichever way possible; hence, preventing an uprising of such peoples and the continuation of a perfectly good agricultural system. I say, bulls***! And for Mr. Peck to insist that natural rights were first limited to Adam and Eve (while in the garden of eden)then stripped away from them after "disobedience" is ludicrous and it supports the Religious theories regarding the promotion of slavery perfectly. Carlton, who I favored very well, decided to take it upon himself to avoid all Biblical theories which Peck brought up and relied more so upon the philosophical writings of great thinkers (i.e. Voltaire who was a man of Color ya'll) which supports that there is no difference between the liberties of both white and black men.
Upon Peck's foul argument considering the credibility of the Bible over that of the Declaration of Independence, I had to remind myself that all those claims are not written in the bible at all, and are, just as the "poor servants" were saying at the end of this chapter, a means to "try to fool de black people." Exactly Peck's point. And of course he was upset when his educated daughter put him in his place by defining Christianity with the famous line: "Thou shalt love they neighbor as thyself." This example of a white female sympathizing with the slave is common among the literature and arguments we have read in this class so it would make sense why the daughter wanted to catch her father in his wrongs.
Some one had to do it. I'm just disappointed that his sermons did not stop. I am however, content with the reaction the slaves had towards such teachings.
Reverend Peck and Carlton are on total ends of the spectrum when it comes to slave relations and religion. When I began to read the section about religion and its relation to slaves, I thought that Peck may have had a touch of abolitionist in him because he referred to his slaves as “people” rather than cattle. I thought that it was commendable of him to view his property as actual human beings and wanted to clothe, feed them, and give them the teachings of the bible. While I continued to read however, I became appalled when he spoke about the bible and its justifications for slavery. He says that the gospel should be used to make mankind better, but yet calls Adam and Eve condemned beings. He goes on to imply that Adam and Eve had human rights as long as they were in obedience to God’s wishes and wills. But when they disregard his wishes they disembarked on these rights and became savages?! So from my understanding, Adam and Eve are compared to his “people” whereas he is compared to God. In this scenario, his slaves will be treated well and lead a great life as long as they are obedient just as Adam and Eve did before they ate the apple. BUT if a slaves was to not follow his rules, they would become classified as dishonorable and therefore forfeit all human rights and be treated as such.
Carlton on the flip side of things thinks that the ideas of his peer are outrageous. He is not as “holy” as Reverend Peck and insists on using his “heart as his guide and his conscience as his bible.” Carlton believes that all men are created equal no matter the skin color and they are subject to the same liberties. Carlton’s main belief is to do right by mankind. Whereas Reverend Peck uses references to the bible and the declaration on Independence to validate his ideas and beliefs about slavery and slave owners, Carlton uses his argument solely on morals. He feels that mankind should do on to others what they would want done to them. He believes that slavery is unfair and unmoral and states very bluntly that he can not see eye to eye with the reverend. I don’t feel that Carlton believes Christianity is important to the slaves because he does not even take Christianity serious himself. I think that he feels Christians are hypocrites by practicing one thing and doing the complete opposite. I think that he feels these Christians are manipulating the word of the bible to stimulate their own needs, and that is why he stresses that his conscience serves as his bible.
As far as Georgiana’s role in the argument, I think she plays a significant part. For one, she disagrees with her father in front of a guest. This is an important event because at this time women rarely had a voice or say so in any type of conversation and for her to totally disagree with her father showed her independence and her will to stand up for what is right. My favorite passage in the section about her would be “I am a native of the south, I am of education and sympathy of the northerner.” With this she tells her father she is anti-slavery. I love how she throws the bible into play during her scene by saying that you should do on to you neighbor as you would want them to do onto you. I think by making such radical statements she is giving her father a run for his money and a lot to take into consideration.
John Peck is a Northern Southerner, and I'm sure that he still considers himself as such due to the fact that made a point of asking Carlton to brag about how well he treats his slaves as opposed to the Southerners. He also calls his slaves his people. He taught them the gospel in hopes that he was making their lives better as well as making them better human beings. He almost acts as if he believes that the slaves are as Adam and Eve; having only the rights that God gave them, and he almost has to reteach them of those rights,the rights that aren't inalienable, but God giving and nothing else, almost as if he was doing them a favor. I don't know he is completely for slavery, since they're his "people", but I'm sure was only against it in name, maybe to keep face in the North, and to his vistors. He seems to think that they shouldn't share the same rights as whites for the fact that they are/were ignorant of the word of God. He goes on to say "Our rights are there established (in the bible), but it is alyways in connection with their duties. Since slaves are the property, they should be treated as such, with the rights that their duties as property allows them.
Carlton was educated in the same manner as Peck, but stayed in the North. I think that gave him a different view on some things that at one time they could have agreed on, it's not the first time they've had this human rights decision because Peck says "again" when Carlton speaks of the "right of man to his liberty". Carlton is a follower of Rousseau, a French philosopher, who believed that a man doesn't start of good or bad, but is made that way by the society that they live in. The man is versed in French philosophy and knows the Declaration of Independence (which was influenced by the French Enlightenment movement). All of that gives Carlton the opinion of someone with a well rounded educationin matters other than the Bible.(Also, the irony of the two men battling about the rights of slaves and quoting the Declaration of Independence, and one of them holding the purchase papers of the mistress to the author of that very document, was not lost on me). Carlton doesn't see a problem with slaes and white men enjoying the same rights because his philosophy has been influenced and developed by outside forces (European forces at that). I'm sure he does have a knowledge of the Bible, but doesn't let it lead his life as Peak does; he finds that Enlightment philosophers more pleasing to his soul. He'd rather be free thinking in his opinions of right and wrong, and slavery in his eyes is a wrong because it conflicts with the slaves' rights as human beings.
Thats the main difference between their two views. Peck believes that slaves have only the rights that god gave them. Nothing more, nothing less. He thinks that by teaching them the gospel makes them more favorable in the eyes of God. Carlton believes that all men, no matter color or station, deserves the same rights as others. It's not their fault that they are, for a lack of a better word, uneducated about their rights; they know what they are told, and they are merely victims of a society that keeps their rights non existent.
Peck's daughter, Georgiana, having the opportunity to experience a northern education with the benefit of of a southern upbringing, could see both sides of the argument. She agress with her father on the duties of man to "produce, secure, and extend human welfare in order to be in God's good graces, but then she switches sides by adding that "to destroy, abrige, or render insecure human welfare is opposing God's will. She quotes a verse from the Bible, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself". By doing so, she gives fire to Carlton's agruement, using her father's Bible to in a way back up the opinion of a man that believes in reason and reason alone. She adds that that particular "passage of Scripture should cause us to have respet to the rights of the slaves." Peck probably was not very happy at the opinion his daughter expressed, but as his only child, she could do no wrong. I feel though, that both of the men in a way dismissed her opinion because nothing else of her argument was said, though it ended theirs.
Reverend Peck preaches the gospel of slave justifcation while Carlton accepts such a gospel, but rejects the source of it itself. Georgiana is the happy medium who sees Christianity as a very powerful weapon against slavery. Peck honestly percieves himself as a good wholesome man because of the treatment he gives his slaves. He's probably a heavy reader of The Old Testament. Peck seems to think it's okay to have slaves as long as you treat them in a Christian manner. Peck believes that his slaves are somehow "better off" because they're owned by a Christian and are superior to non-Christian slaves. Time and time again he invokes the Bible to justify slavery and goes into a long tirade about why slaves should be obedient and accept their lot in life.
Carlton has probably heard these arguments all his life and simply grown tired of the idea of Christianity period. I would see him as more of Deist given the authors he cites to have read and began his assertion of natural rights. Carlton argues for the freedom of the slave, but not with the tools of Christianity. He is not like many who would use the Bible as a rhetorical tool, but he simply rejects it all together. His belief is that without the Bible in the equation man would come to realize that it is wrong to own another human being.
Georgiana is by far the most courageous of the three characters because she's a woman who stepped into the debate of two men. Not just any two men though. It was her father and a friend. That in The South would have been unheard of. Yet, she offers up an argument far superior to both her father's and Carlton's. She uses Christianity to crush her father's argument for slavery. Carlton's way would always be ineffective in The South because a rejection of Christianity would never be looked at with any vigor. Georgiana is the true way to cut to the core of the hypocrisy of Southern arguments. Her father sees this and that is why he's so angered with her. His justification gospel is crushed by Bible quote from his daughter.
Love your neighbor as you love thyself. No one quote could so define the hypocrisy of Christian slavery as that.
Wow. This story only reinforces my personal views on how the bible was--once again--used to justify the mistreatment and oppression of others. Needless to say, I could relate and sympathize with Carlton, and I admired his courage in speaking out against it during an era Christianity was such a powerful force to be reckoned with. Mr. Peck represented the thinking of so many people of that time (and perhaps the thinking of many people today on some other current social issues ::ahem::) But I found it very typical of Mr. Peck to tell Carlton that the bible came first when Carlton tried to quote the Declaration of Independance to dismiss the idea of slavery. The Brown story made me wonder (as I always have) how and why African American people would ever want to adopt Christianity as a religion, given its demoralizing history in this country. I know it's all a matter of interpretation of the scriptures, as Mr. Peck, Carlton, and Georgiana clearly displayed. But nevertheless, the story still brought these nagging questions to my contemporary, 21st Century mind.
I also found it interesting that Mr. Peck was originally from the North, then found himself in the South as a slave owner, whereas Carlton wasn't influenced by Southern thinking. I guess 'when in Rome, do as Romans do'? Again, it only reiforced my admiration of Carlton for sticking to his convictions.
Rev. Peck is the epitome of the BOBM (the Black Oppressor by Biblical Methods)! Rev. Peck represents the many people who used the logic that people of African decent are the descendants of Ham and will forever be cursed. This type of reasoning perpetuated the slave mentality, and sadly this is still taught today as a reason for the problems that Africans and African Americans deal with.
Personally, I would not allow myself to feel as if I should have to pay for something Ham did (fifty levn) years ago.
Back to the subject at hand, Carlton sees the hypocrisy in Rev. Peck. He knows that the money from his southern white followers, and also his hard-working “people” will all be in jeopardy if he starts believing in this notion of the rights of a man. He can only treat his slaves better than most slave-owners, because he has too much to lose, and cannot denounce the institution altogether.
It is my belief that he tries to do little things such as allowing his “people” to know the gospel, to ease his conscious just a bit. The problem lies in his blindness to see that these slaves, whom he calls “people”, are just that …people!
The reader can definitely see that Carlton is passionate with the issue of human rights and, though he uses secular sources to back him up, it is only because he know how the bible can be used out of context to the benefit of a person or a cause.
Georgiana is the perfect mediator, because she presents s logical argument and uses the bible to back her up. She portrays a strong female character with upstanding moral values in which she is so passionate about that she even “disrespectfully” (if you can call it that) debates her father in the presence of another man.
Reverend Peck is the stereotypical white, Christian slaveholder. He uses his brand of Christianity to serve his purposes and justify his lifestyle. I thought it was interesting, and telling, that although he claimed slavery a God-ordained institution and had a considerable amount of theorizing on the subject to attempt to back his argument up, he had little in the way of actual quotes of scripture.
Carlton begins by being portrayed as the stereotypical "secular humanist". He does not honor the Bible, and instead draws his ideologies from great thinkers, as Cassondra pointed out. However, his heart is changed and softened by the gentle Georgiana. Georgiana seem to be the example that Brown agrees with most being that he has Carlton accept her value system in the end. Georgiana's arguments, unlike the Reverend's look to the scriptures, especially the teachings of Jesus to validate her arguments against slavery. I loved how she pointed out that "the acts of the professed friends of Christianity in the South do more to spread infidelity than the writings of all the atheists which have ever been published." Wow! To Carol, I would say this continues to be a problem in present times and that their are many that pervert the Bible to their own means and for their own agendas. The reason I think many African-Americans have retained the Christian religion is that they have been able to reject the doctrines that are man-made while not rejecting Christianity, turning as Dr. Lape said, to the Bible and performing a "literary criticism" so to speak on what they had been fed by their masters. Georigiana eloquently states "If the Bible sanctions slavery, then it misrepresents the character of God." With these kind of statements she is able to persuade Carlton to her line of thinking, but sadly not her stubborn father.
Post a Comment