My next two articles on NewmarketToday will centre on a topic that has intrigued me going back to my early days as a budding historian. I tend not to take what I am told about our history as gospel and frequently have questions.
As a child I was intrigued by the Quaker faith and its place within our local history given my grandma’s Quaker roots. She would regale me with stories of how the "Friends" were staunchly anti-slavery and were at the forefront of the abolitionist movements.
In this article, I'll examine the topic from the viewpoint of Quaker history versus the reality of Christian slavery and white supremacy. This topic was the basis of a paper that I wrote while studying history at university and I have drawn from it for this two-part series. I am hopeful that you will follow along with me as I expand on the topic utilizing additional resources now available.
Our history books have long hailed the Friends (Quakers) as heroes of the abolitionist movement. We hear of Friends working fearlessly to convince other whites to abolish slavery and embrace the concept of freedom for all.
I wanted to understand abolitionist history better and so decided to go back to the “beginning.” The first antislavery protest in North America arose in an area in the U.S. that my Lundy kin called home, Pennsylvania and Vermont. I quickly learned what I had heard was only part of the story about the relationship between the Quakers and slavery.
A colleague pointed me toward the 1688 Germantown Protest, the first document in North America that explicitly denounced slavery. It declares, among other things, opposition to "the trafficking of men," explaining that slavery cannot be a Christian practice as it goes against the Golden Rule.
Specifically, it states, "There is a saying, that we shall do to all men like as we will be done ourselves; making no difference of what generation, descent or colour they are. And those who steal or rob men, and those who buy or purchase them, are they not alike? Here is liberty of conscience, w[hi]ch is right and reasonable; here ought to be likewise liberty of ye body" (taken from 'We Are Against The Traffik Of Men - Body': The Germantown Quaker Protest Of 1688 And The Origins Of American Abolitionism (psu.edu).
For the 17th century, this was a powerful statement, one that we can be proud to accept. However, I still felt that by examining the origins of Quaker abolition, it would allow me to illustrate how an issue as important as abolition would reflect clearly the history of Quaker social justice.
A peculiar thing happened as I proceeded to examine that text laid out in the textbooks. The last line, which was added apparently later and not by the initial authors read: "We, having inspected ye matter, above mentioned, and considered of it, we find it so weighty that we think it not expedient for us to meddle with it here." It went on to add: "A paper being here presented by some German Friends Concerning the Lawfulness and Unlawfulness of Buying and keeping ‘Negroes’, it was adjudged not to be so proper for this Meeting to give a Positive Judgment in the Case, It have so General a Relation to many other P[a]rts, and therefore at present they forbear It."
While the language is not particularly clear, it does appear that the Quaker community was beginning to waver on the subject. While my intention had been to study Quaker antislavery, it became clear that while a very small minority of my Quaker ancestors rejected slavery in the 17th century, most did not. Another question interested me, what did it mean that slavery had “so general a relation to many other p[a]rts?” What were those “other parts?”
It was at that moment that my paper’s focus changed. It had become important for me to understand how the "slaveholding Quakers" (yes, they did exist) fit into this period.
As I dug into 17th-century Quaker world, I was surprised to learn that slavery was not only accepted but was frequently common among the English Quakers who had migrated to the U.S. from England. It further surprised me that many Quakers were also involved in the slave trade.
There had existed a substantial Quaker community in Barbados and the American Quakers used their connections in Barbados to purchase enslaved Africans. As the Friends' social and economic structure developed, these ties with the West Indies and other trade outlets flourished with slavery being both a source of pride and symbol of prosperity. To own slaves was seen as necessary for one’s economic development.
When I originally began to research this topic, I discovered that much of the commentary concerning Quakers and slavery acknowledged that Quakers owned slaves, but they strove to find a "seed" of abolition in the early Quaker records.
I made the decision to concentrate not only on Quaker abolition back then but to also examine how those slave-holding Quakers represented their own time. I wondered whether any of them really would have predicted the demise of the slave trade or of slavery. I also pondered why Quakers accepted slavery in this period, how did they fit slavery into their own theological beliefs?
My plan, while researching my paper was to examine how their views on slavery compared to other Christians sects. I was interested in what Christianity might have meant to those who were enslaved and to the free Black men and women who joined the ranks of the Quakers along with the other denominations. As I proceeded, my focus did narrow a bit, but that was because of the framework of my research.
Barbados was an important English colony, having been settled in 1627 for planting tobacco and then sugar. Initially, the industry relied on a joint labour force of European indentured servants and African slaves, but by the 1650s enslaved Africans had become much of the labour force. Added to this was the fact that Quakerism started to flourish around the same time. Soon there were thousands of Quakers in Barbados, most of them slave owners.
In the 1670s, Quaker founder George Fox indicated his concern about slavery. He urged the Quakers to worship with their enslaved people in their households and to introduce them to Quakerism. He did not call for an end to slavery as a practice, however. Within a few years an act was passed that forbid Quakers from worshipping alongside enslaved men and women, a re-definition of Christianity followed.
This practice was adopted by the Friends who re-located to our area as we will examine in part two of this series. It seems clear that Quakers back then were radical thinkers but not for their abolitionist beliefs but because they suggested that Blacks and whites should "gather together" for worship.
Quakers of the time did share many similar inter-racial beliefs with members of the Church of England (Anglicans), as well as other smaller denominations. Slave owners would often attack Protestant missionaries for inter-racial religious gatherings.
As I looked closer at these and other sources, I began to understand why English slave owners found the prospect of slave conversion so threatening.
When enslaved people become Christian, it challenged the justification for slavery, which was based upon religious difference, as in it was considered legal to enslave “heathens” but not Christians.
In some cases, missionaries taught enslaved people to read the Bible and write. This was very unpopular among slave owners.
When enslaved black Christians met for worship, white colonists feared they were plotting a rebellion.
When Quakers started to include enslaved people in their worship meetings, English slave owners reacted aggressively.
These documents reveal some misunderstood aspects of colonial slavery. English slave owners thought of Christianity, and especially Protestantism, as a religion for free people, and they worried that a baptized slave would demand freedom and possibly seek to rebel. As a result, they excluded most enslaved people from Protestant churches.
I feel that this is an extremely important aspect of early slavery and that it had not been fully recognized. Protestant supremacy, I submit, was the forerunner of "white supremacy." White supremacy uses racial designation to create inequality. But in the 17th century, the concept of race, as we know it, did not exist. And most significantly, the concept of “whiteness” had not yet been created. Slave owners created the ideology of Protestant supremacy, which used religion to justify slavery.
In the earliest slave laws, slave owners didn’t call themselves “white” but “Christians.” Protestant slave owners constructed a caste system based on Christian status, in which “heathen” slaves were afforded no rights or privileges, while Catholics, Jews, and non-conforming Protestants were viewed with suspicion and distrust but granted more protections.
This is why it was so controversial for Quakers and other missionaries to introduce enslaved people to Christianity: because it threatened to undermine Protestant supremacy. This concept of Protestant supremacy was challenged by the Quakers, and by enslaved and free Blacks, who wanted to become Christian.
Enslaved Christians argued they had a right to practise Christianity, read the Bible and worship together. Over time, more and more enslaved and free people of colour fought their way into Christian churches, influenced by theological, practical, and social motivations.
In my article on our local black history, we see that emancipated slaves in our area were often members of our churches and some served as church officials, including ministers.
In next article, we bring the story to Canada.
Sources: Slavery in the Quaker World by Katharine Gerbner; Clarifying The Issue of Quakerism and Slavery submitted by Richard MacLeod (1975); The Quakers of Canada – A History by Arthur G. Dorland; A Quaker Call to Abolition and Creation by Lucy Duncan 'We Are Against The Traffik Of Men - Body': The Germantown Quaker Protest Of 1688 And The Origins Of American Abolitionism (psu.edu).
Newmarket resident Richard MacLeod, the History Hound, has been a local historian for more than 40 years. He writes a weekly feature about our town's history in partnership with NewmarketToday, conducts heritage lectures and walking tours of local interest, and leads local oral history interviews.
