{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_38963/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_38963","id":"gutenberg_38963","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38963","summary":null,"tags":["African Americans -- Religion","Category: History - American","Category: History - Religious"],"text":"Produced by Suzanne Shell and the Online Distributed\nProofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was\nproduced from images generously made available by The\nInternet Archive/American Libraries.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nTHE HISTORY OF THE NEGRO CHURCH\n\nBY\n\nCARTER G. WOODSON, Ph.D.\n\n_Editor of the Journal of Negro History, author of A Century of Negro\n\nMigration, and of the Education of the Negro Prior to 1861_\n\nTHE ASSOCIATED PUBLISHERS\n\nWASHINGTON, D. C.\n\n[Publisher's logo]\n\nCopyright, 1921\n\nBy THE ASSOCIATED PUBLISHERS\n\n[Illustration: A CHRISTIANIZED AFRICAN. _Frontispiece_]\n\n\n\n\nTo\n\nTHE CHERISHED MEMORY OF\n\nMY MOTHER\n\nANNE ELIZA WOODSON\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nThe importance of the church in the life of the Negro justifies the\npublication of this brief account of the development of the institution.\nFor many years the various denominations have been writing treatises\nbearing on their own particular work, but hitherto there has been no\neffort to study the achievements of all of these groups as parts of the\nsame institution and to show the evolution of it from the earliest\nperiod to the present time. This is the objective of this volume.\n\nWhether or not the author has done this task well is a question which\nthe public must decide. This work does not represent what he desired to\nmake it. Many facts of the past could not be obtained for the reason\nthat several denominations have failed to keep records and facts known\nto persons now active in the church could not be collected because of\nindifference or the failure to understand the motives of the author. Not\na few church officers and ministers, however, gladly cooperated with the\nauthor in giving and seeking information concerning their denominations.\nAmong these were Mr. Charles H. Wesley, Prof. J. A. Booker, and Dr.\nWalter H. Brooks. For their valuable assistance the author feels deeply\ngrateful.\n\n    CARTER G. WOODSON.\n\n  Washington, D. C., September, 1921.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n      CHAPTER                                           PAGE\n\n\n      I.--Early Missionaries and the Negro                 1\n      II.--The Dawn of the New Day                        23\n      III.--Pioneer Negro Preachers                       40\n      IV.--The Independent Church Movement                71\n      V.--Early Development                              100\n      VI.--The Schism and the Subsequent Situation       123\n      VII.--Religious Instruction Revived                148\n      VIII.--Preachers of Versatile Genius               167\n      IX.--The Civil War and the Church                  185\n      X.--Religious Education as a Preparation           202\n      XI.--The Call of Politics                          220\n      XII.--The Conservative and Progressive             247\n      XIII.--The Negro Church Socialized                 266\n      XIV.--The Recent Growth of the Negro Church        286\n      XV.--The Negro Church of To-day                    300\n      FOOTNOTES\n      INDEX\n\n\n\n\nILLUSTRATIONS\n\n\n      A Christianized African _Frontispiece_\n      Directing the Wanderer in the right Way\n      The Oldest Negro Baptist Church in the United States\n      Lemuel Haynes\n      Andrew Bryan\n      Richard Allen\n      James Varick\n      Peter Williams\n      Christopher Rush\n      Lott Cary\n      M. C. Clayton\n      Sampson White\n      Josiah Henson\n      Noah Davis\n      Samuel R. Ward\n      Alexander Crummell\n      J. W. C. Pennington\n      Henry Highland Garnett\n      Daniel A. Payne\n      Richard DeBaptiste\n      W. H. Miles\n      Wilberforce During the Civil War\n      William J. Simmons\n      James Poindexter\n      J. C. Price\n      H. M. Turner\n      B. W. Arnett\n      W. B. Derrick\n      J. W. Hood\n      L. H. Holsey\n      Rufus L. Perry\n      Charles T. Walker\n      John Jasper\n      E. K. Love\n      W. R. Pettiford\n      M. C. B. Mason\n      George W. Lee\n      Alexander Walters\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nTHE EARLY MISSIONARIES AND THE NEGRO\n\n\nOne of the causes of the discovery of America was the translation into\naction of the desire of European zealots to extend the Catholic religion\ninto other parts. Columbus, we are told, was decidedly missionary in his\nefforts and felt that he could not make a more significant contribution\nto the church than to open new fields for Christian endeavor. His final\nsuccess in securing the equipment adequate to the adventure upon the\nhigh seas was to some extent determined by the Christian motives\nimpelling the sovereigns of Spain to finance the expedition for the\nreason that it might afford an opportunity for promoting the cause of\nChrist. Some of the French who came to the new world to establish their\nclaims by further discovery and exploration, moreover, were either\nactuated by similar motives or welcomed the cooperation of earnest\nworkers thus interested.\n\nThe first persons proselyted by the Spanish and French missionaries were\nIndians. There was not any particular thought of the Negro. It may seem\na little strange just now to think of persons having to be converted to\nfaith in the possibility of the salvation of the Negro, but there were\namong the colonists thousands who had never considered the Negro as\nbelonging to the pale of Christianity. Negroes had been generally\ndesignated as infidels; but, in the estimation of their self-styled\nsuperiors, they were not considered the most desirable of this class\nsupposedly arrayed against Christianity. There were few Christians who\ndid not look forward to the ultimate conversion of those infidels\napproaching the Caucasian type, but hardly any desired to make an effort\nin the direction of proselyting Negroes.\n\nWhen, however, that portion of this Latin element primarily interested\nin the exploitation of the Western Hemisphere failed to find in the\nIndians the substantial labor supply necessary to their enterprises and\nat the suggestion of men like las Casas imported Negroes for this\npurpose, the missionaries came face to face with the question as to\nwhether this new sort of heathen should receive the same consideration\nas that given the Indians. Because of the unwritten law that a Christian\ncould not be held a slave, the exploiting class opposed any such\nproselyting; for, should the slaves be liberated upon being converted,\ntheir plans for development would fail for lack of a labor supply\nsubject to their orders as bondmen. The sovereigns of Europe, once\ninclined to adopt a sort of humanitarian policy toward the Negroes, at\nfirst objected to their importation into the new world; and when under\nthe pressure of the interests  of the various countries they yielded on\nthis point, it was stipulated that such slaves should have first\nembraced Christianity. Later, when further concessions to the\ncapitalists were necessary, it was provided in the royal decrees of\nSpain and of France that Africans enslaved in America should merely be\nearly indoctrinated in the principles of the Christian religion.\n\nThese decrees, although having the force of law, soon fell into\ndesuetude. There was not among these planters any sentiment in favor of\nsuch humanitarian treatment of the slaves. Unlike the missionaries, the\nplanters were not interested in religion and they felt that too much\nenlightenment of the slaves might inspire them with the hope of\nattaining the status of freemen. The laws, therefore, were nominally\naccepted as just and the functionaries in the colonies in reporting to\ntheir home countries on the state of the plantations made it appear that\nthey were generally complied with. As there was no such thing as an\ninspection of these commercial outposts, moreover, no one in Europe\ncould easily determine exactly what attitude these men had toward\ncarrying out the will of the home countries with respect to the\nChristianization of the bondmen. From time to time, therefore, the\nhumanitarian world heard few protests like that of Alfonso Sandoval in\nCuba and the two Capucin monks who were imprisoned in Havana because of\ntheir inveighing against the failure on the part of the planters to\nprovide for the religious instruction of the slaves. Being in the\nminority, these upright pioneers too often had their voices hushed in\npersecution, as it happened in the case of the two monks.\n\nIt appears, however, that efforts in behalf of Negroes elsewhere were\nnot in vain; for the Negroes in Latin America were not only proselyted\nthereafter but were given recognition among the clergy. Such was the\nexperience of Francisco Xavier de Luna Victoria, son of a freedman, a\nPanama charcoal burner, whose chief ambition was to educate this young\nman for the priesthood. He easily became a priest and after having\nserved acceptably in this capacity a number of years was chosen Bishop\nof Panama in 1751 and administered this office eight years. He was later\ncalled to take charge of the See of Trujillo, Peru.\n\nIn what is now the United States the Spanish and French missionaries had\nvery little contact with the Negroes during the early period, as they\nwere found in large numbers along the Atlantic coast only. In the West\nIndies, however, the Latin policy decidedly dominated during the early\ncolonial period, and when the unwritten law that a Christian could not\nbe held a slave was by special statutes and royal decrees annulled, the\nplanters eventually yielded in their objection to the religious\ninstruction of the slaves and generally complied with the orders of the\nhome country to this effect.\n\nMaryland was the only Atlantic colony in which the Catholics had the\nopportunity to make an appeal to a large group of Negroes. After some\nopposition the people of that colony early met the test of preaching the\ngospel to all regardless of color. The first priests and missionaries\noperating in Maryland regarded it their duty to enlighten the slaves;\nand, as the instruction of the communicants of the church became more\nsystematic to make their preparation adequate to the proper\nunderstanding of the church doctrine, some sort of instruction of the\nNegroes attached to these establishments was provided in keeping with\nthe sentiment expressed in the first ordinances of the Spanish and\nFrench sovereigns and later in the Black Code governing the bondmen in\nthe colonies controlled by the Latins.\n\nAlthough the attitude of the Catholic pioneers was not altogether\nencouraging to the movement for the evangelization of the Negroes, still\nless assistance came from the Protestants settling the English colonies.\nFew, if any, of the pioneers from Great Britain had the missionary\nspirit of some of the Latins. As the English were primarily interested\nin founding new homes in America, they thought of the Negroes not as\nobjects of Christian philanthropy but rather as tools with which they\nmight reach that end. It is not surprising then that with the\nintroduction of slavery as an economic factor in the development of the\nEnglish colonies little care was taken of their spiritual needs, and\nespecially so when they were confronted with the unwritten law that a\nChristian could not be held a slave.\n\nOwing to the more noble example set by the Latins, however, and the\ndesirable results early obtained by their missionaries, the English\nplanters permitted some sort of religious instruction of the bondmen,\nafter providing by royal decrees and special statutes in the colonies\nthat conversion to Christianity would not work manumission. Feeling,\nhowever, that the nearer the blacks were kept to the state of brutes\nthat the more useful they would be as laborers, the masters generally\nneglected them.\n\nThe exceptions to this rule were the efforts of various clergymen in\ncooperation with the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in\nForeign Parts. This organization was established in London in 1701 to do\nmissionary work among the heathen, especially the Indians and the\nNegroes. Its function was to prepare the objects of its philanthropy for\na proper understanding of the church doctrine and the relation of man to\nGod. This body operated through the branches of the established church,\nthe ministrations of which were first limited to a few places in\nVirginia, New York, Maryland, and the cities of Boston and Philadelphia.\nFrom the very beginning this society felt that the conversion of the\nNegroes was as important as that of bringing the whites or the Indians\ninto the church and such distinguished churchmen as Bishops Lowth,\nFleetwood, Williams, Sanderson,  Butler, and Wilson, persistently urged\nthis duty upon their subordinates. In 1727 Bishop Gibson sent out two\nforceful pastoral letters outlining this duty of the missionaries,\nBishop Secker preached a soul-stirring sermon thereupon in 1741, and in\n1784 Bishop Porteus published an extensive plan for the more effectual\nconversion of the slaves, contending that \"despicable as they are in the\neyes of man they are, nevertheless, the creatures of God.\"\n\nThe first successful worker in this field was the Rev. Samuel Thomas of\nGoose Creek Parish in the colony of South Carolina. The records show\nthat he was thus engaged as early as 1695 and that ten years later he\nreported 20 black communicants who, with several others, well understood\nthe English language. By 1705 he had brought under his instruction as\nmany as 1,000 slaves, \"many of whom,\" said he, \"could read the Bible\ndistinctly and great numbers of them were engaged in learning the\nscriptures.\" When these blacks approached the communion table, however,\nsome white persons seriously objected, inquiring whether it was possible\nthat slaves should go to heaven anyway. But having the cooperation of a\nnumber of liberal slaveholders in that section and working in\ncollaboration with Mrs. Haig, Mrs. Edwards, and the Rev. E. Taylor, who\nbaptized a number of them, the missionaries in that colony prepared the\nway for the Christianization of the Negro slaves.\n\nBecoming interested in the thorough indoctrination of these slaves, Mr.\nTaylor planned for their instruction, encouraging the slaveholders to\nteach the blacks at least to the extent of learning the Lord's Prayer.\nManifesting such interest in these unfortunate blacks, their friends\neasily induced them to attend church in such large numbers that they\ncould not be accommodated. \"So far as the missionaries were permitted,\"\nsays one, \"they did all that was possible for their evangelization, and\nwhile so many professed Christians among the whites were lukewarm, it\npleased God to raise to himself devout servants among the heathen, whose\nfaithfulness was commended by the Masters themselves.\" In some of the\ncongregations the Negroes constituted one-half of the communicants.\n\nThis interest in proselyting the Negroes was extended into other parts.\nIn 1723, Rev. Mr. Guy of St. Andrew's Parish reported that he had\nbaptized a Negro man and woman. About the same time Rev. Mr. Hunt, in\ncharge of St. John's Parish, had among his communicants a slave, \"a\nsensible Negro who can read and write and come to church, a catechumen\nunder probation for baptism, which he desires.\"\n\nA new stage in the progress of this movement was reached in 1743 when\nthere was established at Charleston, South Carolina, a special school to\ntrain Negroes for participation in this missionary work. This school was\nopened by Commissary Garden and placed in charge of Harry and Andrew,\ntwo young men of color, who had been thoroughly instructed in the\nrudiments of education and in the doctrines of the church. It not only\nserved as the training school for missionary workers, but directed its\nattention also to the special needs of adults who studied therein during\nthe evenings. From this school there were sent out from year to year\nnumbers of youths to undertake this work in various parts of the colony\nof South Carolina. After having accomplished so much good for about a\ngeneration, however, the school was, in 1763, closed for various\nreasons, one of them being that one of the instructors died and the\nother proved inefficient.\n\nFarther upward in the colony of North Carolina, the same difficulties\nwere encountered. There the motive was the fear that, should the slaves\nbe converted, they would, according to the unwritten law of Christendom,\nbecome free. Some planters, however, were very soon thereafter persuaded\nto let these missionaries continue their work. \"By much importunity,\"\nsays an annalist, Mr. Ranford of Chowan, \"in 1712 we prevailed upon Mr.\nMartin to let him baptize three of his Negroes, two women and a boy. All\nthe arguments I could make use of,\" said he, \"would scarce effect it\ntill Bishop Fleetwood's sermon in 1711 turned ye scale.\" These workers\nthen soon found it possible to instruct and baptize more than forty\nNegroes in one year, and not long thereafter some workers reported as\nmany as 15 to 24 in one month, 40 to 50 in six months and 60 to 70 in a\nyear. Rev. Mr. Newman, proclaiming the new day of the Gospel in that\ncolony, reported in 1723 that he had baptized two Negroes who could say\nthe Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Ten Commandments and gave good\nsureties for their fuller information. According to the report of Rev.\nC. Hall, the number of conversions there among the Negroes for eight\nyears was 355, including 112 adults; and \"at Edenton the blacks\ngenerally were induced to attend service at all these stations where\nthey behaved with great decorum.\"\n\nIn the middle colonies the work was given additional impetus by the\nmission of Dr. Thomas Bray. The Bishop of London sent this gentleman to\nthe colony of Maryland for the purpose of devising plans to convert\nadult Negroes and educate their children. Having also the influential\nsupport of M. D'Alone, the private secretary of King William, who gave\nfor its maintenance a fund, the proceeds of which were to be used to\nemploy catechists, the Thomas Bray Mission decidedly encouraged these\nmissionaries. The catechists appointed, however, failed; but the work\nwas well extended throughout Maryland, into neighboring colonies, and\neven into the settlements of Georgia, through certain persons assuming\nthe title of Dr. Bray's Associates. Traveling in North Carolina, Rev.\nMr. Stewart, a missionary, found there a school maintained by Dr. Bray's\nAssociates for the education of Indians and Negroes. They were\nsupporting such a school in Georgia in 1751; but in 1766 the Rev. S.\nFrink, a missionary trying to secure a hearing in Augusta, found that he\ncould neither convert the Indians nor the whites, who seemed to be as\ndestitute of religion as the former; but he succeeded in converting some\nNegroes.\n\n[Illustration: DIRECTING THE WANDERER IN THE RIGHT WAY.]\n\nIn Pennsylvania the missionary movement among the Negroes found\napparently less obstacles. There are records showing the baptism of\nNegroes as early as 1712. One Mr. Yates, a worker at Chester, was\ncommended by the Rev. G. Ross \"for his endeavors to train up the Negroes\nin the knowledge of religion.\" Mr. Ross himself had on one occasion at\nPhiladelphia baptized as many as twelve adult Negroes, who were examined\nbefore the congregation and answered to the admiration of all who heard\nthem. \"The like sight had never been seen before in that church.\" Giving\naccount of his efforts in Sussex County in 1723, Rev. Mr. Beckett said\nthat many Negroes constantly attended his services, while Rev. Mr.\nBartow about the same time baptized a Negro at West Chester. Rev.\nRichard Locke christened eight Negroes in one family at Lancaster in\n1747 and another Negro there the following year. In 1774 the Rev. Mr.\nJenney observed a great and daily increase of Negroes in this city, \"who\nwith joy attend upon the catechist for instruction.\" He had baptized\nseveral but was unable to add to his other duties.\n\nThe Society, ever ready to lend a helping hand to such an enterprise,\nappointed the Rev. W. Sturgeon  as catechist for the Negroes in\nPhiladelphia. At the same time the Rev. Mr. Neal of Dover was meeting\nwith equally good results, having baptized as many as 162 Negroes within\neight months. Now and then, however, as in the case of Rev. Mr. Pugh, a\nmissionary at Appoquinimmick, Pennsylvania, the missionaries received\nvery few Negroes, because their masters here, as elsewhere, were\nprejudiced against their being Christians.\n\nThe Society did not operate extensively in the State of New Jersey. The\nRev. Mr. Lindsay mentions his baptizing a Negro at Allerton in 1736. The\nmissions of New Brunswick reported a large number of Negroes as having\nbecome attached to their churches, but this favorable situation was not\nthe rule throughout the State. The missionary spirit was not wanting,\nhowever, and the accession of Negroes to the churches followed later in\nspite of local opposition and the general apathy as to the\nindoctrination of the blacks.\n\nIn those colonies further north where the Negroes were not found in\nlarge numbers, little opposition to their indoctrination was\nexperienced; and their evangelization proceeded without interruption,\nwhereas in most southern colonies the proselyting of the Negroes was\nlargely restricted to what the ministers and missionaries could do\nduring their spare time. There was in New York a special provision for\nthe employment of 16 clergymen and 13 lay teachers for the conversion of\nfree Indians and Negro slaves. Elias Neau, a worker in these ranks,\nestablished in New York City in 1704 a catechizing school for Negro\nslaves. After several years of imprisonment in France because of his\nProtestant faith he had come to New York as a trader. Upon witnessing,\nhowever, the neglected condition of the blacks, who, according to his\nwords, \"were without God in the world and of whose souls there was no\nmanner of care taken,\" he proposed the appointment of a catechist to\nundertake their instruction. Finally being prevailed upon to accept the\nposition himself, he obtained a license from the Governor, resigned his\nposition as elder in the French church, and conformed to the established\nchurch of England. At first he served from house to house but very soon\nsecured a regular place of instruction, after being commended by the\nSociety to Mr. Vesey, as a constant communicant of the church and a most\nzealous and prudent servant of Christ in proselyting the Negroes and\nIndians to the Christian religion whereby he did great service to God\nand his church. There was a further expression of confidence in him in a\nbill to be offered to Parliament \"for the more effectual conversion of\nthe Negroes and other servants in the plantations, to compel owners of\nslaves to cause their children to be baptized within three months after\ntheir birth and to permit them, when come to years of discretion, to be\ninstructed in the Christian religion on our Lord's Day by the\nmissionaries under whose ministry they live.\"\n\nNeau's school suffered considerably in the Negro riot in that city in\n1712, when it was closed by local authority and an investigation of his\noperations ordered. Upon learning, however, that the slaves primarily\nconcerned in this rising were not connected with his school but had\nprobably engaged in this enterprise because of their neglected\ncondition, the city permitted him to continue his operations as a\nteacher, feeling that Christian knowledge would not necessarily be a\nmeans of more cunning and aptitude to wickedness. The Governor and the\nCouncil, the Mayor, the Recorder, and Chief Justice informed the Society\nthat Neau had \"performed his work to the great advancement of religion\nand particular benefit of the free Indians, Negro slaves and other\nheathen in these parts, with indefatigable zeal and application.\"\n\nNeau died in 1722; but his work was continued by Huddlestone, Whitmore,\nColgan, Auchmutty, and Charlton. The last mentioned had undertaken the\ninstruction of the blacks while at New Windsor and found it practical\nand convenient to throw into one class his white and black catechumens.\nMr. Auchmutty served from 1747 to 1764 and finally reported that there\nwas among the Negroes an ever-increasing desire for instruction and not\none single black \"that had been admitted by him to the holy communion\nhad turned out bad or been in any way a disgrace to our holy\nprofession.\"\n\nThis good work done in the city of New York extended into other parts\nof the colony. We hear of Rev. Mr. Stoupe in 1737 baptizing four black\nchildren at New Rochelle. At New Windsor, Rev. Charles Taylor, a\nschool-master, kept a night school for the instruction of the Negroes.\nRev. J. Sayre, of Newburgh, promoted the education of the two races in\nfour of the churches under his charge. In 1714 Rev. T. Barclay, an\nearnest worker among the slaves in Albany, reported a great forwardness\namong them to embrace Christianity and a readiness to receive\ninstruction, although there was much opposition among some of the\nmasters. Sixty years later Schenectady reported among its members eleven\nNegroes who were sober and serious communicants.\n\nThese missionaries met with some opposition in New England among the\nPuritans, who had no serious objection to seeing the Negroes saved but\ndid not care to see them incorporated into the church, which then being\nconnected with the state, would grant them political as well as\nreligious equality. There had been an academic interest in the\nconversion of the Negroes. John Eliot had no particular objection to\nslavery but regretted that it precluded the possibility of their\ninstruction in the Christian doctrine and worked a loss of their souls.\nCotton Mather, taking the task of evangelization seriously, drew up a\nset of rules by which masters should be governed in the instruction of\ntheir slaves. He had much fear of the prodigious wickedness of deriding,\nneglecting and opposing all due means of bringing the poor Negroes unto\nGod. He did not believe that Almighty God made so many thousand\nreasonable creatures for nothing but \"only to serve the lusts of\nepicures or the gains of mammonists.\" In the protest of Jonathan Sewell\nset forth in his _Selling of Joseph_, there was an attack on slavery\nbecause the servants differed from those of Abraham, who commanded his\nchildren and his household that they should keep the way of the Lord. In\nthis they were standing upon the high ground taken by Richard Baxter, an\nauthority among the Puritans, who, denouncing the use of the slaves as\nbeasts for their mere commodity, said, that their masters who \"betray or\ndestroy or neglect their souls are fitter to be called incarnate devils\nthan Christians though they be no Christian whom they so abuse.\"\n\nThe opposition there, however, was not apparent everywhere among the\nministers of other sects. From Bristol, Rev. J. Usher of the Society for\nthe Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, wrote in 1730 that\nseveral Negroes desired baptism and were able to \"render a very good\naccount of the hope that was in them,\" but he was forbidden by their\nmasters to comply with the request. Yet he reported the same year that\namong others he had in his congregation \"about 30 Negroes and Indians,\"\nmost of whom joined \"in the public service very decently.\" At Newton,\nwhere greater opposition was encountered, J. Beach seemed to have\nbaptized by 1733 many Indians and a few Negroes. Dr. Cutler, a\nmissionary at Boston, wrote to the Society in 1737 that among those he\nhad admitted to his church were four Negro slaves. Endeavoring to do\nmore than to effect nominal conversions, Dr. Johnson, while at\nStratford, gave catechetical lectures during the summer months of 1751,\nattended by \"many Negroes and some Indians, as well as whites, about 70\nor 80 in all.\" And said he: \"As far as I can find, where the Dissenters\nhave baptized two, if not three or four, Negroes or Indians, I have four\nor five communicants.\" Dr. Macsparran conducted at Narragansett a class\nof 70 Indians and Negroes whom he frequently catechized and instructed\nbefore the regular service. J. Honyman, of Newport, had in his\ncongregation more than 100 Negroes who \"constantly attended the Publick\nWorship.\"\n\nThe real interest in the evangelization of the Negroes in the English\ncolonies, however, was manifested not by those in authority but by the\nQuakers, who, being friends of all humanity, would not neglect the\nNegroes. In accepting these persons of color on a basis of equality,\nhowever, the Quakers, in denouncing the nakedness of the religion of the\nother colonists at the same time, alienated their affections and easily\nbrought down upon them the wrath of the public functionaries in these\nplantations. Believing that such influence would not be salutary in\nslaveholding communities, many of them, as they did in Virginia,\nprohibited the Quakers from taking the Negroes to their meetings. Such\nopposition was but natural when we find that their leader, George Fox,\nwas advocating the instruction of Negroes in 1672 and boldly entreating\nhis coworkers to instruct and teach the Indians and Negroes in 1679 how\nthat \"Christ by the grace of God tasted death for every man.\" When\nGeorge Keith in 1693 began to promote the religious training of the\nslaves as preparation for emancipation and William Penn actually\nadvocated the abolition of the system to commit the whole sect to a\ndefinite scheme to return the Negroes to Africa to Christianize that\ncontinent, such opposition easily developed wherever the Friends\noperated.\n\nThese people, however, would not be deterred from carrying out their\npurpose. The results which followed show that they were not frustrated\nin the execution of their plans. John Woolman, one of the fathers of the\nQuakers in America, always bore testimony against slavery and repeatedly\nurged that the blacks be given religious instruction. We hear later of\ntheir efforts in towns and in the colonies of Virginia and North\nCarolina to teach Negroes to read and write. Such Negroes as were\naccessible in the settlements of the North came under the influence of\nQuakers of the type of John Hepburn, William Burling, Elihu Coleman,\nRalph Sandiford, and Anthony Benezet, who established a number of\nsuccessful missions operating among the Negroes. As the Quakers were,\nbecause of their anti-slavery tendencies, the owners of few slaves and\nwere denied access to those of others, what they did for the\nevangelization of the whole group was little when one considers the\nbenighted darkness in which most Negro slaves in America lived. The\nfaith of the Quakers, their religious procedure, and peculiar customs,\nmoreover, could not be easily understood and appreciated by the Negroes\nin their undeveloped state.\n\nGenerally speaking, then, one should say that the Negroes were\nneglected. The few missionaries among them stood like shining lights\nafter a great darkness. They, moreover, faced numerous handicaps, among\nwhich might be mentioned the conflicts of views, and especially that of\nthe established church with the Catholics and later with the evangelical\nsects. There were also the difficulties resulting from dealing with a\nbackward pioneering people, the scarcity of workers, and the lack of\nfunds to sustain those who volunteered for this service.\n\nSome difficulty resulted too from the differences of opinion as to what\ntenets of religion should be taught the Negro and how they should be\npresented. Should the Negroes be first instructed in the rudiments of\neducation and then taught the doctrines of the church or should the\nmissionaries start with the Negro intellect as he found it on his\narrival from Africa and undertake to inculcate doctrines which only the\nEuropean mind could comprehend? There was, of course, in the interest of\nthose devoted to exploitation, a tendency to make the religious\ninstruction of the Negroes as nearly nominal as possible only to remove\nthe stigma attached to those who neglected the religious life of their\nservants. Such limited instruction, however, as the slaves received when\ngiven only a few moments on Sunday proved to be tantamount to no\ninstruction at all; for missionaries easily observed in the end that\nChristianity was a rather difficult religion for an undeveloped mind to\ngrasp.\n\nAs long as these efforts were restricted to the Anglican clergy,\nmoreover, there could be little question among the British as to the\nadvisability of the procedure. When, however, upon the expansion of the\nterritory of the Catholics and other sects the Negroes came under the\ninfluence of different sorts of religion promoted by men of a new\nthought and new method, some conflict necessarily arose. There was\nanother handicap in that the Anglican clergymen in America during the\nseventeenth and eighteenth centuries were not of the highest order.\nTheir establishments were maintained by a tax on the colonists in\nkeeping with the customs and laws of England, so that their income was\nassured, whether or not they wielded an influence for good among the\npeople. The colonial clergy, therefore, too often became corrupt in this\nindependent economic position. They spent much of their time at games\nand various sports, tarried at the cup and looked upon the wine when it\nwas red, in fact, became so interested in the enjoyment of the things\ninviting in this world that they had in some cases little time to\ndevote to the elevation of the whites, to say nothing about the\nelevation of the Negroes. They did not feel disposed to undertake this\nwork themselves and in adhering to their rights as representatives of\nthe established church precluded the possibility of a more general\nevangelization of the Negroes by the other sects. One might expect from\na country, the religious affairs of which were thus administered, a\nnumber of protests from those thus served. There was such a general lack\nof culture among these backward colonists, however, that no such\ncomplaint followed. Interest in religion must come from the promoters of\nreligion. If the clergymen themselves did not manifest interest in this\nwork, it was out of the question to expect others to do so.\n\nAnother difficulty was the lack of workers. The colonies were not\nrapidly becoming densely populated and it was not then an easy matter to\ninduce young clergymen to try their fortunes in the wilderness of the\nwestern world for such remuneration as the colonists in their scattered\nand undeveloped economic state were able to give. As many of the white\nsettlements, therefore, were neglected, it would naturally follow that\nthe Negroes suffered likewise. Some of these workers volunteering to\ntoil in this field as missionaries were, of course, supported by funds\nraised for that purpose; but the difficulty in raising money for\nmissions is still a problem of the church. At that time the people were\ngenerally more disinclined to contribute to such causes than they are\nto-day. That was the age of commercial expansion and available funds\nwere drawn into that field, much at the expense of the higher things of\nlife. The intelligent Christians, therefore, with a clear understanding\nof the Bible and the doctrines derived therefrom were not legion even\namong the whites prior to the American Revolution. The slaves with the\nhandicap of bondage, of course, could not constitute exceptions to this\nrule.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nTHE DAWN OF THE NEW DAY\n\n\nThe new thought at work in the minds of the American people during the\nsecond half of the eighteenth century, especially after the Seven Years'\nWar, aroused further interest in the uplift of the groups far down. By\nthis time the colonists had become more conscious of their unique\nposition in America, more appreciative of their worth in the development\nof the new world, and more cognizant of the necessity to take care of\nthemselves by development from within rather than addition from without.\nHow to rehabilitate the weakened forces and how to minister to those who\nhad been neglected became a matter of concern to all forward-looking men\nof that time.\n\n[Illustration: THE FIRST COLORED BAPTIST CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA.]\n\nThe clergy thereafter considered the Negro more seriously even in those\nparts where slaves were found in large numbers. Among those directing\nattention to the spiritual needs of the race were Rev. Thomas Bacon and\nRev. Jonathan Boucher of the Anglican Church. The former undertook to\narouse his people through a series of sermons addressed to masters and\nslaves about the year 1750. He said: \"We should make this reading and\nstudying the Holy Scriptures and the reading and explaining of them to\nour children and servants or the catechising and instructing them in the\nprinciples of the Christian religion a stated duty. If the grown up\nslaves from confirmed habits of vice are hard to be reclaimed, the\nchildren surely are in our power and may be trained up in the way they\nshould go, with rational hopes that when they are old, they will not\ndepart from it.\" In 1763 Jonathan Boucher boldly said: \"It certainly is\nnot a necessary circumstance essential to the condition of the slave\nthat he be not indoctrinated; yet this is the general and almost\nuniversal lot of the slaves.\" He said, moreover: \"You may unfetter them\nfrom the chains of ignorance, you may emancipate them from the bondage\nof sin, the worse slavery to which they could be subjected; and by thus\nsetting at liberty those that are bruised though they still continue to\nbe your slaves, they shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption\ninto the glorious liberty of the children of God.\"\n\nThe accomplishment of the task of more thoroughly proselyting the\nNegroes, however, belongs to the record of other sects than the Anglican\nChurch. Even if the Negroes had been given the invitation to take a part\nin the propagation of the gospel as promoted by the first sects in\ncontrol, the organization of these bodies, the philosophical foundation\nof their doctrines, and the controversial atmosphere in which their\nprotagonists lived in this conflict of creeds, made it impossible for\npersons of such limited mental development as the slaves were permitted\nto experience, to participate. The Latin ceremonies of the Catholic\nchurch and the ritualistic conformity required by the Anglicans too\noften baffled the Negro's understanding, leaving him, even when he had\nmade a profession of faith, in a position of being compelled to accept\nthe spiritual blessings largely on the recommendation of the missionary\nproffering them. The simplicity of the Quakers set forth as an attack on\nthe forms and ceremonies of the more aristocratic churches equally taxed\nthe undeveloped intellect of certain Negroes who often wondered how\nmatters so mysterious could be reduced to such an ordinary formula.\n\nDuring the latter part of the seventeenth century and throughout the\neighteenth, there were rising to power in the United States two sects,\nwhich, because of their evangelical appeal to the untutored mind, made\nsuch inroads upon the Negro population as to take over in a few years\nthereafter the direction of the spiritual development of most of the\nNegroes throughout the United States. These were the Methodists and\nBaptists. They, together with the Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, imbibed\nmore freely than other denominations the social-compact philosophy of\nJohn Locke and emphasized the doctrines of Coke, Milton, and Blackstone\nas a means to justify the struggle for an enlargement of the domain of\npolitical liberty, primarily for the purpose of securing religious\nfreedom denied them by the adherents of the Anglican Church.\n\nNeither the Baptists nor the Methodists, however, were at first\nespecially interested in the Negro. Whitefield in Georgia advocated the\nintroduction of slaves and rum for the economic improvement of the\ncolony. He even owned slaves himself, although Wesley, Coke, and Asbury\nopposed the institution and advocated emancipation as a means to\nthorough evangelization. The work of the Methodists in behalf of the\nNegroes, moreover, was still less directed toward their liberation in\nthe West Indies than on the continent, doubtless because of the fact\nthat in that section there did not develop the struggle for the rights\nof man as an attack upon the British government as it happened in the\ncolonies along the Atlantic. But it is said that out of the 352,404\nsignatures to memorials sent by Dissenters to Parliament praying for the\nabolition of slavery, 229,426 were the names of Methodists.\n\nThe missionaries, however, seemed to be trying to stir between Scylla\nand Charybdis. They were forbidden to hold slaves but they were required\nto promote the moral and religious improvement of the slaves without in\nthe least degree, in public or private, interfering with their civil\ncondition. One who served for twenty years in the West Indies said: \"For\nhalf a century from the commencement of Methodism the slaves never\nexpected  freedom, and the missionaries never taught them to expect it;\nand when the agitation of later years unavoidably affected them more or\nless, as they learned chiefly through the violent speeches of their own\nmasters or overseers what was going on in their favor in England; it was\nmissionary influence that moderated their passions, kept them in the\nsteady course of duty, and prevented them from sinning against God by\noffending against the laws of man. Whatever outbreaks or insurrections\nat any time occurred, no Methodist slave was ever proved guilty of\nincendiarism or rebellion for more than seventy years, namely, from 1760\nto 1833. An extensive examination of their correspondence throughout\nthat lengthened period, and an acquaintance with their general character\nand history, enables me confidently to affirm that a more humble,\nlaborious, zealous, and unoffending class of Christian missionaries were\nnever employed by any section of the church than those sent out by the\nBritish conference to the West India Isles. They were eminently men of\none business, unconnected with any political party, though often\nstrongly suspected by the jealousies so rife in slaveholding\ncommunities. A curious instance of this jealousy occurred in regard to\none who was firmly believed to be a correspondent of the Anti-Slavery\nSociety in England. \"I did not know,\" said Fowell Buxton, in the House\nof Commons, \"that such a man was in existence, till I heard that he was\nto be hung for corresponding with me.\"\n\nIn what is now the United States, on the contrary, there developed among\nthe Baptists and Methodists a number of traveling missionaries,\nseemingly like the apostles of old, who in preaching to blacks and\nwhites alike won most Negroes by attacking all evils, among which was\nslavery. Freeborn Garretson, one of the earliest Methodist missionaries,\nsaid to his countrymen that it was revealed to him that \"it is not right\nfor you to keep your fellow creatures in bondage; you must let the\noppressed go free.\" He said in 1776: \"It was God, not man, that taught\nme the impropriety of holding slaves: and I shall never be able to\npraise him enough for it. My very heart has bled, since that, for\nslaveholders, especially those who make a profession of religion; for I\nbelieve it to be a crying sin.\"\n\nBishop Asbury recorded in his _Journal_ in 1776: \"I met the class and\nthen the black people, some of whose unhappy masters forbid their coming\nfor religious instruction. How will the sons of oppression answer for\ntheir conduct when the great proprietor of all shall call them to\naccount?\" In 1780 he records that he spoke to some select friends about\nslave keeping but they could not bear it. He said: \"This I know. God\nwill plead the cause of the oppressed though it gives offense to say so\nhere.... I am grieved for slavery and the manner of keeping these poor\npeople.\"\n\nWith these missionaries attacking slavery, the church as an organization\nhad to take some position. In 1780 the church required traveling\npreachers to set their slaves free, declaring at the same time that\nslavery is contrary to the laws of God, man and nature, and hurtful to\nsociety; contrary to the dictates of conscience and pure religion, and\ndoing that which we would not that others should do to us and ours. In\n1784 the conference took steps for the abolition of slavery, viewing it\nas \"contrary to the golden laws of God, on which hang all the law and\nthe prophets; and the inalienable rights of mankind, as well as every\nprinciple of the Revolution, to hold in the deepest abasement in a more\nabject slavery, than is, perhaps, to be found in any part of the world,\nexcept America, so many souls that are all capable of the image of God.\"\nEvery slaveholding member of their society was required to liberate his\nbondmen within twelve months. A record was to be kept of all slaves\nbelonging to masters within the respective circuits and further records\nof their manumissions. Any person who would not comply with these\nregulations would have liberty quietly to withdraw from the society\nwithin twelve months, and, if he did not, he would be excluded at that\ntime.[1] Persons thus withdrawing should not partake of the Lord's\nSupper and those holding slaves would be excluded from this same\nprivilege.\n\nThe Methodists who had taken this advanced position on slavery in 1784,\nhowever, soon found that they were ahead of the majority of the local\nmembers. Much agitation had been caused by this discussion in the State\nof Virginia and in 1785 there came several petitions asking for a\nsuspension of the resolution passed in 1784 and it was so ordered in\n1785 in the words: \"It is recommended to all our brethren to suspend the\nexecution of the minute on slavery _till the deliberations of a future\nconference_; and that an equal space of time be allowed to all our\nmembers for consideration when the minute shall be put in force.\" The\nconference declared, however, that it held in deepest abhorrence the\npractice of slavery and would not cease to seek its destruction by all\nwise and prudent means. These rules of 1784 were thereafter never put in\neffect but in 1796 the conference took the position of requiring the\nMethodists to be exceedingly cautious what persons they admitted to\nofficial stations in the church; \"and in case of future admission to\nofficial stations, to require such security of those who hold slaves for\nthe emancipation of them immediately, or gradually, as the laws of the\nStates respectively and the circumstances of the case will admit.\" A\ntraveling preacher becoming the owner of a slave forfeited his\nministerial position. No slaveholder should be received in the society\nuntil the preacher who has oversight of the circuit had spoken to him\nfreely and faithfully upon the subject of slavery. Every member who sold\na slave should immediately after full proof be excluded from the\nsociety, and if any member purchased a slave, the quarterly meeting\nshould determine the number of years in which the slave so purchased\nwould work out the price of his purchase. The preachers and other\nmembers of the society were requested to consider the subject of Negro\nslavery with deep attention and to impart to the General Conference\nthrough the medium of yearly conferences, or otherwise, any important\nthought upon the subject. The annual conferences were directed to draw\nup addresses for the gradual emancipation of the slaves to the\nlegislatures of those States in which no general laws had been passed\nfor that purpose.\n\nLocally the Baptists were winning more Negroes than the Methodists by\ntheir attack on slavery during these years, but because of the lack of\norganized effort the Baptists did not exert as much antislavery\ninfluence as the early Methodists. Through their conferences they often\ninfluenced the local churches to do more against slavery than they would\nhave done for fear that they might lose their status among their\nbrethren. As the Baptist church emphasized above all things local\nself-government, each church being a law unto itself, it did not as a\nnational body persistently attack slavery. The Baptists reached their\nmost advanced position as an anti-slavery body in 1789 when they took\naction to the effect \"that slavery is a violent depredation of the\nrights of nature and inconsistent with a republican government, and\ntherefore, recommend it to our brethren, to make use of their local\nmissions to extirpate this horrid evil from the land; and pray Almighty\nGod that our honorable legislature may have it in their power to\nproclaim the great jubilee consistent with the principles of good\npolicy.\"\n\nFrom this position most Baptists gradually receded. Yet, although not\nworking as an organized body, the Baptists in certain parts of the\ncountry were unusually outspoken and effective in waging war on slavery.\nAs there were a number of disputes, owing to the fact that the\ndenomination as a body was far from unanimity on this subject, some\ndissension in the ranks followed. Those who believed in the abolition of\nslavery by immediate means styled themselves the _Emancipating Baptists_\nor the _Emancipating Society_ in contradistinction to the remaining\nCalvinistic Baptists who desired to be silent on the question.\n\n[Illustration: REV. LEMUEL HAYNES, A.M.\n\nSincerely yours Lemuel Haynes [Signature]]\n\nThe most outspoken of the former was David Barrow.[2] He was a native of\nVirginia, where he commenced his ministry in 1771, passing through the\nperiod of much insolence and persecution of the rude countrymen then\ndenying the liberal sects religious freedom. He early became attached to\nthe antislavery school and consequently emancipated his own slaves in\nVirginia without at first having so very much to say against the\ninstitution. After distinguishing himself in the State of Virginia for\nhis unusual piety and great ability, he moved to Kentucky in 1798 and\nsettled in Montgomery County. When the antislavery dispute became very\nardent soon thereafter, he carried his opposition to the extent of\nalienating the support of his coworkers, who, sitting as an advisory\ncouncil, expelled him from the ministry for preaching emancipation, and\npreferred similar charges against him that his local church at Mount\nSterling might act accordingly. After having taken this drastic step,\nhowever, the Association at its next session voted to rescind this\naction; but Barrow had then joined with the emancipators and did not\ndesire to return. Among those whom he found sufficiently companionable\nin the new work which he had undertaken were Rev. Donald Holmes, Carter\nTarrant, Jacob Grigg, George Smith, and numerous other ministers, some\nof whom were native Americans and others native Europeans.\n\nThese emancipators began by inquiring: \"Can any person whose practice is\nfriendly to perpetual slavery be admitted a member of this meeting?\"\nThey thought not. They inquired, moreover: \"Is there any case in which\npersons holding slaves may be admitted to membership into the church of\nChrist?\" They said: \"No, except in the case of holding young slaves with\na view to their future emancipation when they reach the age of\nresponsibility, in the case of persons who have purchased slaves in\ntheir ignorance and desire to leave it to the church to say when they\nmay be free, in the case of women whose husbands are opposed to\nemancipation, in the case of a widow who has it not in her power to\nliberate them, and in the case when the slaves are idiots or too old to\nmaintain themselves.\" Another query was: \"Shall members in union with us\nbe at liberty in any case to purchase slaves?\" The answer was negative,\nexcept it was with a view to ransom them in such a way as the church\nmight approve. These emancipators in Kentucky constituted themselves\nsome years later an organized body and finally became known as the\n\"_Baptized Licking-Locust Association_.\" In the course of time, however,\nfeeling that that mode of association or the consolidation of churches\nwas unscriptural and ought to be laid aside, they changed their\norganization to that of an abolition society.\n\nIt is interesting to note the attitude of the Presbyterians toward the\namelioration of the condition of the Negroes. In 1774 when abolition was\nagitated in connection with the struggle for the rights of man, the\nPresbyterians were early requested to take action. A representation from\nDr. Ezra Stiles and Rev. Samuel Hopkins respecting the sending of two\nnatives of Africa on a mission to propagate Christianity in that land,\nbrought before that body a discussion of all aspects of Negro slavery.\nIn this debate a committee was requested to bring in a report on Negro\nslavery. The Assembly concurred in the proposal to send the missionaries\nto Africa, but deferred further consideration of slavery.\n\nThe first action taken on the subject came, after delay from year to\nyear, in 1787. The committee on overtures brought in a report to the\neffect that the \"Creator of the world having made of one flesh all the\nchildren of men, it becomes them as members of the same family, to\nconsult and promote each other's happiness. It is more especially the\nduty of those who maintain the rights of humanity, and who acknowledge\nand teach the obligations of Christianity, to use such means as are in\ntheir power to extend the blessings of equal freedom to every part of\nthe human race.\" Convinced of these truths, and sensible that the rights\nof human nature are too well understood to admit of debate, the Synod\nrecommended in the warmest terms to every member of their body, and to\nall the churches and families under their care, to do everything in\ntheir power consistent with the rights of civil society, to promote the\nabolition of slavery, and the instruction of Negroes, whether bond or\nfree.\n\nAfter some consideration, however, the Synod reached the conclusion of\nexpressing very much interest in the principles in favor of universal\nliberty that prevailed in America and also in that of the abolition of\nslavery. Yet inasmuch as it would be difficult to change slaves from a\nservile state to a participation in all the privileges of society\nwithout proper education and previous habits of industry, it recommended\nto all persons holding slaves to give them such education as might\nprepare them for the better enjoyment of freedom, and recommended\nfurther that in those cases in which the masters found the slaves\ndisposed to make just improvement of the privilege they should give them\n\"a peculium or sufficient time and sufficient means for procuring their\nliberty at a moderate rate.\"\n\nThere was some agitation of the question in 1793, when a memorial was\naddressed to the General Assembly by Warner Mifflin, a member of the\nSociety of Friends; but no action of importance was taken again until\n1795, when there arose the question as to whether the church should\nuphold communion with slaveholders. After due deliberation the General\nAssembly passed a resolution referring the memorialists to the action\nthat the Assembly had already taken with reference to slavery in 1787\nand 1793. As it seemed that the Presbytery of Transylvania was primarily\nconcerned in this affair, Mr. Rice and Dr. Muir, ministers, and Mr.\nRobert Patterson, an elder, all of that section, were appointed a\ncommittee to draft the following pacifist letter to that Assembly, which\ndetermined for generations thereafter the policy of the Presbyterians\nwith reference to slavery:\n\n  \"To our brethren, members of the Presbyterian Church, under the\n  care of Transylvania Presbytery.\n\n  \"_Dear Friends and Brethren_--The General Assembly of the\n  Presbyterian Church hear with concern from your Commissioners,\n  that differences of opinion with respect to holding Christian\n  communion with those possessed of slaves, agitate the minds of\n  some among you, and threaten divisions which may have the most\n  ruinous tendency. The subject of slavery has repeatedly claimed\n  the attention of the General Assembly, and the Commissioners from\n  the Presbytery of Transylvania are furnished with attested copies\n  of these decisions, to be read by the Presbytery when it shall\n  appear to them proper, together with a copy of this letter, to\n  the several Churches under their care.\n\n  \"The General Assembly have taken every step which they deemed\n  expedient or wise, to encourage emancipation, and to render the\n  state of those who are in slavery as mild and tolerable as\n  possible.\n\n  \"Forbearance and peace are frequently inculcated and enjoined in\n  the New Testament. 'Blessed are the peace-makers.' 'Let no one do\n  anything through strife and vainglory.' 'Let such esteem others\n  better than himself.' The followers of Jesus ought conscientiously\n  to walk worthy of their vocations, 'with all lowliness, and\n  meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another, endeavoring\n  to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.' If every\n  difference of opinion were to keep men at a distance, they could\n  subsist in no state of society, either civil or religious. The\n  General Assembly would impress this upon the minds of their\n  brethren, and urge them to follow peace, and the things which make\n  for peace.\n\n  \"The General Assembly commend our dear friends and brethren to the\n  grace of God, praying that the peace of God, which passeth all\n  understanding may possess their hearts and minds.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nPIONEER NEGRO PREACHERS\n\n\nThe new stage reached in the development of religious freedom in America\nin securing toleration for the evangelical denominations, meant the\nincreasing importance of the Negro in the church. Given access to the\npeople in all parts of the country by virtue of this new boon resulting\nfrom the struggle for the rights of man, the Methodists, Baptists and\nPresbyterians soon became imbued with the idea of an equality of the\nNegro in the church although they did not always militantly denounce\nslavery. Negroes were accepted in these congregations on this basis and\nwhen exhibiting the power of expounding the scriptures were sometimes\nheard with unusual interest. Such elevation of the blacks by these more\nliberal denominations, of course, incurred the displeasure and\nopposition of the aristocratic churchmen to the extent that these\nliberal denominations could not grant the Negroes as much freedom of\nparticipation in the church work as they were disposed to do.\n\nIn those cases in which Negroes were permitted to preach, they found\nthemselves confronting not only the opposition of the more\naristocratic sects but violating laws of long standing, prohibiting\nNegro ministers from exercising their gifts. When their ministrations\nwere of a local order, and they did not seemingly stir up their fellow\nmen to oppose the established order of things, not so much attention was\npaid to their operations. When, however, these Negroes of unusual power\npreached with such force as to excite not only the blacks but the\nwhites, steps were generally taken to silence these speakers heralding\nthe coming of a new day. This opposition on the part of the whites\napparently grew more strenuous upon the attainment of independence. As\nBritish subjects, they had more feeling of toleration for the rise of\nthe Negro in the church than they had after the colonies became\nindependent. While struggling for liberty themselves, even for religious\nfreedom, these Americans were not willing to grant others what they\nthemselves desired. The attitude of most Americans then, unlike that of\nsome of the British, seemed to be that the good things of this life were\nintended as special boons for a particular race.\n\nThe efforts to establish the early churches of South Carolina and\nGeorgia are cases in evidence. The first Negro Baptist Church in\nAmerica, according to Dr. W. H. Brooks, was founded by one Mr. Palmer at\nSilver Bluff across the river from Augusta, Georgia, in the colony of\nSouth Carolina, some time between the years 1773 and 1775. This group\nwas fortunate in having the kind master, George Galphin, who became a\npatron of this congregation. He permitted David George to be ordained\nfor this special work after having formerly allowed George Liele to\npreach there during these early years. Upon the evacuation of Savannah\nby the Americans in 1778, the Silver Bluff Church was driven into exile.\nCalled upon to decide whether they would support the American or British\ncause, friend separated from friend and sometimes master from slave.\nWhen Galphin, a patriot, abandoned his slaves in his flight for refuge\nfrom the British, David George and fifty of these slaves went over to\nthe British in Savannah where they were freed. David George returned to\nSouth Carolina and resided for a time in Charleston, from which he went,\nin 1782, to Nova Scotia, where he abode for ten years, preaching to\nBaptist congregations at Shelburn, Birchtown, Ragged Island, and in St.\nJohn, New Brunswick. Because of the inhospitable climate, the Negro\nslaves who had escaped with their loyal masters crossing the Canadian\nborder to these points in Nova Scotia, went in 1792 to Sierra Leone\nwhere they constituted themselves a colony, with David George the\nfounder of their first Baptist Church. After peace was made in 1783, the\nSilver Bluff Church was revived under the direction of the Rev. Jesse\nPeter who, unlike George Liele in having departed with his master when\nthe British evacuated Savannah in 1782, remained as a slave here in\nSouth Carolina to carry forward the work across the river from Augusta\nin South Carolina.\n\nAccording to Dr. Walter H. Brooks, a portion of this Silver Bluff Church\nbrought into Savannah, Georgia, at the time of the departure of certain\nAmericans to join the British in 1778, took shape as an organized body\nunder George Liele, who had been the servant of a British officer. It is\nhighly probable that David George and Jesse Peter, who had served these\npeople at Silver Bluff, did not have sufficient influence to secure a\npermit to preach to them in Savannah, although they did unite with the\nchurch there. Out of this effort of George Liele developed what Dr.\nBrooks considers the first Negro Baptist Church in the city of Savannah,\nwhich flourished during the British occupancy from 1779 to the year\n1782. The oldest Negro Baptist Church in this country, however, was that\nof the Silver Bluff Church which, in another meeting place and under a\nnew name, became established at Augusta, having existed from the year\n1773 to 1793 before the time of Andrew Bryan's organizing efforts in\nSavannah.\n\n[Illustration: ANDREW BRYAN]\n\nThe struggles of George Liele and Andrew Bryan throw additional light on\nthese early efforts. George Liele was born in Virginia about the year\n1750, but soon moved with his master, Henry Sharpe, to Burke County,\nGeorgia, a few years before the Revolutionary War. As his master was a\ndeacon of the Baptist church of which Matthew Moore was pastor, George,\nupon hearing this minister preach from time to time when accompanying\nhis owner, became converted and soon thereafter was baptized by this\nclergyman. Not long thereafter upon discovering that he had unusual\nministerial gifts, this church permitted him to preach upon the\nplantations along the Savannah river and sometimes to the congregation\nof the white church to which he belonged. As his master was much more\nliberal than most of his kind, Liele was permitted to extend his\noperations down the Savannah river as far as Brampton, Savannah, and\nYamacraw, where he preached to the slaves.\n\nHis ministerial work became so important that his master finally\nliberated him that he might serve without interference; but his work was\ninterrupted by the Revolutionary War, during which his master was\nkilled. Upon the death of his master, moreover, some of the heirs to the\nestate, not being satisfied with the manumission of George Liele, had\nhim thrown into prison, hoping to reenslave him; but Colonel Kirkland,\nof the British Army, then in control of Savannah, came to his rescue by\nsecuring his release from prison. When the British evacuated that city,\nGeorge Liele went with them to Jamaica, indenturing himself to Colonel\nKirkland as a servant for the amount of money necessary to pay his\ntransportation.[3] Before leaving Savannah, however, fortune brought it\nto pass that the vessel in which he embarked was detained for some weeks\nnear Tybee Island, not far from the mouth of the Savannah river. While\nwaiting there he came to the city of Savannah and baptized Andrew Bryan\nand his wife Hannah, Kate Hogg, and Hagar Simpson, who became the\nfounders of the first African Baptist Church in Savannah.\n\nWhen George Liele landed at Kingston he was, upon the recommendation of\nColonel Kirkland to General Campbell, the Governor of Jamaica, employed\nto work out the money for which he had been indentured. Upon discharging\nthe debt he obtained for himself and family a certificate of manumission\nand was free in 1784 to begin his work as a preacher. He preached first\nin a private home to a small congregation and then organized a church\nwith four men who had emigrated from the American colonies. Delivering\nwith power a message of such telling effect as the first dissenter to\nundertake the establishment of a liberal sect in the midst of\ncommunicants of the established church of England, he soon found his\nmeetings interrupted and himself cruelly persecuted. Frequently\nmemorialized for a grant of religious freedom, however, the Jamaica\nAssembly finally permitted George Liele to proceed with his work.\nWithin a few years he had a following of about 500 communicants, and\nwith the help of a number of inspired deacons and elders extended the\nwork far into the rural districts. In addition to his ministerial work\nhe administered the affairs of these various groups, taught a free\nschool, and conducted a business at which he earned his living.\n\nAt first this work was largely inspirational, stirring up the people\nhere and there; and many thought that it would be a movement of short\nduration: but becoming convinced that this was the real way of salvation\nand life, persons adhering to this new creed contributed sufficiently to\nits support to give it a standing in the community. Within a few years\nwe hear of the purchase for a sum of nearly 155 pounds of about three\nacres of land at the east end of Kingston, on which they built a church.\nWhen success had crowned his efforts in Jamaica, he took steps toward\nthe establishment of an edifice at Spanish Town, which was completed a\nfew years later. The records show too that he interested in his cause\nsome men of influence like Mr. Steven A. Cook, a member of the Jamaica\nAssembly, who solicited funds for him in England. Of him Mr. Cook bears\nthis testimony: \"He is a very industrious man, decent, humble in his\nmanners, and, I think, a good man.\" Contemporaries speak of his family\nlife as pleasant. He had a wife and four children, three boys and a\ngirl. He was not a well educated man, but he found time to read some\ngood literature.\n\nThe unusual tact of George Liele was the key to his success. He seemed\nto know how to handle men diplomatically, but some of his policy may be\nsubject to criticism. Unlike so many Baptist and Methodist missionaries\nwho came forward preaching freedom of body and mind and soul to all men\nand thereby stirring up the slaves in certain parts, George Liele would\nnot receive any slaves who did not have permission of their owners, and\ninstead of directing attention to their wrongs, conveyed to them the\nmere message of Christ. His influence among the masters and overseers\nbecame unusual, and the membership of his church rapidly increased. No\nliterature was used and no instruction given until it had at first been\nshown to the members of the legislature, the magistrates, and the\njustices to secure their permission beforehand. One of the masters,\nspeaking of the wholesome influence of Liele's preaching, said that he\ndid not need to employ an assistant nor to make use of the whip whether\nhe was at home or elsewhere, as his slaves were industrious and\nobedient, and lived together in unity, brotherly love, and peace.\n\nThe next pioneer preacher of worth among the Negroes was Andrew Bryan,\nGeorge Liele's successor in Georgia. Andrew Bryan was born a slave in\n1737 at Goose Creek, South Carolina, about sixteen miles from\nCharleston. He was later brought to Savannah, Georgia, where, as stated\nabove, he came under the influence of the preaching of George Liele. He\nat first commenced by public exhortations and prayer meetings at\nBrampton. Nine months after the departure of George Liele, Bryan began\nto preach to congregations of black and white people at Savannah. Moved\nby his convincing message, his master and other whites encouraged him in\nhis chosen field, inasmuch as the influence he had upon slaves was\nsalutary. He was thereafter permitted to erect on the land of Mr. Edward\nDavis at Yamacraw a rough wooden building of which his group was soon\nartfully dispossessed. As his ministrations were opposed by others who\ndid not like this simple faith, unusual persecution soon followed.\nBryan's adherents were not permitted to hold frequent meetings, and in\ntrying to evade this regulation by assembling in the swamps, they ran\nthe risk of rigid discipline. With the aid of his brother Sampson,\nAndrew Bryan, however, gradually held this group together. At first it\nwas small; but finally sufficiently large to receive the attention of\nthe Rev. Thomas Burt in 1785, and that of the Rev. Abraham Marshall of\nKioke in 1788. The latter then baptized forty-five additional members of\nthis congregation, and on January 20, 1788, organized them as a church\nand ordained Andrew Bryan as a minister with full authority to preach\nthe gospel and to administer the ordinances of the Baptist church.\n\nThis recognition of Bryan as a minister, however, did not solve all of\nhis problems. The greater his influence among the slaves, the more the\nmasters were inclined to believe that his work could result only in that\nof servile insurrection. It became more difficult, therefore, for slaves\nto attend his meetings; the patrols whipped them sometimes even when\nthey had passes, and finally a large number of the members were arrested\nand severely punished. The culmination was that Andrew Bryan, their\npastor himself, and his brother, Sampson Bryan, one of the first\ndeacons, were \"inhumanly cut and their backs were so lacerated that\ntheir blood ran down to the earth as they, with uplifted hands, cried\nunto the Lord; but Bryan, in the midst of his torture, declared that he\nrejoiced not only to be whipped but would freely suffer death for the\ncause of Jesus Christ.\" Accused of sinister plans, Andrew Bryan and his\nbrother Sampson were, upon the complaint of their traducers, imprisoned\nand dispossessed of their meeting house. Lorenzo Dow, an eccentric\nitinerant preacher appearing in Savannah about this time, preached at\nBryan's church to show not only his compassion for Bryan's waiting\ncongregation, but his disapproval of the persecution to which this\napostle was subjected.\n\nJonathan Bryan, the master of Andrew and Sampson, insisting that they\nwere the victims of prejudice and wickedness, however, secured for them\na hearing. They came before the Justices of the Inferior Court of\nChatham County, Henry Osborne, James Haversham, and James Montague,\nwho, finding no criminal intent in their efforts, ordered that they be\nreleased. They were then permitted by their master to resume worship in\nthe barn on his plantation, but persecution followed them even there,\nwhere they were surrounded by spies and eavesdroppers. This continued\nuntil one of the eavesdroppers, upon listening to what was going on\namong these communicants at Andrew Bryan's private home, heard this man\nof God earnestly praying for the men who had so mercilessly used him.\nThis enlisted so much sympathy among the people kindly disposed that the\nchief justice of the court, before whom they had been brought, granted\nthem permission to continue their worship of God at any time between\nsunrise and sunset. They held meetings at Brampton about two years,\nduring which they made a number of influential friends among the whites,\nwho, along with the communicants of this group, assisted Bryan in\nraising funds to purchase a lot upon which to begin the erection of a\nchurch in 1794. The first African church stood for years on this lot on\nwhat is now known as Mill Street, running to Indian Street Lane in\nSavannah.\n\nAndrew Bryan faced another crisis upon the death of Jonathan Bryan, his\nmaster. He succeeded, however, in emerging as a free man, the heirs of\nthe estate having given him an opportunity to purchase his freedom for\nfifty pounds. Fortune prospered him thereafter to the extent that he\nsoon bought in Yamacraw a lot on which he built a residence not far from\nthe place of worship. Upon the final division of the Bryan estate it\ndeveloped that the church building was still controlled by that family,\nbut the worship of these communicants continued there under the\nsupervision of the whites without serious interruption. The membership\nhad then reached 700.\n\nBryan soon obtained a position of influence in spite of all of his\ndifficulties, as is evidenced by his own testimony in addressing his\ncoworker, Dr. Rippon, in 1800. He said: \"With much pleasure I inform\nyou, dear sir, that I enjoy good health, and am strong in body, at the\nage of sixty-three years, and am blessed with a pious wife, whose\nfreedom I have obtained, and an only daughter and child, who is married\nto a free man, though she, and consequently under our laws, her seven\nchildren, five sons and two daughters, are slaves. By a kind Providence\nI am well provided for, as to worldly comforts (though I have had very\nlittle given me as a minister), having a house and lot in this city,\nbesides the land on which several buildings stand, for which I receive a\nsmall rent, and a fifty-acre tract of land, with all necessary\nbuildings, four miles in the country, and eight slaves; for whose\neducation and happiness I am enabled through mercy to provide.\"\n\nAs this congregation continued to increase, Andrew Bryan secured the\nservices of his brother as an assistant pastor. He planned, moreover, to\ndivide the church whenever the membership became too large for him to\nserve it efficiently. This was what led to the organization of the\nSecond African Baptist Church of Savannah, with Henry Francis, a slave\nof Colonel Leroy Hamilton, as pastor. As the head of this congregation,\nFrancis manifested power of remarkable leadership, and soon thereafter\npurchased his freedom to devote all of his time to his congregation.\nBryan's church was further divided upon reaching the stage of having an\nunwieldy number, when there emerged from it the Third African Baptist\nChurch. Bryan's church, moreover, became in the course of time the\nbeacon light in the Negro religious life of Georgia. From this center\nwent other workers into the inviting fields of that State, as to\nAugusta, where a flourishing Baptist church was established. This\ncondition obtained until the Negro preacher became circumscribed during\nthe thirties and forties by laws intended to prevent such disturbances\nas were caused by Nat Turner in Southampton County, Virginia. Andrew\nBryan, however, did not live to see this. He passed away in 1812,\nrespected by all who knew him and loved by his numerous followers. The\nposition which he finally attained in the esteem and the respect of the\ncommunity is well illustrated by the honor shown him by the following\nresolutions of the Savannah Baptist Association (white) on the occasion\nof his death:\n\n  \"The Association is sensibly affected by the death of the Rev.\n  Andrew Bryan, a man of color, and pastor of the First Colored\n  Church in Savannah. This son of Africa, after suffering\n  inexpressible persecutions in the cause of his divine Master, was\n  at length permitted to discharge the duties of the ministry among\n  his colored friends in peace and quiet, hundreds of whom, through\n  his instrumentality, were brought to a knowledge of the truth as\n  'it is in Jesus.' He closed his extensively useful and amazingly\n  luminous course in the lively exercise of faith and in the joyful\n  hope of a happy immortality.\"\n\nIn those parts of the South where the pro-slavery sentiment was not\ndeveloped so early as in Georgia, the Baptists were able to give their\nNegro communicants more consideration. After this denomination had won\ntoleration in Virginia, its leaders experienced much less difficulty in\nproselyting Negroes than in the case of other communicants. From 1770 to\n1790 Negro preachers, thanks to the pioneer work of a man of color, Rev.\nMr. Moses, were in charge of congregations in Charles City, Petersburg,\nWilliamsburg, and Allen's Creek, in Lunenburg County. In 1801 Gowan\nPamphlet of that State was the pastor of a progressive Baptist church in\nWilliamsburg, some members of which could read, write and keep accounts.\nWilliam Lemon was about this time chosen by a white congregation to\nserve at the Pettsworth or Gloucester church in that State.\n\nIn Portsmouth, Virginia, a Negro Baptist preacher attained unusual\ndistinction. There the blacks and whites belonging to the same Baptist\nchurch experienced very little difficulty in their acceptance of each\nother on the basis of religious equality. They were constituted a church\nby the Association held in Isle of Wight County in 1789, and after the\nservice of a number of pioneer ministers the church called one Thomas\nArmistead. The church fell into bad hands a few years thereafter and\nsuffered a decline under one Frost, a Baptist preacher, who in the\npropagation of the doctrines of free will caused unusual excitement.\nThis did not subside until he, according to the contemporaries, was\nstricken by the hand of God. While looking out for another pastor there\ncame to this community, in 1795, from Northampton County, a black\npreacher whose name was Josiah Bishop. He preached with such fervor and\nwith such success that the whites as well as the blacks hung, as it\nwere, upon his words. He easily rallied the scattered forces of the\nchurch, revived their spirits, and lifted high the banner of the gospel.\nSo impressed was the congregation with his work that the church gave\nJosiah Bishop the money with which to purchase his freedom and soon\nthereafter bought his wife and his eldest son.\n\nIt is said that his preaching was much admired by both saints and\nsinners wherever he went. \"As a stranger,\" say Lemuel Burkett and Jesse\nReed in their _Concise History of the Kehukee Baptist Association_, \"few\nreceived equal degree of liberality  with him.\" They were, therefore,\nadvised, \"that whereas the black brethren in the church seemed anxious\nfor a vote in the conference that it would be best to consider the black\npeople as a wing of the body, and Josiah Bishop to take over sight of\nthem, as this church, at that time, fellowshiped a number of Negroes.\nThe black people at first seemed pleased with the proposition, but soon\nrepented and came and told the deacons they were afraid that matters\nmight turn up disagreeable to them and dishonoring to God, and said that\nthey would be subordinate to the white brethren, if they would let them\ncontinue as they were, which was consented to.\" Josiah Bishop, of\ncourse, could not long remain as the pastor of a mixed church in the\nslaveholding colony of Virginia. After toiling successfully for a short\nperiod in that city, he moved to Baltimore, where he helped to promote\nthe cause of the rising Baptists in that city. When his work was well\ndone there, he moved to the city of New York, where during 1810 and 1811\nhe served as the pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church.\n\nPioneering in this same field in 1792 was the famous \"Uncle Jack,\" a\nfull-blooded African, recognized by the whites as a forceful preacher of\nthe gospel in the Baptist Church. For some years he preached from\nplantation to plantation, moving so many to repentance that the white\ncitizens in appreciation of his worth had him licensed to preach and\nraised a fund with which they purchased his freedom. They bought him a\nsmall farm in Virginia, where for more than 40 years he continued his\nministry as an instrument in the conversion of a large number of white\npeople.\n\nContemporaneous with Uncle Jack was Henry Evans, a free Negro of\nVirginia. On his way to Charleston, South Carolina, to work at the trade\nof shoemaking, Evans happened to stop at Fayetteville, North Carolina.\nHaving been licensed as a local preacher in the Methodist Church, he\ntarried there to work among the people, whose deplorable condition\nexcited his sympathy. At first he worked at his trade and preached on\nSunday. The town council, feeling that he was a public danger, ordered\nhim to refrain from preaching. Whereupon he began to hold secret\nmeetings. His preaching became so effective, however, and so many white\npersons attended his meetings, that the official opposition yielded\nsufficiently to have a regular Methodist Church organized there in 1790.\nThe edifice was so constructed as to provide quarters for Evans, who\nremained there until his death in 1810, although a white minister was in\nactual charge of the church.\n\nFrom the Methodists there emerged another such preacher, Black Harry,\nwho, accompanying Mr. Asbury, learned from him to preach more forcefully\nthan Asbury himself. According to a contemporary, Harry was \"small, very\nblack, keen-eyed, possessing great volubility of tongue; and, although\nilliterate so that he could not read,\" was one of the most popular\npreachers of that age. Upon hearing Harry preach, Dr. Benjamin Rush\npronounced him the greatest orator in America. Desiring Harry to\naccompany him in 1782, Bishop Asbury made the request, saying that the\nway to have a very large congregation was to give out that Harry was to\npreach, as more would come to hear Harry than to hear Bishop Asbury. On\none occasion in Wilmington, Delaware, where the cause of the Methodist\nwas unpopular, a large number of persons came out of curiosity to hear\nBishop Asbury. But, as the auditorium was already taxed to its fullest\ncapacity, they could only hear from the outside. At the conclusion of\nthe exercises, they said, without having seen the speaker: \"If all\nMethodist preachers can preach like the Bishop, we should like to be\nconstant hearers.\" Some one present replied: \"That was not the Bishop,\nbut the Bishop's servant that you heard.\" This, to be sure, had the\ndesired effect, for these inquirers concluded: \"If such be the servant,\nwhat must the master be?\" \"The truth was,\" says John Ledman in his\n_History of the Rise of Methodism in America_, \"that Harry was a more\npopular speaker than Mr. Asbury or almost any one else in his day.\" In\nthis same capacity Harry accompanied and preached with not only Mr.\nAsbury but with Garretson, Watcote, and Dr. Coke.\n\n\"After he had moved on the tide of popularity for a number of years,\"\nsays John Ledman, \"he fell by wine, one of the strong enemies of both\nministers and people. And now, alas! this popular preacher was a drunken\nragpicker in the streets of Philadelphia. But we will not leave him\nhere. One evening Harry started down the Neck, below Southwark,\ndetermined to remain there until his backslidings were healed. Under a\ntree he wrestled with God in prayer. Sometime that night God restored to\nhim the joys of his salvation. From this time Harry continued faithful;\nthough he could not stand before the people with that pleasing\nconfidence as a public speaker that he had before his fall. About the\nyear 1810 Harry finished his course; and, it is believed, made a good\nend. An unusually large number of people, both white and colored,\nfollowed his body to its last resting place, in a free burying ground in\nKensington.\"\n\nAmong the pioneer Negro preachers one of the most interesting was John\nStewart. He was born of free parents in Powhatan County, Virginia, where\nhe received some religious training and attended a school during the\nwinter, thus securing to him so much mental development by the time of\nreaching maturity that he could make a living much more easily than some\nof his fellows. This early training, however, did not seem to restrain\nhim from certain temptations of this life; for, in going away from home\nto make his career, he fell a victim to bad habits, becoming a dissolute\ndrunkard, drifting here and there. Finally he came to Marietta, Ohio,\nwhere under the influence of the gospel as it was preached among his\nlowly people in that center, he was converted and united with the\nMethodist Episcopal Church. He then became a man of very regular habits\nand devoted much of his time to meditation and prayer. On a certain\noccasion he said, \"I heard a voice like a woman's singing and praising\nthe Lord, while straight from the northern sky, which was filled with a\ngreat radiance, came a man's voice, saying, 'You must declare my counsel\nfaithfully,' and I found myself standing on my feet speaking as to a\ncongregation.\" He felt that this was a call to preach, but at first\nresisted the influence, hoping to escape therefrom. Having fallen sick\nnot long thereafter, however, he looked upon this as a punishment and\nresponded to the voices that he heard, overcoming his fears. Having his\nmind thoroughly made up, he set off then to preach the gospel, steering,\nas he said, \"my course sometimes by the road, sometimes through the\ncities, until I came to Goshen, where I found the Delaware Indians.\"\n\nHe preached and sang among these people for a short period, and finally\nreturned to Marietta. He was again summoned by the voices in the night\nimpelling him to make another pilgrimage. This time he drifted into a\nsettlement of whites, to whom he preached with much success, moving many\nof them to repentance and organizing them as a church. He then proceeded\nto Upper Sandusky, the home of the Wyandot Indians, who, having never\nreceived the gospel, although the Roman Catholics had unsuccessfully\ntried to evangelize them, had fallen back into a worse state of\nheathenism and especially drunkenness, resulting from the vices imported\nby traders. Here he had the opposition of William Walker, the government\nagent, who did not take well to his message, but on being converted very\nsoon thereafter, Walker gave Stewart less trouble in reaching the\nIndians. Another great hindrance, however, was the coming of the other\nwhite traders, who prospered by the liquor traffic that they carried on\nwith these Indians. At first they tried to show that Stewart was not\nproperly authorized as a minister and should be denied the right to\npreach; but having then the support of William Walker, the zealous\nmissionary succeeded in delivering his message. Some of the Indians,\ntoo, felt that the gospel which he preached was not intended for the\nIndians but for the white man, although Stewart endeavored to show that\nthis boon was for all nations and for all people. He persisted in\nholding his position, and in the end success crowned his efforts in\nbringing about the conversion of all of the prominent chiefs of this\ntribe.\n\nIt is said that because of this success his enemies contrived to\ndiscourage him. They prepared for an unusually great celebration in\naccordance with the festive ideas of the Indians, trying to bring them\nback to their old habits. Becoming discouraged, John Stewart preached\nhis farewell sermon and returned to Marietta. But he came back to Upper\nSandusky after an absence of a few months and devoted the rest of his\nlife to work among the Wyandot Indians. Fortunately he was then filled\nwith enthusiasm and the word which he preached did not return void. As\nhis mission was then a success, he appealed for help to the higher\nconference, then meeting at Urbana, in March, 1817. J. B. Finley was\nchosen to work in this field. Stewart had planned for a thorough\nelevation of these people, including industrial training, which centered\naround the erection of a sawmill and the purchase of a farm upon which\nhe taught agriculture. A log structure was soon built for school\npurposes, and there soon followed Miss Harriet Stubbs, who volunteered\nto teach the Indians. Subsequent reports show that the work was in good\ncondition in 1822. The religion of Jesus Christ was flourishing and\neverywhere the Indians were living upright lives. At this time, however,\nStewart's health had failed him, as he had well run his course, having\nbeen exposed to all sorts of hardships. He passed away on the 17th of\nDecember, his hand in that of his wife. His last words, addressed to the\nsorrowing people about his bed, were: \"Oh, be faithful.\"\n\nLemuel Haynes, another pioneer preacher, was born July 18, 1753, at West\nHartford, Connecticut. His father was a man of unmingled African\nextraction and his mother a white woman of respectable New England\nancestry. As he was a natural son, the mother abandoned him in infancy,\nbut he fortunately found asylum at the home of one Haynes, whose name he\ntook and with whom he lived until at the age of five months, when he was\nbound out to David Rose of Granville, Massachusetts, where Lemuel grew\nto manhood.\n\nLemuel was given the rudimentary training in the backwoods schools of\nthe community, in which he learned to read and write. These meager\nadvantages led him to seek an extension of his knowledge through the\nreading of good books. As these were scarce, he had to be content with\nthe Bible, the Psalter, the writings of Watts and Doddridge, and Young's\n_Night Thoughts_. Before his education could be completed, however,\nLemuel, having been prostrated with grief because of the loss of the\nwife of his kind master, entered the continental army, first as a minute\nman in 1774 and then as a regular soldier after the battle of Lexington.\n\nReturning from the war, Lemuel engaged in agriculture; but he had early\nbeen given a pious trend and soon decided to study theology in\nanticipation of the designs of Providence concerning him. For some time\nhe had been accustomed to read the Bible and sermons of others on the\noccasions of conducting family prayers in the home of David Rose. From\nthis exercise he mustered sufficient courage to read one of his own\nsermons, and finally to preach before the local congregations, which\nmarveled at the power of his words. To prepare himself thoroughly to\npreach, Haynes once planned to attend Dartmouth College, but shrank from\nit. After studying privately under Daniel Farrand of Canaan,\nConnecticut, and William Bradford of Wintonbury, Haynes spent a short\nperiod teaching a school for whites. He was licensed to preach in the\nCongregational Church in 1780 and was ordained soon thereafter,\nbeginning his ministry at Middle Granville, where he labored five years.\nHere Bessie Babbit, a white woman of considerable education and piety,\noffered him her heart and they were married in 1783.\n\nFrom this small charge Haynes was called to Torrington, Connecticut. A\nleading citizen was much displeased that the church should have a\n\"nigger minister,\" and to show his lack of respect for the new incumbent\nthis man went into the church and sat with his hat on. \"He had not\npreached far,\" said the man, \"when I thought I saw the whitest man I\never knew in that pulpit, and I tossed my hat under the pew.\" Haynes was\nthen called to take charge of the Congregational Church in West Rutland.\nHere his usefulness was appreciated and his efforts were extended to\nother towns through his revivals, one of the most successful of which he\nconducted in Pittsfield. Having developed such power, he was employed,\nin 1804, by the Connecticut Missionary Society to labor in the\ndestitute sections of Vermont. In 1809 he was appointed to a similar\nservice by the Vermont Missionary Society. In 1814 he preached\nextensively in Connecticut, appearing before crowded houses, having in\nhis audience on one occasion President Dwight of Yale.\n\nWith such standing in the church Haynes was expected to manifest\ninterest in the great questions at issue in New England. One of these\nwas the Stoddardian principle of admitting moral persons without\ncredible evidences of grace, to the Lord's Supper, and the half-way\ncovenant by which parents though not admitted to the Lord's Supper were\nencouraged to offer their children in baptism. In this debate Haynes,\nwith his eloquence and logic, vanquished the famous Hosea Ballou by his\npowerful sermon based on the text _Ye shall not surely die_. There was\nalso a difference of opinion with respect to the operations of the Holy\nSpirit, but Haynes stood with Edwards and Whitefield. Being thus active\nin dispelling clouds of doubt, he brought many back to a more righteous\nconduct.\n\nBecoming involved in the partisan strife which characterized the rise of\npolitical parties after Washington's inauguration, Haynes alienated the\naffections of some of his communicants by his bold advocacy of the\nprinciple conducive to a strong national government as administered in\nthe beginning by George Washington, whose policies Haynes admired. He\nthen left West Rutland and preached a while in Manchester, Vermont,\nuntil 1822, when he accepted a call to Granville, New York. There he\nspent usefully the last eleven years of his life.\n\nIn spite of the fact that Lemuel Haynes was working altogether among\nwhite people, however, he was successful wherever he was stationed. His\neloquence and Christian nobility won him much attention. \"He always\nshowed himself a man of a feeling heart, sensibly affected by human\nsuffering,\" says Cooley, his biographer. \"At home he was industrious,\nhis family government was parental. He was the embodiment of piety and\nhonesty.\" Churches and associations were strengthened by his labors.\nTheir membership increased and the influence of the gospel was extended.\nSo lived and died one of the noblest of the New England Congregational\nministers of a century ago. Of illegitimate birth, and of no\nadvantageous circumstances of family, rank or station, he became one of\nthe choicest instruments of Christ. His face betrayed his race and\nblood, and his life revealed his Lord.\n\nThere served as a pioneer worker for the Presbyterians John Gloucester,\nwho founded the first African Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia in\n1807. According to Gillett's _History of the Presbyterian Church in the\nUnited States_, this church owed its existence, and for many years its\ncontinued support, largely to the \"Evangelical Society of Philadelphia,\"\norganized upon the recommendation  and influence of Dr. Alexander. \"Its\nfirst pastor, although never installed,\" says Gillett, \"was John\nGloucester, a slave of Dr. Blackburn of Tennessee. He had attracted the\nattention of the latter, under whose preaching he was converted, by his\npiety and natural gifts, and by him was purchased, and encouraged to\nstudy with a view to the ministry. After having been licensed and\nordained by the Union Presbytery, he was, in 1818, received from that\nbody by the Philadelphia Presbytery, and, under the patronage of the\n'Evangelical Society,' continued in charge of the African Church until\nhis death in 1822. The house of worship, located on the corner of\nShippen and Seventh Streets, was completed in 1811.\"\n\n\"Mr. Gloucester first commenced his missionary efforts by preaching in\nprivate houses,\" continues Gillett, \"but these were soon found\ninsufficient to accommodate his congregations. A schoolhouse was\nprocured near the site of the future edifice; but in clear weather he\npreached in the open air. Possessed of a strong and musical voice, he\nwould take his stand on the corner of Shippen and Seventh Streets, and\nwhile singing a hymn would gather around him many besides his regular\nhearers, and hold their attention till he was prepared to commence his\nexercises. Possessed of a stout, athletic frame, and characterized by\nprudence, forbearance, and a fervent piety, he labored with unremitting\nzeal, securing the confidence and respect of his brethren of the\nPresbytery, and building up the congregation which he had gathered. His\nfreedom was granted him by Dr. Blackburn, and by his own application he\nsecured the means in England and this country to purchase his family. He\nis said to have been a man of strong mind, mighty of prayer, and of such\nfervor and energy in wrestling supplication that persons sometimes fell\nunder his power, convicted of sin.\"\n\nTo this class of Negro preachers in the South belongs John Chavis,\nmentioned in another connection below. Chavis was a full-blooded Negro\nof dark brown color, born probably near Oxford, Granville County, North\nCarolina, about 1763. From a youth he impressed the public as a man of\nunusual power and was, therefore, sent by his friends to Princeton to\nsee if a Negro could take a collegiate education. Some have said that he\nwas never a regularly enrolled student at Princeton. The records,\nhowever, show that he was under the direction of Dr. Witherspoon, who\nwas soon convinced that the experiment \"would issue favorably.\" In\nkeeping with the course of study of that time, he was chiefly interested\nin the classics. In these fields he easily took rank as a good Latin and\na fair Greek scholar. Exactly how much work he did in the field of\ntheology is not known, but as the line drawn between theology and\nclassical studies at that time was not very definite, he could easily\nlay a foundation for work in the ministry, and especially so if his\ninstruction were under the direction of one man, who would shape his\ncourse of study in keeping with his practical needs rather than in\nconformity with the formal training of the school.\n\nWhether Chavis was sent to Princeton to make a minister of him or not,\nhowever, he very soon bestirred himself in that direction. From\nPrinceton he went to Lexington, Virginia, to preach. In the records of\nthe Presbyterians for 1801, Chavis is referred to as \"a black man of\nprudence and piety.\" \"For his better direction in the discharge of\nduties which are attended with many circumstances of delicacy and\ndifficulty\" some prudential instructions were issued to him by the\nGeneral Assembly, \"governing himself by which the knowledge of religion\namong the Negroes might be made more and more to strengthen the order of\nthe society.\" The annals of the year 1801 report him in the service of\nthe Hanover Presbytery as a \"riding missionary under the direction of\nthe General Assembly.\" He was very soon stationed in Lexington as a\nrecognized preacher of official status working among his own people. In\n1805, however, he returned to his native State, where as a result of the\nclose relations existing between the whites and blacks and his power as\nan expounder of the gospel, he preached to large congregations of both\nraces.\n\nReferring to his career, Paul C. Cameron, a son of Judge Duncan of\nNorth Carolina, said: \"In my boyhood life at my father's home I often\nsaw John Chavis, a venerable old Negro man, recognized as a freeman and\nas a preacher or clergyman of the Presbyterian Church. As such he was\nreceived by my father and treated with kindness and consideration, and\nrespected as a man of education, good sense and most estimable\ncharacter.\" Mr. George Wortham, a lawyer of Granville County, said: \"I\nhave heard him read and explain the Scriptures to my father's family\nrepeatedly. His English was remarkably pure, containing no 'Negroisms';\nhis manner was impressive, his explanations clear and concise, and his\nviews, as I then thought and still think, entirely orthodox. He was said\nto have been an acceptable preacher, his sermons abounding in strong\ncommon sense views and happy illustrations, without any effort at\noratory or sensational appeals to the passions of his hearers.\"\n\nIn North Carolina the disastrous result of the reaction against the\nNegroes handicapped Chavis in his work. As a result of the fear of\nservile insurrection among the slaves after Nat Turner's uprising, the\nexercise of the gift of preaching was prohibited to Negroes in North\nCarolina. Chavis thereafter devoted himself to teaching, maintaining\nclassical schools for white persons in Granville, Wake, and Chatham\ncounties. He was patronized by the most aristocratic white people of\nthat State. In the end he counted among his former students W. P.\nMangum, afterward United States Senator; P. H. Mangum, his brother;\nArchibald and John Henderson, sons of Chief Justice Henderson; Charles\nManly, later Governor of that commonwealth, and Dr. James L. Wortham of\nOxford, North Carolina.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nTHE INDEPENDENT CHURCH MOVEMENT\n\n\nThe facts set forth above easily lead to the conclusion that the rise of\nthe Negroes in the church was impeded by connection with their\nself-styled superiors. At first the whites had seriously objected to the\nevangelization of the Negroes, feeling that they could not be saved and,\nwhen the latter had been convinced of this error, many of them were far\nfrom the position of conceding to the blacks equality in their church\norganizations. Negroes in certain parts, however, were at first accepted\nin the congregations with the whites and accorded equal privileges.\nDuring the American Revolution when there was a tendency to give more\nconsideration to all persons suffering from restriction, this freedom\nwas enlarged. After the reaction following the American Revolution when\nmen ceased to think so much of individual or natural rights and thought\nmore frequently of means and measures for centralized government, the\nNegroes, like most elements far down, were forgotten or ignored even by\nthe church. In this atmosphere of superimposed religious instruction the\nNegro was called upon merely to heed the Word and live. Experience soon\ntaught, however, that it is difficult for a people to maintain interest\nin a cause with the management of which they have nothing to do.\n\nHaving enjoyed for some time the boon of freedom in the church,\nmoreover, the Negroes were loath to give up this liberty. The escape of\na young Negro, a slave of Thomas Jones, in Baltimore County in 1793 is a\ncase in evidence. Accounting for his flight his master said: \"He was\nraised in a family of religious persons commonly called Methodists and\nhas lived with some of them for years past on terms of perfect equality;\nthe refusal to continue him on these terms gave him offense and he,\ntherefore, absconded. He had been accustomed to instruct and exhort his\nfellow creatures of all colors in matters of religious duty.\" Another\nsuch Negro, named Jacob, ran away from Thomas Gibbs of that same State\nin 1800, hoping to enlarge his liberty as a Methodist minister; for his\nmaster said in advertising him as a runaway: \"He professed to be a\nMethodist and has been in the practice of preaching of nights.\" Still\nanother Negro preacher of this type, named Richard, ran away from Hugh\nDrummond in Anne, Arundel County, that same year, while another called\nSimboe escaped a little later from Henry Lockey of Newbern, North\nCarolina.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP RICHARD ALLEN\n\nFounder of the A. M. E. Church.]\n\nThis was the beginning of something more significant. The free Negroes\nin the North began to assert themselves after the manumissions incident\nto the American Revolution, as they were not necessarily obligated to\nfollow the fortunes of the white churches. Such self-assertion early\nculminated in the protest of Richard Allen, the founder of the African\nMethodist Episcopal Church. Richard Allen was the very sort of man to\nperform this great task. He was born a slave of Benjamin Chew of\nPhiladelphia but very soon thereafter was sold with his whole family to\na planter living near Dover, Delaware, where he grew to manhood. Coming\nunder Christian influence, he was converted in 1777 and began his career\nas a minister three years later. Struck with the genuineness of his\npiety, his master permitted him to conduct prayers and to preach in his\nhouse, he himself being one of the first converts of this zealous\nmessenger of God. Feeling after his conversion that slavery was wrong,\nAllen's master permitted his bondmen to obtain their freedom. Allen and\nhis brother purchased themselves for $2,000 in the depreciated currency\nof the Revolutionary War.\n\nRichard Allen then engaged himself at such menial labor as a Negro could\nthen find, cutting wood and hauling, while preaching at his leisure.\nRecognizing his unusual talent, Richard Watcoat on the Baltimore circuit\npermitted Allen to travel with him, and Bishop Asbury frequently gave\nhim assignments to preach. Coming to Philadelphia in 1786, Allen was\ninvited to preach at the St. George Methodist Episcopal Church and at\nvarious other places in the city. His difficulties, however, had just\nbegun. Yet he could not but succeed because he was a man of independent\ncharacter, strict integrity, business tact, and thrifty habits. When he\nspoke a word, it was taken at its face value. His rule was never to\nbreak a promise or violate a contract.[4]\n\nThe special needs of his own people aroused him to action in their\nbehalf. He said, \"I soon saw a large field open in seeking and\ninstructing my African brethren who have been a long forgotten people,\nand few of them attended public worship.\" Starting a prayer meeting in\nPhiladelphia, he soon had 42 members. Encouraged thus, he proposed to\nestablish a separate place of worship for the people of color, but was\ndissuaded therefrom by the protest of the whites and certain Negroes\nunto whom he ministered, only three of whom approved his plan. Preaching\nat this church, however, with such power as to move his own people in a\nway that they had never been affected before, he attracted them in such\nlarge numbers that the management proposed to segregate the Negroes.\nWhen, moreover, the management of the church undertook to carry out this\nplan so drastically even to the extent of disturbing Richard Allen,\nAbsalom Jones, and William White by pulling them off their knees while\nthey were in the attitude of prayer, the Negroes arose and withdrew\nfrom the church in a body.\n\nThis was the beginning of the independent Free African Society organized\nby Richard Allen and Absalom Jones. It appeared that Jones and Allen\nsoon had differing plans; for the former finally organized the African\nProtestant Episcopal Church of St. Thomas, while the majority of the\npersons seceding from the St. George Methodist Episcopal Church followed\nthe standard of Allen in effecting the independent organization known as\nBethel Church. Allen purchased an old building for the Bethel church and\nhad it duly dedicated in 1794, when he organized a Sunday school and a\nday and night school, to which were sent regular ministers by the\nMethodist Conference. Richard Allen was ordained deacon by Bishop Asbury\nin 1799, and later attained the status of elder. Negroes of other cities\nfollowed this example, organizing what were known as African Methodist\nEpiscopal churches in Baltimore; Wilmington; Attleboro, Pennsylvania;\nand Salem, New Jersey.\n\nHaving maintained themselves independently for some time, these African\nsocieties developed sufficient leaders to effect the organization of a\nnational church. In Philadelphia there were in cooperation with Richard\nAllen such workers as Jacob Tapsico, Clayton Durham, James Champion, and\nThomas Webster. In Baltimore there were Daniel Coker, Richard Williams,\nHenry Harding, Stephen Hall, Edward Williamson and Nicholson Gilliard;\nin Wilmington, Delaware, Peter Spencer, the popular leader of the Union\nChurch of Africans, established in 1813; in Attleboro, Pennsylvania,\nJacob Marsh, Edward Jackson and William Anderson; and in Salem, New\nJersey, Peter Cuff. These met in Philadelphia on the 9th day of April,\n1816, to establish the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the moving\nspirits being Richard Allen, Daniel Coker and Stephen Hall, an\nintelligent layman of Baltimore, Maryland. Equally interested in the\nsame movement were Morris Brown, Henry Drayton, Charles Corr, Amos\nCruickshanks, Marcus Brown, Smart Simpson, Henry Bull, John Matthews,\nJames Eden, London Turpin and Alexander Harper of Charleston, who could\nnot attend because of the restrictions there upon the travel of Negroes\nand the effort in the South to proscribe the independent church movement\namong persons of color.\n\nThe most important transaction of the Philadelphia meeting was the\nelection of the bishop. Upon taking the vote the body declared Daniel\nCoker bishop-elect; but for several reasons he resigned the next day in\nfavor of Richard Allen, who was elected on the 10th and consecrated the\nfollowing day by regularly ordained ministers. The conference resolved,\nmoreover, that the people of Philadelphia, Baltimore, and all other\nplaces, who might unite with them should become one body under the name\nof the African Methodist Episcopal  Church. Hoping that this national\nchurch might have accessions from other ranks in which the Negroes were\nnot welcome or at best tolerated, this conference passed a resolution to\nthe effect that ministers coming from another evangelical church should\nbe received in the same standing which they held in the connection from\nwhich they came. This body adopted a book of discipline with its\narticles of religion and general rules just as it had been drafted by\nthe Wesleyans, following the general principles of government as had\nbeen in vogue among the Methodists already. The church then began its\ncareer with seven itinerants and Bishop Allen as the exponents of a new\nthought.\n\nMuch progress thereafter was noted. The Baltimore district under the\ndirection of Daniel Coker reported 1,066 members in 1818, 1,388 in 1819,\n1,760 in 1820, and 1,924 in 1822, while there were in Philadelphia about\n4,000. With the establishment of the New York conference the limits of\nthe connection extended eastward as far as New Bedford, westward to\nPittsburgh and southward to Charleston, South Carolina. Thereafter,\nhowever, there was little hope of success in the South. The African\nMethodists had with some difficulty under the leadership of Rev. Morris\nBrown established in Charleston a church reporting 1,000 members in\n1817, and increasing by 1822 to 3,000 in spite of the intolerant laws\nand the police regulations making it difficult for slaves and free\npersons of color to attend. In 1822, however, because of the spirit of\ninsurrection among Negroes following the fortunes of Denmark Vesey, who\ndevised well laid plans for killing off the masters of the slaves, the\nAfrican Methodists were required to suspend operation. Their pastor,\nMorris Brown, was threatened and would have been dealt with foully, had\nit not been for the interference of General James Hamilton, who secreted\nBrown in his home until he could give him safe passage to the North,\nwhere he very soon reached a position of prominence, even that of bishop\nin the African Methodist Episcopal Church.\n\nAnother secession of the Methodists from the white connection was in\nprogress in other parts. A number of Negroes, most of whom were members\nof the John Street Methodist Episcopal Church, in New York City, took\nthe first step toward separation from that connection in 1796. They had\nnot been disturbed in their worship to the extent experienced by Richard\nAllen and his coworkers in Philadelphia, but they had a \"desire for the\nprivilege of holding meetings of their own, where they might have an\nopportunity to exercise their spiritual gifts among themselves, and\nthereby be more useful to one another.\" Such permission was obtained\nfrom Bishop Francis Asbury by a group of intelligent Negro Methodists,\nchief among whom were Francis Jacobs, William Brown, Peter Williams,\nAbraham Thompson, June Scott, Samuel Pontier, Thomas Miller, William\nMiller, James Varick and William Hamilton. Three of these persons,\nAbraham Thompson, June Scott, and Thomas Miller, were at that time\nrecognized preachers, and William Miller was an exhorter, all of them\nofficiating in this capacity as opportunities presented themselves in\ntheir connection and under the supervision of the white Methodists.\n\nThese workers continued in this situation until the year 1799, when,\nwith a further increase in the Negro membership of the Methodist\nEpiscopal Church in New York City, they proposed to build a separate\nhouse of worship rather than merely hold separate meetings in the\nedifice belonging to the white Methodists. A meeting was held soon\nthereafter and arrangements were made for the purchase of a lot in\nOrange Street, between Cross and Chatham, on which after having paid the\namount of $50, they found out that the title was involved and they\nthereafter purchased a site situated at the corner of Church and Leonard\nStreets and fronting on Church Street. Upon this site they erected a\nbuilding in the year 1800, naming the edifice the African Methodist\nEpiscopal Zion Church. Their white friends, seeing that they were\ndetermined to be a separate body, appointed as their adviser Rev. John\nMcClaskey, who instructed them how to proceed in drawing up the articles\nof government. A charter was secured in 1801 and bears the signatures of\nPeter Williams and Francis Jacobs.\n\nThis church had not proceeded very far before there arose some\ndissension in the ranks. The first exhibition of this was the effort of\ntwo of the founders, Abraham Thompson and June Scott, who, \"induced by\nthe expectation of filthy lucre,\" tried to form a society separate from\nthe Zion church. In this they were aided by a white man who desired to\nexercise his own spiritual gifts, the opportunity for which he could not\nsecure among his own people who belonged to the _Society of Friends_,\nfrom which he had been expelled. This new organization was finally\neffected as the _Union Society_. Very soon thereafter Abraham Thompson\nrepented of his action and abandoned the attempt, leaving June Scott to\ncontinue the work of the Union Society by himself. As he was unable to\nbear the expenses thereafter the society was consequently broken up and\nJune Scott attached himself to another church.\n\nAnother obstacle appeared in 1813 when Thomas Simpkins, upon being\nexpelled from the Zion Church, of which he had been a member and a\ntrustee, undertook to establish a new society. He drew to himself\nWilliam Miller, who had been ordained deacon in the Zion Church.\nObtaining thereafter a site in Elizabeth Street, they succeeded in\npersuading a number of members of the Zion Church to unite with them to\nestablish the Asbury Church. Unlike the unsuccessful attempt of Abraham\nThompson and June Scott in forming the Union Society, the Asbury Church\nbecame permanently established. Desiring, however, to be regular in\ntheir operations, the members of the Asbury Church found themselves\ncompelled to appeal to the same ecclesiastical authorities and to accept\npractically the same government as that already instituted for the Zion\nChurch. This church was thereafter received in the Methodist Church.\nAlthough this was considered a very bad omen for the Zion Church,\nhowever, it continued to make progress in spite of expectations to the\ncontrary. The members of the church decidedly increased and steps were\ntaken for the construction of a house with a school room underneath on\nthe site of the old meeting house. On the 25th of November there began\nthe construction of a more suitable building which was completed by\n1820.\n\nAnother disturbing factor appeared in the scheme of William Lambert. He\nhad been a member of the Zion Church and seceded with those who formed\nthe Asbury connection. Because the Zion Church refused to appoint him as\na minister, and even Asbury refused to hear him preach, he returned from\nPhiladelphia where he had been under the influence of Bishop Richard\nAllen, from whom he had obtained a license to preach, and endeavored to\nestablish a church for Bishop Allen's denomination. He obtained a school\nhouse in Mott Street, and with the assistance of Rev. Mr. White, a\nmember and an ordained deacon, it was fitted for a church. In the\nmeantime Bishop Allen was in touch with some of the official brethren in\nNew York City with a view to extending the jurisdiction  of his own\nchurch. The supporters of Bishop Allen, moreover, appeared at the\nopportune moment, when the Zionites were without a building and were\nalso without the direction that it had formerly had from the white\nMethodists, inasmuch as the latter were disturbed by a schism resulting\nfrom differences as to church government.\n\nFurther disturbance was, therefore, caused when Henry Harden entered the\ncity of New York in 1820 and commenced to form a society of African\nMethodists with the assistance of William Lambert and Rev. Mr. White.\nThe Zionists bearing it rather grievously that Bishop Allen had thus\ntried to invade that field, decided that they would neither preach for\nthe Allenites nor permit the Allenites to preach for them. In this\nresolution, William Miller, the minister of the Asbury Church,\nacquiesced and seemingly agreed thereby to connect himself closely with\nthe Zionites. The church of Richard Allen's connection, however, did not\ndisplease all the persons concerned. According to the account of\nChristopher Rush, who himself became a bishop of the African Methodist\nEpiscopal Zion Church, although Richard Allen arrived and sanctioned all\nthat had been done by those men who were working for the progress of his\ndenomination, \"his presence seemed soon to alter the minds of the Zion\npreachers, for notwithstanding their resolution to discountenance the\nproceedings of the Bishop, yet some of them went to their meetings,\nsome of them sat in their altar, and one of them, James Varick, opened\nmeeting for the Bishop on the second or third Sunday night of the\nexistence of that society.\"\n\n[Illustration: JAMES VARICK]\n\nDuring the first years of their separation the African Methodists in New\nYork had the cooperation of the whites and the funds necessary for the\nconstruction of their building and the maintenance of their ministers\ncame from that source. In the course of time, however, the funds\ncontributed by the people of color themselves increased with this\ngrowing desire for independence. The schism in the white church,\nmoreover, stimulated this desire for thorough separation from the white\nMethodists inasmuch as their so-called superiors were divided in their\nviews as to questions of polity. These Methodists of color believed that\nthey should avail themselves of the opportunity to control their own\naffairs. They had at first had for pastors white Methodist preachers\nwith the local preachers of color serving under them. They thereupon\nnotified the white Methodists that they no longer felt themselves\nobligated to look to them for supplying the pulpit and that they did not\ndesire to have their property involved in the difficulties contemplated\nby the proposed act of incorporation which had led to the schism. The\nZionites were in a state of indecision, however, for the reason that not\nhaving left the white Methodist Church in a snarl as did the followers\nof Richard Allen, the Zionites had no particular grievance to serve as\na cohesive force. Many had thought either of returning to the white\nMethodists or joining the Allenites.\n\nThere soon came a time then when it was necessary for the Zionites to\ndecide exactly what they would do. This being the case, an official\nmeeting was held on August 11, 1820, for the purpose of considering the\nserious state of the church. Two important questions were propounded at\nthis meeting, one being: \"Shall we return to the white people?\" The\nanswer was negative. The next question was: \"Shall we join Bishop\nAllen?\" The answer was also negative. They, therefore, decided to take\nsteps for establishing a firm church government of their own. Several\nefforts have since been made to unite the African Methodists but to no\navail.\n\nBeing desirous, however, to proceed regularly rather than radically,\nthese African Methodists sought ordination and consecration through some\nbranch of the Christian Church. They sent a committee to make such a\nrequest of Bishop Hobart of the Episcopal Church, but he was unable to\nserve them. They then appealed to the bishop of the Methodist Church,\nbut they were put off in one way or another, with excuses of the bishop\nhaving no power to act without the conference and with the request that\nthey should defer action until the conference should have time to\ninvestigate. They thereafter appealed to the conference in session in\nPhiladelphia and were encouraged by a favorable resolution to expect\nthat such service would be rendered them. For some reason they appealed\nto the conference in New York, which finally refused to grant their\nrequest. The Zionites were then reduced to radical measures in that they\nhad finally to follow in the footsteps of the Asbury Church in ordaining\nits own deacons and elder.\n\nBecoming thus aggressive, the Zionites, like the Allenites, had taken\nthe offensive. They extended their operations through missionaries into\nFlushing, New Haven, Long Island, and even into Philadelphia, where\ncertain persons separating from the connection of Richard Allen,\norganized the Wesleyan Church and joined the Zionites. Under the\nleadership of such men as James Varick, George Collins, Charles\nAnderson, and Christopher Rush, they drew up the doctrines and\ndiscipline of the African Methodist Episcopal Church in America, elected\na number of elders, and finally organized in 1821 a national body, of\nwhich James Varick became the first bishop in 1822.\n\nBefore the Negro Methodists perfected their organizations by which the\ninfluence of their churches might be permanently extended throughout the\ncountry, the Baptists had been locally trying to do the same thing. The\nHarrison Street Baptist Church was organized at Petersburg, Virginia, in\n1776; another Negro Baptist Church at Williamsburg, Virginia, in 1785;\nthe First African Baptist Church at Savannah in 1785, with a second\nBaptist Church in that city following fourteen years later; the African\nBaptist Church of Lexington, Kentucky, in 1790; and a mixed Baptist\nChurch in the Mound Bayou, Mississippi district, in 1805, by Joseph\nWillis, a free Negro born in South Carolina in 1762.[5] In the city of\nPhiladelphia on May 14, 1809, thirteen colored members who had for some\ntime felt that it would be more congenial for them to worship\nseparately, were dismissed to form the first African Baptist Church. On\nJune 19, 1809, the use of the First Baptist Church (white) was given\nthem for the meeting at which they were constituted an organized body.\nThe main trouble with the First Baptist Church (white) seemed to be that\nit had suffered from having its anti-slavery ardor dampened during the\nreaction following the Revolutionary War. Whereas many of the Baptists\nin other parts had become radical emancipationists, the white Baptists\nof Philadelphia after having attacked the slave trade, tried to dodge\nthe anti-slavery issue with the excuse that it was a political question\nwith which the church had nothing to do. The anti-slavery sentiment was\nnaturally suppressed during the pastorates of Holcombe, Brantly and\nCuthbert, all southern men, partly in defense of their well-known\nsentiment and partly through the sentiment of the people themselves.\n\nComplete separation of the Negro Baptists in this church was, therefore,\ndeemed a necessity during the first quarter of the nineteenth century\nwhen there was an increasing prejudice against free persons of color\nbecause of the rapid migration of freedmen from the South to\nPennsylvania.\n\nWhen in 1809 the Negroes organized the African Baptist Church in\nPhiladelphia, it was placed under the oversight of Rev. Henry\nCunningham, and was directed for two years thereafter by John King.\nAccording to another record there was at this time in the South a slave\nnamed Burrows who felt that he was called to preach. Many encouraged him\nto come North to beg money to buy his freedom. Two of his friends, free\npersons of color, were so impressed with his worth and believed so\nimplicitly in his word as his bond that they bound themselves in bondage\nfor six months while he absented himself to solicit funds throughout the\nNorth. In a short time this man of such indomitable will and belief in\nhimself and in the future, raised the required sum of money with which\nhe effected his manumission and invited these loyal friends who had been\ninstrumental in his liberation to come North to Philadelphia to assist\nhim in establishing a Baptist church. This was the First African Baptist\nChurch of Philadelphia, which, in 1809, became one of the substantial\nreligious organizations of the city, having enjoyed the services of\nuseful and influential preachers, four of whose long pastorates covered\nthe whole period of one hundred years.\n\nWhen the African Baptist Church of Philadelphia was being organized, the\nsame movement was culminating in New York City. Prior to 1809 the\nBaptists of color had worshiped along with their white brethren. The\nchurch record of November 1, 1770, says: \"After divine service, Hannah\nDunmore and Chloe, a Negro woman belonging to Mr. George Green, were\nreceived into the church.\" Speaking about this relation, this document\nsays: \"Our records have many notices of baptisms and marriages among the\nNegro people and until early in the present century there was a large\ngroup of them in this church.\" But the desire for independence and a\nmore congenial atmosphere so obsessed them that they sought to form an\norganization of their own. This was finally effected in 1809 under the\nleadership of the Rev. Thomas Paul, a native of Exeter, New Hampshire,\n\"where,\" according to the _Baptist Memorial_, \"he was born of\nrespectable parents on the third of September, 1773.\" He experienced\nfaith in Jesus at an early age and was baptized in the year 1789 by the\nRev. Mr. Locke; but, although impressed with the thought that his\ncalling was the ministry, he was not ordained until 1805. Soon\nthereafter he well organized the African Baptist Church in Joy Street,\nin Boston, where he served this congregation for about twenty-five\nyears. His labors, however, were not restricted to that city. He\nfrequently  made preaching excursions into different parts of the\ncountry where his \"color excited considerable curiosity, and being a\nperson of very pleasing and fervid address, he attracted crowds to hear\nhim; at this period of his ministry his labors were greatly blessed with\nnumerous conversions in several revivals of religion commenced in\ndifferent towns under his ministration.\" It was while he was pastor of\nthe Church in Boston, that in 1808 he organized in New York City the\ncongregation now known as the Abyssinian Baptist Church and served it\nfrom June to September of that year, after which Josiah Bishop and\nothers had charge of this very promising work.\n\nThe beginnings of this church are interesting. According to a\ncontemporary, \"About the year 1807, the colored brethren and sisters of\nthe First Baptist Church, worshipping in Gold Street, for reasons\nunnecessary now to mention, respectfully proposed to the said church the\nexpediency of a separation: seeing that the colored Methodists and\nEpiscopalians had made similar propositions to their respective churches\nwith success, they humbly desired the same. But they were unsuccessful\nuntil the year 1809. In the interim the Rev. Thomas Paul, of Boston, at\ntheir request, visited the city, and he was well received in the white\nchurches, preaching to large congregations. Encouraged by such a state\nof things, they resolved on procuring a place of worship. The\nmeeting-house in Anthony Street, the property of the Ebenezer Baptist\nChurch, being for sale, was purchased by them, with the cooperation of\ntheir white brethren. The First Church, satisfied with the competency of\nbrother Paul for the care and management of the petitioners, unanimously\ngranted honorable letters of dismission to four brethren and twelve\nsisters, who, with three others, were constituted a gospel church on\nWednesday, the 5th of July, 1809, under the name of the 'Abyssinian\nBaptist Church.' It is to be regretted that the order of exercises at\nthe public recognition of this new interest cannot be found. Blest with\nthe faithful labors of such a gifted man, crowded assemblies heard the\nword of the Lord, and many were added to the church on a profession of\ntheir faith in Christ.\"\n\nPaul's interest in the Negro was not limited to those in this country.\nIn 1823 he presented to the Baptist Missionary Society of Massachusetts\na plan for improving the moral and religious condition of the Haitians,\nrequesting that he be sent to these people as a missionary. His plan was\nreceived with considerable enthusiasm and he was appointed as a\nmissionary and sent to that country for six months. President Boyer of\nthe Republic of Haiti and other public functionaries kindly received\nthis missionary, giving him permission to preach. There he soon met with\nsome success in edifying a few pious people who seemed gratified beyond\nmeasure by his ministrations. Writing home, he frequently mentioned \"the\npowerful precious soul reviving seasons\" which he and the few disciples\non the island enjoyed. Because of his lack of knowledge of the French\nlanguage, however, he could not reach a large number of the inhabitants\nof that island. He was, therefore, compelled to leave Haiti with the\nregret that he could not do more for its general welfare and especially\nits deplorable moral condition.[6]\n\nThat the independent church movement among Negroes should be directed\ntoward Methodism and Baptism requires some consideration. In those parts\nof the country in which most Negroes were found, the dominant\ncommunicants among the whites were at first Episcopalians, the\nsuccessors to the rites and ceremonies of the Anglican Church. Among\nsome of the best friends of the Negroes, moreover, were the\nPresbyterians, who often extended the blacks the same hand of welcome as\ndid the Quakers. Whether this was due altogether to the emotional nature\nof the Negroes to which the Baptists and Methodists appealed, to chance,\nor to the wisdom of the leaders of the independent church movement among\nthe Negroes, is a much mooted question. Discussing this matter, Bishop\nB. T. Tanner in his _Apology for African Methodism_ (page 63),\nattributed the success of Methodism to the foresight of Richard Allen.\nThe author of this work shows how Richard Allen at first cooperated with\nthe Free African Society in Philadelphia until upon holding a meeting,\nNovember 15,  1788, they adopted a report of the committee providing\nfor an organization of that society as a religious body, on a basis\nwhich, according to Allen's opinion, would have been a usage which\nprevented that freedom which the gospel permits. Feeling that the\ncurrent of religious sentiment was not flowing in the desired direction,\nAllen refused further to cooperate with this group, which by a vote\nformally declared Allen's connection severed with that society, although\nRichard Allen retained the friendship of Rev. Absalom Jones, the first\nrector of the St. Thomas Church, which later developed from this\norganization.\n\nBishop Tanner contends that Allen appreciated the fact that, his people\nbeing undisciplined, a sound judgment educated with their emotional\nnatures should not be forgotten and swallowed up in the cold\nintellectual ritual. As he believed that by blending together the\nemotional and intellectual, the minds of the Negroes could be better\ndeveloped along religious lines, he refused the proffered rectorship of\nSt. Thomas, saying that he could not be anything but a Methodist. He\nsaid, moreover: \"I was confident that there was no religious sect or\ndenomination which would suit the capacity of the colored people so well\nas the Methodist, for the plain, simple Gospel suits best for any\npeople, for the unlearned can understand, and the learned are sure to\nunderstand; and the reason that the Methodists are so successful in the\nawakening and the conversion of the colored people, is the plain\ndoctrine which they preach and having a good discipline.\"\n\nThe Episcopal Church, moreover, could hardly attract Negro churchmen of\nvery much ambition, when it did not require very much reasoning to reach\nthe conclusion that inasmuch as that church had too often neglected the\npoor whites, it would hardly be inclined to proselyte Negroes. Prior to\nthe time that Absalom Jones was made priest, the St. Thomas Church,\naccording to the Protestant Episcopal convention, was not entitled to\nsend clergymen or deputies thereto nor to participate in the general\ngovernment of the Episcopal Church. In the year 1795 they declared it\nwas only for the present. The same position, however, was taken in 1843\nand it was adhered to throughout the period of slavery; for the\nEpiscopal Church persistently refused to make slavery a matter of\ndiscipline.\n\nIt is little wonder then that Episcopal churches among Negroes have much\ndifficulty in their development, and only in a few large cities did we\nhave churches even so successful as that of St. Thomas in Philadelphia.\nAmong these may be mentioned the St. Phillips Church in New York. This\nprosperous church was organized in 1818 and incorporated in 1820. Peter\nWilliams, the first Negro to be ordained as a priest in the Episcopal\nChurch, served as its rector until 1849. He was a man of unusual\nbeginnings. His father, Peter Williams, Sr., was for a number of\nyears the sexton of the John Street Methodist Church, in which position\nhe became distinguished among the white communicants for his fidelity\nand piety. He joined with other Negroes desirous of independent church\naction and established the Zion Church, out of which emerged the African\nMethodist Episcopal Zion Church. Peter Williams, the son, however,\nbecame an Episcopalian, was educated for the ministry and served for\nyears as the rector of St. Phillips Church. In this position he\nmaintained himself as a man of usefulness and influence, touching the\nlife of his people whenever the opportunity presented itself. Bishop\nDaniel A. Payne, who first came into contact with him in New York in\n1835, considered him well educated, for his day, hospitable and\ngenerous. Bishop Payne said: \"He loved to see talented young men\neducating themselves and substantially aided more than one in his\nefforts. Above all he valued an educated minister.\"\n\n[Illustration: REV. PETER WILLIAMS\n\nFirst colored Protestant Episcopal priest in the United States.]\n\nIn this position of subjection to a church control in which he himself\nas a man of color did not largely figure, Peter Williams was handicapped\nand could not serve his race as he desired. At the time of the intense\nagitation during the great crisis when the Negroes were called upon to\ndecide where they would stand on the questions of colonization and\nabolition, Peter Williams at first took an active part in pleading the\ncause of his people. Seeing, however, that this might bring the church\nto the position of having to declare itself on this important question,\nthe bishops of the Episcopal Church, in keeping with the custom of that\ndenomination, silenced Peter Williams with a decree that he should\npreach merely the gospel without interfering with the political affairs\nof the times. It does not appear that he had that moral stamina to impel\nhim to renounce his connection with a church seeking to muzzle a man\npraying for the deliverance of his people. It may be, however, that, as\nhe was too far advanced in years to make any radical change in his\ncourse, he followed the orders of his superiors.\n\nIn Baltimore the Episcopalians practically provided a separate church\nfor Negroes known as the St. James. This was the first Negro church of\nthis denomination established in slave territory. The Negroes were given\na building of their own and one Levington was from time to time\ndesignated as rector for this special service. Although it appears,\nhowever, that for a time a Negro served in this capacity, this task was\ngenerally assigned to a rector of Caucasion blood, who fed the people\nfrom afar with a long-handled spoon, believing that haply they might be\nthereby fed. This church in Baltimore, therefore, did not figure so\nlargely in the life of the Negroes as did the Negro Episcopal churches\nof Philadelphia and New York. In other places where Negroes of this\nfaith were found they were dependent altogether on the ministers of\nwhites. The records of the Protestant Church show here and there Negro\nrectors in remote parts as in the case of one in a small town in New\nYork and another in Connecticut; but it is evident that they had no\nemployment.\n\nThe Presbyterians, who welcomed the Negroes, moreover, were not much\nmore successful in proselyting them. When one considers the liberality\nof this sect in that its theological seminaries, including even\nPrinceton, opened its doors to Negroes and that the denomination too\npermitted persons of color to participate in the government of the\nchurch to the extent that they not only spoke and exercised the right to\nvote in their meetings but also served as moderators, this\ndisinclination on the part of Negroes to attach themselves to the\nPresbyterian Church may require much explanation. Wherever the\nPresbyterians had the opportunity for proselyting the Negroes they\nusually embraced it. Yet there were hardly 20,000 Negroes in the\nPresbyterian church prior to the Civil War. One of the important reasons\nis that the Methodists and Baptists were the first to reach the Negro.\nThe Methodists, moreover, had an itinerant system serving like scouts to\ngo out into the wilderness to find the people and bring them in. Then\nthis disinclination was due also to the fact that the Presbyterian\nchurch, somewhat like the more aristocratic churches, disregarded the\n\"emotional character of experimental religion.\" Its appeal was too\nintellectual. As Bishop Tanner said: \"It strove to lift up without\ncoming down and while the good Presbyterian parson was writing his\ndiscourses, rounding off the sentences, the Methodist itinerant had\ntraveled forty miles with his horse and saddle bags; while the parson\nwas adjusting his spectacles to read his manuscript, the itinerant had\ngiven hell and damnation to his unrepentant hearers; while the disciple\nof Calvin was waiting to have his church completed, the disciple of\nWesley took to the woods and made them reecho with the voice of free\ngrace, believing with Bryant, 'The groves were God's first temples.'\"\n\nThis same appeal of the evangelical rather than the ritualistic explains\nalso the slow progress of the Catholic work among Negroes. The Catholics\nwere early concerned with the amelioration of the condition of the\nNegroes and were found among the first to bear testimony against\nslavery. This denomination opened schools to enlighten the children of\nthe slaves, established missions to reclaim the wayward, and all but\ngranted the despised bondmen in their circles the privileges of liberty\nand equality. The success of their workers among Negroes, however, was\nnot phenomenal. The Catholics did not make much impression on the\nNegroes in the large cities of the North, where they were more\naccessible than in the South; but considerable good was accomplished by\nthe promising beginnings in and around Baltimore, Washington, Mobile,\nand New Orleans. So well was the foundation laid that the reaction in\nfavor of slavery  did not altogether counteract this healthy influence\nin behalf of the enlightenment of the Negroes. Only a small percentage\nof the race thereby profited, however. The proportionately small number\nof Negroes now belonging to the Catholic Church have been proselyted\nlargely since the Civil War.\n\nThe Congregationalists became interested in the uplift of the Negroes\nwith whom they came into contact, although the number reached did not\nmultiply. The leaders of this denomination sympathized with the slave,\naided the fugitive, and preached to the unfortunate the principles of\nreligion so dear to the hearts of their communicants. But so great was\nthe hold of the more evangelical sects on the Negroes that the earliest\nsuccessful effort to constitute a group of them as a working body in the\nCongregational Church was the establishment of the Dixwell Avenue\nCongregational Church in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1829. The records do\nnot show any considerable accession of Negroes to these ranks until\nafter the Civil War when the work of this denomination was popularized\nin various parts by that efficient worker and organizer, the late G. W.\nMoore.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nEARLY DEVELOPMENT\n\n\nThe Negro church continued to go forward. Eight years after the\norganization of the African Methodist Episcopal Church the membership\neasily reached 9,888, including 14 elders, 26 deacons, and 101\nlicentiates, itinerant and local. Its expansion had been so rapid that\nit was soon necessary to establish a western conference to administer\nthe affairs of the many churches then rising in Ohio. Wishing further to\nextend its operations, the church ordained the Rev. Scipio Bean in 1827\nto do mission work in the Island of Haiti. The church established there\nhad as many as 72 members in 1828, and in 1830 it had extended its\noperations into the Spanish port of the Island and gained a foothold in\nthe peninsula of Samana. That same year the Rev. R. Roberts was ordained\na deacon and afterward an elder for missionary work in the same island,\nthen under the successful administration of President Boyer. Although he\nmet with some success in the beginning in answering this cry for help in\na distant land, the work undertaken there was not finally successful.\n\nThere was an apparent falling off in the membership of certain\nconferences after 1830, but this did not indicate any step backward.\nPractically the whole membership in South Carolina was by the public\nopinion, custom, and laws of that commonwealth, cut off from the church.\nThere was during this same period extensive progress in the west,\nespecially in Cincinnati. Great efforts were made to put the church on a\nfirm foundation. During the conferences of the thirties much attention\nwas given to the preparation of the ministry through education,\ncleanliness in dress, high character, and loyalty to the church. The\nwork suffered a loss, however, in that Bishop Allen, who had for years\nled this flock, passed away in 1831. Bishop Morris Brown, who had been\nordained to the episcopacy in 1828, became then the sole bishop and\ncontinued so until 1836 when Edward Waters was ordained as his\nassistant.\n\nProceeding on a sound basis, the church could not but succeed. The\nmembership rapidly grew, as is evidenced by the necessity for the\norganization of two other conferences in the year 1840. This was the\nconference of Canada, which was organized by Bishop Brown at Toronto,\nand then came the conference of Indianapolis as a culmination of the\nsuccessful missionary labors of William Paul Quinn who was later honored\nas the fourth bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. There\nwas an improvement in church literature such as the _Book of Discipline_\nand the conference of the year 1836 decreed the publication of a\nquarterly magazine for the use and benefit of the connection, appointing\nGeorge Hogarth of the city of Brooklyn as General Book Steward.\n\nThe denomination had much difficulty in maintaining the Book Concern.\nThe problem of publication has always been a perplexing one and the\nexperience of this church was no exception to that rule. The business\nseemed to follow the Book Steward from one city to another. In 1847 it\nwas moved from Pittsburgh to New York. That same year it was decided to\npublish a weekly to be called _The Christian Herald_. The first copy of\nthis publication was issued by the Rev. A. R. Green, in 1848, then in\ncharge of the Book Concern. In 1852, however, the name of this\npublication was changed to _The Christian Recorder_. Its editor declared\nthat it would be devoted to religion, morality, science, and literature.\nSome of the papers published therein show an intelligent insight into\nconditions, a deep interest in intellectual forces effective in the\nuplift of the people, and a general knowledge of the great factors which\nhave made the history of the world.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP CHRISTOPHER RUSH.]\n\nThe development of African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was equally\nencouraging. After serving his people successfully for some time Bishop\nJames Varick passed away in 1827. The following year the office was\nfilled by the election of Christopher Rush, a man who had figured in the\norganization of the Zion Church in New York in 1796. Because of his\ngood foundation in education, his equipoise, reliable judgment, and\nChristian piety, Christopher Rush made such a favorable impression upon\nthose with whom he came in contact that he is often spoken of by the\nZionites as the ablest preacher of his time. He lived throughout the\ncrisis through which this church had to go, enabling it to extend its\nterritory so as to compete favorably with the more extensive work then\nbeing accomplished by the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Rush\nserved the connection from 1828 to 1840, a period during which the\nmembership of the sect increased, new churches easily developed, and the\ndenomination realized strength and influence. Associated with Bishop\nRush in this effort were Elders Edward Johnson, Durham Stevens, George\nStevenson, David Crosby, Jonathan Gibbs, Arthur Langford, Tower Hill,\nJohn Marshall, Richard Phillips, David Smith, Jacob Richardson, Samuel\nJohnson, Abraham Green, and David Stevens. In the New York conference at\nthis time there were such men as Timothy Eato, Abraham Thompson, Charles\nAnderson, William Carmen, George Tredwell, William Miller, Levin Smith,\nJacob Matthews, Peter Van Hass, and Jehiel Beaman.[7]\n\nWhile the outstanding members of this group were those who became\nbishops of the Zionites, several others who did not attain the\nepiscopacy, frequently showed exceptional power which materially aided\nthe development of the church. Among these may be mentioned the Rev. S.\nT. Fray, a remarkable natural orator noted for his ability to rouse\nenthusiasm. He was a man of unusual acumen, easily triumphed in debate,\nand as a logician and parliamentarian could vanquish his opponent. There\nwas also Rev. Henry Johnson who passed among his fellows as \"Old\nHickory\" because of his strong force of character. Unusually great work\nfor the church was accomplished by Rev. John A. Williams as a\nrevivalist. Rev. Leonard Collins was one of the reliable pillars in the\nchurch for a number of years but lost his standing by yielding to the\ntemptation of strong drink. Honorable mention may be given Basil McKall,\nAbraham Cole, and especially David Stevens for their forceful preaching\nwhich moved multitudes to come into the church.\n\nIt does not appear that some of the bishops left very much of an\nimpression, although they were men of extraordinary following. Bishop\nSpywood, for example, was retired from his office because there were\nmore bishops than were needed for that service in the church. Bishop\nMoore, who was an inspiring preacher, drawing large crowds and moving\nall classes to repentance, was not at ease as a bishop and he too was\nretired in 1860.\n\nIt was unfortunate, however, that in 1840 a very disturbing factor\nappeared so as to arrest the progress of this church. There arose in\nthis connection an element desiring an assistant superintendent. It\nseemed that this desire came from the friends of Rev. William Miller, a\nman of changing tendencies. Although a preacher of unusual intellect and\na man of general ability, he did not show much stability of character.\nWhen he was a deacon in the African Methodist Episcopal Church in 1813,\nit appeared that he used his position to do the Zion Church an injury.\nAt a later period he, with the Asbury Church, joined the Zionites. Yet\nwith this same church about 1820 he united with Bishop Allen so as to\nform the nucleus of the Bethel Church in New York City in 1830; but\nreturned later to the Zion Church with a fragment of the Asbury\ncongregation. In spite of this changing record, however, his friends\nfelt that he should be made superintendent and it was finally done; but\nalthough an assistant superintendent, he never held a conference nor\nperformed an ordination. It seemed that it was a position of honor\nrather than one of usefulness, but he was known as bishop until he died\nin 1846.\n\nTwo years later when Rev. George Galbreth was elected to this office,\nsome dispute arose as to whether he should be a full bishop or a mere\nassistant, but it was finally decided that he should be an assistant\nonly. As this did not satisfy all concerned, the friends of Mr. Galbreth\ncontinued the fight and in the conference of 1852 they carried the point\nof placing all bishops on equality. Part of their program too was the\nretirement of Bishop Rush, who, being feeble and blind, could no longer\nserve efficiently. The conference thereupon proceeded to elect Galbreth,\nBishop, and Spywood. Bishop Spywood was retired from this office in 1856\nbecause there were too many bishops for the work to be accomplished in\nthe field, and during the remainder of his life he was employed as an\nagent of the New England Mission Board in which he served successfully.\n\nIt happened that soon after the election of the three superintendents,\nthat is, in 1853, Bishop Galbreth died, leaving two bishops in the\nfield. How were these bishops then to stand? Was there such a thing as a\nsenior bishop or were they on equality? Bishop Bishop insisted that he\nwas the General Superintendent and above and beyond his coworker. As\nthis did not satisfy both parties he was called to trial; but, insisting\nthat he was right, he evaded the inquiry and caused a schism in the Zion\nChurch. Those adhering to the suspended bishop held the territory north\nto Philadelphia, south to Charleston and west to Pittsburgh, and called\nthemselves the Wesleyan Methodist Episcopal Church. The others held\nmost of New York, New England, and Nova Scotia, and retained the\noriginal name of the body, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church.\nThese two factions tended to drift in different directions. In the west\nthere was a tendency toward Episcopalianism, whereas the east drifted\ntoward Congregationalism. The question of the church property was\nfinally taken into the courts, which decided in favor of those who\nremained with the denomination. Steps were thereafter taken to heal the\nbreach which had been produced by the stubbornness of one man and the\nhaste of a few others in dealing with him. In 1860 the schism was\nfinally ended by an agreement of the two factions to bury their\ndifferences and unite for the good of the common church.\n\nDuring these years some smaller movements were in progress. A division\nof the Union Church of Africans incorporated at Wilmington, Delaware, in\n1807, resulted in the organization of the African Union Church and the\nUnion American Methodist Episcopal Church in 1850. From the Methodist\nProtestant Church a sufficient number of Negroes finally withdrew to\nform, in 1860, the First Colored Methodist Protestant Church. These\ndenominations, however, have not been able to compete in numbers and\ninfluence with the Allenites and Zionites.\n\nThese activities of the African Methodist denominations mentioned above\nwould seem to indicate that the large majority of the Negroes became\nmembers of these new sects, leaving merely a few for the Baptists. As a\nmatter of fact, however, the contrary was true. The Negro Methodists had\nnational organization and in most cases intelligent men making a\nsystematic effort to extend their work. The Baptists, on the other hand,\nhad both the disadvantages and the advantages of local self-government.\nIn their undeveloped state this unusual liberty sometimes proved to be a\nhandicap to the Baptists in that the standard of the ministry and the\nmoral tone of the churches were not so high as in the case of the\nMethodist bodies, whose conferences had power to make local churches do\nthe right when they were not so inclined. This local self-government of\nthe Baptists, on the other hand, made possible a more rapid increase in\nthe number of churches established and the large influx of members in\nquest of the liberty wherewith they believed Christ had made them free.\n\nWhat then was this peculiar feature of Baptist policy which explains the\nunusual growth? In the first place, the local Baptist Church is\nthoroughly independent of any other organization or church. It may\nbecome associated with other churches in bodies meeting periodically to\ndevise plans for the common good of the denomination; but it is in no\nsense bound by the rules and regulations of such bodies. And should an\nassociation, moreover, exclude a church from its group, that church is\nstill legally constituted a Baptist church and may join another\nassociation or form one of its own in cooperation with other churches\nsimilarly disposed. Any group of baptized believers of not less than\nfour, moreover, may exercise the liberty of organizing a church under\nthe direction of a regularly ordained minister of the denomination and\nordination in the Baptist Church is not a difficulty. With the tendency\nof so many members to find fault, to disagree, to follow the advice of\nill-designing persons seeking personal ends, it was a decidedly easy\nmatter for Negro Baptist churches under these circumstances to split and\nthus multiply. While the Methodists might hesitate to establish an\nadditional church so close to another as to hinder its growth, the\nBaptists in the heat of controversial excitement often established two\nor three churches where there were not at first enough people to sustain\none; but in the course of time these churches, because of their unusual\nliberty in the evangelical effort, would attract so many more than the\nother liberal churches that they would all be filled. The Baptists\nfinally aggregated about as many as all other Negro members of the\nvarious independent Negro churches. It soon happened in the South,\nmoreover, that where the blacks were freely permitted to embrace\nreligion the Negro Baptists outnumbered the whites in mixed churches two\nto one and sometimes three to one or four to one.\n\nDetailed records of these achievements from a national point of view are\nlacking for the reason that the Negro Baptists prior to the\norganization of the National Baptist Convention had no national body of\ntheir own. During the antebellum period they belonged largely to the\nwhite churches in the South, occupying certain seats, the Negro pew, or\nmeeting in the basement of the same edifice for worship at a special\nhour on the Sabbath day. In most cities in the North the independent\nmovement among Negroes brought about the establishment of their own\nlocal churches; but, when associated, they generally belonged to the\nwhite bodies, used their literature, and followed their doctrines. As\nmany of the white churches and organizations took little account of what\nthese Negro communicants were doing but rather considered them as an\nundesirable but inevitable adjunct, no complete records of their\nachievements are extant. Here and there a writer of the history of the\nBaptists gave them honorable mention and now and then a Negro Baptist\npreacher in a locality had sufficient appreciation of the value of\nrecords to leave an account.\n\nThe location and the status of some of these Baptist churches will be\ninteresting, especially in the South where their development was\nretarded by the restrictions of a slaveholding section living in dread\nof servile insurrection. During the thirties and forties a number of\nNegro Baptist churches were established in the District of Columbia, the\nfirst one being organized by Sampson White in 1839 and reaching its\nposition of permanence  some years later under William Williams, whose\nflock was the largest of this sect in the city. As it could not be\nassociated with Negro churches in the South, then dominated by white men\nin the interest of slaveholders, it connected itself with the\nPhiladelphia Baptist Association. The first Negro Baptist Church in\nBaltimore was organized in 1836 and was making unusual progress under\nthe direction of M. C. Clayton, with a membership of 150 in 1846. A\nnumber of other Baptist churches in the city were soon organized\nthereafter, furnishing opportunity for development to its several useful\nNegro ministers, among whom was Rev. Noah Davis of the Saratoga Street\nBaptist Church.\n\n[Illustration: NOAH DAVIS\n\nA Baptist preacher in Baltimore almost a century ago.]\n\nThese places in Maryland, however, were not strictly of the slaveholding\nattitude and so were parts of Virginia. An extensive account of the\nAfrican Baptist Church of Richmond, established from the white church of\nthat faith and placed in charge of Rev. Robert Ryland, a white man,\nserving at the same time as President of Richmond College, appears\nelsewhere. There had been for some years a Negro Baptist congregation in\nPortsmouth, mentioned above. There were elsewhere in the State other\nBaptist and Methodist churches and some of them almost entirely under\nthe direction of Negroes. The first African Baptist Church in Petersburg\nhad 664 communicants, the largest membership in the Middle District\nBaptist Association. The largest Baptist Church in Manchester (now\nSouth Richmond) in 1846 was the African Baptist Church with a membership\nof 487.\n\nIn South Carolina the Negroes were not permitted to separate from the\nwhites, but they so decidedly outnumbered the latter that the churches\nhad the aspect of Negro congregations. Of the 1,643 members belonging to\nthe First Baptist Church in Charleston in 1846 all but 261 were persons\nof color. In the Second Baptist Church there were 200 white people and\n312 Negroes; in the Georgetown Baptist Church 33 white persons and 298\nNegroes. The Welsh Neck Church had 477 Negroes and only 83 whites. In\nthe Association to which these churches belonged the blacks outnumbered\nthe whites two to one. No distinction was made between the members of\nthe two races in the minutes of the Association. The Bethel Association\nof this State, however, had for a number of years prior to 1838 reported\nthe Negro members. It then had 1,502 whites and 637 blacks; but in 1843\nthe whites were 1,804 and the blacks 1,000.\n\nThe main interest in the Negro Baptists of Georgia during this period\ncentered around the church established in Savannah by Andrew Bryan. For\nabout two years after the death of the founder in 1812 the church\nremained without a pastor, having its pulpit supplied during this period\nby Rev. Evans Great. At the end of this interregnum the church set apart\na Sabbath day to pray that the great head of the church would direct\ntheir choice to a worthy successor. Although Andrew Marshall  had\nserved as an assistant pastor under his uncle he had upon his death\nbecome largely engaged in business. The church, however, by a majority\nvote chose Andrew Marshall in preference to Evans Great, and the former\nentered upon the service with exercises auguring well for success. Being\nprosperous in his ministry as well as in his business, Andrew Marshall\nwas respected not only by his own people but also by the most desirable\nwhites.\n\nHis prosperity and his influence, however, led to a supposed violation\nof the laws. After having accumulated a goodly portion of money, he\npurchased from certain Negroes who had no permit to trade or sell, some\nbricks with which he constructed his two-story brick house. As this was\na violation of the law, his traducers seized upon this opportunity to\nhumiliate him, and, although his former master interceded in his behalf\nand enlisted the sympathy of the best white citizens, he was\nadministered a whipping as a punishment for this so-called high crime.\nThis crippled him in his ministry for a while, but he soon recovered\ntherefrom, having the assistance of Henry Cunningham and Evans Great,\nwho, in spite of the fact that the latter was defeated by Andrew\nMarshall for the pastorate of the church, served under him thereafter as\nan assistant pastor and cooperated with him loyally.\n\nAndrew Marshall emerged from these trials but another of more\nconsequence awaited him. He alienated the affection of the white people\nof this denomination by preaching what they considered false doctrines.\nFurther trouble was caused when he permitted Alexander Campbell, then\ncalled the new light preacher, to speak in the African Baptist Church.\nThe orthodox Baptist of the city disapproved of Marshall's admitting Dr.\nCampbell to his pulpit and disputes in the church immediately followed.\nThe church became hopelessly divided and its strife was the topic of the\ntown. Marshall withdrew from the building with one portion of the\nchurch, the other remaining under the leadership of Adam Johnson. As\nAndrew Marshall was much more powerful than any other man of his\nconnection, he carried with him then out of this church a large\nmajority.\n\nThe association to which this church belonged, however, took action in\nhis case, recommending that Marshall be silenced indefinitely, that the\nAfrican Church be dissolved, and that measures be taken to constitute a\nnew body as a branch of the white Baptist church. The Negro members in\nthe country, then members of the African Baptist Church in Savannah,\nwere to take letters of dismission and either unite themselves with the\nneighboring churches of the Baptist faith or be constituted as separate\nchurches. The association also gave its approval of the Christian\ndeportment of the Second African Church. This, of course, made all of\nthe Negro churches wards of the white and according to the law no Negro\ncould exercise the gift of preaching in those churches unless he was\nendorsed by two or more white Baptist ministers. As the property of the\nFirst African Church was under the trusteeship of the association, its\nwill had to be respected. There is no evidence, however, that these\norders of the association were ever carried out. As most of the members\nof the churches lived in the country rather than in the city of\nSavannah, moreover, the dispute was one in which the minority rather\nthan the majority of the members were concerned.\n\nMarshall, however, solved his own problems with the assistance of\ncertain influential white men who enabled him to purchase the old\nbuilding of the white Baptists, out of which they moved into a new\nchurch edifice on Chippewa Square. As this was a much larger building\nthan the old meeting house constructed by Andrew Bryan and Marshall\ncould preach with more power than any other minister in that vicinity,\nhe had little difficulty in attracting a larger following, although most\nof the official class of the First African Baptist Church deserted him.\n\nUpon the withdrawal of Andrew Marshall and his supporters from the\nedifice of the First African Baptist Church and their taking over of a\nnew edifice, there arose a serious question which even to-day has not\nbeen really settled. This question was whether or not Marshall and his\nfollowers continued the church established by Andrew Bryan or abandoned\nit to the control of those who remained and were later accepted in the\nSunbury Association of Georgia as the Third African Baptist Church,\nstill later known as the First Bryan Baptist Church. The officers in the\ncontrol of this church contended that they rather than the followers of\nMarshall represented the church as it was established by Bryan. They\ninsist that, although in being received in the Sunbury Association they\nwere designated as the Third African Baptist Church, they, nevertheless,\nrepresented the church as it was originally established by Andrew Bryan.\nAll of the actual officers of the original church and all of the persons\nwho had represented the church as it originally was in the Sunbury\nAssociation remained to carry on the work as it had been theretofore\nwithout any special organization of a new church and succeeded at the\nsame time to the possession of this property. They emphasized also the\nfact that Andrew Marshall had never represented the church in this\nassociation and that he himself was a member of the Second African\nChurch rather than of the church of which he was pastor.\n\nThis Third African Church, later the First Bryan Baptist Church, then\nextended a call to Thomas Anderson, who served them until 1835, when the\ncongregation secured the services of Steven McQueen. In 1841 the church\nwas again without a regular pastor but accepted the services of John\nDevous, a former deacon of the Second African Church. Soon thereafter\nwe hear of the resignation of Mr. Devous and the installation of Isaac\nRoberts, also a member of the Second African Church. Mr. Roberts proved\nto be the most energetic of all pastors in the city after the rise of\nAndrew Marshall. He improved the building, inspired the members, and\nedified their souls. But upon the death of Thomas Anderson, the pastor\nof the Second African Church, Mr. Roberts resigned to accept that\npastorate, in 1849. The church then extended a call to Bristol Lawton of\nBeaufort, South Carolina, who preached for just one year and was\nsucceeded by Garrison Frazer, a Baptist from the State of Virginia. Mr.\nFrazer was a man of high church principles and was a good worker in the\nranks. About the time of the outbreak of the Civil War, he resigned and\nthe church then had ordained for its leadership Rev. Ulysses L. Houston,\nwho developed much power as a preacher. In this position he extended the\ninfluence of the church and made himself a great factor even among the\nwhite Baptists of the community. He served in this capacity for some\nyears, laboring through the war into freedom. Andrew Marshall continued\nin charge of his church, maintaining himself with the same prestige and\nretaining a large following until he passed away in 1856, when he was\nsucceeded by Rev. William J. Campbell. Andrew Marshall was mourned by\nthousands unto whom he had ministered  and by tens of thousands who had\nobserved his good work in delivering the poor that cry and in directing\nthe wanderer in the right way.\n\nAlabama also had a large number of Negro Baptists although there did not\ndevelop as many independent churches as there were in Georgia. The Negro\nmembership in the mixed churches was a little more than one-half of the\nnumber. In the city of Montgomery the Negroes were almost three to one.\nProbably the most flourishing center was the African Baptist Church at\nMobile. This congregation had once been a part of the First Baptist\nChurch (white), but in 1839 the congregation was dissolved to form two.\nThat year the Negro church was admitted to the Bethel Association. The\nNegroes had a fine house of worship built by themselves and had\ndeveloped among them some intelligent local preachers, among whom were\ncertain gentlemen known as Heard, Hunton, Hale, Stowe, Collins,\nSchroebel, and Grant.\n\nThe center of interest among the Negro Baptists in Florida was\nJacksonville. There the First Bethel Baptist Church was organized in\n1838 with four whites and two Negroes as charter members. These were\nRev. J. Jaudan and wife, Deacon James McDonald and wife and two slaves\nbelonging to Jaudan. They held their first meetings in the Government\nBlock House near the County Court House but later purchased on Church\nStreet, between Hogan and Julia Streets, a lot on which was built the\nfirst edifice. When later the whites decided to separate from the\nNegroes and undertook to dispossess them altogether the court decided\nthat the property belonged to the Negroes in as much as they were in the\nmajority. Later, however, the Bethel Baptist Church sold out this\nproperty to the whites and purchased property on the corner of Main and\nUnion Streets. In our day we have seen the Bethel Baptist Church\nincorporated by the State as an institutional church which figures as an\nimportant factor in the life of the Negroes of Jacksonville.\n\nIn the western slave States, where the Negroes were few, they were,\nnevertheless, found in considerable numbers in the Baptist Church.\nOne-fourth of the Baptists in Tennessee were Negroes. The membership in\nKentucky was of a much larger proportion. The African Baptist Church of\nLexington was founded by a thrifty Negro who, in spite of the law, was\npermitted to remain in the State as a worthy free Negro and as such not\nonly preached but as early as the thirties had accumulated a fortune\nvalued at $20,000. In 1846 this church under the leadership of L.\nTerrell was the largest in the Elkhorn Association and was considered\n\"orderly and flourishing.\" During these years the First African Baptist\nChurch of Louisville had been developing along the same line and was the\nlargest in its association, having 644 members. Under the pastorate of\nRev. Henry Adams, a man of considerable education and ability to lead,\nit attained a position of much usefulness.  The Negro Baptist Church of\nSt. Louis, founded in 1827, was, in 1848, the largest in its connection\nand with the impetus given the work by its pastor, J. B. Meacham, it\nbecame still more influential.\n\nIn the North the development of the Negro Baptists did not proceed so\nsmoothly. In the first place, neither the majority of the Negroes nor a\nlarge percentage of the whites in that section belonged to the Baptist\nChurch. The northern Negroes, moreover, had something to conjure with.\nMethodism among them was a radical independent movement offering liberty\nin a sphere in which the Negro had never freely moved. Many Negroes,\ntherefore, heeded the call of the African Methodists to \"come ye out\nfrom among them and work out your own salvation with fear and\ntrembling.\" Independent Methodists in the South, however, were more of\nan exception to the rule than was the case of the Baptists in the North,\nfor the Negro Baptists had every opportunity so to worship God in the\nNorth, if they desired, whereas the independent Negro Methodists were\nactually prohibited from invading most of the South.\n\nAs a matter of fact the Baptist churches were among the first separate\norganizations established in the North for Negroes, and as the free\nNegroes and fugitives were in the course of time driven out of the South\nby the intolerable conditions obtaining there during the reactionary\nperiod, the northern Negro Baptist churches multiplied and their\nmembership increased. Practically all large urban communities of the\nNorth had some Negro Baptists. Philadelphia was especially well\nsupplied. There was the First African Church founded by Negroes in 1809,\nwith a membership of 257, under Richard Vaughn in 1846. The Union\nColored Church, with a membership of 200, was in charge of Daniel Scott.\nJ. Henderson was the pastor of the Third African Baptist Church, with a\nmembership of only 61, and William Jackson ministered to a similar\nnumber in the so-called African Church.\n\nFarther north the Baptists were also making progress. The Abyssinian\nBaptist Church of New York City was, in 1846, doing well under the\ndirection of Rev. Sampson White, with a membership of 424. In Boston the\nAfrican Baptist Church had held its own, but in New England, where the\nabolition sentiment was developing and there resulted a more healthy\nsentiment in behalf of fairness for the Negro, the independent movement\namong Negro Methodists and Baptists was not generally considered\nnecessary. Negroes were accepted in white churches and heard preached\nand saw practiced the principles of the brotherhood of man and the\nfatherhood of God. Only in centers of large Negro population then, as in\nBoston, Providence, Newport, New Haven and Hartford, did the Negroes\ntend largely to separate from the whites.\n\nTo the west, however, where came Negroes fleeing from the persecution of\nthe southern whites, independent churches flourished much better.\nPittsburgh, Buffalo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Detroit, and\nChicago soon found Baptist as well as Methodist churches common. Some of\nthe pioneers in the group of Baptists were Richard DeBaptiste of Detroit\nand later of Chicago, and James Poindexter of Columbus. These in the\ncourse of time so rapidly increased that the Negro Baptists finally\nestablished an independent connection, the Providence Baptist\nAssociation, the first Negro body of the kind in the United States,\norganized in Ohio in 1836. Such was the case in Illinois where the\nBaptist churches of St. Clair and Madison counties, of Shawneetown,\nVandalia, Jacksonville, Springfield, Galena, and Chicago, representing\nabout twelve churches, organized in 1838 the Wood River Baptist\nAssociation. Feeling that there was a need for a still larger body, the\nchurches of these parts organized in 1853 the Western Colored Baptist\nConvention.\n\nThe progress of these independent churches in the west suffered no\ninterruption until the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, when\nmany Negroes who had escaped from the South and settled in these cities\nhad to flee to Canada for safety. In Canada West, the various\nsettlements saw the influence of the Baptists and Methodists extended,\nbut for a long time there had been a Baptist church in Toronto which\nunder Rev. W. Christian was flourishing in 1846, and the Methodists soon\nmade there a more systematic effort.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE SCHISM AND THE SUBSEQUENT SITUATION\n\n\nAn important factor in the growth of the Negro Church was that the\nNegroes found the white churches of their choice less friendly and\nfinally saw them withdrawn from the churches in the North to perpetuate\nslavery. In the South, the slaves and free Negroes had to accept\nwhatever religious privileges were allowed them; but when the national\nbodies grew lukewarm on abolition, receded from the advanced position\nwhich they had taken in the defense of the Negro, and persistently\ncompromised on the question to placate their southern adherents to\nmaintain intact their national organizations, Negroes forgot the stigma\nattached to their radical religious bodies and united freely with their\nbrethren who during the first years of their independence found it\ndifficult to secure a following.\n\nIn 1808 the general conference of the Methodists provided that the\nannual conferences should form their own regulations relative to buying\nand selling slaves, thus making it possible for the body of preachers to\nact efficiently in one direction against slavery, even should the\ngeneral conference  choose wholly to refrain. This rule was abrogated\nin 1820, however, and the only important changes made thereafter with\nreference to the Negroes were some rules adopted in 1824, one of which\nprovided that all preachers should prudently \"enforce upon their\nmembers,\" the necessity of teaching their slaves to read the word of\nGod, and to allow them time to attend upon the public worship of God on\nour regular days of divine service. Another rule provided that Negro\npreachers and official members should have all the privileges which are\nusual to others in the district and quarterly conferences, where the\nusages of the country did not forbid it, and that the presiding elder\nmight hold for them a separate district conference, when the number of\nNegro local preachers would justify it. The annual conferences might\nemploy Negro preachers to travel and preach, where their services were\njudged necessary, provided that no one should be so employed without\nhaving been recommended according to the form of discipline.\n\nThe Presbyterians had tried to evade the Negro question but it was again\nbrought up in view of the cruelty practiced in the traffic of slaves\nduring the first decade of the nineteenth century. The General Assembly\nwas forced to take some action again in 1815. It then referred to its\nprevious resolutions on the subject and expressed regret that slavery of\nAfricans existed, hoping too that such measures might be taken as would\nsecure religious  education at least to the rising generation of slaves\nas a preparation for their emancipation at some time in the future. As\nto the transfer of slaves necessary in the economy of the slave States\nthe General Assembly regarded this as unavoidable; but it denounced the\nbuying and selling of slaves by way of traffic and all undue cruelty\namong them as inconsistent with the spirit of the Gospel, recommending\nit to the presbyteries and sessions in their care to make use of all\nmeasures to prevent such shameful conduct. In 1818 there came before\nthis General Assembly a resolution to the effect that a person who\nshould sell as a slave a member of the church, who should be at the time\nin good standing in the church and unwilling to be sold, acted\ninconsistently with the spirit of Christianity and ought to be debarred\nfrom the communion of the church.\n\nAfter considerable discussion, the subject was submitted to a committee\nto prepare a report for the adoption of the General Assembly, embracing\nthe object of the above resolution and also expressing the opinion of\nthe Assembly as to slavery. This report, unanimously adopted, carried,\namong other things, a declaration that the voluntary enslaving of one\nportion of the human race by another is a gross violation of the most\nprecious rights of human nature, utterly inconsistent with the law of\nGod which requires us to love our neighbors as ourselves, and totally\nirreconcilable with the spirit and principles of the gospel of Christ,\nwhich enjoins that all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to\nyou, do ye even unto them.[8]\n\nIn another part of this report, however, the Assembly seemed to undo\nwhat it had done; for it exhorted others to forbear harsh censures, and\nuncharitable reflections on their brethren, who unhappily live among\nslaves whom they cannot immediately set free, but who, at the same time,\nare really using all their influence, and all their endeavors, to bring\nthem into a state of freedom, as soon as a door for it can be safely\nopened. It also encouraged the members of the Society to patronize the\nAmerican Colonization Society with a view to sending the Negroes to\nAfrica and thus deliver themselves and their country from the calamity\nof slavery. The General Assembly recommended the encouragement of\nreligious instruction of the slaves in the principles of the Christian\nreligion, granting them liberty to attend on the preaching of the\ngospel, when they have opportunity, by favoring the instruction of them\nin the Sabbath schools wherever those schools should be formed and by\ngiving them all other proper advantages for acquiring the knowledge of\ntheir duty both to God and man. The General Assembly further recommended\nthat it was incumbent on all Christians to communicate religious\ninstruction to those who are under their authority, so that the doing of\nthis \"in the case before us so far from operating as some have\napprehended that it might, as an incitement to insurrection, would, on\nthe contrary, operate as a most powerful means for the prevention of\nthose evils.\"\n\nIn this straddling position these churches tried to discountenance as\nfar as possible all cruelty of whatever kind in the treatment of slaves,\nespecially the cruelty of separating husband and wife, parents and\nchildren, and that which consisted in selling slaves to those who would\neither themselves deprive these unhappy people of the blessings of the\ngospel or who would transfer them to places where the gospel was not\nproclaimed, or where it was forbidden to slaves to attend upon its\ninstruction. During the thirties most of these churches were taking the\nposition of evading the question, but the abolition members therein kept\nthe problem before them. Postponement of the discussion thereafter\nbecame the order of the day. One decade later many took the position\nassumed by the Presbyterian Church in 1845 when, as a result of various\nmemorials on slavery, the Assembly, deploring the division of the church\non slavery, passed a resolution that the church could not legislate\nwhere Christ has not legislated, that as Christ and the Apostles\nadmitted slaveholders as members of the church, they could not be\nexpected to do otherwise. Some disclaimed, however, any desire to deny\nthat slavery is an evil, or to countenance the idea that masters may\nregard their slaves as real property and not as human beings. They\nmerely intended to say that since Christ and his Apostles did not make\nthe holding of slaves a bar to communion, the church organizations as\nthe court of Christ had no authority to do so. The apostles of Christ\nsought to ameliorate the condition of the slaves, not by denouncing and\nexcommunicating their masters but by teaching both masters and slaves\nthe glorious doctrines of the gospel and enjoining upon each a discharge\nof their relative duties. These sects rejoiced rather that the ministers\nand churches of the slaveholding States were awakening to a deeper sense\nof their obligations to extend to the slave population generally the\nmeans of grace, for many slaveholders not professedly religious favored\nthis object. They deplored the agitation which tended to separate the\nnorthern from the southern portion of the church, \"a result which every\ngood citizen must deplore as tending to the disunion of our beloved\ncountry and which every enlightened Christian will oppose as bringing\nabout a ruinous and unnecessary schism between brethren who maintain a\ncommon faith.\"\n\nThe schism, however, was impending; for the southern members of the\nchurches boldly defended slavery as justified by the scriptures, while\nmany northerners differed from them. Ministers and laymen wrote works\nsetting forth these doctrines while pseudo-scientists and philosophers\nundertook to justify the enslavement of the Negroes on the ground of\nracial inferiority. Southerners who would not go to the extent of\njustifying the institution on these untenable grounds merely deprecated\nit as an evil for which they were not responsible and of which they\ncould not rid themselves. Richard Fuller, a southern Baptist of unusual\ninfluence in shaping the policy of that sect in his section, expressed\nthis thought in the words: \"I am willing to appear in any controversy\nwhich can even by implication place me in a false light and odious\nattitude representing me as a eulogist and abettor of slavery, and not\nas simply the apologist of an institution transmitted to us by former\ngenerations--the existence of which I lament--for the commencement of\nwhich I am not at all responsible--for the extinction of which I am\nwilling to make greater sacrifices than any abolitionist has made or\nwould make, if the cause of true humanity would be thus advanced.\"\n\nThe outbreaks soon followed, however, in spite of efforts to heal the\nbreach. There came from the Alabama State Baptist Convention a memorial\nwith respect to the discrimination of the Foreign Mission Board against\nslaveholders in making its appointments. The reply of the Board was\nconciliatory but was to the effect that a slaveholder could not be\nconsistently appointed as a missionary for the reason that such action\nwould involve an approval of slavery. This and other Baptist conventions\nthereafter severed their connection with the national body, and in 1845\norganized the Southern Baptist Convention. That same year occurred the\nsecession of the Southern Methodists. That denomination had for years\nstruggled with this question and had undertaken to maintain the position\nthat slavery is an evil to be deplored and that ministers and bishops at\nleast should abstain therefrom. When, in 1845, the Methodists undertook\nto discipline one of its bishops, James O. Andrew, charging him with\nholding slaves, the southern delegates stood by him and withdrew to\norganize the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. In 1857, the\nPresbyterians who had all but compromised sufficiently to hold their\nnational body intact gave an expression of opinion on the Fugitive\nSlave Law which so offended its southern members that they withdrew and\nformed the nucleus around which the Southern Presbyterian Church was\nestablished in 1861.\n\nIn spite of the reactionary tendencies of the white churches, however,\nno such thing as the independence of the Negro had ever been possible in\nthe South and could not be so after the radical aspect which this\nmovement assumed in the North. In slave States, the majority of Negroes\nbecame a decidedly neglected mass during the reaction, although many of\nthem were nominally members of churches. When because of the\ninsurrectionary movement led by certain blacks like Gabriel Prosser,\nDenmark Vesey and Nat Turner, it became unpopular to teach Negroes to\nread and the educated white persons were not willing to supply this lack\nof religious workers among the blacks, there was no longer hope for\nordinary religious instruction. This reaction was unusually disastrous\nto the Negro preacher when it was noised abroad that Nat Turner was a\nminister. The rumor attached to Negro ministers throughout the South the\nstigma of using preaching as a means to incite their race to servile\ninsurrection.\n\nSome of the legislation enacted by the States after this great upheaval\nwill indicate the extent to which this fear controlled the minds of the\nsouthern people. In 1832 Virginia passed a law to silence Negro\npreachers, making it impossible for them thus to function except in\ncompliance with very rigid regulations and in the presence of certain\ndiscreet white men. In 1833, Alabama made it unlawful for slaves or free\nNegroes to preach unless before five respectable slaveholders and when\nauthorized by some neighboring religious society. Georgia enacted a law\nin 1834 providing that neither free Negroes nor slaves might preach or\nexhort an assembly of more than seven unless licensed by justices on the\ncertificate of three ordained ministers. Other Southern States soon\nfollowed the example of these, passing more drastic laws prohibiting the\nassembly of Negroes after the early hours of the night, and providing\nfor the expulsion of all free Negroes from such commonwealths, so as to\nreduce the danger of mischief from the spread of information by this\nmore enlightened class.\n\nThus circumscribed, the Negroes in the South had to follow their masters\nin religious matters. They continued to join the Methodist and Baptist\nchurches, but constituted a part of a mixed membership worshiping under\nthe same roof. The masters had long since learned that coincidence of\nreligious belief on the part of the slave and the owner was a necessity\nin the economy of the slaveholding States. No master would look with\nfavor upon seeing his slave proselyted or influenced by a minister whom\nhe would not tolerate as his own spiritual adviser. Later there was not\nmuch commingling of the two races in the same meetings. White ministers\npreached to the Negroes in their special meetings or provided some Negro\nexhorter of power to supply that need, but only when such Negro\nminister's character had been thoroughly investigated and approved in\naccordance with the law and public opinion. Where there were not so very\nmany Negroes in the churches, they were segregated in the gallery or\ncertain pews, which they entered by a side door, as provided in the\nCourt of the Gentiles in the Temple of Jehovah; but if there were many\nNegroes and very few whites in these congregations, they usually\nprovided separate buildings or used the same edifices at different\nhours. The argument in favor of this segregation was that God in making\nthe races different intended that they should be kept separate and\ndistinct.\n\nWhere there was allowed much liberty in seating, very often grave\nproblems arose. Such was the case in Charleston, South Carolina, in the\nBethel Church in 1833 on an occasion when Dr. Capers was to preach. As\nmore whites came than could be seated and the Negroes refused to vacate\ntheir customary seats, a number of uncouth young white men forcibly\nejected them therefrom. Because one of the preachers a few days\nthereafter sharply criticized this action of the uncouth element they\nbecame unusually indignant, registering a protest against such censure.\nAn effort was made to settle the matter by reconciliation, but when that\nfailed, nine of the young men were expelled only to be followed by 150\nothers to form a new organization, which established connection with the\nMethodist Protestant Church.\n\nThis sort of segregation was common to all of the denominations alike.\nThe Presbytery of Charleston, finding the church in that city unusually\ncrowded in 1850, built a structure for the worship of the Negro\nmembership, costing $7,700. The edifice was of the shape of a T to\nprovide seats for the whites in the transepts. It had connected with it\nall of the facilities for religious instruction in the other churches\nwith the exception that teaching was oral. The Episcopalians in that\ncity, however, found it more difficult to carry out such a policy in\nrelieving the congestion of the Negro pews in St. Michael's and St.\nPhillip's. These communicants decided to build what was to be called the\nCalvary Church for the accommodation of the blacks who were then\noccupying temporary quarters in Temperance Hall. Because of certain\nradical action of the burial societies among the Negro communicants,\nhowever, the owner of Temperance Hall refused further to accommodate the\nNegroes and the Calvary Church was demolished while it was in the\nprocess of construction.\n\nThe Negroes seemed to have retained several separate places of worship\nin the State of Virginia, as in the case of Georgia. Among the churches\nestablished for Negroes at a very early period was that of Williamsburg,\nVirginia, organized  exclusively for Negroes in 1776 and admitted as\nsuch to the Dover Baptist Association in 1791. Upon petitioning the\nstate legislature in 1823, however, the Negroes were refused the permit\nto build a Baptist church in Richmond, although the one used by the\nwhites was not sufficiently spacious to permit their attendance. In\n1841, however, when the Baptist church was finally compelled to build a\nnew structure to accommodate its increasing membership, they turned over\nto the Negroes for their special place of worship the old building in\nwhich they organized what is known as the first African Baptist Church\nunder the pastorate of the Rev. Robert Ryland, a white man, who served\nduring the same period as president of Richmond College. When this\nbecame unusually crowded the Ebenezer Baptist Church was organized by\nthe overflow membership in 1855 and was controlled very much in the same\nway. There were flourishing Negro Methodist and Baptist churches in\nother parts during the forties, fifties, and sixties, conducted very\nmuch on the order of the First African Baptist Church in Richmond, or\nlike the Anthony Street Church in Mobile, Alabama, in charge of the Rev.\nKeidor Hawthorne. In other centers in Virginia, however, the Negroes\nwere proceeding almost independently. There was then a representative\nBaptist congregation in Portsmouth under the direction of the noted\nbuilder and organizer, E. G. Corpew. Rev. Mr. Morris, another pioneer in\nthe work, was at this time leading forward the Court Street Baptist\nChurch in Lynchburg. In 1837 and 1838 Sampson White was reported as a\nsuccessful minister in charge of the Gillfield Baptist Church of\nPetersburg, which as early as 1803 undertook to erect its first\nstructure. Sampson White then went to Norfolk for a short stay in this\ninviting field, and in 1839 came to Washington and organized the\nNineteenth Street Baptist Church.\n\n[Illustration: SAMPSON WHITE\n\nA Baptist preacher in Virginia, the District of Columbia, and New York\nalmost a century ago.]\n\nIn the District of Columbia, where, as in Maryland, the restrictions on\nNegroes were not so rigid as in some other parts of the South, the\nNegroes had numerous churches of the Baptist and Methodist faith, and\nunder the leadership of John F. Cooke established, in 1843, the\nFifteenth Street Presbyterian Church.\n\nBaltimore was no exception to this rule. As the slave and free\nmembership freely mingled in that city they had, as early as 1835, ten\ncongregations, and by 1847 thirteen, ten of which were Methodist. The\nwork of the Baptists had been largely promoted by M. C. Clayton, the\npreacher of versatile genius, who founded the First African Church in\nthat city in 1836, and by Noah Davis, a leader and organizer of much\nability.\n\n[Illustration: REV. M. C. CLAYTON\n\nA Baptist preacher of power in Baltimore before the Civil War.]\n\nThis favorable condition, however, obtained in the South only in those\ncommunities where the authorities winked at the violation of the law by\nfree Negroes and where slaves enjoyed unusual privileges because their\nmasters were a law unto themselves. In 1828 the Alabama Baptist\nAssociation  conditionally purchased a slave named Caesar at the cost\nof $625 and sent him to preach the gospel and live among his people. He\nwas then made the companion of the famous white evangelist, James\nMcLemore, of much note in Alabama. Caesar was respected alike for piety\nand his ability as a preacher. Not infrequently he addressed audiences\ncomposed entirely of whites. Another slave of Alabama, Doc Phillips, was\na Baptist preacher of a commanding influence among his people. The\nTuskegee Association of that State undertook to purchase him that he\nmight be appointed a missionary, but he declined to be severed from his\nmaster, who allowed him whatever time he might desire for preaching. So\nwas this true of George Bentley of Giles County, Tennessee, a slave of\nunusual note, having attained distinction as a preacher of power, well\nversed in polemic theology. Out of a debate on baptism lasting more than\nfour days he emerged victor over a white minister in that county\nchallenging him to a discussion of the principles of baptism. He\nnumbered among his communicants the best white people of the community,\nwho paid him a salary of more than $600. He, like Doc Phillips, refused\nto have his congregation purchase his freedom, as he did not care to be\nseparated from his kind master.\n\nHere and there in the South, however, there developed certain Negro\npreachers better known to fame. A striking example of this class was\nLott Cary, who was born a slave in Virginia. When quite young he was\nhired out and thereby came under the influences which caused him to be a\nman given to profane and intemperate habits, although his parents were\nof the higher class of slaves. In 1807, however, he was awakened by\nhearing a sermon from the third chapter of John on the interview of\nNicodemus with our Saviour, from the words: \"Notwithstanding what I say\nunto you, you must be born again.\" So powerful was the preaching and so\ntelling was the effect on the mind of this slave that he immediately\nsecured a copy of the New Testament and almost miraculously learned to\nread by studying that chapter. Upon developing into a strong spiritual\nman, he was made superintendent of all the laborers in the tobacco\nwarehouse in which he was working in Richmond. Not long thereafter he\nreceived permission to serve as an exhorter in the First African Baptist\nChurch of that city, the membership of which, then being about 2,000,\nrequired the services of a number of assistant pastors.\n\n[Illustration: REV. LOTT CARY\n\nA missionary to Africa.]\n\nLott Cary reached a new stage in his development in the fall of 1813,\nwhen Luther Rice, who had just returned from the East, appeared in that\ncity preaching rousing sermons urging the Baptists to enter upon and to\nsupport the work of missions in foreign fields. In November of that year\nthe Richmond Foreign Missionary Society was organized and delegates were\nsent to Philadelphia  the following spring to participate in the\norganization of the Baptist Triennial Convention. As this new body had\nfor one of its objects mission work in foreign fields, the national\ninterest aroused therein excited also a deep interest among the Negro\nmembers of the churches in Richmond. Two years later, therefore, the\nRichmond African Baptist Missionary Society, with Lott Carey as the\nmoving spirit, was formed with the sole object of sending the gospel\ninto Africa. This society was composed of the Negro members of the First\nAfrican Baptist Church and of other churches throughout the city. It\nheld annual meetings and with their small donations accumulated as much\nas $700 during the first four years.\n\nAs no one volunteered to go abroad to extend this mission work, Lott\nCary himself determined to go to Africa, accompanied by Collin Teague.\nThey were, therefore, duly appointed by the Board of the Baptist\nTriennial Convention as missionaries to Liberia. In 1821 Cary and Teague\nwith many others sailed from Norfolk for the land of their fathers\nbeyond the Atlantic. Before leaving Richmond, Cary and wife, Teague and\nwife with their son Hillary, who later became editor of the _Liberian\nHerald_, and Joseph Sanford and his wife, formed what is called the\nFirst Baptist Church of Monrovia. This congregation was later designated\nas the mother of the Providence Baptist Association in Liberia.\n\nUpon arriving in Liberia, Lott Cary addressed himself with much energy\nto the task of reconstruction and organization in this foreign field. He\neasily became a leader among the communicants of that denomination and\npreached for years among them as a man representative of the power of\nthe gospel unto the salvation of the heathen. Wielding such influence in\nthe religious field, he easily convinced others of the necessity for\navailing themselves of his services in another line. He was, therefore,\nmade governor of one of the provinces of Liberia. After administering\nthe affairs of this province a short period he fell a victim to the\ndiseases which swept away so many others who gave their lives as a\nsacrifice in this foreign land.\n\nHis fate, too, was not unlike that of Harrison Ellis of Alabama. In that\nrapidly developing slaveholding commonwealth where men gave little\nattention to things spiritual, even for the whites themselves, Harrison\nEllis rose to great eminence as a power in the church. Born a slave, he\nwas, of course, denied the opportunities for mental development. He was,\nhowever, a man of such strong character and so efficient in his work as\na blacksmith, a trade in which he excelled, that it was possible for him\nto secure privileges denied so many others of his race. He soon mastered\nthe rudiments of education, and building upon this foundation, began to\nacquire knowledge of Latin. Having a deep impression as to the worth\nof Christianity and the influence of the gospel as a factor in the\nuplift of his people, he thought of preparing himself for the ministry.\nThe study of Latin then was to some extent neglected for a more thorough\nstudy of Greek with a view to reading the New Testament. Some attention\nwas thereafter given to Hebrew to get a better grasp of the linguistic\nsetting of the Old Testament. He thereafter took up the principles of\ntheology.\n\nA man of such unusual attainments in spite of the various difficulties\nwith which he had to struggle in earning a livelihood and securing\ninstruction, Ellis naturally impressed the people of his community.\nComing under the influence of the Presbyterians, he was encouraged by\nthem to make an effort for the exercise of his gifts as a minister. As a\nman of such a well developed mind could not find in this country\nadequate opportunity for service in this field, he was urged to go to\nLiberia. The Presbyterian synod of Alabama, therefore, examined him with\na view to testing his efficiency. In this examination he proved himself\na good Latin and Hebrew scholar and showed still greater proficiency in\nGreek. His attainments in theology were highly satisfactory. Giving an\naccount of the rise of this prodigy the _Eufala Shield_, an organ of\nthat State, referred to him as a man \"courteous in manners, polite in\nconversation and missionary in demeanor.\" Impressed with his usefulness,\nthe Presbyterians of Alabama finally purchased him and his family, in\n1847, at a cost of $2,500, that they might go to Liberia and work among\ntheir own people.\n\nIn Liberia, Harrison Ellis took up his post under very favorable\nauspices. He quickly impressed those with whom he came in contact,\nattracted to him a sufficient number of persons to constitute a\nrespectable following, easily held his own among other intelligent\nNegroes, and finally became one of the most influential men in the\ncolony. Soon thereafter, however, like so many others, who in that land\nof their fathers gave their lives as a sacrifice for their many\npersecuted brethren in the western world, he finally proved inadequate\nto the demands of that climate and passed away, admired by those who\nknew him and mourned by his coworkers and friends.\n\nThese few Negro ministers, however, could not reach the masses of their\nrace. In their undeveloped state the rural Negroes depended upon the\ncrumbs that fell from the white ministers' tables. The religious\nexperience of such Negroes, therefore, was more nominal than rational.\nMany of them obtained their first religious impressions in some camp\nmeeting during a special effort in behalf of the lost. These meetings\nwere looked forward to with a great deal of anticipation and persons,\nknowing of the good supposedly derived therefrom, came from afar and\nremained about the place, thus giving to such convocations the\nwell-known name of camp meetings. As these assemblages were social as\nwell as religious and sometimes partook of a festive nature, the\nNegroes easily became attracted to this more liberal method of promoting\nthe cause of Christ.\n\nThe Negroes in these meetings appealed especially to the white ministers\nbecause of their quick response to the appeal to come out of darkness\ninto light. While an Episcopal clergyman with his ritual and prayer book\nhad difficulty in interesting the Negroes, they flocked in large numbers\nto the spontaneous exercises of the Methodists and Baptists, who, being\ndecidedly evangelical in their preaching, had a sort of hypnotizing\neffect upon the Negroes, causing them to be seized with certain\nemotional jerks and outward expressions of an inward movement of the\nspirit which made them lose control of themselves. The program of the\nday was a delivery of sermons at intervals, interspersed here and there\nby appeals to sinners to come forward to be prayed for at the anxious\nseat, while various members, having unusual influence over the\nunconverted and in touch with God, whispered in their ears the way to\nfind salvation and life.\n\nAmong the Baptists, the soul-stirring reunion was known as a protracted\nmeeting, which differed very little from that of the Methodist camp\nmeeting. The preacher came forward, declaring the dawn of a new day and\nthe shower of blessings that every one could receive. The burden of his\nmessage was that he had come to set forth those things which had been\nhitherto kept from the wise and prudent but lately revealed unto fools.\nSeeing that they were made a special object of the philanthropy of these\nnew workers, the Negroes became seized with hysteria because of this new\nboon; and the interest in the work passing from one to another, spread\nalmost like a contagion, moving communities to seek salvation. Persons\npassing as sinners were made to feel that they were wretches in the\nsight of God and that direful punishments awaited them as the lot of the\nwicked. Their state was awful to behold, and their opportunities were\nswiftly passing away. That moment was the accepted time; for their delay\nwould mean damnation. Persons fell helpless before the altar of the\nchurch and had to be carried out to be ministered unto, and when they\nemerged from their semi-conscious state they came forward singing the\nsong of the redeemed who had been washed white in the blood of the Lamb.\n\nStatistics show, however, that such a conversion of people who were\ngiven no opportunity for mental development amounted to very little in\nthe edification of their souls. Not long after these exciting camp\nmeetings and protracted efforts had passed over many of these persons,\nwho had been most vociferous in their praise of God for cleansing them\nof their many sins, readily fell thereafter by the wayside in engaging\nin what is known as pleasurable evils. Baptists and Methodists during\nthis period insisted that dancing was an evil, but how could the\nplantation Negro resist the temptation when he heard the clapping of\nthe hands and the tune of the banjo? It became fashionable, therefore,\nfor a person to be converted several seasons, sometimes once every four\nor five consecutive summers before his feet could be completely taken\nout of the mire and the clay and placed upon the solid rock where the\nwind might blow and the storm might rise, but none should frighten them\nfrom the shore.\n\nBecause this wild religious excitement meant very little in the uplift\nof the slaves, there were throughout the South members of other than\nMethodist and Baptist churches who still adhered to the idea of the\nliterary instruction of the blacks. Although there were soon laws on the\nstatute books to the contrary in practically all of the Southern States,\nthe wives and children of ministers taught their few slaves to read the\nBible, and when this was unpopular or prohibited, they made use of the\ncatechism in requiring the Negroes to memorize the principles of\nreligion and to learn formal prayers. There were some masters who went\nto the extent of opening private schools for their slaves.\n\nThe more the Negroes were instructed by these rather intellectual\ndenominations, however, the less they, as a group, seemed inclined to\njoin their fortunes with those persons who were disposed to lay a\nfoundation for an intensive spiritual development. When the Methodists\nand Baptists had had a chance to proselyte the Negroes, the\nEpiscopalians and the like were almost relieved of the necessity for\nany effort among them. From the report of Alston's Parish in South\nCarolina, in which there were 13,000 slaves, for example, 3,200 were\nMethodists and 1,500 Baptists, while only 300 belonged to the Episcopal\nChurch. In St. Peter's Parish of that State the Methodists had 1,335 of\n6,600 in 1845. In the Parish of St. Helena the Baptists reported 2,132\ncommunicants, the Methodists 314, and the Episcopalians only 52. The\nEpiscopalians discounted the religious benefit derived by attendance\nupon the Methodist and Baptist evangelical meetings, feeling that\nbecause of their social and festive nature the Negroes lost more in\nworldly pleasures thereby than they gained in spiritual uplift. Many of\nthem believed that it would have been much better for the slaves, had\ntheir masters kept them at home. They did not think very well of the\ninfluence of the Negro preachers, contending that they often did harm.\nWhere there was an improvement in Negro character many insisted that it\nwas due to the religious and moral training given by their masters, and\nstill more largely by their mistresses. For this reason it was strongly\nurged upon masters to manifest more interest in the morals of their\nbondmen, as it would not only make them better men spiritually but would\nincrease their economic efficiency.\n\nFrom the Negroes' point of view, however, religious experience did not\nresult from instruction in books. Persons known to be illiterate had\nstrange visions and prophesied with such success as to move multitudes.\nSlaves prohibited from attending meetings violated the law and braved\nthe dangerous network of the patrols enforcing the police regulations.\nWhen converted they made no secret of their new experience and boldly\nshouted before their masters, praising the Lord. That they should,\ncontrary to instructions, frequent the places of these emotional\nupheavals was considered crime enough, but to appear before their owners\nthemselves, telling them about what the Lord had done for their souls\nand at the same time warning these aristocratic \"Christians\" to repent\nof their sins and flee from the wrath to come, was more than the ruling\nclass could endure. These Negro converts were cruelly told to hush up\nbecause they \"were getting above themselves,\" and if they refused to\nobey, many of them were whipped until they stood in puddles of blood\ndrawn by the lashes inflicted upon their bodies, while others, stricken\ndown with heavy blows or subjected to mortal torture, went to their\ndeath rather than cease to bear witness for Jesus.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nRELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION REVIVED\n\n\nBecause such religious instruction as the Negroes received after the\nenactment and the enforcement of the reactionary legislation of the\nSouth failed to secure to them that mental development necessary to\nunderstand the Christian doctrine and to connect it with the practical\nproblems of life, northern friends of the Negroes forced a change in\ntheir religious instruction by exposing the unchristian policy of\npreventing a people from learning of God through the only source of\nrevelation, the Bible. Abolitionists like William Jay and many northern\nministers who did not consider themselves anti-slavery, fearlessly\nbranded as sinners the so-called southern Christians who were thus\npreventing the coming of the kingdom of God. Southerners eloquently\nretorted on the defensive, of course, but believed in their hearts that\nthe deplorable situation should be remedied. Much effort was made\nthereafter to render more thorough the oral instruction of slaves, but\nwithout very much success. Nearer the middle of the nineteenth century,\nhowever, there appeared among the clergy and sympathetic whites in\nthe South some inclination to disregard the custom and laws of that\nsection that the necessary foundation for the instruction of the Negroes\nin the Christian doctrine might be given.\n\nIn this work the evangelical denominations participated more freely than\nothers. From the Episcopal Church to which most of the richest\nslaveholders belonged, not very much help came because that church never\nconsidered slavery a sin and never made it a matter of discipline. That\nthe bodies of the Negroes were made miserable in this world and that\ntheir souls might be damned were of little concern to some persons, who\nwere not especially interested in monopolizing heaven even for poor\nwhites. The gospel, moreover, as some saw it, had little to do with the\nsettlement of differences between the races in this world, since it was\nrather concerned with the adjustment of affairs in the kingdom to come.\n\nThere were among the Episcopalians, however, some striking exceptions to\nthis rule. Among these should be mentioned Bishop Polk of Louisiana. In\n1854, he informed Frederick L. Olmsted, who was then traveling through\nthat country, that he had confirmed thirty black persons near the\nstation assigned to the Legree estate, where the conditions set forth in\n_Uncle Tom's Cabin_, he contended, did not obtain. Bishop Polk owned 400\nslaves himself but endeavored to bring them up in a religious manner,\nbaptizing all of their children and teaching them the catechism. \"All\nwithout exception,\" says Olmsted, \"attend the church service, and the\nchanting is creditably performed by them in the opinion of their owner.\nNinety of them are communicants, marriages are celebrated according to\nthe church ritual, and the state of morals is satisfactory. Twenty\ninfants had been baptized by the Bishop just before his departure from\nhome, and he had left his whole estate, his keys and the like, in the\nsole charge of one of his slaves, without the slightest apprehension of\nloss or damage.\" Referring further to the slaveholding of this minister\nof the gospel, Olmsted remarked that \"in considering the position of\nthis Christian prelate as a slaveholder, the English reader must bear in\nmind that by the laws of Louisiana emancipation had been rendered all\nbut impracticable, and that if practicable it would not necessarily be\nin all cases an act of mercy or of justice.\"\n\nTaking up again the religious instruction of the slaves, Olmsted found\n\"that there were widely different practices in that State.\" He observed\nthat there were some other slaveholders who, like Bishop Polk,\nencouraged and even obliged their slaves to engage in religious\nexercises. Yet among the wealthier slave owners, and especially in that\nsection of the country where the blacks outnumbered the whites, there\nwas generally a visible and often an avowed distrust of the effect of\nreligious exercises upon slaves and even the preaching of white\nclergymen to them was permitted by many only with reluctance. The\nprevailing impression among northern people with regard to the important\ninfluence of slavery in promoting the spread of religion among the\nblacks, he contended, was erroneous. Northern clergymen supposed as a\ngeneral thing that there was a regular daily instruction of the slaves\nin the truths of Christianity. \"So far as this is from being the case,\"\nsaid Olmsted, \"although family prayers were held in several of the fifty\nplanters' houses in Mississippi and Alabama in which I passed a night, I\nnever in a single instance saw a field hand attend or join in the\ndevotions of the family.\"\n\nThere should be mentioned also in this connection the services of Bishop\nMeade of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Virginia. Early in his\ncareer he addressed himself to the neglected condition of the Negroes,\npreaching rousing sermons, telling them their duty toward their own\ngroup. He was interested in the colonization movement and hoped to\nsecure the release of certain recaptured Africans to encourage the\nmanumission of others who might be given a chance to establish a nation\nfor their race in Africa. Although thereafter he did not emphasize the\nemancipation of the slaves very much because of the reactionary\ninfluences at work in the country, he did advocate the thorough\neducation of those slaves who were to be colonized abroad. As an impetus\nin this direction he republished the sermons of the Rev. Thomas Bacon,\nwho answered every argument presented against the religious instruction\nof Negroes. He especially besought the ministers of the gospel to take\ninto serious consideration a matter of which \"they also will have to\ngive an account.\" \"Did not Christ,\" said he, \"die for these poor\ncreatures as well as for any others, and has he not given charge to the\nminister to gather his sheep into the fold?\"\n\nThe Presbyterians, much more liberal in their attitude toward the blacks\nthan the Episcopalians, manifested an unfailing interest in the\ncondition of these people far down. Although the church as a national\nbody receded from its early position of attacking slavery and thereafter\ncompromised with the institution, there was among these people in the\nvarious parts of the country a continuous effort to promote the\nreligious instruction of the Negroes. Early manifesting interest in the\npreparation of Negroes for colonization in Africa, the Presbyterians\nplanned to bring out of the South Negroes liberated for expatriation\nthat they might be first trained in a school for this purpose\nestablished at Parsippanny, New Jersey. As this failed, this church\nfinally established for this purpose, in 1854, Ashmun Institute, now\nLincoln University.\n\nIn the very heart of the South, however, the Presbyterians did not fail\nto aid the instruction of Negroes wherever public opinion permitted it,\nalthough they had to confine themselves largely to verbal instruction.\nIn the mountains of Virginia, North Carolina, and Kentucky, where the\nScotch-Irish element dominated, there was no diminution of ardor in the\nreligious instruction of the Negroes. Expressions of interest came also\nfrom the Presbyterian synods of Georgia and Alabama, while those in the\nmountains openly advocated literary instruction as a preparation for\nthorough indoctrination. In the States of Maryland, Tennessee, and\nKentucky, they were not handicapped by laws prohibiting the education of\nthe Negroes. They, therefore, spoke out more boldly for the\nestablishment of schools, and especially Sabbath schools, which paid as\nmuch attention to the teaching of reading as it did to the actual\ninstruction in the Bible.\n\nAmong the Presbyterians in the South the most efficient worker was the\nRev. C. C. Jones, who toiled among the Negroes in Georgia. Taking the\nsituation as it was rather than complaining because it was not\ndifferent, Jones addressed himself to the task of trying to convince the\nslave owners as to the advisability of religious instruction. He\nbelieved that if the circumstances of the Negroes were changed, they\nwould equal if not excel the rest of the human family in religion,\nintellect, purity of morals and ardor of piety. He feared that white men\nwould cherish a contempt for the Negroes which would cause them to sink\nlower in the scale of morality and religion. He, therefore, advocated\nthe attendance of both races upon the same services that they might\nlearn by contact from their masters. The independent church organization\nfor which the Negroes contended, he believed, would rather give them an\nopportunity to deteriorate.\n\nBy a logical array of facts, moreover, he tried to prove that Negroes\nwho had been instructed in the doctrines of Christianity had less\ntendency toward servile insurrection than those who had been left in\nheathenism. Even the Southampton insurrection started by Nat Turner, he\nbelieved, was due to the fact that, being unable to understand the real\nscheme of things, he had misguided the slaves by his false prophecy.\nThose Negroes who had been well instructed in the principles of\nChristianity had never been found guilty of any such crimes.\n\nIn this effort Jones had a very difficult task; for the tendency during\nthat day was rather toward segregation in the church. Most southern men\nhad no idea of elevating the Negroes to the status of white men, not\neven in matters of religion. The whites believed that the domestic\nelement of the system of slavery itself afforded adequate means for\ntheir improvement and the natural safe and effective means of their\nelevation. In other words, their instruction must be decidedly different\nfrom that of white men, in regard to whom the term education had widely\ndifferent significations. The best the Negro could hope for would be an\nimitation of the white man to call into action that peculiar capacity\nfor copying the mental and moral habits of the superior race.\n\nJones's work did not differ materially from that of the Rev. Josiah Law\nof Georgia, who was almost as successful in grappling with the same\nproblem. These workers, however, soon found that there was a strenuous\nobjection even to the verbal instruction of Negroes for fear that the\noral exercise would inspire a desire for literary training, which was\nout of harmony with the status of the Negro in a slaveholding\ncommonwealth. Thinking that it might lead to such a state of affairs,\nmost masters in some parts of the South opposed all instruction of\nNegroes during the thirties and forties.\n\nThereafter appeared occasional evidences of further interest in the\nreligious instruction and the evangelization of the slaves and free\npeople of color, however, in spite of this opposition. Much interest was\nmanifested in this work by the Presbyterians of Charleston; Union,\nGeorgia; Concord, South Alabama; and Mississippi. In 1825 the General\nAssembly went on record to the effect that \"no more honored name could\nbe conferred on a minister of Jesus than that of Apostle to the American\nslaves, and no service can be more pleasing to the God of Heaven, or\nmore useful to our beloved country, than that which this title\ndesignates.\"\n\nThe minutes quoted from the report of the Presbytery of Georgia in 1839\nsaid: \"We are happy to say, in regard to the religious instruction of\nthe Negroes, that this important part of our service has received a new\nimpulse during the last year. This business receives considerable\nattention in many parts of our bounds. Plantations are open to all our\nministers and fields presented among this people which it is impossible\nfor them to occupy. Sabbath schools, for their exclusive benefit, exist\nin some of our churches, and we are happy to believe that there is an\nincreasing interest felt on this subject. Within our bounds there is one\nminister whose whole ministry is devoted exclusively to this people, and\nmost, if not all, the several pastors and stated supplies preach as\noften as once a week to this class of our population. In Liberty County\nthere is at this time very considerable attention to religion among the\nblacks, not less than fifty being under serious impressions. A beloved\nbrother in Augusta and another in the vicinity of Natchez are following\nthe noble example by devoting their whole time to this interesting\nwork.\"\n\nThe Presbytery of Georgia remarked in referring to one of their number\nwho devoted his whole time to this work: \"During the year he has been\nblessed with a revival in one part of his field of labor. Fourteen\nprofessed conversion, and were added to the church. Another brother, in\nanother part of our bounds, reports the conversion and reception into\nthe church to which he ministers, of eight colored persons.\" And the\nPresbytery of Hopewell spoke of their churches generally as cheerfully\nyielding the half of their pastor's services to this department of\nlabor. It also expressed a belief that several churches \"will soon be\nerected for the exclusive accommodation of the Negroes, and that the\nfield will be occupied as missionary ground by at least one who is\ndeeply interested in the work.\"\n\nThe Presbytery of South Alabama said in 1847: \"Perhaps without a\nsolitary exception our ministers are devoting a considerable part of\ntheir labors to the benefit of the colored population. It is a field\nwhich we all hope to cultivate; and to some the great Head of the Church\nis intimating an abundant harvest.\" \"Most of our pastors,\" said the\nPresbytery of Charleston, \"devote a part of the time to the exclusive\nservice of the blacks and in some instances with the most pleasing\nsuccess. A scheme is now in agitation for the full consent of the\nPresbytery for establishing an African Church in the city of\nCharleston.\"\n\nIn 1854 the report of the General Assembly on the instruction of the\nNegroes in the slave States said that instead of abating, the interest\nin the religious welfare of the Negroes was increasing. In their houses\nof worship provision at once special and liberal was made for the\naccommodation of the people of color so that they might enjoy the\nprivileges of the sanctuary in common with the whites. \"Besides this,\nnearly all of our ministers hold a service in the afternoon of the\nSabbath, in which all exercises are particularly adapted to their\ncapacities and wants. In some instances ministers are engaged in their\nexclusive service ... not ministers of inferior ability, but such as\nwould be an ornament and a blessing to the intelligent, cultivated\ncongregations of the land. In a still larger number of instances the\npastor of a church composed of the two classes, inasmuch as the blacks\nformed the more numerous portion, devotes to them the greater share of\nhis labors, and finds among them the most pleasing tokens of God's\nsmiles upon his work. Besides the preaching of the word to which they\nhave free access, in many cases a regular system of catechetical\ninstruction for their benefit is pursued, either on the Sabbath at the\nhouse of worship or during the week on the plantations where they\nreside.... The position taken by our Church with reference to the much\nagitated subject of slavery secures to us the unlimited opportunities of\naccess to master and slave, and lays us under heavy responsibilities\nbefore God and the world not to neglect our duty to either.\"\n\nAmong the Methodists who directed their attentions to mission work among\nNegroes no one was more prominent than Bishop William Capers of South\nCarolina. He had no idea of preparing Negroes for manumission, but\nlooked to the edification of their souls as a preparation for the life\nto come, justifying the relation of slave and the master by the Bible in\nkeeping with most ministers of his time. He emphasized, on the other\nhand, the necessity of the masters' being kind to their bondmen and\nespecially in providing for their spiritual needs. After preaching a\nnumber of sermons to this effect, he devised a scheme for adapting the\nteaching of the Christian truth to the mental condition of the slaves.\nHe planned to have the old Negroes instructed by preachers and the\nchildren through catechists by the memory method, while their minds were\nin a plastic state, always remembering, however, that any minister who\ndid not believe in the southern religion of the relation of master and\nslave as sanctioned by his sort of Christianity should not enter upon\nthis work. With the support of a number of leading men in that\ncommonwealth Bishop Capers established two missions in 1829 and two\nadditional ones in 1833. Thereafter one or two others were added every\nyear until 1847, when there were seventeen engaging the attention of\ntwenty-five preachers. When Bishop Capers died in 1855 he saw his work,\naccording to his plan, very well done. The Methodists then had 26\nmissions manned by 32 preachers, having in their churches 11,546\ncommunicants. The cost of this religious instruction had, during the\nBishop's time, increased from $300 to $25,000 a year.\n\nThe work of the Baptists here and there was almost as effective, but\nbecause of their lack of a national body to concentrate the effort of\nthe various local churches, such good results did not always follow. In\ncertain communities, however, especially in the State of Virginia, there\nwere obtained unusually desirable results. This was the case in the\ncities of Portsmouth, Norfolk, and Petersburg; and still better success\nwas achieved in Richmond through the well organized work of the First\nAfrican Baptist Church, which, under the direction of the Rev. Robert\nRyland, President of Richmond College, served not only to benefit the\nNegroes of that community, but also to inspire other white churches to\nmake similar provisions for the instruction of the blacks.\n\nLott Cary himself speaks of religious instruction in this church at an\nearly period. He said: \"I was, during the years 1815, 1816, 1817 and\n1818, engaged for the benefit of the leading colored members of the\nchurch\" (referring to the First Baptist Church) \"in a gratuitous school\nat the old Baptist meeting house ... at first in connection with Rev.\nDavid Roper ... and subsequently with Rev. John Bryce, co-pastor of the\nchurch.\"\n\nThe work of this church, however, was largely in the hands of the\nwhites. The local government was changed from the democratic to\nsomething more Presbyterial than Congregational, because of the belief\nthat the Negroes were not prepared for democracy. The government was\nvested in the pastor and thirty deacons exercising general supervision\nover the church and constituting the source of authority in the church.\nThe instruction, of course, was at first confined to the catechism and\nto the memorizing of hymns and special passages of the Bible. Ryland\nhimself compiled a catechism for the colored people and hoped to add to\nit such books as _Pilgrim's Progress_, _The African Preacher_, _The Life\nof Samuel Pierce_ and _The Church Member's Guide_.\n\nRyland did not share the distrust of the Negroes who might learn to\nread. Unlike most of the ministers after this reactionary period, he\nadvocated the thorough instruction of the slaves. He said: \"They will\nmake more useful servants, if in a state of bondage, and more safe and\nreliable residents, if free, by having their minds imbued with rational\nviews of Christianity. How can we expect them to develop the great\nprinciples of the gospel in a well ordered life while they are dependent\non desultory oral instruction for their entire knowledge? I am fully\naware that some will think that I am approaching delicate ground, and\nyet with the most considerate feelings and with the admission that grave\nabuses might follow, I am constrained to believe, nevertheless, that\ngreater benefit will accrue both to themselves and to society by\nincreasing their facilities to understand the gospel whose maxim is 'On\nearth peace, good will toward man.' I am a Southern man by birth,\neducation and habits. I deplore the ultraism and recklessness of the\nNorth on this subject and in the least on account of _increased\nrestrictions_ which have been thus occasioned to the colored people. But\nI would respectfully ask Southern Christians if they are not in danger\nof neglecting _known, imperative duty_, because others are not disposed\nto mind their own business. Let us not be led from the path of _real\nbenevolence_ either by the abolitionists of the North or by the morbid\nsensitiveness of the South.\"\n\nExactly how much Ryland accomplished at the First African Baptist Church\nis not known. Referring to his communicants, Ryland recorded that their\ngeneral appearance was that of serious, intelligent worship. It is\ncertain that many Negroes, who became impressed with Christianity and\nendeavored to embrace it, looked upon it as an opportunity and a\nprivilege to belong to this church, and inasmuch as he emphasized\nconsistent Christian conduct, it certainly forced a number of them to\nlive more righteously than they would have, if these rules had not been\nrigidly enforced. The attitude here might be criticised in that the\nchurch was accepting merely those who were known to be persons of good\nconduct and did not seemingly go out to stir up and reform those who\nmade no pretense to be Christians. When a person made a profession of\nfaith and wanted to join this church he was required to present a\ncertificate of good conduct.[9]\n\nIn this work Ryland had the cooperation of Joseph Abrams, a Negro who\nhad been licensed to preach and ordained but had been prohibited from\nthe exercise of his gifts by the hostile legislation proscribing Negro\npreachers after Nat Turner's insurrection. During the days prior to this\nreaction Abrams had been a preacher of much success among the Negroes of\nthe First Baptist Church. Afterward he could take no more conspicuous\npart in the Sunday exercises than to pray a long prayer, into which he\nsometimes worked a short sermon. \"As he enjoyed, however, the confidence\nof the citizens,\" says a writer in the _American Baptist Memorial_ of\n1853, \"he was tolerated in preaching funerals at private houses, and was\nsparingly invited to close the worship in the church by words of\nexhortation.\" \"He was heard with far more interest than I was,\" said\nRyland, \"and on this account I should have often requested him to speak\nbut for the fear of involving him and the church in legal trouble.\"\nAbrams died in 1854. From the same pulpit which he had once occupied,\nhis former pastor, John Bryce, delivered to a large crowd of grieving\npersons within and as many more without one of the most eloquent\neulogies in keeping with the life of the man. A long procession of\nhundreds of persons followed him to his grave, over which the people\nerected a beautiful monument in the form of an imposing obelisk.\n\nSo emphatically was duty of religious instruction urged in certain parts\nof the South, that not only sympathetic clergymen and their children but\nmen high in official positions championed the cause of literary\ninstruction for the Negroes that they might learn the principles of\nreligion. One important case in evidence is that of J. B. O'Neal of\nSouth Carolina. Discussing this matter in detail, O'Neal observed that\nthe extension of the instruction of the Negroes to the extent of\nlearning to read the Bible would hardly do any harm. He did not believe\nthat the Christianization of the Negroes in a slave commonwealth would\ntend to lift them above their masters and destroy the \"legitimate\ndistinction\" in the community. General Coxe of Fluvanna County,\nVirginia, had all of his slaves taught to read the Bible in spite of the\nlaw and public opinion to the contrary, and so did a farmer whom\nFrederick Law Olmsted visited in Mississippi. Other instances here and\nthere may be mentioned. Exactly how many other persons of the\naristocratic folk of the South had the same attitude is difficult to\ndetermine; for the white people of that day, like those of the present\ntime, often conceded privately that the Negroes should enjoy their\nrights, but were unwilling to suffer the stigma of being called the\nchampions of their cause.\n\nWith this new impetus given religious instruction in many parts,\nhowever, it was very difficult to overcome the desire for the more\nthorough evangelization of the Negroes. There was not only a\nmanifestation of interest here and there in the South; but during the\nforties and fifties there followed considerable improvement, especially\nthrough such local organizations as those in Liberty and MacIntosh\ncounties in Georgia and in the Presbyterian synods of Kentucky, Alabama,\nNorth Carolina, and Tennessee. A few Negroes, who prior to the reaction\nhad learned to read and write and had a rudimentary knowledge of the\nBible, were sometimes employed in the more liberal portions of the South\nto teach the aged and the young to say prayers, repeat a little of the\ncatechism, and to memorize hymns. Here their instruction depended\nentirely upon the memory. What could not be thus done for them was\nneglected. Literature especially adapted to this end prepared by\nchurchmen safeguarding the interests of the slaveholding South was\npreferably used. Some of these works were Dr. Capers' _Short Catechism\nfor the Use of Colored Members on Trial in the Methodist Episcopal\nChurch in South Carolina_, _A Catechism to be Used by Teachers in the\nReligious Instruction of Persons of Color in the Episcopal Church of\nSouth Carolina_, John Mines' _Catechism_, Dr. C. C. Jones' _Catechism of\nScripture, Doctrine and Practice Designed for the Original Instruction\nof Colored People_, Dr. Robert Ryland's _The Scripture Catechism for\nColored People_, and E. T. Winkler's _Notes and Questions for the Oral\nInstruction of Colored People with Appropriate Texts and Hymns_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII\n\nPREACHERS OF VERSATILE GENIUS\n\n\nThe situation in the North was then more encouraging, though far from\nbeing ideal. During the critical period through which the Negroes were\npassing between 1830 and the Civil War the Negro minister had to divide\nhis attention so as to take care of all of the varying interests of an\noppressed race. Among the poor it has never been considered exceptional\nfor a minister to work at some occupation to increase the meager income\nwhich he receives from his parishioners. We have already observed above\nthat Andrew Bryan made himself independent as a planter, that Richard\nAllen at first earned his living as a teamster, and that Andrew Marshall\nwith much business acumen maintained himself in a local express\nbusiness. During the critical period from 1830 to 1860, however, the\nNegro minister was not only compelled sometimes thus to support himself,\nbut often had to devote part of his time to the problems of education,\nabolition, colonization and the Underground Railroad.\n\nEducation for the Negro was both a test and a challenge. Few persons\nbelieved that the Negro was capable of the mental development known to\nthe white man. The challenge to them, then, was: Show that your race has\npossibilities in the intellectual world, bring forth proof to uproot the\nargument that your race is the inferior of the other peoples. To make\nthe challenge more concrete, can a Negro master the grammar, language,\nand literature of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew? Can he learn to think? Can\nhe understand the significant things of life as expounded by\nmathematicians, scientists, and philosophers? A few Negroes had\ndemonstrated here and there unusual ability in these fields; but they\nwere not generally known or their achievements were accounted for by\ntheir racial connection with the white race in this country or with some\nArabic stock of Africa, known to be Caucasian rather than Negroid.\n\nThe greater impetus to education among Negro ministers, however, came\nnot so much from the desire to meet this requirement as from the need of\nit in promoting the work of the church. It is true that the whites were\nsubjecting the blacks to a mental test, but it required very little\nlogic to show that the contention as to Negro inferiority was a case of\nmaking desire father to the thought. The independent church movement had\nto depend on education; and the Negroes themselves, as they made\nprogress, required of their ministry the service of instructors to bring\nthe people to a higher standard of thought. Acquiring an education then\nwas not always an easy task. Negroes had no advanced schools of their\nown and they were generally refused in most of those of the North. Until\nthe rise of the Union Literary Institute in Indiana, Oberlin and\nWilberforce in Ohio, Ashmun Institute in Pennsylvania, and Oneida\nInstitute in New York, the Negro had to break his way into whatever\ninstitution of learning he entered. Negroes who were ignorant themselves\ncould not always appreciate what the struggle for educational\nopportunities actually meant.\n\nThe Negro ministers, moreover, were at the same time in the midst of a\nlife and death struggle. During the thirties and forties the questions\ninvolving the Negroes engaged the attention of almost everybody. The\nNegro ministers, the then best developed leaders among their people,\ncould not be silent. Inasmuch as men had to be won to the support of the\ncause, these apostles to the lowly had to appear before the other race\nin the North as spokesmen of an oppressed people. Preaching was\nimportant enough, but there could be no preaching without the liberty to\npreach. Except in a few such cases as that of William Douglass, the\nrector of St. Thomas Church, Philadelphia, and that of Peter Williams,\nthe rector of St. Phillips', in New York City, where the pro-slavery\nchurch hierarchy hushed the Negro ministers loyally speaking for their\npeople, the Negro clergyman spoke out fearlessly for the emancipation\nof his race and its elevation to citizenship.\n\nAs the American Colonization Society went only half way in carrying out\nthis program in that it advocated the emancipation of the Negroes for\ndeportation to Africa, merely to rid the country of freemen belonging to\nanother than the Caucasian race, the Negro ministers were generally\nopposed to that organization. They fearlessly attacked the promoters of\nthe cause, saying, \"Here we were born, here we fought for the\nindependence of this country, and here we intend to die and be buried in\nthe soil hallowed by the blood of our fathers shed in defense of this\ncountry.\" When, however, the increasing intelligence of the Negroes made\ntheir humiliation in this country less and less durable, the Negro\nministers became divided among themselves on this important question;\nfor a few of the leaders of that day began to advocate colonization in\nsome other country than Africa.\n\nIn the meantime, moreover, almost every Negro minister was otherwise\nengaged in spiriting away fugitives from the slaveholding States through\nthe North into Canada. They were in touch with men in other centers,\nfound out what was going on, learned what was the trend of things, and\nplanned to act accordingly. And well might they be so engaged; for not a\nfew of these ministers were fugitives themselves, and whether or not\ntheir freedom had such origin, all Negroes in the North were, after the\npassage of that unconstitutional drastic Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, in\ndanger of being apprehended and enslaved without what civilized\ncountries regard as due process of law. Some of the ministers themselves\nhad to move for safety into Canada during this crisis, carrying in some\ncases practically all of their congregations with them.\n\n[Illustration: JOSIAH HENSON\n\nA pioneer Methodist preacher in Canada. The Prototype of Uncle Tom's\nCabin.]\n\nThe Negro minister easily learned also the power of the press. Much time\nwhich they would have under other circumstances devoted to the\nedification of their flocks they had to spend in raising funds to\npurchase printing plants and in editing the publications issuing\ntherefrom. They could deliver their message to their congregations, they\ncould occasionally address thus groups of the other race; but their\nmessage needed a wider circulation in a more enduring form. There were,\ntherefore, during this crisis few Negro ministers of literary\nattainments who did not either undertake to edit a newspaper or to\ncontribute thereto. If they had a message worth while, the abolition\npapers would generally delight in publishing it. If they refused and the\nmessage was a burning one, the Negroes would establish an organ of their\nown.\n\nTo bring out this idea of the minister of divided interests serving his\npeople in many ways, no career is more illuminating than that of Bishop\nDaniel A. Payne. Having been much better trained than most of his\ncoworkers, he emphasized education as a necessary foundation for\nthorough work in the ministry. Taking this position, he made himself at\nfirst more of a teacher than a preacher, devoting most of his time to\nactual classroom instruction, hoping to raise the standard of the\nministry in the African Methodist Episcopal Church, with which he\nfinally cast his lot after being graduated at the Lutheran Seminary at\nGettysburg. Taking this position, he had arrayed against him all the\nenemies of culture. One writer charged him with branding the ministry\nwith infamy and with reckless slander on the general character of his\nown denomination. There was great fear that there might follow discord\nand dissolution between the ignorant and the intelligent portion of the\nchurch. Preaching to his congregation, the ignorant minister would often\nboast of having not rubbed his head against the college walls, whereupon\nthe congregation would respond: \"Amen.\" Sometimes one would say: \"I did\nnot write out my sermon.\" With equal fervor the audience would cry out:\n\"Praise ye the Lord.\" Working zealously, however, Bishop Payne committed\nthe denomination to the policy of thorough education for the ministry, a\nposition from which the African Methodist Episcopal Church has never\ndeparted, and to which it owes not a few of the advantages that it now\nenjoys in having so many intelligent men in its ministry.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP DANIEL A. PAYNE]\n\nWhile Bishop Payne as a churchman did not become altogether involved in\nthe anti-slavery movement, so many distinguished men in the church did.\nJohn N. Marrs of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was more of\nan anti-slavery lecturer than a preacher. Thomas James of the same\ndenomination was equally as effective as an anti-slavery lecturer. He\nwas much readier to fight than to preach when he thought of the\nenormities of slavery. Another Zionite, Dempsey Kennedy, a pioneer\npreacher of remarkable skill in stirring up audiences, rendered as much\nservice as an abolitionist as he did as a minister.\n\nOne of the best examples of this type is Charles Bennett Ray, born in\nFalmouth, Massachusetts, December 28, 1807. He was educated at the\nWesleyan Academy of Wilbraham, Massachusetts, and later at Wesleyan\nUniversity, Middletown, Connecticut. After studying theology he became a\nCongregational minister. For twenty years he was the pastor of the\nBethesda Church in New York City, where many learned to wait upon his\nministry. He is better known to fame, however, by the work which he did\noutside of his chosen field in connection with the anti-slavery\nmovement, the Underground Railroad, and _The Colored American_, which he\ncreditably edited from 1839 to 1843.\n\nRay aided the cause of liberty by lending practical aid which men in\nhigh places often had neither the time nor the patience to give, using\nhis home as a mecca for the meetings of such men as Lewis Tappan,\nSimeon S. Josselyn, Gerrit Smith, the land philanthropist, and James\nSturge, the celebrated English philanthropist, interested in the\nabolition of slavery. In cooperation with wealthy abolitionists he\nassisted many a slave to the light of freedom, especially through the\naid of Henry Ward Beecher of the Plymouth Church in Brooklyn. Ray found\nhimself cooperating also with the group of radical free people of color\nmeeting in Philadelphia and in other cities of the North from 1830 until\nthe Civil War. When one reads of his participation in this work with\nJames Forten, a business man, and Charles B. Purvis, another layman, he\nis inclined to forget that Charles B. Ray was a minister, as his name\nappears in the records of practically all of these conventions of the\nfree people of color and his work stands out as an important factor\ncontributing to the success with which these aggressive Negroes kept\ntheir case before the world and gradually hastened the dawn of their\nfreedom. In all of his various employments, however, Ray did not lose\ninterest in and did not necessarily neglect his mission to promote the\nmoral uplift of his fellows. A contemporary, William Wells Brown, paying\nhim a tribute as a terse, vigorous writer and an able and eloquent\nspeaker, well informed upon all subjects of the day, says also that he\nwas \"blameless in his family relations, guided by the highest moral\nrectitude, a true friend of everything that tends to better the\nmoral, social, religious and political condition of man.\"\n\nIn the class with Ray should be mentioned Henry Highland Garnett,\nanother minister of the Presbyterian Church, devoting most of his time\nto the many movements which attracted the attention of his colaborers.\nHaving escaped from Maryland to the North in 1822, Garnett experienced\nsufficient mental development to ask for admission to the Canaan\nAcademy, where he, along with Alexander Crummell and others, caused the\nschool to be broken up by a mob arraying itself against the idea of\npermitting persons of color to enjoy such privileges in that community.\nProceeding, however, to the Oneida Institute in New York, he succeeded\nin laying a foundation for his work under the noble-hearted friend of\nman, Beriah Green. Here Garnett attained the reputation of an\naccomplished man, an able and eloquent debater and a good writer. He\nsoon developed into a preacher of power of the evangelical type, whose\ndiscourses showed much thought and careful study. He had complete\ncommand of his voice and used it with skill, never failing to fill the\nlargest hall. Soon there was a demand for him as a preacher. He was sent\nas a missionary to the Island of Jamaica. He later spent some time in\nWashington as the pastor of the Presbyterian Church and served at\nanother time at the Shiloh Church in New York City.\n\n[Illustration: HENRY HIGHLAND GARNETT]\n\nGarnett, however, was soon more than a preacher. From the time he made\nhis first public appearance in New York City in 1837 he secured for\nhimself a standing among first-class orators. In 1843 he delivered\nbefore the National Convention of Colored Americans at Buffalo, New\nYork, one of the most remarkable addresses ever uttered by man. His\ncontemporary says: \"None but those who heard that speech have the\nslightest idea of the tremendous influence which he exercised over the\nassembly.\" For forty years thereafter he was an advocate of the rights\nof his race, a forcible and daring speaker wherever he had an\nopportunity to present his cause. Visiting England in 1850, he was well\nreceived as an orator. Garnett, moreover, served much of his time as an\neducator, having been President of Avery College, where he passed as a\nman of learning.\n\nIn this group of enterprising clergymen of this period should be\nmentioned Alexander Crummell, although his more important service to the\nrace belongs to the two generations following the Civil War. Crummell\nwas a native of New York, but a descendant of a Timanee chief in West\nAfrica. Early in his career he attended a Quaker school with Thomas S.\nSidney and Henry Highland Garnett in New York, and later experienced\nwith the latter, as mentioned above, the humiliation of seeing the\nAcademy of Canaan, New Hampshire, broken up because of the admission of\nNegroes. Crummell then studied three years under Beriah Green at the\nOneida Institute. Having then the aspiration to enter the ministry of\nthe Episcopal Church, he applied for admission to the General\nTheological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church of New York,\nwhich, in keeping with its hostile attitude toward the Negro, refused to\naccept him.\n\n[Illustration: ALEXANDER CRUMMELL]\n\nThus barred from entering upon his life's work, Crummell could not then\ninfluence the public to the same extent as Negro leaders laboring in the\nmore inviting fields. Presenting his case to the clergy in Boston in\n1842, he was ordained deacon by Bishop Griswold. After studying two\nyears under Dr. A. H. Vinton of Providence, Rhode Island, Crummell was\nordained priest by Bishop Lee of Delaware at St. Paul's Church in\nPhiladelphia, and engaged to work in a barren field. Here poverty and\nill health overtook him and rendered his circumstances all but\nintolerable. To earn a livelihood he conducted for four men a private\nschool, which, after having a promising beginning, proved inadequate to\nhis support.\n\nHe then went to England, where he was well received as a preacher and\ngiven the opportunity to prosecute further his studies at Queen's\nCollege, Cambridge University, from which he obtained the degree of\nBachelor of Arts in 1853. Crummell then began his career as a missionary\nand educator, working in Liberia and Sierra Leone for about twenty\nyears. He returned to the United States in 1873 and entered upon his\nwork as an Episcopal priest in Washington, where, as the rector of St.\nMary's, and as the founder of the American Negro Academy, he experienced\nthe culmination of his usefulness as a scholar, a clergyman, and a\nchampion of the rights of his people.\n\nAmong these workers should be mentioned also James W. C. Pennington,\nanother minister of the Presbyterian Church. Pennington was born a slave\non a farm in Maryland and there became a blacksmith by trade. Upon\nreaching maturity he escaped to the North, where he early embraced the\nopportunities for learning. He developed into an unusually bright\nscholar in Greek, Latin, and German; and soon manifested an inclination\nfor the study of theology, in which he showed much proficiency.\nImpressed with his worth as an educated man well trained for the\nministry, the Presbyterians ordained him to preach and stationed him at\nHartford, Connecticut, where he served some years. He later became the\npastor of the Shiloh Church in New York City.\n\n[Illustration: J. W. C. PENNINGTON]\n\nWhile Dr. Pennington did not drift so far from the ministry as many of\nhis colaborers, he was at once in demand for work in various other\nfields. He went to Europe three times in the capacity of a lecturer. His\nsecond visit was the occasion on which he remained for four years,\npreaching, lecturing and attending the Peace Congresses held at Paris,\nBrussels, and London. While at Paris in 1849 he was invited to conduct\ndivine services at the Protestant Church, which on that occasion was\nvisited by the American and English delegates. His sermon was an elegant\nproduction, left a marked impression upon his hearers, and above all\nmade a more logical case for the Negro. While in Germany the degree of\nDoctor of Divinity was conferred upon him by the University of\nHeidelberg. Returning to this country, he labored zealously and\nsuccessfully for the education and the moral, social, and religious\nelevation of the race, until he went to Jamaica, where he died.\n\nRev. E. Payson Rogers, another Presbyterian preacher stationed as pastor\nof a church at Newark, New Jersey, divided his time between writing and\npreaching. He was a man of education, research, and literary ability.\nAlthough not a fluent and easy speaker, he was logical and spoke with a\ndegree of refinement seldom observed. Possessing the inclination to\nwrite verse to express the thought and feeling of a struggling people,\nhe wrote a poem on the Missouri Compromise which he read in many of the\nNew England cities and towns in 1856. This poem contained brilliant\nthought and amusing suggestions. Anxious to benefit his race, he visited\nAfrica in 1861, where he was attacked by a fever and died in a few days.\n\nJ. Theodore Holly was another minister of versatile genius. He acquired\na good education through studious habits and contact with men of\nculture. Although he became a clergyman of the Protestant Episcopal\nChurch and was for several years pastor at New Haven, where he\nsustained the reputation of being an interesting and eloquent preacher,\nhe set about to establish what he called Negro nationality. He was not\nprimarily interested in African colonization, but believed that the\nredemption of Africa could be effected through Haitian emigration. In\nthe _Anglo-African_, a magazine published in 1859, he contributed a\ndissertation setting forth these facts. Impressed with the idea that\nHaiti might be used as an asylum for free persons of color, he raised a\ncolony in keeping with the resolution passed by the Convention of Free\nPersons of Color in Rochester in 1853 and sailed for Haiti in 1861. As\nthe location which he selected was infelicitous, most of those who went\nwith him, including his own family, died, and he returned to the United\nStates, where he finally rendered greater service and from which he was\nlater commissioned as Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church in\nHaiti.\n\nOne of the most interesting men of this type was Leonard A. Grimes, a\nBaptist minister, born in Leesburg, Loudoun County, Virginia, in 1815.\nAlthough he was a man of free parentage he was subjected to all of the\ndisabilities that his race had to endure in the South except that of an\nactual slave. He spent his youth working at the butcher's trade and at\nan apothecary's establishment in Washington but subsequently hired\nhimself out to a slaveholder whose confidence he gained. In\naccompanying his employer in his travels in the remote parts of the\nSouth he had an opportunity to see slavery in its worst form and to\nreach a decision that he would make every effort possible to destroy the\nevil. Returning to Washington very soon thereafter, he began to express\nan interest in the operations of the Underground Railroad, in connection\nwith which he rendered valuable service. Upon being appealed to by a\nfree man of color with a slave wife and seven children, he aided them to\nescape to Canada. Suspicion, however, fell upon Grimes and he was soon\nthereafter apprehended, tried, found guilty, and sent to the State\npenitentiary at Richmond for two years.\n\nUpon the expiration of his imprisonment Grimes returned to Washington\nand soon then went to New Bedford, Massachusetts, where he resided two\nyears. He next went to Boston. Having early in his career been impressed\nwith the thought that he was called to the ministry, he had spent much\nof his time in this work while engaged as an agent of the Underground\nRailroad. Finding a group of persons in Boston at that time in need of a\npastor, he entered upon the task of serving them in that capacity. This\ncongregation was known as the Twelfth Baptist Church, of which he was\nthe pastor for more than twenty-five years, ministering to some of the\nbest persons of color in that city in such a way as to make his work a\nmonument to which Bostonians still point with pride. As a preacher he\nwas a man of power, though not an easy speaker. He manifested great\namiability of character and always had a pleasant word for those with\nwhom he came into contact. Although primarily engaged in the work of the\nministry during the great crisis in this country, he never abandoned\nentirely the anti-slavery cause, in spite of the fact that many of his\ndenomination were trying to defend that institution. He passed away in\n1873, after having experienced some of the freedom for which he\nstruggled.\n\nAmong the prominent Negro ministers who lived through this critical\nperiod no one exhibited more versatility than Samuel R. Ward. Impressed\nwith the superior gifts with which he was endowed, Gerrit Smith enabled\nhim to secure a liberal education. Ward then entered upon the ministry\nin the Presbyterian Church. For several years he was settled over a\nwhite church at South Butler, New York, where, according to William\nWells Brown, Ward \"preached with great acceptance and was highly\nrespected.\" Coming to the aid of his race during the trying days of the\nabolition agitation, Ward took the platform and from 1840 to the passage\nof the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 preached or lectured in every church,\nhall, or schoolhouse in Western and Central New York. \"Standing about\nsix feet in height, possessing a strong voice, and energetic in his\ngestures, Ward,\" says his biographer, \"always impressed his highly\nfinished and logical speeches upon his hearers.\"\n\n[Illustration: SAMUEL R. WARD]\n\nWard became more of a platform orator than a preacher. His aim seemed to\nbe not so much to preach the gospel of heaven as to preach the gospel of\nthis world that men calling themselves Christians might learn to respect\nthe natural and political rights of their fellows. In the interest of\nthis cause he traveled through much of this country, visited England in\n1852, and then went to Jamaica, where he finally resided until he died\nat an early age. Referring to the death of R. B. Elliot, Frederick\nDouglass, Ward's most famous contemporary, remarked: \"I have known but\none other black man to be compared with Elliot, and that was Samuel R.\nWard, who, like Elliot, died in the midst of his years. The thought of\nboth men makes me sad. We are not over rich with such men, and we may\nwell mourn when one such has fallen.\"\n\nNo better example of the varying interests of the Negro can be mentioned\nthan that of Hiram R. Revells, who after the Civil War became one of the\ntwo Negroes who have served in the United States Senate. Revells was\nborn a free man at Fayetteville, North Carolina, in 1822. There he\npassed his boyhood and then went to Indiana, because the laws of North\nCarolina in 1835 forbade the establishment of schools for persons of\ncolor. He had experienced some educational development by private\ninstruction and was prepared to profit by the advanced training\nreceived in a Quaker school in Indiana. He then moved to Darke County,\nOhio, where he remained for some time. He was subsequently graduated at\nKnox College, Galesburg, Illinois. Revells then entered the ministry as\na preacher of the African Methodist Church at the age of twenty-five,\nholding his first charge in Indiana. He filled important posts in\nMissouri, Maryland, Kentucky, and Kansas, but did not succeed so well in\nSt. Louis, where the church developed into a turmoil, resulting in the\nresignation of the pastor.\n\nUpon the outbreak of the war, Revells directed his attention to other\nmatters. He assisted in raising the first Negro regiment in Maryland and\nthe first one in Missouri. He then returned to Mississippi in 1864,\nsettling at Vicksburg and later at Jackson, where he had charge of\ncongregations. He also assisted in the extension of the work of the\nAfrican Methodist Episcopal Church in other parts and in establishing a\nschool system. His health having failed, however, he returned to the\nNorth after the close of hostilities and remained there eighteen months,\nat the expiration of which he again came to Natchez, Mississippi, where\nhe preached regularly to large audiences. Entering politics, he was\nappointed alderman by General Ames, who was then military governor\nthere. In 1869 he was elected to the State Senate and the following year\nto the United States Senate.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX\n\nTHE CIVIL WAR AND THE CHURCH\n\n\nThe outbreak of the Civil War was also an outbreak in the church. The\nversatile minister then proclaimed war and sometimes donned the uniform.\nOne half of the nation had preached that God hath made of one blood all\nnations that dwell upon the face of the earth; the other half insisted\nthat the plan of the Creator was a caste system by which one element of\nthe population should be made hewers of wood and drawers of water for\nthe other. The ordeal of battle was then on, and it was believed that\nthe exhibition of the greater force on one of the two sides would\ndetermine the will of God. Men of both sections fought for what they\nbelieved to be right. Sermons resounded with the ring of freedom, the\nBible was quoted to strengthen the belief in a just war, and songs of a\nmilitant tone made the welkin ring with that enthusiasm with which the\nChristian boy was inspired to give his life as a sacrifice, fighting for\nfreedom or defending his section from the invasion of the ruthless foe.\nGod was here; God was there; in fact, he was, as the participants would\nhave it, fighting the battles of all.\n\nNegroes realized that the Christianity of America was being subjected to\na test. They had entered the church themselves but only with the belief\nthat this liberal doctrine of the power of God to free a man's soul from\nsin meant also that such power would eventually be adequate to free the\nbody. They had borne the burden in the heat of the day, even walked\nthrough the flames of that fiery ordeal of death; but they had never\nlost faith in God. Here and there an old hero in the midst of his\nmartyrdom had prophesied upon his dying bed that God would deliver his\npeople from the hands of the oppressors; a heroine of vision had dreamed\nthat her Maker had poured healing oils upon her lacerated back, assuaged\nher excruciating pain, and made her free. Patience had been the\nwatchword of the Negro. God was moving in a mysterious way to perform\nwonders which in the near future would make all things plain. Stand\nstill, therefore, and see the salvation of the Lord.\n\nWould these dreams come true? Evidently they would, the Negroes thought,\nwhen they heard of churchmen denouncing slavery in no uncertain terms,\nmemorializing the State legislatures and Congress for its abolition, and\nassuring the nation of their heartiest support in the suppression of the\nrebellion occasioned by the effort to save the tottering institution.\nThe Negroes could not fail to see the hand of God in the declaration of\nthese churchmen that our national sorrows and calamities had resulted\nfrom our forgetfulness of God and the oppression of our fellowmen.\nChastened by the affliction of the Civil War, many like the Methodists\nhoped that the nation might humbly repent of its sins, lay aside its\nhaughty pride, honor God in all her future legislation, and render\njustice to all who had been wronged. They honored Lincoln for his\nproclamation of freedom and rejoiced in the enactment of the measures\ndesigned to reach this end. And so impressed with this militant service\nof the church, Lincoln had to say in reply to this denomination: \"The\nMethodist Episcopal Church, not less devoted than the best, is, by its\ngreater numbers the most important of all. It is no fault in others that\nthe Methodist Church sends more soldiers to the field, more nurses to\nthe hospitals, more prayers to Heaven, than any. God bless the Methodist\nChurch! Bless all the Churches! And blessed be God, who, in this our\ngreat trial, giveth us the churches!\"\n\nBecause of this militant attitude of the church, the Negroes thought\nmore of fighting for freedom than they did of saving souls. The slaves\nbreathed the spirit of the song:\n\n      \"Oh, freedom! Freedom over me!\n      Before I'd be a slave,\n      I'd be buried in my grave\n      And go home to my Lord and be free!\"\n\nNegroes known to be pious gladly donned the uniform and some ministers\nof the gospel abandoned their charges to recruit men to fight for the\ncause. The friends of the Negroes, moreover, were militantly arrayed\nagainst their former brethren in the South. The abolition churches of\nthe North received the anathemas of the churches of the South and vice\nversa. The war was religious as well as political, causing wounds which\nhaving not yet been healed even unto this day seriously affect church\nwork among Negroes in the South.\n\nThe Civil War as a social and political upheaval made necessary some\nreadjustments in the church. The Negroes in the South were no longer\nbondmen to be circumscribed in keeping with the regulations of a slave\ncommonwealth and the Negroes in the North might then exercise more\nliberty without the fear of incurring the displeasure of those having\nthe impression that the Negroes should in religious as well as in other\nmatters be subject to men who enjoy a superior social position. It was\nthen, moreover, a different question from what it was before. Prior to\nthe Civil War one had inquired as to what should be done for the Negro.\nIt was then a question as to what the Negro would do for himself. Things\nfor which he had long asked theretofore were thereafter readily given or\ntaken.\n\nFor example, during the period intervening between the separation of the\nnorthern and southern wings of the church in 1844 and the Civil War, the\nNegro members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the North asked for\nseparate conferences, a more general recognition of their local\npreachers, and a larger participation in the affairs of the church. The\nreason given was that the African Methodists, holding up to these Negro\ncommunicants the contempt with which they had been treated by their\nwhite superiors, caused large numbers of Negro Methodists to join the\nindependent African churches. The policy of the Methodist Church was not\nto grant such recognition, deciding, as it did in 1848, that such\nseparate conferences were inexpedient. Some encouragement was given the\nemployment of Negro local preachers. In 1852, in reply to an urgent\nrequest of this sort from the Negro Methodists of the Philadelphia and\nNew Jersey conferences, where they were losing many to the African\nMethodists, a sort of annual meeting of the Negro Methodist pastors was\nallowed, if the bishop of the diocese concerned found it practicable.\nThe Methodist Church held this position, however, despite the fact that\non this account it lost not less than one-fourth of the membership of\nits churches from the year 1844 to the time when the annual conference\nof the Negro pastors was provided for in 1866. These white Methodists,\nhowever, consecrated Francis Burns for the service as Bishop of Africa\nin 1858 and in 1866 thus elevated to the episcopacy John W. Roberts,\nanother man of color. As the appeal for the Negro conference was still\nmore urgent this time not only from the Negroes of the Philadelphia and\nNew Jersey conferences but from that of Baltimore, the General\nConference had to take more definite action than merely to say that such\na step was inexpedient.\n\nThe reasons for this action were many and complicated. In the first\nplace, even after the secession of those in the South, there were in the\nMethodist Episcopal Church a number of members who, wishing to get rid\nof the Negroes, thought that a refusal to grant this request would\nalienate their affections to the extent that they would secede as the\nother African Methodists had done. Some of these communicants actually\nencouraged the Negroes in saying that, should the blacks go out and\nestablish themselves independently of the whites, the latter would have\nmore respect for them because of this exhibition of their self-reliance.\nTo impress this on the Negro, some white Methodists went so far as to\ninvite to their pulpits the ministers of the African Methodist Churches,\nwhereas the Negro ministers in the Methodist Church itself were ignored.\nWhen this method of trying to convince the Negro that he was an intruder\nfailed, the busy-bodies would often say that the white management of the\nMethodist Church was merely using the Negro members as tools.\n\nSome then thought that, because of love for the Negroes, the Methodist\nChurch did not want to see them go. Others believed that a majority felt\nthat the Negroes should have their own choice whether for separate\norganization or to unite with one of the African Methodist Churches\nbut that, should such action be taken, the public would get the\nimpression that the Methodists had organized another Negro church to\nbreak the other two down. It was thought wise, moreover, to defer action\nof such far-reaching effects until the Negro question then so intensely\nagitated should approach nearer a definite settlement. A Negro national\nchurch, furthermore, could not minister to the wants of all Negroes\ninasmuch as the one proposed, like the other two already in the field,\ncould not have prior to emancipation operated among the Negro Methodists\nin the South. The Methodist Church was neutral, if anything, during the\nCivil War period. It did not try to get rid of its Negro membership and\nit made no particular effort to increase it. Wherever one of the two\nAfrican Methodist Churches was in a position to minister to the\nspiritual needs of the Negroes, the Methodists made no effort to\nproselyte such Negroes, although Negroes desiring admission to the\nMethodist churches were not refused.\n\nThis question was further agitated and had to be given serious\nconsideration in 1864. The conference after discussing the memorials\nfrom the Negro membership took the position that it must retain\noversight of the Negroes to give them efficient supervision. The\nconference, however, encouraged _colored pastorates_ for _colored\npeople_ wherever practicable. It authorized the organization of mission\nconferences. These separate conferences, however, were not to impair\nthe existing rights of the colored members nor yet to forbid the\ntransfer of white ministers to such conferences where it might be deemed\npracticable and necessary. The Negroes in the Methodist Church had at\nlast received some right to share in the management of their own\npastorates, which, however, were still subject to the supervision of the\nwhite bishops. The African Methodists still made inroads on the Negro\nmembership, therefore, because they could point with pride to men in\nauthority in their church and the Negro members of the white connection\nusually conceded their point as well taken in that they received the\nbishops of the African Methodists in their homes and churches and gave\nthem every possible consideration.\n\nSome less numerous Negro communicants of white denominations were at\nthis time severing their connection with their former coworkers. In 1865\nthe Negro members of the white Primitive Baptist Churches of the South\norganized at Columbia, Tennessee, the Colored Primitive Baptists in\nAmerica. In 1866 the African Union First Colored Methodist Protestant\nChurch of America and elsewhere was established by merging the African\nUnion Church with the First Colored Methodist Protestant Church. In 1869\nthe General Assembly of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church organized its\nNegro membership as the Colored Cumberland Presbyterian Church.\n\nThe Methodist Episcopal Church, South, with a much larger number of\nNegro members than all of these denominations easily solved the problem\nof Negro membership, as the Cumberland Presbyterians had done. While the\nMethodists in the North reluctantly loosed their hold on the Negro\nmembership by granting the people of color active participation in their\naffairs through an annual conference, the Methodist Church, South,\nalmost voluntarily agreed to organize its Negro constituency as a\nseparate organization known as the Colored Methodist Episcopal Church.\nWhether the southern Methodists did this to eliminate the Negroes or\nbecause they thought that the Negroes in their new status as freemen\ncould do their own work better than white men, is a much mooted\nquestion. It is clear that many of the slaveholding type of Christians\nwould want to get rid of the Negro members since they could no longer\ndetermine their faith and how it should be exercised. The only reason\nthere was for the Negro to belong to the same church as that of his\nmaster was to control the exercise of his religious belief. As this was\nno longer necessary, the Negroes, so far as one element was concerned,\ncould then easily go.\n\nDesiring to attach to this branch of the Methodist Church the stigma of\ntheir having been once connected with their oppressors, some Negroes\nthemselves have referred to these Colored Methodists as \"seceders\" and\n\"a Democratic Rebel concern\" intended to lead the Negroes back into\nslavery. Such statements are most uncharitable and they not only do the\nNegroes concerned an injustice but question the good motives of a number\nof benevolent southern men who took this step, feeling that it was the\nbest way for the Negroes to develop their religious life after\nemancipation. There were many masters who believed that, since the\nNegroes had finally become free, they should have every encouragement to\nlearn how to take care of themselves.\n\nIt would be most uncharitable, moreover, to suffer any stigma to attach\nto the Colored Methodists on this account. The Negroes who constituted\nthis church went with the southern wing of that denomination at the time\nof its secession because they were compelled so to do. The independent\nAfrican Methodists were by law and public opinion prohibited from\nextensive proselyting in the South and prior to the Civil War they had\nwith the exception of their establishments in the liberal border States\nhardly touched the large body of the black population south of the Mason\nand Dixon line. The free Negroes in the South were, as in the case of\nMorris Brown and his followers in 1822, cut off from their brethren in\nthe North and the slaves were compelled to worship according to the\nrigid regulations set forth above and in the same churches to which\ntheir masters belonged.\n\nThe separation of the Negro membership from the Methodist Episcopal\nChurch, South, came after the Civil War. In 1866 the conference meeting\nthat year in New Orleans made provision for the organization of the\nNegro members in separate congregations and for district and annual\nconferences, if the Negroes so desired. It was further provided on this\noccasion that if it were acceptable to the Negroes and it met the\napproval of the bishops of the church, the freedmen might have a general\nconference like that of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, according\nto the regulations of which the Negro deacons, elders, and bishops, if\nnecessary, should be ordained to conduct this work among their own\npeople. It was further determined that should the time arrive when the\nNegro members should be so set apart, all the property intended for the\nuse of such members, held by the trustees of the Methodist Episcopal\nChurch, South, should be transferred to duly qualified trustees of the\nnew organization.\n\nAt the next conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, meeting\nin Memphis in 1870, it was reported that the Negro membership had\norganized five annual conferences and unanimously desired to be\norganized as a distinct body. The Memphis Conference thereupon agreed to\ncomply with this request. Delegates were then elected to the first\ngeneral conference which assembled in Jackson, Tennessee, October 15,\n1870. From the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, there were sent as\nrepresentatives Bishops Robert Paine and H. N. McTyeire; and as\nministers, A. L. P. Green, Samuel Watson, Thomas Taylor, Edmund W.\nSehon, Thomas Whitehead, and B. J. Morgan. The prominent delegates from\nthe five annual conferences of the Negro members were Richard Samuels,\nSolon Graham, Anderson Jackson, R. T. Thiergood, L. H. Holsey, I. H.\nAnderson, R. H. Vanderhorst, W. H. Miles, W. P. Churchill, Isaac Lane,\nJohn W. Lane, Job Grouch, F. Ambrose, and William Jones.\n\nAfter having had read to this body the action of the conference it was\nsuggested that a committee be appointed to find a new name for this\nproposed body. The name proposed was the Colored Methodist Episcopal\nChurch in America, which was unanimously accepted. The body then\nproceeded to elect bishops. W. H. Miles was elected on the first ballot.\nAfterward R. H. Vanderhorst was also chosen. Bishops Paine and McTyiere\nthen consecrated them the first two bishops of the Colored Methodist\nEpiscopal Church in America. Three additional bishops, L. H. Holsey, J.\nA. Beebe, and Isaac Lane, were elected and ordained in March, 1873.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP W. H. MILES,\n\nof the C. M. E. Church.]\n\nThe large body of Negroes, however, were attracted after the war not by\nthe Methodist Church but by the Baptist. The freedom, which even prior\nto emancipation meant so much in the growth of the Baptists, was\nthereafter a still greater cause for their expansion. It was easier than\never for a man to become a prominent figure in the Baptist Church. While\nthe Methodists were hesitating as to what recognition should be\nallowed the Negroes or whether they should be set apart as a separate\nbody, the Negro Baptists were realizing upon their new freedom which\nmade possible the enjoyment of greater democracy in the church. Every\nman was to be equal to every other man and no power without had\nauthority to interfere.\n\nThis situation in the Baptist Church appealed very strongly to the then\nrecently enfranchised Negro in the reconstructed States. As the white\nman of the South had over emphasized politics and the professions to the\nextent that these avenues in that section were overmanned, the Negro in\nhis undeveloped state accordingly made the same mistake in trying to\nescape drudgery. A rather hard row to hoe, or an unusually heavy burden\nwas too often abandoned on hearing a call to the ministry, and the\ndevotee thus impressed had practically no difficulty in securing a\nhearing in this locally democratic Baptist Church. The grade of\nintellect possessed by the novice in this ministerial service had little\nto do with his acceptability; for there were all sorts of degrees of\nmental development among the freedmen and every man preferred to follow\nthe one who saw the spiritual world from his own particular angle and\nexplained its mysteries in the dialect and in the manner in which he\ncould understand it. If in delivering the gospel message the verb might\nnot every time agree with the subject, that had little to do with the\npower to start a soul on the way to glory.\n\nOperating on this basis, local churches sprang up here and there as\nBaptist preachers, a law unto themselves, went abroad seeking a\nfollowing. Out of some of these efforts came several good results. Many\nof the churches thus established have in our day developed into beacon\nlights. And so was it true of some of those churches which branched off\nfrom or drew out of the old Baptist Churches of long standing\nestablished years before the Civil War. There were not so many such\nAfrican Baptist churches in the South during that period. Because of\nfear of servile insurrection the whites would not permit many Negro\nchurches to have an independent existence. The pressure once removed,\nhowever, groups of Negroes long waiting for religious freedom found\nadequate opportunity for exercising it in the organization of numerous\nBaptist churches. This was not in all cases abruptly effected, for the\nNegroes had no church buildings of their own and could not easily\npurchase them; but in their poverty they made unusual sacrifices to meet\nthis emergency and whites liberally inclined assisted them in the rapid\npromotion of this work. Yet this movement did not reach its climax until\nsome years later; for the lure of politics presented another field of so\nmuch interest to the Negroes that even the preachers of long standing\ntoo often abandoned their posts altogether. After the Reconstruction,\nmoreover, when the Negro in the South had been removed from politics, a\nmuch larger number of bankrupt leaders entered the ministry or devised\nschemes to make use of the various churches.\n\nAn impetus toward improvement came from mutual associations. The Baptist\nchurches were not obligated to unite to form associations and when\nformed did not necessarily have to be bound by the action of these\nannual meetings; but immediately after the war Negro Baptist churches,\nwhich in the South had formerly been coolly received by white bodies and\nwere not permitted to form associations of their own, readily united for\nmutual benefit in the exercise of their new freedom. In those meetings\nthe uninformed heard of the urgent need to educate the masses, the duty\nof the ministry to elevate the laity, and the call upon all to\nChristianize the heathen. The periodical visits of white churchmen,\ninterested either in the Negro or in exploiting them, brought new light\nas to what was going on in the other bodies conducted by men of higher\nattainments.\n\nAs the Negro Baptists, however, did not soon effect more potential\norganizations than the district Baptist Associations then composed of a\nfew churches, they never had a national policy; and their local\ndemocracy would have furnished no machinery to carry out such a policy,\nif they had adopted one. To the State groups, then, must the reader look\nfor the signs of progress and thanks to the genius of the Negro, such\nevidence was not long wanting.\n\nThe Negro Baptists of North Carolina organized the first State\nConvention in 1866. Alabama and Virginia followed in 1867, and very soon\nthereafter came Arkansas, Kentucky, and finally all of the States in the\nSouth. Immediately thereafter they began to affiliate with larger\nnational bodies. The first of these larger groups was the Northwestern\nand Southern Baptist Convention, organized in 1864. In 1866 there was\nheld an important convention in Richmond, when it was determined to\nconsolidate all of the general interests of the Negro Baptists, the\nMissionary, the Northwestern and Southern conventions as one large body,\nto be called the Consolidated American Baptist Missionary\nConvention.[10]\n\nThis convention operated largely in the South and tended to decline. In\n1873 the West revived its organization under the name of the Baptist\nAssociation of the Western States and Territories, while the northern\nchurches adhered to another organization called the New England\nMissionary Convention, organized in 1875. In the course of time these\ntwo bodies so expanded as to embrace the whole country, yet in 1880\ncertain Baptists here and there formed a national body to do work in\nforeign lands, designating it the Baptist Foreign Mission Convention of\nthe United States. The feeling, however, that there should be a\nconcentration of the efforts of all Baptists directed through one\nnational body to a particular point of attack led to a more significant\nnational meeting of the Negro Baptists held in St. Louis in 1886. The\nwork of the Baptist Foreign Mission Convention was later so modified\nthat all of the national and international church work of the\ndenomination was unified through the organization of the National\nBaptist Convention.\n\nThat these Baptists despite their excess of liberty succeeded as well as\nthey did, was due in a measure to the fact that they exercised the good\njudgment in not immediately getting too far from their friends. The\nNegroes used the same polity, the same literature, and sometimes the\nsame national agencies as the white Baptists. The southern Baptists were\nthen less interested in these communicants whom, some say, they gladly\ngot rid of when they could no longer dictate their spiritual development\nas the master did that of the slave; but the northern Baptists felt\nobligated to send their missionaries among the freedmen. These apostles\nto the lowly brought words of good cheer, expounded the gospel,\nestablished new churches, and distributed books for the enlightenment of\nthe masses. Among some of these lowly people these men were received as\napostles of old, welcomed to a new harvest which had long been waiting,\nfor the laborers among the lowly were few.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X\n\nRELIGIOUS EDUCATION AS A PREPARATION\n\n\nThe separation of the Negro churchmen from the white organizations,\nhowever, was not necessarily a declaration of war. Most Negroes regarded\nthis as the right step toward doing for themselves what others had\nhitherto done for them and some whites so considered it. As a matter of\nfact, the ties which have bound the Negro church organization to the\nwhites were not such as could be severed by a mere change in the\nmanagement of church affairs. The Negroes had already been divided from\nthe whites by an unwritten law. The upheaval of the Civil War merely\nfurnished the occasion for the separation. There still remained among\nthe northern whites numerous philanthropists who desired to help them in\nthe promotion of religion and morality. From this group, therefore, came\nnumerous Christian workers supported by funds freely contributed to\ndeliver the captive and proclaim the year of jubilee.\n\n[Illustration: WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY DURING THE CIVIL WAR.]\n\nThese Christian workers, however, cared not so much about proselyting as\nthey did about education, the greatest need of the freedmen. The\nBaptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians, who had considerable\ncommunicants among the Negroes prior to the Civil War, took the lead in\nthis movement, establishing at strategic points schools which they\nbelieved would become centers of culture for the whole race. The\nBaptists established Shaw University at Raleigh in 1865; Roger Williams\nat Nashville and Morehouse at Atlanta in 1867; Leland at New Orleans and\nBenedict at Columbia in 1871. The Free-will Baptists founded Storer\nCollege at Harpers Ferry in 1867. The Methodists, who were no less\nactive, established Walden at Nashville in 1865, Rust at Holly Springs\nin 1866, Morgan at Baltimore in 1867, Haven Academy at Waynesboro in\n1868, Claflin at Orangeburg in 1869, and Clark at Atlanta in 1870. The\nPresbyterians, who could not compete with the Baptists and Methodists in\nproselyting Negroes, largely restricted their efforts to the\nestablishment of Biddle at Charlotte in 1867 and to the promotion of the\nwork begun at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania, established as Ashmun\nInstitute in 1854. The Episcopal Church showing the tender mercy of the\nwicked, established St. Augustine at Raleigh in 1867. The American\nMissionary Association, an agency of the Congregational Church,\nestablished Avery Institute at Charleston, Ballard Normal School at\nMacon, and Washburn at Beaufort, North Carolina, in 1865; Trinity at\nAthens, Alabama, Gregory at Wilmington, North Carolina, and Fisk at\nNashville in 1866; Talladega in Alabama, Emerson at Mobile, Storrs at\nAtlanta, and Beach at Savannah in 1867; Hampton Institute in Virginia,\nKnox at Athens, Burwell at Selma, now at Florence; Ely Normal in\nLouisville in 1868; Straight University at New Orleans, Tougaloo in\nMississippi, Le Moyne at Memphis, and Lincoln at Marion, Alabama, in\n1869; Dorchester Academy at McIntosh, and the Albany Normal in Georgia\nin 1870. The Congregationalists, moreover, figured in the establishment\nof Howard University, which was chartered by the United States\nGovernment in 1867 with provision for the education of all persons\nregardless of race.\n\nSome other less effective forces were at work during this period\naccomplishing here and there results seemingly unimportant but in the\nend productive of much good. In 1862 Miss Towne and Miss Murray, members\nof the Society of Friends, established the Penn School on St. Helena\nIsland. Cornelia Hancock, a Philadelphia woman of the same sect, founded\nthe Laing School at Mount Pleasant, near Charleston, South Carolina.\nMartha Schofield, another Friend of Pennsylvania, opened at Aiken in\n1865 the Schofield Industrial School. In 1864 Alida Clark, supported by\nFriends in Indiana, engaged in relief work among Negro orphans in\nHelena, Arkansas, and in 1869 established near that city what is now\nknown as Southland College. The Reformed Presbyterians maintained a\nschool at Natchez between 1864 and 1866, and in 1874 established Knox\nAcademy at Selma, Alabama. The United Presbyterians opened a sort of\nclandestine school in Nashville in 1863, and in 1875 established\nKnoxville College as a center for a group of schools for Negroes in\nEastern Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, and Northern Alabama.\nFranklinton Christian College, maintained by the American Christian\nConvention, was opened in 1878 and chartered in 1890. Stillman Institute\nwas established by the southern Presbyterians at Tuscaloosa in 1876.\nPaine College was founded at Augusta in 1884.\n\nWith these striking examples of sacrifice in behalf of the education of\ntheir race, the Negro churches themselves began to participate in the\nextension of education as a means to spread the gospel through an\nintelligent ministry and to enable the laity to appreciate it as the\ngreat leverage in the uplift of the man far down. The African Methodists\nhad through the efforts of Bishop Payne already undertaken the\nestablishment of Union Seminary near Columbus, which was finally merged\nwith Wilberforce, established by the Methodists in 1858 near Xenia,\nOhio. The African Methodists also established Western University in\nKansas. To extend their educational work in the South, however, this\nsame denomination established Allen University at Columbia in 1881;\nMorris Brown at Atlanta in 1885; and later other schools at Waco, Texas;\nJackson, Mississippi; and Selma, Alabama. The Zion Methodist Church too\nwas planning the establishment of Livingstone College in 1879 and\nremoved to the present site of Salisbury in 1882, was popularized\nextensively by the eloquent J. C. Price. Early emphasizing education,\nthe Colored Methodist Church opened Lane College at Jackson, Tennessee,\nin 1882 and later established other schools at Birmingham, Alabama,\nHolly Springs, Mississippi, and Tyler, Texas. With the support of the\nAmerican Baptist Home Mission Society the Negro Baptists have done\nlikewise and, moreover, have established independently of the whites\nother such schools as the Virginia Theological Seminary and College at\nLynchburg, largely developed by the talented Gregory W. Hayes; the\nWilliam J. Simmons University of Louisville; the Arkansas Baptist\nCollege, now under the direction of the efficient J. A. Booker; and the\nNational Training School for Girls in Washington, D. C., an institution\nso well managed by the noted orator and indefatigable worker, Nannie H.\nBurroughs.\n\n[Illustration: J. C. PRICE\n\nAn orator and educator in the church.]\n\nTo make proper use of the schools various organizations cooperating\nunder the name of Freedmen's Aid Societies sent workers into the South\nto meet every need of the Negro. These efforts were not altogether those\nof the church, but so many churchmen were connected therewith that the\nstory of the Negro church would be incomplete without it. Cooperating\nwith these agencies, the American Missionary Association had in 1868 as\nmany as 532 missionaries and teachers working among the Negroes,\nspending as much as $400,000 a year. Then there came the National\nFreedmen's Relief Association of New York with 14 teachers and funds\namounting to $400,000 and $250,000 in supplies; the Pennsylvania\nFreedmen's Relief Association or Philadelphia Society with a force of 60\nteachers and a fund of $250,000 in 1865; the Western Freedmen's Aid\nCommission with receipts aggregating $227,000 to support teachers in the\nSouth in 1865; the Northwestern Freedmen's Aid Commission sending to the\nSouth in 1865 as many as 50 teachers. In the District of Columbia, among\nthe Negroes themselves, there were organized and operated the National\nFreedmen's Relief Association and the National Association for the\nRelief of Destitute Colored women and children, the latter being\nsupported by funds appropriated by Congress.\n\nThe Friends, a distinctly religious body, early participated in the same\nwork through various local agencies. Among the first was the Friends\nAssociation of Philadelphia and its vicinity for the Relief of Colored\nFreedmen, which between 1863 and 1867 expended $210,500 among the\nfreedmen in Virginia and North Carolina. More interested in education\nand religion, the Friends' Association for the Aid and Elevation of the\nFreedmen worked among the Negroes of Virginia and South Carolina, where\nbetween 1862 and 1869 they maintained 14 schools with 732 students and\nexpended for schools, seeds, supplies, donations to asylums, and 50,000\ncopies of the New Testament, $57,500. The New England Friends began\nwork among the freedmen in 1864 in Washington, D. C., operating there a\nstore at cost prices and conducting day, evening, and Sunday schools.\nFinally there cooperated with the New England Friends those of Maryland\norganized in 1864 as the Baltimore Association for the Moral and\nEducational Improvement of the Colored People. This society was\nfortunate in receiving annually for some time a subsidy from the city of\nBaltimore to the amount of $20,000.\n\nForeign friends of the race were equally active in promoting education\nand religion among the freedmen. In 1863, members of the Society of\nFriends in England contributed to this relief work L3,000. The following\nyear L5,000 came from this source in England and L1,500 from Ireland.\nThat same year there came through the New England Society $2,100 from\nthe London Freedmen's Aid Society, smaller sums from France and Ireland,\nand $1,313 from five Parsee firms in London. Similar contributions were\nsecured from abroad by other relief societies organized in the United\nStates. According to facts obtained by the Freedman's Bureau the English\naid societies contributed to the relief of the Negroes between 1865 and\n1869 at least $500,000. Dr. J. L. M. Curry believed that the total\nreceipts in money and supplies reached $1,000,000.\n\nThe facts set forth above well represent the activities of the Friends\nand of the Congregationalists, Free Will Baptists, Wesleyans,\nMethodists, and Reformed Dutch, for whom the American Missionary\nAssociation served as an agent; but there were in the field several\nchurches working independently. Among these were the Methodists,\nBaptists and Presbyterians. To systematize its efforts the Methodists\norganized in 1866 \"The Freedmen Aid Society of the Methodist Church.\"\nThe first efforts of this society were directed toward primary, normal,\nand higher education. In 1868 the Methodists had then established\nthrough this agency 29 schools with 51 teachers and 5,000 students in\nVirginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and\nGeorgia. By the end of the sixth year of its existence the receipts of\nthe society amounted to $315,100.\n\nDuring these years the American Baptist Home Missionary Association\nsupported by Presbyterians and United Brethren in Christ, was sending\nworkers right in the wake of the Union armies invading the Mississippi\nValley. The Baptists had opened a school for Negroes in Alexandria in\n1862, and by 1864 had sent missionaries into the District of Columbia,\nVirginia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, and Louisiana. Because of the\nfreedom exercised by the Baptists locally, there was among them much\nduplication of effort which resulted in confusion; but the American\nBaptist Home Missionary Association finally emerged as a unifying factor\namong these workers. This society had made such rapid strides by 1867\nthat it had in the field 50 ordained ministers and a large number of\nNegro students in training for the work. The Free-Will Baptists while\ncooperating with the American Home Missionary Association made some\nefforts by themselves. They carried on some work in the Shenandoah\nValley and in the West with 40 missionaries and teachers and 3,467\nstudents.\n\nThe Presbyterians also took this work seriously. The General Assembly in\nsession at Pittsburg in 1865 appointed a special committee on freedmen,\nwith 18 members, two of whom were designated as secretary and treasurer.\nAs there were already in the field 36 teachers as missionaries supported\nby local societies, this general bureau took over their work. The\nfollowing year there were in the field 55 missionaries, reporting 3,256\nday pupils, 2,043 Sunday School scholars, and six churches with 526\nmembers, in Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina, and Kansas. The income\nfor this work was $25,350 in 1865, together with 30 or 40 boxes of\nclothing; but between 1865 and 1870 this denomination expended $244,700\nto maintain their workers, who in 1820 had increased to 157, of whom 105\nwere Negroes. The Old School and United Presbyterians did not accomplish\nso much but they had a few missions here and there. In 1864, there were\nin Washington five schools with 174 students supported by the Reformed\nPresbyterian Board of Missions with an expenditure of $3,000 a year.\n\nSome other sporadic efforts in behalf of the freedmen deserve at\nleast casual mention. The Protestant Episcopal Freedmen's Commission was\norganized in 1865 to engage in this work, but with the exception of some\nphysical relief extended the unfortunate it accomplished very little.\nFrom The Massachusetts Episcopal Association for the Promotion of\nChristian Knowledge among the Freedmen and other Colored Persons of the\nSouth and Southwest, organized that same year, still less assistance\ncame. The American Bible Society up to 1868, however, distributed a\nmillion copies of scriptural and religious works among the freedmen. The\nAmerican Tract Society also sent out such works, opened some schools,\nand conducted church services in Washington.\n\nThe Negroes, although poor in the goods of this world, soon made\nsufficient sacrifice materially to give impetus to the relief work among\nthemselves. The Negroes in Maryland gave $23,371 to aid the relief work\npromoted by the Baltimore Association for the Moral and Educational\nImprovement of the Colored People. They organized bodies of their own,\nmoreover, to participate directly in this uplift work. In 1864 there was\nestablished in Brooklyn \"The African Civilization Society,\" which\ngradually extended its work through churches and schools into the\nDistrict of Columbia, the Carolinas, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia,\nMississippi, and Louisiana. The reports of this organization show that\nin 1868 it employed 129 teachers instructing 8,000 students at an\nexpense of $53,700. For some years the society operated in Brooklyn an\norphan asylum with the aid of the Freedmen's Bureau, but in 1869 the\nmanagement found itself embarrassed for lack of funds. From 1864 to 1868\nthe African Methodists so extended its mission and school work as to\nhave 40,000 Sunday school pupils and 39,000 volumes in school libraries.\n\nIt will be interesting to mention some of the men in the North, who\nconstituted the management of the home offices of these aid societies\nand who used their time and influence in raising the necessary funds.\nAmong the officers of the American Freedmen's Aid Commission, a sort of\ngeneral agency in New York for several relief societies, were William\nLloyd Garrison, the famous abolitionist, as vice-president; Frederick\nLaw Olmsted, the noted traveler through the South prior to the war,\nserving as general secretary; and, as directors, John G. Whittier, the\nanti-slavery poet, Francis G. Shaw, another abolitionist, and Henry Ward\nBeecher, the true and tried friend of the Negro. Lyman Abbott became\ngeneral secretary of the combined organizations. The American Freedmen's\nAid Commission and The American Union Commission added to their staff\nWilliam Cullen Bryant, Phillip Brooks, Bellamy Storer, and Edward L.\nPierce, who had done so much for the contrabands in South Carolina prior\nto the close of the war. When most of these societies in a convention in\nCleveland united under the name of the American Freedmen's Union\nCommission, they had for president Chief Justice Chase, who not only by\nword but by actual sacrifice of his means did much to promote the\nChristian education of the freedmen.\n\nAmong the supporters of the New England Society there appeared many\nworkers known before as friends of the Negro. The Rev. Edward Everett\nHale and J. M. Manning were most active in Boston in raising funds and\nfinding teachers and missionaries to work in Negro schools. Gov. John A.\nAndrew served as the first president of the New England Freedmen's Aid\nSociety, Edward Atkinson as secretary, and James Freeman Clarke as\nvice-president. And from New England came scores of workers, following\nup the work commenced by those gallant soldiers, Thomas Wentworth\nHigginson, and Robert Gould Shaw.\n\nSouthern people were not exactly neutral on the enlightenment of the\nNegro. They did not, as a whole, seriously object to it and in the\ncourse of time there appeared among them men of their own group\nfearlessly advocating Negro education. Dr. A. G. Haygood, a\ndistinguished churchman among the Methodists, deserves here some\nmention. He represented in a large measure the best thought in the South\nconcerning the Negro. He came forward to impress upon the South the\nclaims of the Negro on the \"sympathy and helpfulness of all who were\nmore fortunate, especially those who called themselves the followers of\nJesus Christ.\" This sentiment he set forth in a book, entitled _Our\nBrother in Black_, which struck the North with agreeable surprise and\nled the South to think more seriously of another solution of the\nso-called Negro problem. Invited to be the Director of the John F.\nSlater Fund established soon thereafter, Dr. Haygood had an opportunity\nto spend nine years translating into action the theory set forth in his\nbook.\n\nLess interested in Christian education but nevertheless effective in\npromoting generally the cause which made the situation of the Negro\nchurch so much better in the South was Dr. J. L. M. Curry, a lawyer and\ncongressman, representative of the Southern Confederacy. His work as\nDirector of the Peabody Fund, easily connected with the systematic\nefforts of Dr. Amory Dwight Mayo, a northern man, who investigated the\nNegro schools in the South, set forth methods for their improvement and\nkept the North and the South well informed as to the forces at work\namong Negroes for the good of all. The southern churches as a whole\nduring this period, however, did not so quickly forget their prejudices\nas to do anything of consequence for the good of the Negroes. The Negro\nhad been begrudgingly granted his freedom and the northern teacher and\nmissionary seemed like interlopers to be tolerated but not worthy of\ncooperation. The South, moreover, could not have done very much for\nNegro missions for the reason that immediately after the war it was\ndecidedly impoverished; for many of the aid societies which assisted the\nNegroes ministered also to the whites in the desolated areas.\n\nThese missionary teachers came with a determination to do something like\nthat of Francis Xavier, Henry Martyn, and Adoniram Judson, who bore the\nreligious message to the Orient. They came to change the character of\nthe freedmen through an intelligent religion based upon actual knowledge\nof God as revealed in the Bible. Among these workers one should mention\nRev. D. L. Johnson, a teacher of refugees in Washington; Solomon Peck, a\nvolunteer teacher of the contrabands at Beaufort, South Carolina, in\n1862; Horace Bumstead, afterward President of Atlanta University; and\nGen. O. O. Howard, President of Howard University.\n\nThe sort of education promoted by these workers will further explain the\nsignificance of the movement. All of the church aid societies and many\nof those beyond the control of churchmen had for their purpose the\nindustrial, social, intellectual, and religious improvement of the\nfreedmen. The capstone of the structure they would build then had its\nfoundation in moral and religious instruction. Most workers, therefore,\nwere chosen with regard to their fitness to function in these positions\nas missionaries in the school room. Few persons volunteering to do such\nwork at that time could be devoid of a sympathetic nature, but more than\nthis was required to build in these new citizens  that Christian\ncharacter which would make them helpful to their fellows and useful in\nthe work of the Master. While education was necessary for the Negroes as\nfor all other persons, the chief need of the Negro, as most of these\nworkers observed it, was religion.\n\nActing upon this idea, therefore, almost every Negro school provided in\nsome way for religious instruction. If the course of study were not\nsufficiently broad to base thereupon a more advanced course, there was\nusually provided some instruction in the English Bible. In case the\ncourse of study became so pretentious as to style itself a college\ncurriculum, there was usually added the regular course in theology,\nwhich, in spite of the fact that it was the only professional work in\nwhich such institutions engaged, was sufficient for them to take over\nthe title of university. Although lacking adequate understanding\nsometimes, however, these institutions had so much of the right spirit\nthat they accomplished all but wonders. While they did not always hold\nthe students long enough to impart all that a college graduate or a\nprofessional man should know, they so inspired the youth with the love\nof study that the habit once formed led them into fields of research and\nendeavor which men much better trained often failed to reach.\n\nThe emphasis of the northern churches upon instruction rather than upon\nmere proselyting immediately after the war, therefore, was not\nmisplaced.  They no doubt wrought more wisely than they thought. The\nNegro already had his predilections toward the Methodists and the\nBaptists and the mere contest for the increase of church membership to\nbe recruited among a people, the masses of whom could not then serve God\nintelligently would have been love's labor lost. Northern denominations\nwisely cooperated with one another regardless of sectarian lines to do\nwhatever was needful whether or not the largest contributor to the\nsuccess of the enterprise received credit for it. Negroes who went from\nthese schools had, of course, the impress of the respective\ndenominations to which they owed their education, but very often, as it\nwas in the case of the Presbyterians, the denomination lost to the\nothers of a more popular appeal most of the men which it trained.\nLincoln and Biddle Universities have by their training of men who, on\nleaving school joined the Methodists or Baptists, contributed to the\nsuccess of these denominations. When one thinks of Walter H. Brooks, the\npopular Baptist minister in Washington, and of Joseph C. Price, the idol\nof the Zion Church, as graduates of Lincoln University, this contention\nbecomes convincing.\n\nWith all of these workers in the field promoting religious education\nwithout regard to creed, the Negro churches soon had a much larger\nnumber of men equipped to extend their work. The minister who could\nneither read nor write became an exception to the rule and when still\nambitious in spite of such shortcomings he sometimes ceased to have a\nfollowing. Preaching became more of an appeal to the intellect than an\neffort to stir one's emotions. Sermons were made as an effort to\nminister to a need observed by careful consideration of the\ncircumstances of the persons served, hymns in keeping with the thought\nof the discourse harmonized therewith, and prayers became the occasion\nof thanksgiving for blessings which the intelligent pastor could lead\nhis congregation to appreciate and of a petition for God's help to live\nmore righteously. In fact, the tone of worship in the Negro church had\nbeen as a result of the post bellum efforts in education very much\nchanged as early as 1875 and decidedly so by 1885.\n\nGiven such an impetus the work of the Christian church among Negroes was\nrapidly carried forward. Within a few years the neglected masses of the\nfreedmen unto whom the gospel had never been successfully preached were\ngenerally evangelized and provided with some sort of facilities for\nreligious instruction. Publication societies sold through colporters and\nmissionaries religious literature adapted to the special needs of the\nfreedmen and religious workers organized in churches circles devoted to\nthe study of Christian doctrine and the Bible. As the church thus\nliberalized offered the Negroes a much better opportunity for\ndevelopment than the other institutions, many of which for years after\nemancipation were regarded as spheres which the Negro should not enter,\nthe freedmen specialized in the study of this one concern thrown open to\nthem, mastering in a few years the principles of the Christian religion\nand the story of the Bible to the extent that their friends and enemies\nwere all but startled. As a result, therefore, Negroes of to-day have a\nmuch more thorough knowledge of these fundamentals than most white men.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI\n\nTHE CALL OF POLITICS\n\n\nThis favorable beginning, however, was not indicative of a\nstraightforward attack on the tents of wickedness. Many Negroes who were\ntrained for the ministry never entered thereupon because of the lure of\npolitics during the days of Reconstruction. Some who had engaged in this\nChristian work found out that in spite of the most thorough training by\npious men, they were not fitted for such a calling and abandoned it for\nthe political arena. Others who were seemingly successful in the\nministry divided their time between their profession and politics,\neither because of the exigencies of the situation or the desire to\nattain positions of prominence in keeping with the traditions of the\nwhite people of the South, who have emphasized unduly the status of the\nprofessional class.\n\nThere were during the Reconstruction period, moreover, so many other\nnecessities with which the Negroes had to be supplied that the Negro\npreacher, often the only one in a community usually sufficiently well\ndeveloped to lead the people, had to devote his time not only to church\nwork but to every matter of concern to the race. In some respects,\nthe Negroes after the war were not far removed from the conditions\nobtaining in the North before the war. Many of their former problems\nstill confronted them. The chief difference was that after the war the\nNegroes had fighting ground on which to stand to wage a battle for those\nthings which, having been begrudgingly granted, were being gradually\ntaken away.\n\nThat the Negro preacher should continue a man of so many interests was\nbut a natural consequence of the trend in the development of the race in\nthis country. Up to this time the Negroes had established and maintained\nonly one institution of their own. That was their church. When the time\ncame for them to exercise other functions in society this one\ninstitution had to be overworked to supply the needs of others. Inasmuch\nas the church then became the center of so many activities the minister\nin charge often had to take the lead in shaping the policy of his people\nthat they might advance in the right way. Ministers who abandoned their\npulpits for the political world may be condemned as deserting their post\nof duty; but when one considers the call of their race in the situation\nin which it was and the valuable services some of them rendered, he\ncannot hastily conclude that the race thereby lost more than it gained.\nHistory should be studied sympathetically. The devotee to the faith\nshould not denounce these men as recreant to Christianity and the\nstudent of politics must not dub them as interlopers in a forbidden\nfield. Never before had a race been liberated under such circumstances.\nNever before had a group in such an undeveloped state been called upon\nto do so many things in such a short time. That the procedure of the\nrace in this infinitely complex situation differed somewhat from that of\nothers who had centuries to do what the Negroes were required to\naccomplish in a day, should be no cause of surprise.\n\nIn this respect, moreover, the Negroes did not differ widely from the\nwhites. It is true that there has not been any period in the history of\nthe whites when such a large percentage of the ministry freely\nparticipated in matters of the world, but the Negro minister found in\nthe record of the whites precedents for all of his deviation from the\ncustomary course of the preacher of the Word. In their frontier\ncondition the pioneering whites had often been reduced to the necessity\nof following the leadership of the versatile minister just as the\nNegroes were during the Reconstruction period. Among them the minister\nwas sometimes the man of all work. He had a farm or business from which\nhe obtained most of his means of subsistence; he of necessity often\nstudied law and practiced in the local courts; he not infrequently\naspired to office and, if successful, sometimes forgot his beginnings.\nAnd even within the memory of the living, examples are not wanting.\nEx-Governor Atkinson of West Virginia was a minister  in the Methodist\nChurch and, like the Negro during these trying days, answered the call\nof his constituents. James A. Garfield, who attained the presidency of\nthe United States, abandoned this exalted profession for the more\ninteresting role of politics.\n\nThe salient facts of the careers of some of these ministers thus allured\nare more than interesting. Dr. William J. Simmons after being educated\nand engaged in the Baptist ministry for some time entered politics in\nFlorida about 1874. Well received by his neighbors, he soon became\ncounty clerk and then county commissioner. He served as chairman of the\ncounty campaign committee and a member of the district congressional\ncommittee. In the campaign of Hayes and Tilden, Simmons was a\nconspicuous figure. He stumped the State for the Republican candidates\nwith such success as materially to aid the cause in that he helped to\nraise the Republican majority of his county from 525 to 986 when the\nwhole State gave Hayes a majority of only 147. Dr. Simmons later settled\nin Louisville, where he distinguished himself as a minister and as the\nfounder of what is now known as the William J. Simmons University.\n\n[Illustration: DR. WILLIAM J. SIMMONS]\n\nDr. James Poindexter's career shows how difficult it was for the Negro\nministers to avoid politics. Coming from Virginia, as a pioneer among\nthose who sought better opportunities in the Northwest, he was at once a\nserious leader. He became a minister in the Baptist Church even before\nthe Civil War and never actually sought an official position, hoping\nrather to maintain himself as a fearless speaker and writer in behalf of\nhis oppressed people. Yet he too was to some extent attracted to\npolitics in self-defense. He was the first man of color in Ohio\nnominated for the House of Delegates, but was defeated. We find him some\nyears later serving as the foreman of a grand jury. He was appointed a\ntrustee of the Ohio University at Athens but the Democratic Senate of\nthe State would not confirm him. He was for four years a member of the\nCity Council of Columbus, serving that body as vice-president. Later he\nwas appointed to fill a vacancy on the School Board of Columbus, was\nelected to the position at the expiration of the term, and reelected\nagainst great odds over a Democratic opponent in 1887.\n\n[Illustration: DR. JAMES POINDEXTER\n\nPioneer Baptist preacher in Ohio.]\n\nPoindexter's position in this case, like that of so many others, may be\nstated in his own words. Addressing an audience on the \"Pulpit and\nPolitics,\" he said: \"Nor can a preacher more than any other citizen\nplead his religious work or the sacredness of that work as an exemption\nfrom duty. Going to the Bible to learn the relation of the pulpit to\npolitics, and accepting the prophets, Christ, and apostles, and the\npulpit of their times, and their precepts and examples as the guide of\nthe pulpit to-day, I think that their conclusion will be that wherever\nthere is a sin to be rebuked, no matter by whom committed, and ill to be\naverted or good to be achieved by our country or mankind, there is a\nplace for the pulpit to make itself felt and heard. The truth is, all\nthe help the preachers and all other good and worthy citizens can give\nby taking hold of politics is needed in order to keep the government out\nof bad hands and secure the ends for which governments are formed.\"\n\nDr. J. T. White, another preacher of the Reconstruction period, attained\nmuch distinction in this field. Fortunate in having acquired a\nfundamental education in Indianapolis prior to the war, he easily made\nan impression at the Consolidated Baptist Convention in St. Louis in\n1865 when he received a call to a small Baptist Church of Helena,\nArkansas. Among these communicants he toiled successfully without\nconcern as to other affairs until 1868, when the reconstruction of the\nState was begun. He was induced to present himself as a candidate for\ndelegate to the constitutional convention and was elected. He figured\nconspicuously in framing the constitution and canvassed the State to\nsecure its ratification. He then became a part of the restored State\ngovernment, serving his fellow citizens as a member of the House of\nDelegates, to which he was twice re-elected. He was chosen to serve one\nterm in the State Senate, after which he was appointed by the Governor,\nCommissioner of Public Works and Internal Improvements. During this same\nperiod, however, he was doing his best work in building and edifying\nchurches at Helena and Little Rock, and extending Baptist influence\nthroughout the State and nation.\n\nG. W. Gayles, a Mississippian of this type, acquired before his\nemancipation enough education to read intelligently. Having an\ninclination to study the Bible, he aspired to the ministry, for which he\nwas set apart by a council of reputable Baptist ministers of Greenville\nin 1867. Going to Bolivar county to find a more inviting field, he\nbecame the pastor of the Kindling Altar Church in which he made an\nhonorable record. He soon became involved in public affairs, however, as\nis evidenced by his appointment as member of the Board of Police for a\ndistrict in Bolivar County by Governor A. Ames. The following year he\nwas appointed Justice of the Peace in that county by Governor J. L.\nAlcorn, but later in that same month he was made a supervisor of another\ndistrict in that county. He was then elected a member of the Mississippi\nLegislature, serving a term of two years in the lower house and then as\nState Senator from the 28th district, beginning 1877 and continuing into\nthe eighties, when there had been no other Negro in that body since\n1875.\n\nIn spite of his political activities, however, Gayles did not abandon\nreligious work. Beginning in 1872, he served for many years as\nmissionary for the counties of Bolivar and Sunflower and then in that\ncapacity for Coahoma. Appreciating his worth, the Baptist State\nMissionary Convention made him its corresponding secretary in 1874\nand president in 1876, with the power to edit a denominational organ\nknown as _The Baptist Signal_, by which he showed himself a national as\nwell as a State character.\n\nJesse Freeman Boulden was forced into politics against his will. In\nPhiladelphia he acquired an elementary education. He later embraced\nreligion in Maryland, and in 1853 connected himself with the Union\nBaptist Church in Philadelphia. He then became pastor of the Zion\nBaptist Church in Chicago, where he was succeeded by Richard DeBaptiste\nas pastor of the combined Olivet Baptist Church in 1863. As the war was\nthen turning out favorable to the Union forces, Boulden called together\nat Brooklyn, Illinois, in 1864, a group of Illinois Baptist churches\nknown as the Wood River Association to consider the importance of\nfollowing the army and looking after the interests of the denomination\nin the South. This work then engaged the attention of Mr. Boulden to the\nextent that he gave up his church in 1865 and settled at Natchez,\nMississippi. This was in many respects the turning point of his career.\nHe immediately plunged into political matters as a leader to the manner\nborn. He presented to Congress the first petition of that State praying\nthat Negroes be granted the right of franchise. Boulden held the first\nemancipation celebration in 1866, and began to lecture to Negroes on the\nduty of the hour. Thus interested, he was made a factor in the\norganization  of the Republican party in the north-eastern part of the\nState. He made the first Republican speech in the court house at\nColumbus and was a member of the first Mississippi Republican State\nConvention in 1867.\n\nIn all of this, however, he was not seeking personal gain; for brought\nout against his will as a candidate for the lower house of the\nlegislature, he once thought of declining, but finally yielded, thinking\nthat he might be able to do some good. In this position he took the lead\nin piloting through the legislature the election of Hiram Revells as\nUnited States Senator, and, after helping B. K. Bruce to become\nSergeant-at-Arms of the Senate, used his influence to make him also a\nmember of the upper national body. He, like many others of his time,\nhowever, never deserted the ministry altogether for politics. After\nserving various churches and editing _The Baptist Reflector_ of\nColumbus, Mississippi, he rendered his most valuable service as general\nagent of the American Baptist Home Mission Society for the State of New\nYork.\n\nP. H. A. Braxton, pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church in Baltimore, and\nthe Rev. D. F. Rivers, once a member of the Tennessee Legislature,\nseemed to have had their day in politics and then entered upon the\nministry in contradistinction to most men of their time. Leaving the\nfarm on which he was born a slave in Virginia, Braxton went into the\nstave business. Entering politics in King William county soon\nthereafter, however, he became constable in 1872, acquitting himself\nwith honor. In the meantime he studied law with some degree of success.\nHe then went to Washington, D.C., where he received an appointment in\nthe custom house service in which he was converted in 1875. It seems\nthat he lost the desire for politics thereafter. He was commissioned to\npreach in 1875, and appointed general agent of the consolidated American\nBaptist Missionary Convention in 1878. He took charge of the Calvary\nBaptist Church in Baltimore in 1879 and there made a record for himself\nand his denomination as a forceful preacher, successful organizer, and\nradical reformer. Rev. Mr. Rivers, after toiling in the West, came to\nWashington where he is still an active pastor.\n\nAllen Allensworth prepared for the ministry at the Ely Normal School and\nat Roger Williams University. He rose rapidly in the denomination,\nserving the Kentucky Baptists as their financial agent, the pastor of\nchurches at Elizabethtown, Franklin, Louisville, Bowling Green, and\nCincinnati, and as a missionary in the employ of the American Baptist\nPublication Society. During these years, however, he was equally active\nas a leader in politics. The Republicans of Kentucky made much use of\nhim as a campaigner, as he was a speaker of well-known power. By this\nparty he was chosen to serve as an elector for the State-at-large on the\nGarfield-Arthur ticket in 1880 and was sent as delegate from that State\nto the National Republican Convention which met in Chicago in 1884. No\none knows how far his political activity would have gone, had he not\nentered the army as chaplain before the Negro political organization in\nthe South had collapsed.\n\nChristopher H. Payne, who with the possible exception of Mordecai W.\nJohnson, has been the most intelligent preacher of color to toil in West\nVirginia, shows in his career how the political world finally absorbed\nsome Negro ministers altogether. He began as a teacher in West Virginia,\nwhere by dint of energy he mastered the fundamentals of education. He\nthen became converted and on realizing a call to the ministry, entered\nthe Richmond Institute where he distinguished himself as a promising\nscholar. After serving the American Baptist Publication Society as a\nSunday school missionary and as pastor of churches in Virginia and West\nVirginia, he became interested in politics in which he participated not\nonly as a speaker but as an editor. He spent some time reading law,\nsecured admission to the bar, and practiced in the local courts. In the\ncourse of time, he became more widely known as a figure in politics than\nas a churchman, although he was at the same time serving as pastor of\nsome church and presiding over Baptist Associations and for years the\nBaptist State Convention of West Virginia. In 1896, he was elected a\nmember of the West Virginia Legislature, the first Negro to be so\nhonored in that State. He was later appointed a deputy Collector of\nInternal Revenue under Nathan B. Scott, and in 1903 was appointed Consul\nto the Virgin Islands, where he served fourteen years. Since the recent\npurchase of these possessions by the United States he has remained there\nto practice law.\n\nBishop W. B. Derrick of the African Methodist Episcopal Church also had\na political career. From a brief career on the high seas he enlisted in\nthe United States Navy during the Civil War and upon being converted\nentered the ministry of the African Methodist Church, serving with\ndistinction in the Virginia Conference. Having by the end of the\nseventies attained this position of influence, he was induced to take an\nactive part in the politics of that State at the time when one of the\nlocal parties desired to readjust the State debt. He allied himself with\nthe \"Funders,\" the party in favor of paying the debt as it was\ncontracted, since he believed that his attitude was in harmony with the\nprinciples of the National Republican Party. Thinking that his people\nwere about to be made tools in the hands of ambitious and unscrupulous\nmen, Dr. Derrick fearlessly denounced the \"Readjusters\" as a clique\nseeking to repudiate the payment of an honest debt. As this contest\ndeveloped into a vindictive political battle engendering much local\nstrife out of which the \"Readjusters\" emerged victors, Dr. Derrick,\ndeeming it best to leave Virginia, resigned his charge and spent some\ntime visiting his relatives in the West Indies. He returned to this\ncountry to resume his ministry in which he so rapidly developed that he\nbecame a popular bishop of his church.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP W. B. DERRICK]\n\nBishop H. M. Turner, one of the outstanding men of the Negro race, had\nhis day also in politics. He equipped himself for the ministry by\nprivate instruction obtained under adverse circumstances, joined the\nMethodist Church in 1848, and transferred to the African Methodists in\n1867, rising rapidly in this last-mentioned connection from the position\nof an itinerant preacher in St. Louis to an eldership in Washington, and\na chaplaincy in the United States Army. During these years, however, he\nwas most active in politics. In 1867 he was appointed by the National\nRepublican Committee to superintend the organization of the Negroes in\nGeorgia. In this capacity he stumped the State and wrote many articles\nwhich he spread broadcast to direct his people in his way. That year he\nwas elected a member of the State Constitutional Convention. He was next\nchosen a member of the legislature the following year and re-elected in\n1870, when he was expelled on account of his color. President Grant\nappointed him post-master of Macon in 1869; but he had to resign on\naccount of persecution. He was afterward appointed Coast Inspector of\nCustoms and United States Government Detective, but after holding the\nposition a few years he resigned it to meet the demands of the church\nwhose cause, in spite of his political activities, he had never\nabandoned, and whose good judgment made him the influential bishop of\nthe denomination.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP H. M. TURNER]\n\nSpeaking of his career himself, he said on an occasion: \"And my labors\nhave not stopped in the religious sphere, but it is well known to every\none that I have done more work in the political field than any five men\nin the State, if you will take out Colonel Bryant. I first organized the\nRepublican party in this State, and have worked for its maintenance and\nperpetuity as no other man in the State has. I have put more men in the\nfield, made more speeches, organized more union leagues, political\nassociations, clubs, and have written more campaign documents, that\nreceived larger circulation, than any other man in the State. Why, one\ncampaign document I wrote alone was so acceptable that it took four\nmillion copies to satisfy the public. And as you are well aware, these\nlabors have not been performed amid sunshine and prosperity. I have been\nthe constant target of Democratic abuse and venom, and white Republican\njealousy. The newspapers have teemed with all kind of slander, accusing\nme of every crime in the catalogue of villainy; I have been arrested and\ntried on some of the wildest charges and most groundless accusations\never distilled from the laboratory of hell. Witnesses have been paid as\nhigh as four thousand dollars to swear me into the penitentiary; white\npreachers have sworn that I tried to get up insurrections, etc., a\ncrime punishable with death; and all such deviltry has been resorted to\nfor the purpose of breaking me down, and with all they have not hurt a\nhair of my head, nor even bothered my brain longer than they were going\nthrough the farce of adjudication.... I invariably let them say their\nsay and do their do; while they were studying against me, I was studying\nfor the interest of the church, and working for the success of my\nparty.\"\n\nRichard Harvey Cain, converted in 1841 and installed as a preacher in\nthe African Methodist Episcopal Church in 1844, saw himself rising to a\nposition of usefulness after his training at Wilberforce, followed by\nhis pastoral work in the New York and South Carolina Conferences.\nAlthough he had unusually extended his field of labor by successful\nefforts at Summerville, Lincolnville, Georgetown, Marion, and Sumter, he\nhad too much energy to be confined altogether to the church. Interesting\nhimself in whatever touched the life of his people, he edited a\nRepublican newspaper in 1868. He secured his election as a member of the\nReconstruction constitutional convention in South Carolina and played an\nimportant role in rebuilding the government of that State along liberal\nlines. He served two years as State Senator from the Charleston\nDistrict. In 1879 he was given a much more honorable recognition in\nbeing elected a member of the Forty-third Congress. He was again thus\nhonored in being elected to the Forty-fifth Congress in 1881 and \"served\nwith distinction and marked ability,\" making most eloquent speeches in\nthe advocacy of civil rights for the Negro.\n\nHis close connection with the church, however, was still maintained, for\nhe was elected bishop in 1880 and assigned to the Louisiana and Texas\ndistrict. Speaking of him as a man remarkable for uniting these two\nfields, Bishop Derrick said: \"He surely could be considered a captain of\nthe hosts, one of the kindliest and pleasantest of Christian statesmen\nand a man of clear good judgment blended with a strong resolution and\nfirmness, which made him the master of many difficult situations in the\nactive and political career which marked his statesmanship with\nbrilliant success.\"\n\nBishop B. W. Arnett, one of the most popular men who have hitherto risen\nin the African Methodist Church, served his people also in these two\nways. When political opportunities were first offered the Negroes in the\nSouth he had already served as a teacher and had passed through the\ngradations of the ministry to a position of influence in his\ndenomination in Ohio. The need was too urgent and the call too\nimperative for him not to participate in the affairs of his State and\nnation. Once in politics, he easily became a commanding figure even in\nOhio, where because of the small black population a Negro could not\nsecure the following easily obtained at that time in the Southern\nStates. In 1885 he was elected to the Ohio Legislature from Greene\nCounty, thus securing the opportunity to fight for the repeal of the\nnefarious \"Black Laws\" which disgraced the statute books of Ohio prior\nto the Civil War. Arnett piloted through the lower house the bill to\nthis effect and with Senator Ely supporting it in the Senate, the feat\nwas triumphantly accomplished. Never did a Negro serve his people to\nbetter advantage. At the same time he was using his influence to correct\nnational abuses and was earnestly laboring for the extension of his\nchurch, which he honorably served as financial secretary, statistician,\nand finally as bishop.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP B. W. ARNETT]\n\nBishop James W. Hood, of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, in\nhis day one of the most influential men of color in the United States,\nfound himself also in the political world. He began as a preacher in\nNova Scotia in 1860, served later at Bridgeport, Connecticut, and then\nwent to North Carolina, where his successful work exalted him to the\nbishopric in 1872. His very going to North Carolina, however, had a\npolitical setting. He went to Newbern as a missionary under General\nButler's invitation to the churches to send missionaries, even while the\nplace was under the fire of the Confederate forces. When the war in that\narea was cleared up and Reconstruction was undertaken Bishop Hood was\namong the first to participate therein. He was elected president of the\nconvention of Negroes assembled at Raleigh in October, 1865, one of\nthe first, if not the first, political convocation of this sort ever\nassembled in the South. On this occasion he so fearlessly advocated\nequal rights for the Negro that he was warned by the people around that\nhis life would be in danger, if he did not desist therefrom. In 1867 he\nwas elected as delegate to the constitutional convention of North\nCarolina, in which he took such an active part in framing the\nfundamental law, incorporating into it such liberal provisions for\nhomesteads and public schools that it was spoken of by the reactionaries\nas Hood's constitution until it was amended in 1875. He served as a\nmagistrate under the provisional government in North Carolina and later\nbecame a deputy Collector of Internal Revenue for the United States.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP J. W. HOOD]\n\nIn 1868 he was appointed an agent of the State Board of Education and\nAssistant Superintendent of Public Instruction, receiving a salary of\n$1,500 a year; but he did not abandon his church work, having built up a\nlarge congregation at Charlotte during the three years he served in\nthese positions. He traveled also in the interest of the Freedmen's\nBureau in the capacity of an Assistant Superintendent. Thus in a\nposition to help his people, Bishop Hood had in 1870 as many as 49,000\nNegro children in school. He had established for Negroes a department\nfor the deaf, dumb, and blind and had about sixty inmates under care and\ninstruction at the expense of the State. He hoped to establish a State\nuniversity, but the undoing of Reconstruction prevented him from\nreaching that end. He was named in 1872 by the Republican caucus as\ntheir candidate for Secretary of State, but he declined the honor. He\nserved that year as delegate at large to the National Republican\nConvention, which nominated Grant the second time. In 1876 he was chosen\ntemporary chairman of the Republican State Convention, which he served\nwith much satisfaction.\n\nThis account of the Negro in politics, however, does not establish the\nfact that either the majority or even the best prepared of the Negro\nministry devoted all of their time to politics. There were many striking\nexamples to the contrary. Bishop Daniel Payne lived long after the Civil\nWar to promote education and religion, and when he died was regarded by\nmany as the most useful man of the race. Bishop Lee, as President of\nWilberforce University and a functionary of the African Methodist\nEpiscopal Church, rendered his race constructive service. Dr. Alexander\nCrummell took no active part in politics, although he fearlessly spoke\nout for the political and civil rights of his race. Dr. J. Sella Martin,\nprominent in the ministry before and after the Civil War, attained the\ndistinction of one of the most eloquent men of his race without\npermitting politics to consume much of his time. Bishop Grant, one of\nthe most useful men of his denomination, did not find it necessary to\nseek honors beyond the limits of the church. John Jasper, known to fame\nas the Baptist preacher of the Sun-Moving theory, established for\nhimself throughout Virginia and adjacent States a reputation for piety\nand sincerity, which, without political influence, made him a power in\nthe country.\n\n[Illustration: JOHN JASPER\n\nA conservative Virginia preacher.]\n\nAmong these consecrated churchmen, moreover, none can be considered a\nbetter example than Bishop B. T. Tanner, a well-educated man, who became\ndistinguished in the services of his church years before the\nemancipation. His addresses exhibited learning and mature thought and\nthe several works which he published entitled him to the distinction of\nbeing one of the most scholarly Negroes of his time. Among these works\nmay be mentioned his _Apology for African Methodism_, _The Negro's\nOrigin_, _An Outline of Our History and Government_; _The Negro, African\nand American_. In 1884 he was made editor of the _African Biblical\nReview_, which he so popularized that he was soon chosen bishop by his\ndenomination.\n\nBishop L. H. Holsey of the C. M. E. Church distinguished himself by a\ncareer equally as honorable. After rendering faithful service as a\nminister in the church he was elevated to the episcopacy at a time when\nthe church needed the guidance of a master hand. The manner in which he\naddressed himself to his task and the good results which he obtained\nsoon convinced his communicants that the selection was not a mistake.\nThat during his day the Colored Methodists did their task so well was\ndue in a measure, of course, to the numerous sacrifices made by other\nfaithful churchmen of his denomination. Among these should be mentioned\nBishops Elias Cottrell, Isaac Lane, R. S. Williams, N. C. Cleaves, R. A.\nCarter and C. H. Phillips, who still stand as the respectable and\ntrustworthy leaders of their denomination.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP HOLSEY, of the C. M. E. Church.]\n\nDeserving of honorable mention in this connection are many distinguished\nNegroes who impressed the world as preachers of power. They not only\nbuilt imposing edifices and pastored large congregations, but went from\nplace to place in the State and country impressing the world with the\npower of God unto salvation. So generally did they ingratiate themselves\ninto the favor of the public that they passed among the people as seers\nand prophets of a former period. Among these should be mentioned Dr. W.\nBishop Johnson and Dr. C. M. Tanner of the District of Columbia; Dr.\nHarvey Johnson of Baltimore; E. K. Love and W. J. White of Georgia;\nDaniel Stratton, Nelson Barnett, and R. J. Perkins of West Virginia; and\nJ. J. Worlds and L. W. Boone of North Carolina. There were also James\nHolmes, for years the pastor of the First Baptist Church of Richmond,\nVirginia; Dr. Richard Wells, the pastor of the Ebenezer Baptist Church\nin the same city; Anthony Binga, a churchman of scholarly bearing, who\nwrote important dissertations of a theological nature while pasturing\nthe leading Baptist Church in Manchester, Virginia; and Dr. William\nH. Stokes, a worker of much influence in Richmond, still speaking\nfearlessly in behalf of his people.\n\n[Illustration: DR. E. K. LOVE\n\nA popular minister in Savannah, Georgia.]\n\nIdentified with this serious group was Richard DeBaptiste, who migrated\nwith his free parents of color from Fredericksburg, Virginia, to the\nNorthwest after the restrictions placed upon the Negroes of this class\nin Virginia became intolerable. His first important work was that of\nteaching a public school for colored youth in the Springfield township\nat Mt. Pleasant, Ohio, where he later organized and pastored a Baptist\nChurch from 1860 to 1863. He then became pastor of the Olivet Baptist\nChurch in Chicago, a charge which he held until 1882. Serving in this\ncapacity, he purchased two building sites at a cost of $16,000 and built\ntwo brick church edifices costing respectively $15,000 and $18,000.\n\n[Illustration: REV. RICHARD DEBAPTISTE\n\nA preacher of the Word in Chicago.]\n\nHis work as a minister, however, was in no sense local. He was elected\ncorresponding secretary of the Wood River Association in 1864, was a\nprominent figure and officer in the Northwestern and Southern Baptist\nConvention organized in 1865, and was chosen president of the American\nBaptist Missionary Convention in Nashville, Tennessee, serving it\nconsecutively for four years. He was thereafter elected president at\nintervals and remained a commanding figure in the convention because of\nhis power and influence in the church. Manifesting further interest in\nthe work of the denomination, he contributed to the church literature\nthrough the _Chicago Conservator_, the _Western Herald_, and the\n_National Monitor_. In fact, in his day he was not only the outstanding\nminister of his denomination in the West, but one of the most\ninfluential men of his race.\n\nOne of the most prominent ministers of the Reconstruction period who\nwere not deterred from their course by politics was Rufus L. Perry. Born\na slave in Nashville, Tennessee, where because of the liberal attitude\nof the whites toward the Negroes, he, in spite of his condition, was\npermitted to attend a free school for Negroes, Perry had, even before\nthe Civil War, laid a foundation upon which he well built thereafter. He\nescaped from slavery in 1852 and entered upon the study of theology at\nthe Kalamazoo (Michigan) Seminary, graduating with the class of 1861,\nwhen he was ordained as pastor of the Baptist Church at Ann Arbor,\nMichigan. He later served as a pastor at St. Catherine's, Ontario, and\nat Buffalo and Brooklyn, New York. He had then convinced the world that\nhe was \"very logical, a clear reasoner, close and active debater, deep\nthinker, and excellent writer,\" \"a man of splendid natural abilities,\"\nwho \"goes at once to the bottom of any subject that he undertakes.\"\n\n[Illustration: DR. RUFUS L. PERRY]\n\nUpon the dawn of freedom he entered upon the larger duties in the\nservice of the Negroes, doing at first missionary and educational work\namong the freedmen, endeavoring to evangelize and elevate the race\nthrough the system of religious education. Seeing the need for an organ\nthrough which his people and his denomination could speak to the world,\nhe edited _The Sunbeam_, served as co-editor of the _American Baptist_,\nand later edited _The People's Journal_ and _The National Monitor_. His\narticles always showed his interest in his denomination, his knowledge\nof general literature, and his grasp of men and things. For ten years he\nserved as corresponding secretary of the Consolidated American Baptist\nMissionary Convention and was later made corresponding secretary of the\nAmerican Educational Association and of the American Baptist Free\nMission Society.\n\nHaving given much attention to the study of ethnology and the classics,\nhe doubtless impressed the world most by writing a book entitled _The\nCushites; or the Children of Ham as seen by the Ancient Historians and\nPoets_. In this work he showed remarkable ability for research and\nextensive knowledge of the social sciences. He undertook to refute the\nstatement that the Ethiopians and the Egyptians were not black persons,\nendeavored to disabuse the public mind of the impropriety of a\ncontemptuous attitude to the Negroes because of their bondage, inasmuch\nas all races have at times been enslaved, and eloquently produced\nhistorical facts to convince thinking men as to the important\nachievements of the Negroes in their more fortunate ages in the past. He\ncertainly made the impression of being one of the ablest men in the\nUnited States, and will long be remembered as a scholar making for the\nrace a defense which many of his contemporaries were not prepared to\nappreciate.\n\nThe ministry was sufficiently attractive also to Dr. George W. Lee, who\nbegan his career in North Carolina. After having distinguished himself\nby efficient service in that State, he was, in 1885, called to the\npastorate of the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church to succeed the Rev. J. H.\nBrooks, its founder, who passed away the previous year. Dr. Lee was\nnoted especially for three significant elements of character. He was a\npromoter of African missions, was always disposed to help the under-man\nin a struggle, and made himself a patron of the youth aspiring to\nleadership. His pastorate was characterized by important achievements\nbearing on the progress of not only his congregation but that of his\ndenomination. Noted for his originality and ability to master a\nsituation, he soon attracted a large following and increased the\nmembership of his church almost to 4,000. He easily became a man of\nnational reputation, and in his travels abroad so impressed the people\nwherever he went that he passed as an international character.\n\n[Illustration: DR. GEORGE W. LEE]\n\nWith the possible exception of Dr. C. A. Tindley, the talented Methodist\nminister of Philadelphia, probably the greatest preacher of power\ndeveloped during the last generation has been Dr. C. T. Walker. Coming\nunder the influence of Christian missionaries and of the Atlanta\nBaptist College, he had his beginnings determined in an atmosphere of\nreligious education. For forty years, excepting five years when he had\ncharge of the Mt. Olivet Baptist Church, New York City, he was pastor of\nthe Tabernacle Baptist Church of Augusta, Georgia. His church in Augusta\nwas attended not only by thousands of his own race, but by hundreds of\nwinter tourists, who heard him with unusual satisfaction. Among these\nwere former President Taft, John D. Rockefeller, Gen. Rush C. Hawkins,\nDr. David Gregg and Lyman B. Goff. With the support of such a large\nnumber this church undertook to supply the needs of the community,\ndeveloping into an institutional enterprise with all of the activities\nof a social welfare agency. This expansion necessitated a new building,\nwhich he erected at a cost of $185,000.\n\n[Illustration: DR. C. T. WALKER]\n\nDr. Walker was interested in all things promoting the uplift of the\nrace. He was the founder of the now spacious 135th Street Branch, Young\nMen's Christian Association, New York City, and figured largely in the\nestablishment of a similar branch for his people in Augusta, Georgia. He\nwas one of the prominent figures of the National Baptist Convention of\nthe United States, being vice-president of the organization when he\ndied, as well as vice-president of the Georgia Baptist State Convention\nand moderator of the Walker Association. He traveled extensively in\nEurope and the Holy Land and was the author of a number of books of\ntravel and also of sermons. His main work at home and abroad, however,\nwas that of an evangelist whose fame as such so rapidly extended that he\nwas one of the most popular speakers in the country, attracting larger\ncrowds than any other Negro of his time.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII\n\nTHE CONSERVATIVE AND PROGRESSIVE\n\n\nIt is clear from the account set forth above that the Negro church as\nsuch had some difficulty in finding itself. There was still a question\nas to what its functions and ideals should be, and this very question\nall but divided the church into conservative and progressive groups. The\nconservative element in control became so dogmatic in its treatment of\nthe rising progressive minority that the institution for a number of\nyears lost ground among the talented tenth. For this reason the ministry\nonce became decidedly uninviting to young men. Young people so rapidly\nlost interest in the church that the Sunday sermon denouncing the\nwaywardness of the wicked generation was generally expected; and, if a\nspecial discourse of this vitriolic nature did not periodically follow,\npastors availed themselves of the opportunity to digress from the\ndiscussion of the hardships of slavery, hell, and the grave to express\ntheir deep regret that the intellectual youth were disinclined to walk\nin the footsteps of their fathers. Such sermons frightened some into\nrepentance, but drove as many away from contact with the Christian\nelement of the community.\n\nThe waywardness of the youth, however, was not so much a wickedness as\nit was a divergence in the Negro social mind. The ex-slaves had remained\nconservative. The old-time religion was good enough for them. They\nrejoiced to be able to sing in freedom the songs of their fathers, and\ndeemed it a privilege to testify in \"their experience or class meetings\"\nand to offer at their Sunday services long drawn out invocations which\nafforded them the once forbidden exercise of the outpouring of a pent-up\nsoul. Preachers who came down from that well-fought age appreciated, of\ncourse, the unique position which they then occupied. For all a new\nworld had been created, so to speak, and what they needed then was only\nto enjoy the new boon vouchsafed to the lowly. The Negroes should thank\nGod for their freedom, and the only way to express that gratitude was\nthrough vociferous praise and stentorian thanksgiving within the courts\nof the Lord. God had brought the Negro up out of Egypt through Sodom and\nGomorrah, and to show his gratitude the chief concern of the Negro\nshould then be \"to be ready to walk into Jerusalem just like John.\"\n\nThe Negroes then under the instruction of well-enlightened missionaries\nfrom the North could not long remain in this backward state. Although\nnot taught radical doctrines but, on the contrary, influenced by\nconservative religious teachers, the educational process itself had to\nwork some changes in the young Negro's point of view, inasmuch as he was\ntaught not what to think but how to think. The young Negroes, therefore,\nhad not attended school very long or moved very much among persons\nmentally developed before they found themselves far removed from the\nmembers of their race less favorably circumstanced. They developed an\ninquiring disposition which leveled shafts at the strongholds of\nchurchmen whose chief protection lay in their unfortunate plight of\nbeing embalmed in their ignorance along with a majority constituency\nhopelessly lost to the \"eternal truths\" coming into the mind of the\nNegro youth by \"natural light.\"\n\nDuring the last quarter of the nineteenth century, therefore, the\nconservative and progressive elements in the church unconsciously\ndrifted far apart. In the course of time it was no longer a struggle\nbetween the old and young. The difference in age ceased to be the line\nof cleavage. It was rather a difference of ideas. These groups were\nwidely differing in their interpretation of religion, in their ideas as\nto the importance of the church in the life of the community, in their\nattitudes as to the relation of the church to the individual, and in\ntheir standards of public conduct. On the whole, there was an effort to\nstand together; but in spite of themselves the line of cleavage had to\nbe recognized and dealt with as a fact. As poverty is jealous of\nopulence, so is ignorance jealous of intelligence; and in this case the\njealousy all but developed into caste hate.\n\nThe progressive element commonly dubbed by the conservatives as the\neducated Negroes could not accept the crude notions of Biblical\ninterpretation nor the grotesque vision of the hereafter as portrayed by\nthe illiterate ministers of the church. This developed mind found itself\nunwillingly at war with such extravagant claims and seeking a hearing\nfor a new idea. Religion to the progressives became a Christian\nexperience rather than the wild notions of revelation, which among some\nof the uninformed too often bordered on superstition and voodooism of\nthe middle age, after the restraint of slavery had been removed and the\nNegroes as groups exercising religious freedom could indulge their fancy\nat will.\n\nThe educated Negro, moreover, no longer thought of religion as the\npanacea for all the ills of the race. Along with religion he would\ninsist that education should go as its handmaiden, inasmuch as there can\nbe little revelation of God where there is arrested mental development.\nThe very example of Christ himself, as understood by the progressive\nNegro, furnished no evidence as to the virtue of unrestrained emotion\nresulting from a lack of understanding and from an unwillingness to\nsearch the Scriptures for the real revelation of God.\n\nBeing weak on the intellectual side, the conservative Negro churchman\ncould not fail to decry the educated communicants as a growing menace to\nthe church. The church militant was ordered forward to attack the\nstrongholds of this unbelief lest the institution might be shaken from\nits very foundation. The toleration of such views might bring upon this\ngeneration the wrath of God, who would visit the race with condign\naffliction. The educated class had information, not judgment; and the\nprinciples of religion, moreover, must be accepted as they are without\nquestion. The effort here was to crush the scion because it was\nproducing a more vigorous species than the root from which it sprang, to\ndestroy life because in the new generation it meant living too\nabundantly.\n\nThe churchmen of the conservative order observed with regret, moreover,\nthat the talented Negro had a differing conception as to the relation of\nthe church to the individual. Among the conservatives, the church, the\nonly institution in which they could participate in the days of slavery,\nengaged their undivided attention with the exception of politics in\nself-defense during the Reconstruction period. The conservatives\nbelieved that the individual should sacrifice all for the church. On\nSunday, they would come from afar to swell the chorus of the faithful,\nand there they would remain during the day, leaving their net earnings\nin the hands of the management, given at the cost of a sacrifice placed\non a common altar. The educated Negro, on the other hand, thought of\nthe church as existing for the good of the individual. It was to him a\nmeans for making the bad good, and if the institution were defective it\nmight be so reshaped and reorganized as to serve the useful purposes of\nman.\n\nThe church, moreover, as the progressive Negro saw it, was not\nnecessarily Christlike unless the persons composing it were of such\ncharacter themselves. As there were too often found here and there\nimpostors serving as important functionaries in churches in which they\nmasqueraded as Christians, the educated Negro insisted upon a new\ninterpretation of Christian doctrine, boldly asserting new principles as\nto the relation of man to his fellowman and man to God. Religion, the\nprogressive element insisted, is a social virtue not an individual boon.\nMan cannot by his professed periodical baring of his soul to God set\nhimself aright when his conduct has not been in conformity with the\nteachings of Jesus. Since an individual is what he does, an institution\ncomposed of individuals, too often shamed with ignorance and vice, could\nnot be the ideal Christian organization to which Christ looked as his\nrepresentative following here on earth.\n\nThe Negro in freedom, moreover, when given an opportunity for mental\ndevelopment, gradually became assimilated to the white man's standard of\nconduct. The educated Negro began to see little harm in dancing and card\nplaying when representative white churches abrogated such prohibitions\nor suffered them to fall into desuetude. Taunted as to the evil desire\nfor the ways of the world, the talented man usually retorted that while\nhis conduct was questioned by his own people it was in keeping with the\nethics of the most enlightened of the land, whereas the conservatives\ntended to follow the policy of practicing almost any sort of vice\nclandestinely and to masquerade as Christians until exposed.\n\nThis argument was of little worth; for many of the so-called vices of\nthe Negro members of the church could be reduced largely to unconfirmed\nreports and indulgences of the imagination of persons having foul minds.\nWhile the writer offers no brief for the religious workers of long ago,\nhe must insist that we have no evidence to justify the sweeping\ngeneralization that the Negro Christians of the conservative order were,\nas a rule, morally corrupt or that they generally harbored unclean\npersons in their group. Their record rather shows a most healthy\nattitude toward maintaining a high standard of morality. The adulterer,\nthe gambler, the thief, and the like, were usually summarily expelled\nfrom the church as undesirables, who should not sit in the congregation\nof the righteous. In fact, had it not been for the hold of Christianity\non these freedmen, their standards of morality would have been so much\nlower; for they saw for emulation little of the righteous in the white\npeople with whom they came into contact when these generally imposed\nupon the blacks by lying and stealing and openly sought Negro women\nwith whom the flower of southern families lived in open adultery. The\nconservatives stood for the right, although they were often too narrow\nto overlook the so-called vices which supplied to those of talent the\nharmless pleasures of this world.\n\nThe progressive element seriously objected to church management. Negro\nministers and the governing bodies of the churches often manifested more\nzeal than tact in the conduct of church affairs. They too frequently\nbuilt rather costly edifices, paid their pastors disproportionately\nlarge salaries, and lavished unduly upon them and their families gifts\nwhich the poor of their congregations could ill afford. The Negroes\nwanted a well-groomed leader in a heaven on earth to lead them to the\nheaven beyond. The management then incurred debts of such magnitude that\nthe church too often developed into a money raising machine dominated\nfrom without by white speculators who profited by this folly. The\nprogressive element militantly arrayed itself against this outlay made\nat the expense of the moral and religious life of the community. In\ntheir zeal they too often denounced the conservatives in control as\ntricksters and grafters, when, as a matter of fact, the management lost\nmore by inefficient administration than it acquired by so-called\ncorruption.\n\nThe progressive Negroes boldly advocated a change in the worship.\nFrom the more advanced white churches they had learned to appreciate the\nvalue of serious and classical music, of intelligent sermonizing, and of\ncollecting offerings in the pews. The old-time plaintive plantation\nhymns, they insisted, should give place to music of a refined order,\nsupported by the piano, organ, or other instruments; the tiresome\nminister, covering all things in creation in his discourse, should yield\nto a man prepared to preach to the point at issue; and instead of the\ndress-parade lifting of collections the raising of funds to support the\nchurch should be reduced to a business transaction conducted without\nostentation. The conservatives, however, would not have in their\nchurches the musical instruments used in theaters and dance halls, would\nnot even listen to an attack on their backward ministry, and scoffed at\nthe proposal to supplant time-honored customs by innovations taken from\nthe practices of their former cruel oppressors.\n\nThe general result was that in many communities a much larger number of\nintelligent people were driven from the church or rendered inefficient\ntherein than were saved to it. There was little chance for cooperation\nso long as the conservatives were unyielding; and the progressives,\nunable to treat the conservatives diplomatically, failed to put aside\ncomplaint to begin with the masses where they were that they might carry\nthem where they should be. Some of the progressive  element left their\nnames on the church books only to forfeit membership by non-attendance\nor the failure to pay required dues. Others saw themselves excluded for\nviolation of the sacred rules of the congregation proscribing\nparticipation in the worldly joys. A few who felt compunction of\nconscience on realizing how disgraceful in the eyes of the community it\nseemed to put one's hand to the plow and then turn back, had their\nbacksliding healed and returned to the fold.\n\nThose who left the conservative churches were often received by the\nCongregationalists, the Presbyterians, the Episcopalians, and the\nCatholics, who, having a more flexible attitude toward the pleasures of\nthe world, offered asylum to the outcasts driven from the former\nsanctuaries. This separation included not only laymen but in some cases\nministers, who, on connecting themselves with some other denominations,\nserved their people in churches differing widely from those which were\nso handicapped by unprogressive elements that they had no hope to toil\nupward therein. The large majority of the members of these smaller\ndenominations were once members of Baptist or Methodist churches or were\nthe children of persons who were once thus connected.\n\nIt was not necessary, however, for a large number of Baptists thus to be\nlost to that denomination. Unlike the Methodists, who are restrained by\nepiscopal government, the Baptists needed only to exercise the\nprivileges of democracy guaranteed  in that church. A dissatisfied\ngroup of the \"upper crust\" in a Baptist Church could at any time\norganize another Baptist Church without any restraint except that of the\nfear of the failure of the enterprise from the economic point of view.\nSchismatic churches or exclusively aristocratic congregations,\ntherefore, followed in large cities where a sufficient number of the\nmalcontents in the various denominations could unite for this common\npurpose.\n\nThis schismatic movement was followed by both good and bad results. The\nseparation of the progressive and the conservative elements in the\nchurch made it impossible for the unprogressive to learn by example from\nthose with whom they came into contact. Each remained happier in the new\nstate so long as the results of this divergence were not strikingly\napparent. The conservatives could better remain what they were and the\nprogressives could more easily become what they wanted to be. The\ncessation of hostilities, however, did not always follow; for both\nchurches representing different points of view made their appeals to the\nsame community, endeavoring to secure financial and moral support. In\nsmall communities what was done for the one could not be done for the\nother for the reason that the community had so much and no more to\nspare. The success or failure of the one or the other, therefore, too\noften meant grudge or ill will.\n\nThis contest between the progressive and conservative,  however, has\nbeen more than local. There have arisen serious situations, some of\nwhich have been handled so diplomatically as to avoid outbreaks in the\nranks, and others which have led to radical changes. For example, the\nprogressive Negro in the Methodist Episcopal Church for a number of\nyears bore it grievously that, although the members of the race\nconstituted an important element in this denomination, they were not\nallowed freely to participate in its management. The objective was to\nmake a Negro one of the regular bishops, but conservative whites\ninsisted that the time had not come for such a radical step.\n\nDuring this long struggle in the Methodist Church the progressive group\nbecame very impatient. It was in favor of separation from the white\nconnection either to establish an independent church or to join one of\nthe African Methodist churches already in the making. The conservative\nelement frowned down upon any such proposal as a suicidal scheme,\nbelieving that in cooperating with the whites the Negroes had much more\nto gain than to lose. The advocacy of continued union with the whites\nunder the prevailing circumstances, however, was dubbed by the\nprogressive Negroes a manifestation of the spirit of servility resulting\nfrom a slavish attachment to their former masters. The counsel of the\nconservative prevailed, however, and although the Negro membership\ndoes not enjoy exactly the same privileges as the white, it has steadily\ngained ground.\n\nThe best example of a situation which could not be thus handled is that\nof the repudiation of the white Baptists by the progressive Negro\nelement of this church. The white Baptists, of course, had no actual\ncontrol of the Negro communicants, but had some very strong moral claims\non them. White missionaries of this denomination had distributed\nliterature, organized churches, constructed edifices, and established\nschools among Negroes; and the boards supporting the missionaries had\nsupplied some of the funds by which most of these institutions were\nmaintained. To say anything derogatory to the policies of the management\ndirecting this beneficent work, therefore, seemed to the conservative\nNegroes all but blasphemous.\n\nThe progressive Baptist element, however, had a different attitude.\nThousands of Negro teachers and preachers whom these Baptist schools had\ntrained had entered upon their life's work with the hope that they would\nfigure conspicuously in the life of their people. When they faced the\nstern realities of the situation they too often found their way was\nblocked. White men, to be sure, did not aspire to the pastorate of Negro\nchurches; but they undertook to dictate the policy of associations and\nconventions to retain their hold on the Negro Baptists. The conflict\ncame when Negroes after being refused the privilege of participating in\nthe management of the American Baptist Home Mission Society began to\nquestion the motives of its official staff. More fuel was furnished for\nthe flames when, after having all but agreed to accept contributions of\nNegroes to its Sunday school literature, the American Baptist\nPublication Society, upon protest from Southern churchmen, receded from\nthat position. The issue was then joined. The National Baptist\nConvention, a union of the Negro Baptists, was effected in 1886, and as\nthe struggle grew more intense every effort was made so to extend it as\nto destroy the influence of white national bodies among Negroes.\n\nThe Negroes had a just cause for complaint. If under the leadership of\nthe white Baptists their way to promotion would be blocked and their\nliterary aspirations crushed, what hope was there for the race to rise\nand of what benefit would education be to the Negro, if it did not equip\nhim to do for himself what the white man at first had to do for him? How\ncould the motives of the white Baptists be lofty, moreover, if they did\nnot believe that Negroes should rise in the church and school? To this\nthe whites replied that they looked forward with the most pleasant\nanticipation to the day when the Negroes would be prepared to enjoy the\ngood things for which they clamored, but that the time for the Negroes\nto dispense with the leadership of the whites had not then come. Many\nyears of education and social uplift were still necessary before the\nNegroes could successfully set out to do for themselves.\n\nThis argument had little weight with the progressive Negroes and they\nwere not wanting in logical speakers to place their case before the\nworld. There was that courageous leader, Dr. Harvey Johnson, of\nBaltimore, who belabored his former friends as enemies of the race.\nEqually effective, too, was the eloquent Dr. Walter H. Brooks of\nWashington, who fearlessly took up the cudgel and dealt the white\nBaptists many a blow from which they never recovered. With the National\nBaptist Convention emerging as a common concern of Negroes under the\norganizing hand of Dr. E. C. Morris, and the National Baptist Publishing\nHouse extending the circulation of elementary literature throughout the\ncountry under the direction of the efficient Dr. R. H. Boyd, this\nself-assertion of the Negro Baptists became a factor to be reckoned\nwith.\n\nAll problems, however, were not immediately solved. The progressive\nNegroes had the right spirit, but did not every time have adequate\nunderstanding. They had had no experience in editing literature and\npractically none in raising sums of money necessary for the maintenance\nof educational establishments and missionary enterprise. The majority of\nthe Negro Baptist ministry trained in the schools of the American\nBaptist Home Mission Society at first adhered to this organization and\npersisted in using the Sunday school literature of the American Baptist\nPublication Society, deriding the publication efforts of the Negro\nBaptists as the greatest travesty on Biblical literature. This criticism\nwas most uncharitable, but nevertheless effective, for the reason that\nsome who at first wished the movement well made the mistake of despising\nthe day of small things.\n\nThe struggle was most intense in the Southeast. The influence of Shaw\nUniversity in North Carolina and Virginia Union University in Richmond\nhad given the white Baptists an all but firm hold on the Negroes in\nthese and adjacent States. The presidents of these institutions and the\nwhite agents of the denomination attended the Negro associations and\nconventions, hoping to dictate their policies; but this interference\nonly widened the breach. Under the leadership of that forceful orator\nand successful leader, Gregory W. Hayes, a large number at first and\nfinally a majority of the Baptists of Virginia disclaimed connection\nwith these white friends and concentrated their efforts on supporting\nthe Virginia Theological Seminary and College through the Baptist State\nConvention of that commonwealth. The leading Baptists of North Carolina,\nhowever, still adhered in large numbers to the American Baptist Home\nMission Society, cooperating therewith through the local associations,\ntheir State conventions, and the conservative national body known as the\nLott Cary Convention, which had also many adherents in Virginia and\nscattered followers throughout adjacent States. In other parts, the\nfactions about equally divided, except in the southwestern section of\nthe country, where the Negroes have tended to break away from the white\nBaptists.\n\nAs to which faction was right, history alone will tell. Even at the\npresent, however, one can see a decided advantage in the independent\nNegro movement. Every one will admit that the Negro must eventually rely\nsolely upon himself, and that not until he emerges from a state of\ndependency can he hope to secure the recognition of the other groups.\nThe white man is rapidly tiring of carrying the so-called burdens of the\nNegro. The Negro home, church, and school must, as fast as possible,\nbecome sufficient unto themselves. The sooner they attain this stage in\ntheir development, the better will it be for the race. The Negro\ninstitutions which during the turbulent period have, in separating from\nthe whites, learned to supply their own needs, have made a step far in\nadvance of those dependent on the whites. In this day, when the northern\nphilanthropists are either withholding their donations to Negro schools\nor restricting them to Hampton and Tuskegee, it is difficult for some of\nthese establishments to eke out a subsistence, while the independent\nNegro schools, having had years of experience in developing a following,\nfind their prospects growing brighter from year to year. The National\nTraining School for Girls, founded and successfully directed by the\nnoted Nannie H. Burroughs, obtains practically all of its funds from\nNegroes. The Virginia Theological Seminary and College, under the\ndirection of the efficient Dr. R. C. Woods, depends for its support\naltogether upon Negroes, who contribute to it annually about $60,000.00.\nThere is not in this country a Negro institution dominated by whites\nthat can raise half of this sum in this way. A few years ago when\nWilberforce University was heavily indebted and it seemed that it needed\nsome one to rescue it, the State of Ohio proposed to buy the church\nportion of the institution; but the trustees, with the spirit of the\nprogressive Negro, emphatically replied that the whole State of Ohio did\nnot have enough money to buy Wilberforce. Rallying under the leadership\nof Bishop Joshua H. Jones, the African Methodists raised $50,000 in one\nyear and cleared the institution of debt.\n\nIn this changing order, moreover, when the white administrators of Negro\nschools find themselves deprived of the former financial support\nreceived from the North, they veer around to the position of southern\nwhite people, accepting and sometimes enforcing in Negro institutions\nthemselves the unwritten laws of caste that the white management may\ncurry favor with the prejudiced community. As these administrators must\nunder such circumstances lose the support of the Negroes and experience\nhas not yet shown that many southern white men will make sacrifices for\nNegro education, the institutions in the hands of such misguided white\nfriends of the Negro will probably suffer.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII\n\nTHE NEGRO CHURCH SOCIALIZED\n\n\nThe Negro church as a social force in the life of the race is nothing\nnew. Prior to emancipation the church was the only institution which the\nNegro, in a few places in the South and throughout the North, was\npermitted to maintain for his own peculiar needs. Offering the only\navenue for the expressional activities of the race, the church answered\nmany a social purpose for which this institution among other groups\ndifferently circumstanced had never before been required to serve. It\nwas, in the first place, a center at which friend looked forward to\nmeeting friend, contact with whom was denied by the rigorous demands of\nslavery. It was then a place of enlightenment through the information\ndisseminating from the better informed or by actual teaching in the\nSunday school. It served often as an outlet for expression of the Negro\nsocial mind, now for a renewed determination to break their chains\nthrough prayer, then to resort to concerted action on the basis that he\nwho would be free must himself first strike the blow.\n\nAfter the emancipation, moreover, the Negro church developed a social\natmosphere which somewhat strengthened its hold on the youth about to go\nastray. Not only education found its basis in the church, but fraternal\nassociations developed therefrom. Business enterprises accepted the\nchurch as an ally, and professional men to some extent often became\ndependent thereupon. Most movements among the Negroes, moreover, have\nowed their success to the leadership of Negroes prominent in the church.\nNo better examples can be mentioned than W. W. Browne, a minister who\norganized the True Reformers fraternity; W. R. Pettiford, another\npreacher, who became one of the pioneer Negro bankers; John R. Hawkins,\nthe Financial Secretary of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, who\nin applying efficiency to the business of his office secured for his\ndenomination an unusually large income, and Dr. W. F. Graham, who in\naddition to his significant achievements in the church, has well invaded\nvarious businesses, in which he has exhibited evidence of unusual\nability.\n\n[Illustration: DR. W. R. PETTIFORD\n\nA business-like minister in Alabama.]\n\nSince the Civil War, the Negro church as a factor in general uplift has\nbecome what the oppressed Negro longed to make it prior to that\nconflict. In the first place, Negroes regularly attend church whether\nChristians or sinners. They have not yet accumulated wealth adequate to\nthe construction of clubhouses, amusement parks, and theaters, although\ndance halls have attracted many. Whether they derive any particular joy\ntherefrom or not, the Negroes must go to church, to see their friends,\nas they are barred from social centers open to whites. They must attend\nchurch, moreover, to find out what is going on; for the race has not\nsufficient interests to maintain in every locality a newspaper of its\nown, and the white dailies generally mention Negroes only when they\nhappen to commit crimes against white persons. The young Negro must go\nto church to meet his sweetheart, to impress her with his worth and woo\nher in marriage, the Negro farmer to find out the developments in the\nbusiness world, the Negro mechanic to learn the needs of his community\nand how he may supply them.\n\nAttached to the church is the Sunday school. Many a Negro had in\nattending it learned clandestinely to read and write before the war. Now\nthey without fear of punishment eagerly studied in the churches on\nSunday, learned the alphabet, the spelling of words with one, two and\nthree syllables, and finally to read the Bible, that they might know for\nthemselves the truths hitherto kept from their fathers but now revealed\nto their children in freedom. Education here was decidedly easy, the\nmotive actuating the student being the immediate results in the form of\na better knowledge of one's Christian duty and the reward awaiting the\nfaithful. Many of these Negroes often learned more on a single Sunday\nthan the average student acquired in a day school during a week. In\nthese Sunday schools, not a few Negroes laid the foundation for the\nmore liberal education which they thereafter obtained in the schools\nestablished by the religious and philanthropic friends of the Negroes\nworking in the South immediately after the Civil War.\n\nThe church not only promoted education through the pulpit and Sunday\nschool, but through its emphasis on the Bible unconsciously stimulated\nthe efforts toward self-education. Whether a Negro attended Sunday\nschool or not, he heard read to him from the Bible two or three times a\nweek dramatic history, philosophical essays, charming poetry, and\nbeautiful oratory. Hearing these repeated again and again and under\ncircumstances securing undivided attention, he had many of these\nprecious passages sink into his heart like seed planted in fertile\nground to bring forth fruit fourfold. Under the continuous instruction\nof the Negro preacher, who in expounding the Bible drew such striking\nfigures and portrayed life, death, and the beyond in a dramatic fashion,\nthe youth not only experienced the emotion so characteristic of the\nNegro communicant but had his intellectual appetite whetted with the\ndesire to seek after the mysteries.\n\nThe majority of Negroes, therefore, became Bible readers. Reading the\nBible, they not only found what a minister of limited education could\npoint out, but facts drawn from the best thought of the ancient world.\nAnd it was not mere reading; for many of them committed to memory\nchoice passages of the Scriptures. Hundreds of them could recite\naccurately chapter after chapter of the treasures of Holy Writ; almost\nas many could give a crude but logical exposition of these literary\ntreasures. From the study of the Bible the Negro developed, moreover, a\ndesire for Biblical literature. He heard the moral appeal and gladly\naccepted the message to those in quest of the higher life in Christ.\n\nThis influence of the Bible, moreover, did more than lead to the reading\nof literature of a kindred nature. Some read books on ancient and\nmedieval history, and finally works on the history of modern Europe.\nOthers more seriously concerned were by this mere exposition of the\nScriptures led to study collaterally commentaries on the Bible and to\ntake up theology. In this they exhibited the power of self-education\nwhich with a strong spirituality combined with unusual imagination made\nso many Negroes preach with success. They had no more formal education\nthan to read, and that was often picked up in the Sunday school; but\nthey had the experience of a seeker, the light of the Bible, and the\nguidance of men who eloquently expounded it to the waiting multitude.\nThese they freely drew on and from them they obtained help abundantly.\nCrude sometimes as the language might be, the thought of this self-made\nphilosopher was original and few heard one preach without wondering how\nmen of limited opportunities could speak so fluently and wisely.\n\nEqually helpful was the socialized church as a forum for the Negro. The\nolder members developed an unusually valuable and sometimes a\ntroublesome knowledge of parliamentary practice by participating in the\ndebates on the business centering around communications received,\nresolutions voicing the sentiment of the body, and policies shaping the\ndestinies of the local church. Here, then, was a constructive field\nwhich to the Negro seemed like an invitation to enter the creative\nworld. He entered it and freely participated. True enough the formal\nprocedure too often overshadowed the actual program to the extent that\nno plan at all could sometimes be carried out, because of unnecessary\ndebate and contention; but the training thereafter served many a Negro\nin good stead in preventing his race from being imposed upon or in doing\nsomething constructive in politics, in the school, and in the church.\n\nThe church through the literary societies attached thereto supplied a\nsimilar need of the younger Negro. Having more formal education than the\nolder Negroes, the youth were more easily interested in the live\nquestions of the day, the desire to discuss which usually resulted in\nthe organization of a literary society. The declamations and recitations\nwere not always highly literary and sometimes the questions discussed\ncould not be thus dignified when we observe such debates as whether the\ndog is more useful than the gun, or whether water is more destructive\nthan fire; but the scale ascends a little in the discussion as to\nwhether the pen is mightier than the sword. It matters little, however,\nwhether or not the procedure was in keeping with that of the best\nliterary circles, these Negroes were thereby undergoing training which\nresulted in valuable discipline. Not any of them knew very much, but one\nlearned from the other. They developed the power to think and to think\non their feet, to express that thought and to express it so eloquently\nas to make a lasting impression. The church, then, has been a training\nschool for the Negro orators who have impressed the world as the\ninspired spokesmen of a persecuted people.\n\nThe Negro church, in short, has served as a clearing house for the\ncommunity. It has not only afforded opportunities for the evangelical\nminister coming with an inspiring message to revive the lukewarm, but\nevery public man has had to reach the Negro through his church. The\nlecturer on \"men, women, children and things in general\" asks for a\nhearing there; the phrenologist holds his seances in this sanctuary; the\nspurious \"foreigner\" in quest of a collection seeks there the\nopportunity to tell a credulous people about wonders of other lands; and\nthe race leader demands this rostrum from which he, like a watchman on\nthe wall, sounds the alarm for an advance against the bold enemy who, if\nnot checked, will fix upon the race disabilities and burdens until all\nthe hopes of liberty will be lost.\n\nThe latest development in the socialized church is its service as a\nwelfare agency. The Negro in his religious development has not yet gone\nso far as the white man in divesting Christian duty of spiritual\nministration and reducing it to a mere service for social uplift; but he\nhas gradually realized the necessity for connecting the church more\nclosely with the things of this world to make it a decent place to live\nin. In other words, if man is his brother's keeper, the church, the\nimportant institution in the community, must be the keeper of other\ninstitutions. If it would build in men Christian character, it must\ninfluence the more or less direct control of the forces in the community\nwhich prevent the attainment of such an end. If men are to be saved,\nthey must be saved for service, not merely for their refuge at the last\nhour. The church, then, must not let a man destroy himself and accept\nhim when he is no longer useful because of the loss of physical and\nmental power through depravity, but it must by preaching the gospel or\nprevention save a man from himself.\n\nThe coming of the church to this position, however, has not been\neffected without much difficulty. The conservative element for many\nyears looked upon the participation of churches in certain sorts of\nsocial welfare work as compromising with the devil. The more\nconservative idea was that man should be meditative and seclusive, that\nhe should withdraw himself altogether from the pleasures of this world\nand work out his salvation with his eye \"single to the honor and glory\nof God.\" The Young Men's Christian Association and the Young Women's\nChristian Association with a different point of view were, therefore,\nfor a number of years unwelcome among some Negro churches.\n\nDuring the last generation, however, the Negro church has decidedly\nchanged in its attitude toward this work, as is evidenced by the fact\nthat wherever these social welfare agencies have succeeded in carrying\nout their program they have done so largely with the aid of Negro\nchurchmen. In the midst of the health crusades and the community service\norganizations favorably impressing the public, the Negro church in many\nurban centers where it might have continued conservative, found itself\nfacing the alternative of either responding to these social needs of the\nmembership or seeing its constituency gradually drawn away by agencies\nwhich would. In case some social uplift agency failed to attract the\nyouth, they too often drifted to the dance halls or places where their\nneeds were supplied in the midst of vices. Many churches have,\ntherefore, modified their program. Seeing that the young Negro is\ndecidedly social and hoping to save him, they have done what many\nformerly questioned. The Negro church, moreover, has become in many\nrespects a social welfare agency itself, doing in several communities so\nmuch of this work that it has been unnecessary for the national agencies\nto invade some of their parishes with an intensive program.\n\n[Illustration: DR. M. C. B. MASON\n\nA pulpit orator in the Methodist Church.]\n\nThe form this social work of the church takes in our day varies from\nthat of a mere church club or so with a precarious existence to that of\nan organization almost like that of the Young Men's Christian\nAssociation. The beginnings of this work appear first in such as the\nmen's forum, the women's league, the girls' club, or the boys' athletic\nassociation. When these clubs tend to endure they finally work toward\nthe natural end of constituting themselves branches of an organization\ndirected by one trusted worker assisted by those in charge of the\nvarious activities.\n\nA church on this order takes the name of the institutional church. At\nthe head of this body, of course, is the pastor of the church; but in\ncharge of this work sometimes is a director well trained in the social\nsciences and with the modern method of attacking the problems of to-day.\nThe work scheduled is more than the mere supervision of clubs\nvoluntarily organized. The director has a program which that particular\ncommunity needs, and he is there to show the people how to work out\ntheir social salvation. If he is wise in presenting the case, he usually\nsecures the cooperation necessary to organize the community for the\npurpose of self-education. The community is given an introduction to\nitself. Every talent lying dormant is here given an opportunity to be\nhelpful in some way. What the individual from afar may bring for the\ngood of a few through this well-organized community service becomes the\nheritage of all. No club can be large enough to accommodate the large\nmembership in a city, but what the clubs of one church acquire is\ncommunicated to similar groups in another through such friendly rivalry\nas athletic contests, debates, periodical reports, and conferences. Many\nof the persons participating in this work are not in the beginning\nspiritually inclined, but the experience of the church in working with\nsuch groups has shown that the church has a better chance for success in\nmaking its evangelical appeal to persons under its control than in the\ncase of delivering its message to those who have not been to any great\nextent influenced by Christian contact.\n\nChurches which have undertaken this work have had varied experiences.\nThe Institutional Church in Chicago under Dr. R. C. Ransom helped to\nblaze the way in this new field of endeavor. Under Dr. J. Milton Waldron\nand later under Dr. J. E. Ford, the Baptist Church of Jacksonville,\nFlorida, made itself, through its clubs and Bible Institute, an\neffective community center. Dr. H. H. Proctor, a Congregational minister\nof Atlanta, practically converted his church into an organization of\nsuch groups as the day nursery, kindergarten, gymnasium,  school of\nmusic, employment bureau, and Bible school.\n\nDr. W. N. DeBerry, the pastor of a Congregational church in Springfield,\nMassachusetts, has probably solved the problem about as well as any of\nthese workers. In the first place, the church has a well-equipped modern\nplant so beautifully located and managed as to attract large numbers. It\nhas, moreover, a parish home for working girls and a branch church at\nAmherst, Massachusetts. In the main plant are maintained a free\nemployment bureau, a women's welfare league, a night school of domestic\ntraining, a girls' and a boys' club emphasizing the handicrafts, music,\nand athletics. This church has solved the problem of supplying the needs\nof the people during the week as well as their spiritual needs on\nSunday, by emphasizing some life activity for every day in the week.\n\nOther ministers of the gospel, who have not seen fit to carry out in\ntheir parishes in such detail the establishment of social welfare work,\nhave nevertheless done much along special lines to socialize their\nchurches. One hears of that indefatigable worker, the Rev. Mr. Bradby,\nof Detroit; R. W. Bagnall, the rector of the Episcopal Church of the\nsame city; the fearless George Frazier Miller, an Episcopal rector of\nBrooklyn; the talented leader, Dr. W. H. Brooks of New York City; the\npopular western worker, Dr. S. W. Bacote of Kansas  City; Dr. J. M.\nRiddle of Pasadena, California; and Dr. W. H. Jernagin, of Washington,\nD. C. Others of this group are Dr. Richard Carroll of Greenville, South\nCarolina; Bishop Sampson Brooks, as pastor of the Bethel Methodist\nEpiscopal Church in Baltimore; Dr. W. D. Johnson of Plains, Georgia, now\na bishop of his denomination; the picturesque pulpit orator and\nbeautiful word painter, Dr. Peter James Bryant, of Atlanta, Georgia; and\nthat popular preacher of the social gospel, Dr. W. W. Browne, of the\nMetropolitan Baptist Church in New York City.\n\nDr. L. K. Williams, pastor of the Olivet Baptist Church in Chicago, has\ndoubtless surpassed all in this group. Under his direction the church\nconducts forty-two departments and auxiliaries with 512 officers, among\nwhom are twenty-four paid workers. The membership of both church and\nSunday School enormously increased through these agencies, that of the\nformer being 8,743 and of the latter 3,100. This church has two edifices\nand five assistant pastors. During 1919 it collected $56,209 and\ndisbursed $54,959. In an eighty-day rally it raised $29,235 in cash. In\nfact, so effective has been the socializing influence of this church\nthat the community, in consideration of its inestimable value, gladly\nresponds to any call it makes.\n\nThe Negro ambitious to rule, moreover, finds in the church about the\nonly institution in which he may freely exercise authority. Fortunately\nhere the Church and State are no longer connected. In the extension of\nthe boon of toleration, the Negroes in countries in which they have been\nfound in large numbers, have been permitted to conduct their spiritual\naffairs as they like. There are in the South to-day, however, white men\nwho regret that immediately after the Civil War they permitted the\nNegroes to establish their separate churches. As these bodies are to-day\nbeing used to promote truths and foster movements which are prejudicial\nto the interest of the Southern restriction program for the Negro, the\nheirs of the former master class now rue the day when their fathers\npermitted these Negro churchmen to get from under their control. They\ncomplain that, whereas formerly they could learn from their Negro\nservants exactly what was going on in their group, the development the\nNegro church has in our day produced a reticent Negro loathe to disclose\nthe forces operating in their churches.\n\nNo one understands this better than the Negro himself. The law of the\nSouth otherwise interpreted to the detriment of the Negro vouchsafes to\nhim a little protection in the exercise of religion and in most parts\npublic opinion has not become so unhealthy as to warrant action to the\ncontrary. The Negro preacher, therefore, is granted more freedom of\nspeech and permitted to exercise more influence than any other Negro in\nhis community. Some fearless Negro ministers, like Bishop Lampton, have\nbeen driven out of the South because of utterances which enraged the\nwhites, who have considered the exercise of free speech among Negroes an\nattack on their social laws; but, as a rule, the Negro minister may in\ncriticism of the white race and in the defense of his people say things\nwhich other Negroes of good standing in the South would not dare to\nutter. Although the State may chide an outspoken minister here and\nthere, it will hardly be so unwise so to restrict the Negro church as to\ninterfere materially with its development as the South has done in the\ncase of the Negro school in making Negro education altogether\nindustrial. The church serves as a moral force, a power acting as a\nrestraint upon the bad and stimulating the good to further moral\nachievement. Among the Negroes its valuable service is readily apparent\nwhen one considers the fact that this race, oppressed as it has been by\nthe government of the State and nation, is at heart rebellious, while\nthe church, as outspoken as it may seem, is not radical. Coming under\nthe influence of the church, the safety valve in the South, the race has\nbeen dissuaded from any rash action by the patient and long suffering\nministry reiterating the admonition that \"vengeance is mine, I will\nrepay.\"\n\nYet some men, like the sanguine and prophetic Kelly Miller, see in the\nNegro church of to-day the opportunity to become the unbridled servant\nof the people. The support of the Negro preacher comes from the people\nand he can fearlessly speak for them within the limits of public\nopinion. The Negro teacher or politician must be careful as to what he\nsays; for, inasmuch as his support comes through the white race, he must\nproceed cautiously lest he be deprived of his position. As a rule, their\nlips are forever sealed on the rights of the Negro. As social\nproscription has retarded the development of the Negro lawyer, the\nimpetus toward the uplift of the race must come from its ministry, and\nwith the entrance of a larger number of intelligent men upon this work\nthe masses of the Negro race will be willing to have them lead the way.\n\nThe ministry too is more attractive among Negroes than among whites. The\nwhite minister has only one important function to perform in his group,\nthat of spiritual leadership. To the Negro community the preacher is\nthis and besides the walking encyclopedia, the counselor of the unwise,\nthe friend of the unfortunate, the social welfare organizer, and the\ninterpreter of the signs of the times. No man is properly introduced to\nthe Negro community unless he comes through the minister, and no\nmovement can expect success there unless it has his cooperation or\nendorsement. The rise of the Negro physician has during recent years\ncomparatively diminished the influence of the Negro preacher, but the\nlatter is still the greater force in the community and will remain so\nunless the Negro learns to imitate the white people in substituting in\ntheir faith the doing of the will of their race for that of doing the\nrevealed will of God.\n\nThe importance of the position of the Negro minister is apparent when\none considers the large following which some of these churches have.\nHere the minister controls not only hundreds but thousands, as in the\ncases of Rev. J. E. Willis of the Vermont Avenue Baptist Church in\nWashington, of the Rev. Mr. Adams of the Concord Baptist Church in\nBrooklyn, Dr. M. W. Reddick in the leadership of thousands of Baptists\nin Georgia, and the eloquent Dr. M. W. D. Norman, who after years of\nservice as a minister in North Carolina and Virginia and as Dean of the\nTheological Department of Shaw University, succeeded the lamented Rev.\nRobert Johnson at the Metropolitan Baptist Church in Washington, where\nthousands wait upon Dr. Norman's words. Some of these ministers are\ndrawing very large numbers, because, instead of merely building large\nedifices and buying fine clothes and gifts for themselves, they are\nputting efficiency in the management of the churches, as in the cases of\nR. H. Bowling in Norfolk, Mordecai W. Johnson in Charleston, and Dr. A.\nClayton Powell in New York City. In the Negro churches, moreover, as\nwith Dr. J. C. Austin in Pittsburgh, there are being organized banks,\nhousing corporations, insurance companies, and even steamship projects\nin keeping with the ideas of Dr. L. G. Jordan. Yet despite this change\nin point of view, the Negro church has not become a corrupt machine.\nIts affairs are still in the hands of men who, as a majority, are\ninterested in their race rather than in themselves. The opportunity here\nsought is not that of leadership but that of service.\n\nOne service of which the race is in need, as the Negro minister is\nbeginning to understand it, is the prevention of poverty. The poor you\nhave with you always, and the poor will sometimes steal before they will\nstarve. The masses must be elevated above dependence on another race for\nwhat they shall eat or drink or the wherewithal they shall be clothed.\nThe saving of young men and women of the race from those pursuits in\nwhich they are unduly exposed to the temptations of the low and the\ncontemptible of both races, is becoming a most important concern of many\nNegro churches. The Negro minister is now beginning to realize that\nevery time he saves a youth from such undesirable conditions he himself\nbecomes like unto Christ, a savior of man. If to do this it will be\nnecessary to establish a business enterprise or make the church a\nfraternal insurance company, the new Negro minister will act\naccordingly. This is the way the race should go. The minister is the\nshepherd of the flock. The sheep know the voice of the shepherd and a\nstranger they will not follow.\n\nOut of the exercise of these many privileges in the Negro church,\nmoreover, has come unusually important results. Although the Negro\nlearned in this way much that he had to forget, received many\nimpressions which led to improper expression, the experiences in the end\nredounded to the good of the race. Misinformation when detected served\nbut to emphasize the need of information; imposition accentuated the\nnecessity for honest leadership; and the results of too much credulity\nled to conservatism in the masses. It was the school of experience for\nthe Negro community. The church furnished the opportunity for this\nexperience and the people learned their lesson well. They learned how to\ndiscriminate, how to think for themselves, how to take care of\nthemselves in a critical situation, in short, how to be self-sufficient.\n\nThe most important of all lessons the Negro has learned through his\nchurch has been that of perseverance in cooperative effort. This is the\nmost striking result of this social work. Negroes have not readily\nresponded to the call of men in other fields, but the fact that these\nchurch groups, large and small, have held together for decades, and even\ngenerations, in the sacrificing effort to purchase houses of worship for\nwhich some of them have well paid two or three times because of thieves\nwithin and thieves without--that fact alone is evidence of the\ndevelopment of the power of consolidation among Negroes, an asset which\nin our day is being drawn upon for organization in education and in\nbusiness and bids fair to have tremendous results when properly\nexploited by honest leaders enjoying the confidence of the masses.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV\n\nTHE RECENT GROWTH OF THE NEGRO CHURCH\n\n\nThe student of this phase of history will naturally inquire as to the\nactual results from all of these efforts to promote the progress of\nChristianity among these people. Here we are at a loss for facts as to\nthe early period; but after 1890, when the first census of Negro\nchurches was taken, we have some very informing statistics: and although\nthe general census of 1900 took no account of such statistics, the\nUnited States Bureau of the Census took a special census of religious\ninstitutions in 1906, basing its report upon returns received from the\nlocal organizations themselves. The items of this report covered the\nmembership, places of worship, seating capacity of the edifices, the\nvalue of church property, and the number of ministers. There were\nreported also the number and value of parsonages, the debt on church\nproperty, and later the statistics of Sunday schools.\n\nSummarizing the details, the census showed that in 1906 there were\n36,770 Negro church organizations with a membership of 3,685,097. They\nhad 35,160 church edifices and 1,261 halls used as places of worship,\naffording a seating capacity of 10,481,738. There were 4,779 parsonages\nworth $3,727,884, whereas the church edifices were worth $56,636,159.\nThe debt on such church property, however, was $5,005,905. These\nchurches had 34,681 Sunday schools administered by 210,148 officers and\nteachers in charge of 1,740,009 scholars.\n\nComparing these statistics of 1906 with those of 1890, one sees the\nrapid growth of the Negro church. Although the Negro population\nincreased only 26.1 per cent during these sixteen years, the number of\nchurch organizations increased 56.7 per cent; the number of\ncommunicants, 37.8 per cent; the number of edifices, 47.9; the seating\ncapacity, 54.1 per cent; and the value of church property, 112.7 per\ncent. The proportionately smaller increase in the membership is\naccounted for by the discovery of an overstatement of this item through\nerror by the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in 1890, which in\n1906 was corrected. It is worthy of note here that the number of halls\ndecreased, showing that they gave place to permanent buildings for those\nwho had been housed in temporary quarters.\n\nThe distribution of these churches is of value to determine the extent\nof this progress. Over 90 per cent of the organizations were in the\nSouth, where the large majority of the Negroes are. Because of the\nsocial and economic conditions in that section, however, the proportion\nof the total value of church property was smaller, being only 73.5 per\ncent, and the proportionate amount of debt on church property\naccordingly smaller, being 53.1 per cent. Considering State by State,\none finds that the southern group, of course, took the lead, whereas\nIdaho, Nevada, New Hampshire, North and South Dakota, and Vermont\nreported no Negro churches at all in 1890; but South Dakota and New\nHampshire carried such an item in their returns in 1906. Georgia held\nfirst rank in the number of Negro communicants in 1890 and 1906, while\nAlabama advanced from third to second place in 1906, and Mississippi\nfrom the sixth in 1890 to fourth in 1906. Oklahoma did the unusual thing\nof advancing from the thirty-third place in 1890 to the twentieth in\n1906. Most of these changes, however, followed corresponding changes in\nthe Negro population of these States, resulting not every time as a\nnatural increase but from migration.\n\nA smaller number of Negro communicants were distributed among 18 white\norganizations in 1906. Between 1890 and 1906, however, the Southern\nBaptist Conventions and the Evangelical Lutheran churches lost their\nNegro members; but for the first time the following reported Negro\nchurches in 1906: The Advent Christian Church, the Seventh Day\nAdventists, the General Council of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in\nNorth America, the General Eldership of the Churches of God in North\nAmerica, the Wesleyan Methodist Connection,  the Moravian Church, the\nReformed Church in America, and the Church of the United Brethren in\nChrist. Other difficulties arise in making the comparison here; for the\nColored Primitive Baptists were not reported as a separate denomination\nin 1890, but in 1906 they, with the exception of four churches of this\nfaith, constituted a body of their own. The white denomination reporting\nthe largest number of Negro members was the Methodist Episcopal Church.\n\nThe sectarian would be interested in learning, moreover, the progress\nreported for the various denominations. The greater achievements were\naccredited to the 11 exclusively Negro organizations reporting in 1890\nand the 17 of this same composition making returns in 1906. These were\nBaptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians, with a sprinkling of such\nsmaller groups as the Church of God and Saints of Christ, organized in\n1896; Churches of the Living God, organized in 1899; the Voluntary\nMissionary Society in America, organized in 1900; the Free Christian\nZion Church of Christ, organized by Schismatic Methodists of all sects\nin 1905; the Union American Methodist Episcopal Church, the African\nUnion Methodist Protestant Church, organized in 1866; the Reformed Union\nApostolic Church, organized in 1882; and the Reformed Methodist Union\nEpiscopal Church, organized in 1896. While these smaller bodies were\ndeveloping between 1890 and 1906 there disappeared other small Negro\nnational church organizations known as the Congregational Methodist\nChurch and the Evangelical Missionary Church. Of the distinctly Negro\ndenominations, the one reporting the largest number of communicants was\nthe National Baptist Convention. Following thus in the order of their\nnumerical rank came next the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the\nAfrican Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, and the Colored Methodist\nEpiscopal Church.\n\nFurther statistics show more definitely the progress along sectarian\nlines. In 1906 the six Baptist bodies reported 19,891 organizations with\n2,354,789 communicants and church property valued at $26,562,845. The\nten Methodist bodies combined came second with 15,317 organizations,\n1,182,131 communicants and church property valued at $25,771,262. Taken\ntogether, the Methodists and Baptists had 35,208 or 95.8 per cent of the\ntotal number of Negro organizations; 3,536,920 or 96 per cent of the\ntotal number of Negro communicants and $52,334,107 or 92.4 per cent of\nthe total value of church property.\n\nOther statistics show further tendencies of little importance. The\nmarked increase in the number of Free Baptists between 1890 and 1906 is\naccounted for by better returns the latter year. The falling off of the\nDisciples of Christ was said to be due to the change resulting from\nseparation of the Disciples and the churches of Christ. There were,\nmoreover, during the same period significant changes in the membership\nof the Negroes in such white organizations as the Roman Catholic, the\nCongregational, the Presbyterian, and the Episcopal churches.\n\nThe progress of the Negro church, however, has been made, as shown\nabove, in the denominations organized and controlled exclusively by\nNegroes. In 1906 they had 85.4 per cent of the organizations, 87 per\ncent of the membership, 83.2 per cent of the scholars in the Sunday\nSchool; 78.9 per cent of the value of the church property, 74.5 per cent\nof the total amount of the debt on church property, and 67 per cent of\nthe value of parsonages. The statistician accounts for the relatively\nlarger proportion of the value of property and debt among the partly\nNegro denominations by the fact that these organizations are largely in\nNorthern States where church buildings are of better type and parsonages\nmore common. These figures show that the Negro denominations are growing\nmore rapidly than the others. The statistician says: \"While in 1890 they\nhad 81.7 per cent of the organizations against 18.3 per cent for the\nother class, in 1906, they reported 85.4 per cent, while in the past\nNegro bodies had dropped 14.6 per cent.\" The variations, instead of\nrefuting this statement, tend to confirm it. The National Baptist\nConvention, for example, dropped from 53.4 per cent to 50.4 per cent in\norganizations but advanced from 50.4 per cent to 61.4 per cent in\nmembership and from 33.9 per cent to 43.1 per cent in value of church\nproperty. The Northern Convention showed a decrease in every item as to\nits report on the Negro membership. The African Methodists apparently\nfell behind but the difference was due not to any actual decrease in\nmembership but to more accurate returns as is confirmed by more recent\nreports in their histories and their year books. The Presbyterians and\nCongregational churches show a slightly increased percentage in\nmembership but a decreased percentage in value of property. The\nProtestant Episcopal Church reported a general increase, especially in\nthe value of church property. The percentages of increase in the case of\nCatholic Churches are not striking except in the case of membership.\nThese last mentioned denominations, moreover, still have a comparatively\nsmall following among the Negroes.\n\nThe Bureau of the United States Census has fortunately compiled\nstatistics to show even the sex of these communicants. These tend to\nconfirm the oft repeated declaration that the women largely support\nNegro churches. \"Of the total number of organizations reported,\" says\nthe statistician, \"34,648, or 94.2 per cent, made returns showing the\nsex of communicants or members, and the number thus reported, 3,527,660\nwas 95.7 per cent of the total membership. Of this number 1,324,123, or\n37.5 per cent, were males, and 2,203,537, or 62.5 per cent, were\nfemales. As compared with the figures for all religious bodies, white\nand Negro, which show 43.1 per cent males and 56.9 per cent females,\nthey indicate a greater preponderance of females in Negro bodies.\" The\ncensus reports account for this difference in contending that the Roman\nCatholic bodies, among which the proportion of males is relatively large\n(49.3 per cent), constituted over 36 per cent of the total church\nmembership reported by the census of 1906, but only one per cent of the\nNegro church membership. In the total Protestant church membership the\npercentage of females is 60.3, or only slightly lower than that of the\nmembership of the Negro churches alone.\n\nThe few denominations which show the larger proportion of males are the\nCatholics with 47.5 per cent, the colored Cumberland Presbyterian, 46.5\nper cent, and the United American Free-will Baptist Church, 43.9 per\ncent. Those showing the smallest proportion of males are the Protestant\nEpiscopal Church, with 35.2 per cent; the Colored Primitive Baptists in\nAmerica, 35.7 per cent, and the Northern Baptist Convention, 35.9 per\ncent.\n\nStatistics of the Sunday schools exhibit direct evidence as to how\nlargely this institution functions in the religious life of the Negroes.\nThe Bureau of the Census believes that the most significant fact\nregarding the Sunday schools reported by Negro churches is the\nexceptionally large proportion of organizations reporting them. \"Whereas\nthe percentage of all church organizations in the United States\nreporting Sunday schools,\" says the census, \"was only 79 per cent, 91.2\nper cent of the entire number of Negro organizations made such a\nreport.\" The two classes of denominations are nearly even, the rate for\nthe exclusively Negro bodies being a little lower than that for Negro\norganizations in other bodies. Among the single denominations, those\nshowing the highest percentage of Sunday schools, as compared with the\ntotal number of organizations, are the Colored Cumberland Presbyterian\nChurch, with 98 per cent, and the Presbyterian Church in the United\nStates of America, with 97.1 per cent. The denominations showing the\nlowest percentage, as compared with the total number of organizations,\nare the Colored Primitive Baptists in America, with 20.8 per cent, and\nthe United American Free-will Baptists, with 39.9 per cent. Of all the\nSunday schools given, the National Baptist Convention reported 17,910,\nor 51.6 per cent, a little more than one-half; the African Methodist\nEpiscopal Church, 18.1 per cent; the Methodist Episcopal Church, 10.8\nper cent; the Colored Methodist Episcopal Church, 6.7 per cent, and the\nAfrican Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, 6 per cent. These five bodies\nreported 32,360 Sunday schools, or 93.3 per cent of the total number\nreported by Negro organizations. The statistics as to officers,\nteachers, and scholars show about the same proportions.\n\nThe report on Negro ministers shows a very rapid increase, in fact, a\nmuch larger number than in the case of other professional men among\nNegroes. The results show that although when brought into comparison\nwith the white race the professions among Negroes are generally\nundermanned, the Negro ministry, so far as numbers are concerned, is\nwell supplied. In 1906 there were 31,624 Negro ministers. The Baptists\nthen had 17,117, the African Methodist Church 6,200, the African\nMethodist Episcopal Zion Church 3,082, the Colored Methodist Episcopal\nChurch 2,671, the Colored Primitive Baptists in America 1,480, the\nColored Cumberland Presbyterian Church 375, and the United Free-will\nBaptists 136. The remaining number of ministers were distributed among\nthe smaller denominations.\n\nAnother essential in the estimate of the religious progress of the Negro\nis the work done by the churches for their expansion into neglected\nparts. It has been said that the Negroes of the United States annually\ncontribute more than $125,000 to home missions, supporting about 250\nhome missionaries and aiding more than 400 churches in backward\ndistricts. Owing to the recent migration resulting in all but the\ndepletion of many churches in the South, and the necessity for others in\nthe North, there has been much stimulus from without in some centers\nwhere churches have had little support from those migrants primarily\ninterested in economic gain. Ever alive to the situation, however, the\nvarious Negro denominations have raised large sums to organize and\nmaintain new churches wherever these migrants of color have settled in\nlarge numbers.\n\nIn foreign missions the Negro denominations have done almost as well.\nThey annually contribute to this work more than $150,000. While some of\nthis sum has been expended in promoting this cause in various foreign\nfields, the larger portion of it, by special designation, has been used\nin countries having a preponderance of Negro population, especially in\nAfrica. The Negro Baptists, through the Foreign Mission Board of the\nNational Baptist Convention, the work of which is directed by that\nuntiring apostle to the lowly, Dr. L. G. Jordan, carries on missionary\nwork in five foreign countries. This body has established 61 stations,\n83 out-stations, and 43 churches, having altogether 14,700 communicants,\namong whom are 43 native workers and 451 assistants. The African\nMethodist Episcopal Church, having organized their mission work earlier\nthan the Baptists--that is, in 1844, whereas the Baptists did not\norganize theirs until 1880--have been more successful abroad. This\ndenomination has invaded as many as eight foreign countries. Most of its\nefforts, however, have been restricted to Africa, where this\ndenomination has two bishops reaching 17,178 members through 118\nordained ministers and 479 local preachers and teachers. This work in\nAfrica was promoted largely through Bishops Levi J. Coppin and J. Albert\nJohnson, who, transferred to districts in this country, are still\nrendering their denomination valuable service. The African Methodist\nEpiscopal Zion Church, which did not organize its foreign mission work\nuntil 1892, has established three foreign mission stations, five\nout-stations, and eleven churches. Other denominations have also done\nmuch to support missionary effort in foreign parts.\n\nTo promote Christian education both at home and in foreign fields these\ndenominations have well supported publishing houses. The Colored\nMethodists have for a number of years had a successful plant for this\nwork, which reached a stage of progress under its efficient agent, Dr.\nJ. C. Martin. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church was earlier in\nthe field and saw the work recently expanded under the well-known Dr. J.\nW. Crockett. The African Methodist Episcopal Church, a pioneer in this\nenterprise, has easily taken the lead in this work among the Negro\nchurches, especially under such efficient managers as Dr. R. R. Wright,\nin charge of the Publishing House and editor of _The Christian Recorder_\nin Philadelphia, under Dr. R. C. Ransom, the brilliant editor of the\n_African Methodist Episcopal Church Review_, and under the progressive\nIra T. Bryant, the director of the publications of the Sunday School\nUnion in Nashville, founded by Bishop C. S. Smith. The Negro Baptists,\nhaving become enraged at the refusal of the white Baptists to recognize\nthem as constituents of an all comprehending denomination, organized\nthe National Baptist Convention, which accepted as one of its most\nimportant concerns the establishment of The National Baptist Publishing\nHouse. After attaining a high degree of success under the efficient Dr.\nR. H. Boyd, however, this establishment became the business of only that\nportion of the Baptists who supported Dr. Boyd in his efforts to direct\nthe work on what his opponents called a private basis. The other Baptist\nfaction has established another publishing house in Nashville.\n\nStill another idea of the growth of the Negro church may be obtained\nfrom the statistics as to their administrative officers. The work of the\nNegro denominations has grown to the extent that the African Methodist\nEpiscopal Church has fifteen bishops and nine other administrative\nofficers, the Colored Methodists seven bishops and eleven other\nadministrative officers, and the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church\nten bishops and fifteen other administrative officers. The affairs of\nthe National Baptist Convention, incorporated, are administered by\nthirteen officers, and the National Baptist Convention, unincorporated,\nby an equal number of functionaries. These, however, are not all\nregularly engaged in administrative work as in most of the Methodist\ndenominations. The smaller groups of Baptists and Methodists show here\nand there top-heavy administrative staffs, whereas very large groups of\nNegro members in white churches have fewer supervisors. The Methodist\nEpiscopal Church, however, has for some years maintained for the Negroes\nabroad a missionary bishop, in the capacity of whom Bishops Alexander P.\nCamphor and Isaiah B. Scott have served. The noble fight as indicated by\nfavorable ballots taken in various conferences, moreover, all but\nresulted in the election of the eloquent Dr. J. W. E. Bowen as a regular\nbishop. Becoming sufficiently liberal, however, to override race\nprejudice, the Conference of 1920 not only chose as bishop for Africa\nthat pleasing preacher and successful pastor, Dr. M. W. Clair, but at\nthe same time set apart for the New Orleans diocese the scholarly and\nbrilliant editor of the _Southwestern Christian Advocate_, Dr. R. E.\nJones.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV\n\nTHE NEGRO CHURCH OF TO-DAY\n\n\nThese new developments have kept the Negro ministry still attractive,\nbut because of many undesirable situations here and there in the church\ncomparatively few young men have, during the last decade or so, aspired\nto this work. Some young Negroes have learned to look upon the calling\nas a necessary nuisance. Except in church schools where the preparation\nfor the ministry is an objective, it has often been unusual to find one\nNegro student out of a hundred aspiring to the ministry, and too often\nthose who have such aspirations represent the inferior intellect of the\ngroup, as it happened in the church during the middle ages. So rapidly\ndid the ministry fall into discredit in many quarters a few years ago\nthat most women of promise would not dare to engage themselves to men\nwho thought of becoming clergymen; and, if the marital connection\nhappened to be effected before the lot of the bride was known, it was in\nmany cases considered a calamity. Because Negroes now realize how\nlimited the opportunity for the race is in politics and some of the\nprofessions, however, the ministry will doubtless continue, as it has\nsince the Reconstruction, a sort of avenue through which the ambitious\nyouth must pass to secure a hearing and become a man of influence among\nhis people. This does not mean that irreligious men will masquerade as\nspiritual advisers but that, inasmuch as the church as an institution is\nconsidered a welfare agency as well as a spiritual body to edify souls,\nsome Negroes, interested in the social uplift of the race, are learning\nto accomplish this task by accepting leadership in the church.\n\nNegroes see in the ministry, moreover, a new mission. The world, having\nnow gone mad after the trifles of this life, is sadly in need of a\nredeemer to save men from themselves. In the contest between selfishness\nand godliness the former has been victor in the soul of the American and\nEuropean. There are those like Bishop John Hurst believing that the\nNegro church must play the role of keeping the fire burning on the altar\nuntil the day when men again become reverent, and that the Negro's\nliberal interpretation of the Christian religion, based upon the\nbrotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God, must gain ascendancy and\nbe accepted by a regenerated world of to-morrow.\n\nAs a preparation to this end the afflictions of the Negro have\nadequately developed self-control in the race. The watchword of the\nNegro church has been patience while waiting on the Lord. The Negro has\nlearned not to avenge his own wrongs, believing that God will adjust\nmatters in the end. The Negro agrees with Professor Joseph A. Booker,\nthat he that taketh up the sword shall perish by the sword. Even during\nthese days, when we learn much about the lawless, the behavior of the\nNegroes is no exception to the rule. An investigation shows that the\nNegroes never do any more than to defend themselves in keeping with the\nfirst law of nature. White persons who once found it possible to\nintimidate the whole group by shooting or lynching one or two now face\npersons of color bent upon defending their homes. At heart, however, the\nNegro is conservatively Christian and looks forward to that favorable\nturn in the affairs of man when the wrongs of the oppressed shall be\nrighted without the shedding of blood.\n\nThe Negro church is criticized by a few radical members of the race as a\nhindrance to the immediate achievement of the aims of the race, in that\nthe white race in the exercise of foresight encourages and even\nsubsidizes the Negro ministry in carrying out this conservative program.\nThis will tend, it is said, to keep the Negro down, whereas the white\npeople themselves do not actually believe in such doctrine; for their\nown actions show that they use it as a means to an end. This, however,\nis hardly a fair criticism of the Negro church of to-day. No force from\nwithout can claim control of this institution, and certainly no one can\nbridle its fearless speakers who stand for the Negro of to-day. The\nNegro churchmen, moreover, are not any more conservative than other\nleaders of the people. They may be more generally effective because of\ntheir greater influence. That the Negro church is conservative is due to\nteaching and to tradition, and it is fortunate that Providence has had\nit so. Acting as a conservative force among the Negroes, the church has\nbeen a sort of balance wheel. It has not been unprogressive but rather\nwise in its generation in not rushing forward to a radical position in\nadvance of public opinion. In other words, the Negro church has known\nhow far it can safely instruct its people to go in righting their own\nwrongs, and this conservatism has no doubt saved the Negro from the fate\nof other oppressed groups who have suffered extermination because of the\nfailure to handle their case more diplomatically.\n\nThis does not mean, however, that the Negro church of to-day is not\nalive to the sufferings of the race and is not critical of the attitude\nof the so-called Christian elements in this country. Some Negro\nministers like Dr. F. J. Grimke are decidedly outspoken, even to the\nextent of being classed with the militant Reds now being deported. Dr.\nPezavia O'Connell, a gentleman of scholarship and character, has all but\nsuffered professional martyrdom because he has always fearlessly\nchampioned the cause of the Negro. Inasmuch as such an advanced position\ndoes not always harmonize with the faith of his communicants, he has\nbeen proscribed in certain circles. R. W. Bagnall, George Frazier\nMiller, and Byron Gunner have actually preached the use of force and\nencouraged resistance to the mobs to the extent that some Negroes have\nprobably addressed themselves vindictively to the task of retribution.\nThrough the Negro churches, and these alone, have the Negroes been able\nto effect anything like a cooperative movement to counteract the evil\ninfluences of such combinations against the race as the revived Ku Klux\nKlan.\n\nThe church then is no longer the voice of one man crying in the\nwilderness, but a spiritual organization at last becoming alive to the\nneeds of a people handicapped by social distinctions of which the race\nmust gradually free itself to do here in this life that which will\nassure the larger life to come. To attain this the earth must be made\nhabitable for civilized people. Funds are daily raised in Negro churches\nto fight segregation, and an innocent Negro in danger of suffering\ninjustice at the hands of the local oppressor may appeal with success to\nthe communicants with whom he has frequented a common altar. The\nNational Association for the Advancement of Colored People would be\nunable to carry out its program without the aid of the Negro church.\n\nAlthough Negroes are not now attracted to the church as much as\nformerly, the census reports still show that there are more Negroes in\nthe ministry than in any other profession. The only really close\ncompetitor of the Negro in this profession is the southern white man.\nWhile the educated white men of the North are taking up scientific\npursuits and business, the southern whites are carrying out their\ndesigns on the ministry, in keeping with the well-laid plans by which\nthey have succeeded in getting partial control of the northern press.\nDuring recent years so many southern white students have crowded\nnorthern schools of theology that, in keeping with the spirit of\nBeelzebub, some of these institutions now deny Negroes admission. The\npulpits of the North are being gradually taken over by the apostles\nindoctrinated by the medieval agents of race hate.\n\nSince the Negro ministry is still the largest factor in the life of this\nrace, it naturally conflicts with the propaganda of the ministry\npreaching caste. These representatives of the master and slave classes\nmust, in the capacity of spokesmen of widely differing groups, work out\nthe solution of the problems of the church in the United States; for\neither the one or the other must dictate the religious program of the\neconomically mad North. The North cares little about priest-craft. The\nstruggle there for dollars and cents and for opportunities to spend them\nin riotous living is too keen to spare time for such matters as\nChristian living and the remote hereafter. The South, on the other hand,\nhas never lost its bearing. In spite of riots here and there and\nlynchings almost anywhere, that section still considers  itself a\nChristian land and, in its way, has lifted high the name of Christ\nwithout being influenced by his life. The North, then, if it ever awakes\nfrom its lethargy, will probably accept either the principles of Jesus\nof Nazareth as they have been preached and practiced by the Negroes, or\nthe Anglo-Saxon-chosen-people-of-God faith for which many misguided\nwhite communicants have jeopardized their own lives and have taken those\nof Negroes unwilling to worship at the shrine of race prejudice.\n\nThe white people of this country are not interested in the real mission\nof Christ. In the North the church has surrendered to the capitalistic\nsystem and developed into an agency seeking to assuage the pains of\nthose suffering from the very economic evils which the institution has\nnot the courage to attack. In the southern portion of the United States,\nthe white churches have degenerated into perfunctory machines engaged in\nthe service of deceiving the multitude with the doctrine that the\nAnglo-Saxon, being superior to other races by divine ordination, may\njustly oppress them to maintain its supremacy and that the principles of\nJesus are exemplified in the lives of these newly chosen people of God\nwhen they permit their so-called inferiors to eat the crumbs let fall by\nthose whom their idol god has carefully selected as the honor guests at\nthe feast. If the humble Nazarene appeared there disturbing the present\ncaste system, he would be speedily lynched as he was in Palestine.\n\nIn spite of the Negroes' logical preaching of the fatherhood of God and\nthe brotherhood of man, however, the North now seems inclined to accept\nthe faith of the South. Science has long since uprooted the theory that\none race can be superior to another, but the northern churches are loath\nto act accordingly. The same churches, which prior to emancipation,\nchampioned the cause of the Negro, are to-day working indirectly to\npromote racial distinctions. The southern white man, wiser in his\ngeneration than most of his competitors, easily realized that he could\nnot legally reenslave the Negro, but early devised a scheme to convert\nthe North to the doctrine of segregation, educational distinctions, and\nthe elimination of the Negroes from the body politic, to make it\nimprobable, if not impossible, for the Negroes to attain the status of\nwhite men. The Christian spirit of the North at first rebelled against\nthe very idea; but, already pledged to the policy of the economic\nproscription of Negroes through trades unions, that section, once\nbristling with churches dominated by abolitionists, soon yielded to the\ntemptation of sacrificing the principles of Jesus for dollars and cents.\nThe Negro of to-day, therefore, is hated as much by the northern\nreligious devotee as by the southern enthusiast at the shrine of race\nprejudice.\n\nEvidence as to such conditions obtaining is not wanting. In the midst of\nthe changing order involving all but the annihilation of the Negro, the\nrace has repeatedly appealed to the \"Christian\" element of the North\nonly to have a deaf ear turned to its petition. Inasmuch as the northern\nministers are influenced by rich laymen whose businesses have so many\nramifications in the South, they refrain from such criticism or\ninterference in behalf of the Negro, since it might mean economic loss.\nNegroes at first secured from northern churches large sums of money to\nestablish adequate private schools and colleges throughout the South,\nbut before these institutions could be developed these funds were\ndiverted to the support of industrial education which the South openly\ninterpreted to signify that no Negro must be encouraged to become the\nequal of any white man, and that education for him must mean something\nentirely different from that training provided for the Caucasian. The\nnorthern white man, more interested in developing men to produce cotton\nand tobacco than in the training of a race to think for itself, again\nbowed to mammon. Churches which once annually raised sums for the\nmaintenance of various Negro schools have now, as a majority, restricted\ntheir contributions to Hampton and Tuskegee, where, it is believed, the\nultimate distinctions of the whites and blacks can, by the process of\nsafeguarded education, be best effected. Practically all of the\nso-called Christian philanthropists have followed their example.\n\nThe Negro church, however, finds itself facing still another problem.\nDuring recent years Negroes have manifested more interest in the\nredemption of Africa. Negro churches have long since contributed to\nmissions and the periodical return of the apostle to the lowly far away\nhas been awaited with the anticipation of unwonted joy; but it is only\nrecently that the church has begun to make sacrifices for the cause.\nWhereas a few years ago a congregation felt that it had done its duty in\nraising a missionary collection of ten or fifteen dollars, that same\ngroup is to-day supporting one or two missionaries in Africa. The\nraising of funds for this purpose and the administration of it have been\nof late so well extended, as noted above, that the national church\norganizations have had to assign this work to boards, whose business is\nto supply the missionaries at the various posts and extend their\noperations by establishing schools where they have sufficiently well\nestablished the work to require systematic training.\n\nIn spite of their well-laid plans, however, the Negro church finds\nitself handicapped in reaching the Africans. Controlled as that\ncontinent is by the capitalistic powers of Europe, they have much\napprehension as to the sort of gospel the Negro missionary may preach in\nAfrica, lest the natives be stirred up to the point of self-assertion.\nThey desire that missionaries to Africa, like race leaders in the\nUnited States, be \"hand-picked.\" In other words, the missionary movement\nmust bow to mammon. To the heathen, then, must go those who have served\nonly as forerunners of foreign conquests involving the discomfiture, the\noppression, and in many cases the annihilation of the very people whom\nthey professed to be saving.\n\nFollowing in their wake, a certain American \"Christian\" organization\nfinanced by \"philanthropists\" recently sent to Africa Thomas J. Jones\nwho, in behalf of his race, sought to carry out this policy. The effect\nof this mission was soon apparent. After having nobly served in Africa\nand India, Max Yergan, an International Young Men's Christian\nAssociation Secretary, appointed to serve permanently in Africa,\nrecently toured the United States for a mission fund which the Negroes\nfreely contributed that through him some portion of Africa might be\nredeemed. This man in Africa having ingratiated himself into the favor\nof the capitalistic government there, however, according to Yergan's\nstatement, influenced the administration to refuse him the permit to\nwork among his own people. The same meddler, according to a complaint\nmade by the colored branch of the Young Men's Christian Association, all\nbut made himself the dictator of the appointments of that department and\nother Negro welfare agencies sent abroad during the World War. His\nbusiness now seems to be that of furnishing the world with\n\"hand-picked\" Negro leaders to damn even the natives in Africa. The\nwhite church then, has not only failed to preach the social gospel of\nJesus, but is preventing the Negroes from carrying that message to their\nown people. In other words, the principles of the humble Nazarene must\nbe crushed out to make money and perpetuate caste.\n\nThis and other handicaps, however, have not prevented the progress of\nthe church. Probably the most promising aspect is that Negro ministers\nof to-day measure up to a higher standard than formerly. They are not\ndiverted from their course by politics and the like. Here and there, of\ncourse, are some of little promise, who in a poverty-stricken condition\naccept almost any bribe offered them by political bosses, but\nfortunately this number is known to be rapidly decreasing. During the\nlast generation there has developed among Negroes the feeling that the\npolitical embroglio is an unclean sphere which the minister should not\nenter. The increasing duties of the Negro preachers, moreover, have\nrecently so multiplied that they have no time for such service.\nExperience has shown that even in the case of those who have gone into\npolitics in self-defense that they have accomplished little good or that\nsome layman could have handled the matter more successfully.\n\nWe have recently had two striking cases in evidence. Bishop Alexander\nWalters, after having rendered valuable service to the cause as an\neducator  and minister in Kentucky, California, and Tennessee, became\nthe ranking bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church. He\nthen decided that his people had been so long duped by the grafters and\ntricksters masquerading as the successors of Lincoln and Grant, that he\nwould use his influence to have the Negroes divide their vote by\nsupporting Woodrow Wilson in 1912. Dr. J. Milton Waldron, an influential\nBaptist minister of Washington, feeling that it would mean a new day for\nthe Negro to have this democratic college president of many promises\nelevated to the headship of the nation by the aid of the Negro vote, did\nlikewise. Disappointed in the end, however, by the hypocrisy of Wilson,\nwho, in his heart hated Negroes, these churchmen saw themselves\npainfully humiliated among their people, who, in return for the large\nnumber of votes which they gave Wilson, received nothing but segregation\nin the civil service, elimination from public office, and conscription\nto do forced labor in the World War, while he was promising that the\nNegroes should have justice and have it abundantly.\n\n[Illustration: BISHOP ALEXANDER WALTERS]\n\nThe Negro churchmen of to-day realize, as most leaders of the race do,\nthat the hope of the blacks lies not in politics from without but in\nrace uplift from within in the form of social amelioration and economic\ndevelopment. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are interested in the\nNegro except so far as the race may be used to enable them to get into\noffice. Their platform promises have been not something to stand on but\nto get into office on. This does not in any sense, however, mean that\nthe Negro minister has lost interest in public matters of concern to\nevery citizen, but rather that he has learned the possibilities in the\npolitical world. He will in no sense withdraw from the contest in behalf\nof the rights of his people. His method of attack will be different.\nCarrying out this reconstructed policy for the rehabilitation of the\nrace, the Negro minister, like a majority of the thinking members of\nthis group to-day, will welcome the assistance and cooperation of the\nwhite man, but will not suffer himself to be used as a tool in\nconnection with forces from without the circles of the race, pretending\nto be interested in the solution of its problems.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n[Footnote 1: At a love feast conducted by Bishop Asbury at the Virginia\nConference in 1783, strong testimonials were borne in favor of African\nliberty. He said in 1785, speaking of the Virginia Conference: \"I found\nthe minds of the people greatly agitated with our rules against slavery\nand a proposed petition to the General Assembly for the emancipation of\nthe blacks. A colonel and Dr. Coke disputed on the subject and the\ncolonel used some threats; next day brother O'Kelly let fly at them, and\nthey were made angry enough; we, however, came off with whole bones.\"\nWorking in this field against slavery, these Methodists waited upon\nGeorge Washington, who politely received them and gave his opinion\nagainst slavery. This conference, however, did not bring striking\nresults. Saying that he was much pained in mind, Bishop Asbury asserted:\n\"I am brought to conclude that slavery will exist in Virginia perhaps\nfor ages. There is not a _sufficient sense of religion nor liberty to\ndestroy it_.\" In Georgia in 1741 he said, \"Away with the false cant that\nthe better you use the Negroes, the worse they will use you! Make them\ngood; then, teach them the fear of God, and learn to fear him\nyourselves, ye masters. I understand not the doctrine of cruelty.\"]\n\n\n[Footnote 2: He published a pamphlet entitled _Involuntary, Unmerited,\nPerpetual, Absolute, Hereditary Slavery, examined on the principles of\nNature, Reason, Justice, Policy, and Scripture_. The work is written in\ngrave and manly style and with nice discriminations and candid reasons\nset forth the claims of the emancipating Baptists in a creditable\nmanner.\n\nIn 1778, Mr. Barrow received an invitation to preach at the house of a\ngentleman who lived on Nansemond River, near the mouth of James River. A\nministering brother accompanied him. They were informed on their\narrival, that they might expect rough usage, and so it happened. A gang\nof well-dressed men came up to the stage, which had been erected under\nsome trees, as soon as the hymn was given out, and sang one of their\nobscene songs. They then undertook to plunge both of the preachers. Mr.\nBarrow was plunged twice. They pressed him into the mud, held him long\nunder the water, and came near drowning him. In the midst of their\nmocking, they asked him if he believed? and throughout treated him with\nthe most barbarous insolence and outrage. His companion they plunged but\nonce. The whole assembly was shocked, the women shrieked, but no one\ndurst interfere; for about twenty stout fellows were engaged in this\nhorrid measure. They insulted and abused the gentleman who invited them\nto preach, and every one who spoke a word in their favor. Before these\npersecuted men could change their clothes, they were dragged from the\nhouse, and driven off by these outrageous churchmen. But three or four\nof them died in a few weeks, in a distracted manner, and one of them\nwished himself in hell before he had joined the company, &c.\n\nIn Mr. Barrow's piece against slavery, we find the following note: \"To\nsee a man (a Christian) in the most serious period of all his\nlife--making his last will and testament--and in the most solemn manner\naddressing the Judge of all the earth--_In the name of God,\nAmen._--Hearken to him--he will very shortly appear before the Judge,\nwhere kings and slaves have equal thrones!--He proceeds:\n\n  \"Item. I give and bequeath to my son ----, a negro man named ----,\n  a negro woman named ---- with five of her youngest children.\n\n  \"Item. I give and bequeath to my daughter ----, a negro man named\n  ----, also a negro woman named ----, with her three children.\n\n  \"Item. All my other slaves, whether men, women or children, with\n  all my stock of horses, cattle, sheep, and hogs, I direct to be\n  sold to the highest bidder, and the monies arising therefrom\n  (after paying my just debts) to be equally divided between my two\n  above-named children!!!\n\n  \"The above specimen is not exaggerated; the like of it often turns\n  up. And what can a real lover of the rights of man say in\n  vindication thereof?\n\n  \"Suppose for a moment, that the testator, or if the owner, dies\n  intestate (which is often the case), was ever so humane a person,\n  who can vouch for their heirs and successors? This consideration,\n  if nothing else, ought to make all slaveholders take heed what\n  they do, 'for they must give an account of themselves to God.'\"]\n\n\n[Footnote 3: Departing under similar circumstances at the same time,\nwent Rev. Mr. Amos, a product of the same Christian environment,\ndirecting his course to New Providence, Bahama Islands, British West\nIndies, where he established a flourishing Baptist Church.]\n\n\n[Footnote 4: When he purchased the property for the Bethel Church on\nLombard Street near Sixth and the majority of the committee refused to\naccept, Allen having given his word so to do, kept it at a great\npersonal loss.]\n\n\n[Footnote 5: A man of fair education, Willis was a power in that State\nas early as 1798. We hear of him in Louisiana in 1804. Mississippi sent\ntwo ministers to ordain him in Louisiana in 1812. He organized later the\nLouisiana Baptist Association and was chosen as its moderator in 1837.]\n\n\n[Footnote 6: \"In all of his journeyings,\" says a contributor to the\n_Baptist Magazine_, \"he seemed to go among the people in the fullness of\nthe blessings of the Gospel of Christ. He was not indeed an ordinary\nman, for without those advantages of good education in early life, he\nbecame distinguished as a preacher. His understanding was vigorous, his\nimagination was vivid, his personal appearance was interesting and his\nelocution was grateful. We have heard him preach to an audience of more\nthan 1000 persons when he seemed to have the complete command of their\nfeelings for an hour together. On baptismal occasions he was truly\neloquent. His arguments were unanswerable, and his appeals to the heart\nwere powerful. The slow and gentle manner in which he placed candidates\nunder the water, and raised them up again, produced an indelible\nimpression on the spectators, that they had indeed seen the burial with\nChrist in baptism. Near the close of his career in 1831 when he finally\ndied of a painful illness, he bore striking testimony to his faith in\nJesus. His mind being 'wonderfully sustained by the consolations of the\nGospel,' he said on one occasion to a friend, 'Since I saw you last I\nhave been happy in God--my sky has been without a cloud. I know that\nwhen the earthly house of my tabernacle is dissolved, I have a house not\nmade with hands, eternal in the heavens.' When asked at another time if\nhe had a good hope through grace, O, said he, I am altogether unworthy,\nbut trust in him 'who of God is made unto me wisdom, righteousness,\nsanctification and redemption.' After a short pause, he observed, 'I\nknow in whom I have believed, and that he is able to keep that which I\nhave committed unto him until that day.' When his sufferings were great,\nand he felt as if he were dying, he would say in broken accents,\n'Come--Lord--Jesus--come quickly.' But he would add, 'I pray for\npatience.' He frequently repeated, 'I know that my Redeemer liveth. Whom\nI shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another.' On\nhis daughter's observing what a fine day it was, and how calm the water\nwas, he said smiling, 'Just like my mind, my dear--not a\nwave--unruffled.' One morning being asked how he had rested the\npreceding night, he replied, 'The Lord has spared my life one night\nlonger; but I never longed for any thing so really, as to die and to be\nwith my Saviour.' Towards the close of his last sickness, he exclaimed\nwith emphasis and a voice stronger than usual--'I am now ready to be\noffered up and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good\nfight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith; henceforth\nthere is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord the\nrighteous Judge, shall give me at that day.'\"]\n\n\n[Footnote 7: There appeared later between 1830 and 1840 others of much\nworth. These were Charles A. Boyd, Henry Johnson, William H. Bishop,\nHosea Easton, James Simmons, Henry Drayton, David Blake, Adam Ford,\nDaniel Vandevier, Francis P. Graham, John W. Lewis, George Garnett,\nWilliam Fuller, J. H. Williams, William Serrington, John A. King, John\nTappen, John Dungy, Richard Noyee, Peter Ross, John Lyle, John P.\nThompson, John Chester, Nathan Blunt, John N. Mars, J. B. Johnson,\nThomas James, Edward Bishop, Thomas Jackson, Dempsey Kennedy, William\nTilmon, George Washington, Benjamin Simms, W. L. Brown, John Wells,\nSamuel Serrington, George A. Spywood, Jesse Kemble, Leonard Collins,\nBasil McKall, William Jones, John Jackson, Abraham Cole, Samuel T. Gray,\nWilliam McFarlan, Philip Lum, Shadrach Golden, and Abraham Miller.]\n\n\n[Footnote 8: The Assembly bore it grievously that slavery exhibits the\npersons of color as dependent on the will of others, \"whether they shall\nknow and worship the true God, whether they shall enjoy the ordinances\nof the gospel; whether they shall perform the duties and cherish the\nendearments of husbands and wives, parents and children, neighbors and\nfriends; whether they shall preserve their chastity and purity, or\nregard the dictates of justice and humanity.\" ... \"The evils to which\nthe slave is always exposed often take place in fact, and in their very\nworst degree and form; and where all of them do not take place, as we\nrejoice to say in many instances, through the influence of the\nprinciples of humanity and religion on the mind of masters, they do\nnot--still the slave is deprived of his natural right, degraded as a\nhuman being, and exposed to the danger of passing into the hands of a\nmaster who may inflict upon him all the hardships and injuries which\nhumanity and avarice may suggest.\n\n\"From this view of the consequences resulting from the practice into\nwhich Christian people have most inconsistently fallen, of enslaving a\nportion of their brethren of mankind--for 'God hath made of one blood\nall nations of men to dwell on the face of the earth'--it is manifestly\nthe duty of all Christians who enjoy the light of the present day, when\nthe inconsistency of slavery, both with the dictates of humanity and\nreligion, has been demonstrated, and is generally seen and acknowledged,\nto use their honest, earnest, and unwearied endeavors, to correct the\nerrors of former times, and as speedily as possible to efface this blot\non our holy religion, and to obtain the complete abolition of slavery\nthrough Christendom, and if possible throughout the world.\"]\n\n\n[Footnote 9: The following is a specimen:\n\n  DEAR SIR:--My woman, Clarissa Hill, has expressed a wish to unite\n  herself in Christian communion with the church of which you are\n  the acting minister. She is a most faithful servant, and one, of\n  whom it affords me pleasure to say, that I believe she endeavors\n  to conform to the great principles of her faith, and I believe she\n  will be an exemplary and honorable member of your church, should\n  you think proper to receive her as such. She has belonged to me\n  for sixteen years, during which time her conduct has been most\n  unexceptionably moral, and therefore, I cheerfully consent to her\n  being baptized and admitted to your communion.\n\n  Very respectfully, etc.,\n\n  C. S. M.]\n\n\n[Footnote 10: Three years later this convention sent six missionaries to\nAfrica. These were J. H. Pressly, W. W. Cooley together with their\nwives, J. J. Coles and H. McKinney. The National Convention was\norganized in 1880, out of a protest against the attitude of certain\nwhites toward the Negroes and they have since continued as a separate\nbody having a publishing house of their own rather than patronize the\nAmerican Baptist Publication Society.]\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n      Abbott, Lyman, interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Abrams, Joseph, a Negro preacher in Richmond, 163\n\n      Adams, Henry, pioneer Negro preacher in Louisville, 119\n\n      Adams, J. B., pastor of the Concord Baptist Church, 282\n\n      Afflictions, the effect of, 301-302\n\n      Africa, missionary work in, impeded, 309-311\n\n      African Civilization Society, the, achievements of, 211-212\n\n      A. M. E. Church, the establishment of, 72-78;\n        troubles of, with the Zionites, 81-85;\n        schools of, 205;\n        educational program, 212\n\n      A. M. E. Zion Church, the beginnings of, 78-85;\n        indecision of, 81-85;\n        struggles of, 82-84;\n        schism in, 106-107;\n        schools of, 206\n\n      African Union First Colored Methodist Protestant Church of\n          America, established, 192\n\n      African Union Church organized, 107\n\n      Alabama, Negro churches in, 118;\n        reactionary laws of, 132;\n        Presbyterians in, 155, 156-157\n\n      Alexander, Dr. A., a friend of John Gloucester, 66\n\n      Allen, Richard, the work of, 73-78;\n        recognition of, 73;\n        early efforts, 74-75;\n        elected bishop, 76;\n        death of, 101\n\n      Allen University, the establishment of, 205\n\n      Allensworth, Allen, religious work of, 229;\n        in politics, 229-230\n\n      Ambrose, F., a pioneer C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      American Baptist Home Mission Association, efforts of, 209\n\n      American Baptist Home Mission Society, the, achievements of,\n          203, 209-210;\n        the attack on, 261-264\n\n      American Freedmen's Aid Commission, the work of, 212\n\n      American Freedmen's Union Commission, the establishment of,\n          213\n\n      American Missionary Association, schools of, 203-204\n\n      American Union Commission, the, achievements of, 212-213\n\n      Americans, unfavorable attitude of, 41\n\n      Anderson, I. H., a pioneer C. M. E. preacher, 196\n\n      Anderson, Thomas, a preacher in Savannah, 116\n\n      Anderson, William, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Andrew, Governor John A., a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Andrew, a pioneer Negro teacher in Charleston, 8-9\n\n      Anglican clergy, the attitude of, 20-24; corruption, 20, 21,\n          22\n\n      Anthony Street Church, establishment of, in Mobile, 135\n\n      Arnett, Bishop B. W., religious work of, 236;\n        in politics, 235-236;\n        effort of, to repeal \"Black Laws,\" 236\n\n      Asbury, Bishop, the position of, 26, 28;\n        work of, 28-30;\n        recognition of Richard Allen by, 73\n\n      Ashmun Institute, the establishment of, 152\n\n      Atkinson, Edward, a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Auchmutty, the work of, among Negroes in New York, 14\n\n      Austin, J. C., a popular preacher in Pittsburg, 282\n\n\n      Babbit, Bessie, white wife of Lemuel Haynes, 63\n\n      Bacon, Thomas, sermons of, on the instruction of Negroes, 23,\n          151-152\n\n      Bacote, S. W., a preacher in Missouri, 277-278\n\n      Bagnall, R. W., a social welfare minister, 277;\n        advanced position of, 304\n\n      Ballou, Hosea, contest of, with Lemuel Haynes, 64\n\n      Baltimore, Baptist churches in, 111;\n        Association for the moral and Educational Improvement of the\n            Colored People of, the efforts of, 208, 211\n\n      Baptists, early progress of, 85-91, 107-122, 298;\n        reason for growth of, 108-109, 110;\n        in the North, 120-122;\n        statistics of schools of, 206;\n        statistics of, 286, 296;\n        division and increase of Negro Baptists, 256-257\n\n      Baptist Association of Western States and Territories, 200\n\n      Baptist conventions, the rise of, 199-201\n\n      Baptist Foreign Mission Convention, 201\n\n      Baptist Home Missionary Society, the American, the work of,\n          203, 209-210\n\n      Baptists (white) the Emancipating, 32-36\n\n      Baptists (white) the work of, among Negroes, 31-36;\n        position in 1789, 32;\n        anti-slavery work of, 32-36;\n        the schism of, 130;\n        interest of, in the Negro, 160\n\n      Baptized Licking-Locust Association, 36\n\n      Barclay, T., the work of, in New York, 15\n\n      Barnett, Nelson, a pioneer Baptist preacher of West Virginia,\n          240\n\n      Barrow, David, the position of, 33-34\n\n      Bartow, the work of, among Negroes, 11\n\n      Baxter, Richard, ideas of, carried out, 16\n\n      Beach, J., the work of, among Negroes, 16-17\n\n      Beckett, the work of, in Pennsylvania, 11\n\n      Beebe, J. A., a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 196\n\n      Beecher, H. W., interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Benezet, Anthony, a worker among Negroes in Philadelphia, 18\n\n      Bentley, George, a pioneer Negro preacher in Tennessee, 137\n\n      Bethel Church, organization of, 75\n\n      Bible, influence of, among Negroes, 266-272\n\n      Biddle University, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Binga, Anthony, a useful minister in Richmond, 240\n\n      Bishop, Bishop, election of, 106;\n        schismatic connection of, 106-107\n\n      Bishop, Josiah, a Negro Baptist preacher among whites, 54-55\n\n      Bishops of England, interested in proselyting the Negroes, 6-7\n\n      Black Code, 5\n\n      Black Harry, a pioneer Methodist Negro preacher, 56-58\n\n      \"Black Laws\" of Ohio, efforts to have them repealed, 236\n\n      Blackburn, Gideon, master of John Gloucester, 66-67\n\n      Book Concern of the A. M. E. Church, established, 102\n\n      Booker, J. A., an educator, 206;\n        opinion of, 302\n\n      Boone, L. W., a preacher of power in North Carolina, 240\n\n      Boston, the Negro Baptists in, 121\n\n      Boucher, Jonathan, the words of, 23-24\n\n      Boulden, J. F., in politics, 227-228;\n        religious efforts of, 227\n\n      Bowen, J. W. E., a prominent candidate for bishop, 299\n\n      Bowling, R. H., a preacher of renown in Norfolk, 282\n\n      Boyd, R. H., head of the National Baptist Publishing House,\n          261, 297\n\n      Bradby, a social welfare minister, 277\n\n      Braxton, P. H. A., religious effort of, 228-229;\n        in politics, 229\n\n      Bray, Dr. Thomas, the mission of, 10\n\n      British, favorable attitude of, 41\n\n      Brooks, Bishop Sampson, a popular social preacher, 278\n\n      Brooks, Philip, interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Brooks, Walter H., quotation from, 41-42;\n        the education of, 217;\n        attack of, on white Baptists, 261\n\n      Brooks, W. H., a Methodist minister in New York, 277\n\n      Brown, Marcus, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Brown, Morris, a pioneer African Methodist preacher in South\n          Carolina, 76;\n        elected bishop of A. M. E. Church, 101\n\n      Brown, William, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78\n\n      Brown, W. W., popular pastor in New York, 278\n\n      Browne, W. W., a minister in business, 267\n\n      Bryan, Andrew, efforts of, in Savannah, 43, 47-53;\n        persecution of, 49-52\n\n      Bryan, Jonathan, master of Andrew Bryan, 49;\n        his friend, 50\n\n      Bryan, Sampson, brother and co-worker of Andrew Bryan, 49-50\n\n      Bryant, Ira T., a publisher, 297\n\n      Bryant, William C., interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Bryce, John, a preacher to Negroes, 160, 164\n\n      Bull, Henry, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Bumstead, Horace, an educator, 215\n\n      Burling, William, interest of, in Negroes, 18\n\n      Burns, Francis, a Negro made bishop to Africa by the\n          Methodists, 189\n\n      Burroughs, N. H., the achievements of, 206\n\n      Burrows, pastor of the African Baptist Church in Philadelphia,\n          87\n\n      Burt, Thomas, a supporter of the work in Savannah, 48\n\n      Buxton, Fowell, a comment of, 27\n\n\n      Caesar, a pioneer Negro Baptist preacher, 137\n\n      Cain, Bishop R. H., religious work of, 234-235;\n        in politics, 234-235;\n        a member of Congress, 234\n\n      Call of politics, 220-246\n\n      Cameron, Paul C., quotation from, on John Chavis, 68-69\n\n      Camp meetings among Negro Methodists, 144-145\n\n      Campbell, Alexander, sermon of, in Andrew Marshall's church,\n           114;\n        trouble resulting from, 114, 115\n\n      Campbell, General, a friend of George Liele, 45\n\n      Campbell, William J., successor to Andrew Marshall, 117\n\n      Camphor, A. P., a Methodist missionary bishop, 299\n\n      Capucin monks, protest of, 3\n\n      Carroll, Richard, a preacher of social welfare tendency, 278\n\n      Carter, R. A., a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Cary, Lott, sketch of, 137-140;\n        ordained to preach, 139;\n        work of, in Liberia, 139-140;\n        death of, 140;\n        interest of, in religious instruction, 160\n\n      Casas, las, a missionary, 2;\n        attitude of, on slavery, 2\n\n      Caste in the white church, 306-309\n\n      Catholics working among Negroes, 1-6;\n        appeal to Negroes a failure, 98;\n        attraction of Negroes by, 256\n\n      Challenge to the Negro in freedom, 168\n\n      Change in worship advocated, 254-255\n\n      Chapman, James, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 75\n\n      Charleston, a Negro school in, 8-9;\n        Morris Brown's work in, 77;\n        fracas in church, in, 133-134;\n        Negro churches of, demolished, 134;\n        Presbyterians of, interested in the instruction of Negroes,\n            155\n\n      Charlton, the work of, among Negroes in New York, 14\n\n      Chase, Salmon P., interest of, in freedmen, 213\n\n      Chavis, John, an educated Negro teacher and preacher, 67-69\n\n      Christian, W., pastor of a Negro Baptist Church in Toronto,\n          122\n\n      Christian character emphasized, 252\n\n      \"Christianity\" of the whites, a farce in modern times, 306-309\n\n      Church management, questioned, 254\n\n      Churchill, W. P., one of the pioneer C. M. E. workers, 196\n\n      Civil War, the, and the church, 185-201;\n        an upheaval, 188\n\n      Clair, M. W., a bishop of the M. E. Church, 299\n\n      Clarke, James Freeman, a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Clayton, Moses C., a pioneer Baptist preacher in Baltimore,\n          111, 136\n\n      Cleaves, N. C., a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Coke, Bishop, the position of, 26\n\n      Coker, Daniel, a pioneer preacher in the A. M. E. Church,\n          75-76;\n        elected bishop, 76;\n        resigned, 76;\n        work of, in Baltimore, 76\n\n      Cole, Abraham, a preacher of power, 104\n\n      Coleman, Elihu, interest of, in Negroes, 18\n\n      Colgan, the work of, in New York, 14\n\n      Collins, Leonard, a pioneer preacher in the A. M. E. Zion\n          Church, 104\n\n      Colonization Society, the American, opposed, 170\n\n      Colored Cumberland Presbyterian Church organized, 192\n\n      Colored Methodist Episcopal Church organized, 193-197;\n        unfair criticism of, 193-194\n\n      Columbus, missionary spirit of, 1\n\n      Conflict of sects, 19-20\n\n      Congregationalists, interest of, in Negroes, 99;\n        small following, 99;\n        promotion of education by, 203-204;\n        attract Negroes later, 256\n\n      Conservative and progressive in the Negro church, 247-265\n\n      Consolidated American Baptist Missionary Convention, 200\n\n      Control of Negro church, desired by whites, 278-280\n\n      Cook, Steven A., a friend of George Liele, 46\n\n      Cooke, John F., founder of the Fifteenth Street Presbyterian\n          Church, 136\n\n      Cooperation taught through the church, 284, 285\n\n      Coppin, Bishop L. J., foreign mission work of, 296-297\n\n      Corpew, E. G., a preacher in Portsmouth, 135\n\n      Cottrell, Elias, a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Coxe, General, attitude of, toward the teaching of slaves, 164\n\n      Crockett, J. W., denominational work of, 297\n\n      Cruikshanks, Amos, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Crummell, Alexander, the struggles of, 176-177;\n        interest of, in civil rights, 238\n\n      Cuff, Peter, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Cunningham, Henry, a co-worker with Andrew Marshall, 113\n\n      Curry, J. L. M., work of, 214\n\n      Cutler, Dr., a missionary in Boston, 17\n\n\n      D'Alone, M., supporter of Negro and Indian Missions, 10\n\n      Davis, Edward, a friend of Andrew Bryan, 48\n\n      Davis, Noah, a pioneer Baptist preacher in Baltimore, 111, 136\n\n      Dawn, the, of a new day, 23-39\n\n      DeBaptiste, Richard, a pioneer Baptist preacher in the\n          Northwest Territory, 122;\n        religious work of, 241-242\n\n      DeBerry, W. N., church of, socialized, 277\n\n      Derrick, Bishop W. B., religious work of, 231;\n        in politics, 231-232\n\n      Development, the early, of the Negro church, 100-122\n\n      Devous, John, a preacher in Savannah, 116\n\n      Differing ideas in the Negro church, 247-265\n\n      Difficulties, the, of missions, 19-22\n\n      District of Columbia, Negro churches in, 110-111, 136\n\n      Dixwell Avenue Congregational Church, establishment of, 99\n\n      Dover Baptist Association, received Negro church, 135\n\n      Dow, Lorenzo, sermon of, in Andrew Bryan's church, 49\n\n      Drayton, Henry, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Drummond, Hugh, the escape of a slave preacher from, 72\n\n      Durham, Clayton, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 75\n\n\n      Early development of the Negro Church, 100-122\n\n      Eden, James, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Education, a concern of the Negro preacher, 168\n\n      Edwards, Mrs., interest of, in proselyting Negroes, 7\n\n      Eliot, John, interest of, in slaves, 15\n\n      Ellis, Harrison, a Negro preacher in Alabama, 140-142\n\n      Episcopalians, interest of, in Negroes, 94-97;\n        attitude of, toward Negroes, 150-152;\n        assistance of, given freedmen, 210-211;\n        attract Negroes, 256\n\n      Evangelical sects, work of, 23-29;\n        appeal of, successful, 143-144\n\n      Evans, Henry, a pioneer Negro preacher in North Carolina, 56\n\n\n      Farrand, Daniel, teacher of Lemuel Haynes, 63\n\n      Finley, J. B., the successor of John Stewart, 60-61\n\n      First Colored Methodist Protestant Church organized, 107\n\n      Fisk University, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Fleetwood, Bishop, sermon of, on the conversion of Negroes, 9\n\n      Foreign mission and the Negro church, 296, 297\n\n      Foreign relief to freedmen, 208\n\n      Ford, J. E., church institutional work of, 276\n\n      Fox, George, attitude of, toward freedom and enlightenment, 18\n\n      France, decrees of, as to indoctrinating slaves, 3\n\n      Francis, Henry, a Negro preacher in Savannah, 52\n\n      Fray, S. T., a pioneer preacher in the A. M. E. Zion Church,\n          104\n\n      Frazer, Garrison, a pastor in Savannah, 117\n\n      Free African Society, organization of, 75;\n        comment of, 92\n\n      Free-Will Baptists, the achievements of, 203, 209\n\n      Freedmen Aid Societies, the work of, 208-209\n\n      Freedmen Aid Society, the, of the Methodist Church, the\n          establishment of, 209\n\n      Freedmen's Bureau, facts from, 208\n\n      French, missionary spirit of, 1\n\n      Friends, the relief work of, 207-208;\n        the Society of, in England, the efforts of, 208\n\n      Friends' Association of Philadelphia, for the relief of\n          colored Freedmen, the work of, 207\n\n      Friends' Association for the Aid and Elevation of the\n          Freedmen, 208\n\n      Frink, S., a missionary in Georgia, 11\n\n      Fugitive Slave Law, effect of, on the migration of Negroes,\n          122\n\n\n      Galbreth, George, election of, as bishop, 105-106;\n        dispute concerning, 106\n\n      Gales, G. W., in politics, 226;\n        religious efforts of, 226\n\n      Galphin, George, patron of the Silver Bluff Church, 42\n\n      Garnett, Henry Highland, the career of, 175-176\n\n      Garretson, Freeborn, attitude of, on Negro conversion, 28\n\n      Garrison, William L., interest of, in relief of freedmen, 212\n\n      George, David, pastor of the Silver Bluff Church, 42;\n        work of, in Nova Scotia, 42;\n        in Sierre Leone, 42\n\n      Georgia, the instruction of Negroes in, 10-11;\n        Negro Baptists in, 112-118;\n        reactionary laws of, 132;\n        Presbyterians of, interested in the Negro, 155, 157\n\n      Gibbs, Thomas, the escape of a slave preacher from, 72\n\n      Gibson, Bishop, interested in proselyting Negroes, 7;\n        letters of, 7\n\n      Gillfield Baptist Church, Petersburg, establishment of, 136\n\n      Gilliard, Nicholson, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Gloucester, John, a pioneer Presbyterian preacher, 65-67\n\n      Goff, Lyman B., interested in the preaching of Charles T.\n          Walker, 245\n\n      Goose Creek Parish, Negroes of, instructed, 7\n\n      Graham, Solon, an early C. M. E. minister, 196\n\n      Graham, W. F., a minister in business, 267\n\n      Grant, Bishop, a useful churchman, 238\n\n      Great, Evans, a preacher in Savannah, 112, 113\n\n      Green, A. R., an editor and Book Steward, 102\n\n      Green, Beriah, a friendly teacher of Negroes, 175, 176\n\n      Gregg, David, interested in the preaching of Charles T.\n          Walker, 245\n\n      Gregg, Jacob, an Emancipating Baptist, 35\n\n      Grimes, Leonard, sketch of, 180-182\n\n      Grimke, F. J., position of, 303\n\n      Grouch, Job, a C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      Growth of the Negro church, 286-299\n\n      Guy, Rev. Mr., a preacher to Negroes, 8\n\n      Gunner, Byron, the advanced position of, 304\n\n\n      Haig, Mrs., interest of, in proselyting Negroes, 7\n\n      Hale, Edward Everett, a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Hall, C., preaching of, to Negroes, in North Carolina, 10\n\n      Hall, Stephen, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Hamilton, Leroy, the master of Henry Francis, 52\n\n      Hamilton, William, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church,\n          78-79\n\n      Hampton Institute, the establishment of, 204\n\n      Hanover Presbytery, John Chavis a missionary for, 68\n\n      Harden, Henry, troubles of, with the A. M. E. Zion Church,\n          82-83\n\n      Harding, Henry, a supporter of Richard Allen, 75-76\n\n      Harper, Alexander, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Harry, a Negro teacher in Charleston, 8-9\n\n      Haversham, Justice James, favorable to Andrew Bryan, 49-50\n\n      Hawkins, Gen. Rush C., interested in the preaching of Charles\n          T. Walker, 245\n\n      Hawkins, John R., a business man in the church, 267\n\n      Hawthorne Keidor, a preacher to Negroes in Mobile, 135\n\n      Hayes, Gregory W., the work of, 206;\n        conflict of, with the American Baptist Home Mission Society,\n            262\n\n      Haygood, A. G., a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Haynes, Lemuel, a scholarly Negro preacher to whites, 62-65\n\n      Henderson, Archibald, a student under John Chavis, 70\n\n      Henderson, John, a student under John Chavis, 70\n\n      Henderson, J., a preacher in Philadelphia, 121\n\n      Hepburn, John, a worker among Negroes, 18\n\n      Hogarth, George, election of as A. M. E. Book Steward, 102\n\n      Hogg, Kate, a member of the Savannah African Church, 45\n\n      Holly, J. T., the record of, 179-180\n\n      Holmes, Donald, an emancipating Baptist, 35\n\n      Holsey, L. H., an early C. M. E. preacher, 196;\n        elected bishop, 196;\n        work of, 239-240\n\n      Home missions of the Negro church, 295-296\n\n      Honyman, J., the efforts of, among Negroes, 17\n\n      Hood, Bishop James W., the religious work of, 236;\n        in politics, 236-238\n\n      Hopkins, Samuel, the interest of, in Negroes, 36\n\n      Houston, U. L., a pastor in Savannah, 117\n\n      Howard, O. O., an educator, of freedmen, 215\n\n      Howard University, the establishment of, 204\n\n      Huddlestone, work of, in New York, 14\n\n      Hunt, Rev. Mr., a teacher of Negroes, 8\n\n      Hurst, Bishop John, the faith of, 301\n\n\n      Illinois, Negro Baptists in, 122\n\n      Independent church movement, 71-99\n\n      Intelligent people lost to the church, 255-256;\n        welcomed by others, 256\n\n\n      Jack, Uncle, a pioneer Negro preacher in Virginia, 55-56\n\n      Jackson, Anderson, an early C. M. E. minister, 196\n\n      Jackson, Edward, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Jackson, William, a preacher in Philadelphia, 121\n\n      Jackson, Tennessee, C. M. E. Church organized at, 195-196\n\n      Jacksonville, Florida, Negro Baptist church in, 118-119\n\n      Jacob, a slave preacher, the escape of, 72\n\n      Jacobs, Francis, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78-79\n\n      Jamaica, the work of George Liele in, 43-46\n\n      James, Thomas, an anti-slavery preacher, 173\n\n      Jasper, John, a popular Baptist preacher, 238-239\n\n      Jaudan, Rev. J., a preacher to Negroes in Florida, 118\n\n      Jenny, Rev. Mr., the work of, among Negroes, 11\n\n      Jernagin, W. H., a social welfare minister in Washington, 278\n\n      John Street Methodist Episcopal Church, troubles of, 78, 83-84\n\n      Johnson, Adam, pastor of a schismatic church in Savannah, 114\n\n      Johnson, Dr., a worker at Stratford, 17\n\n      Johnson, D. L., a teacher of contrabands, 215\n\n      Johnson, Harvey, attack of, on white Baptists, 261\n\n      Johnson, Henry, a pioneer preacher in the A. M. E. Zion\n          Church, 104\n\n      Johnson, Bishop J. Albert, foreign mission work of, 296-297\n\n      Johnson, M. W., a rising preacher in the Baptist Church, 282\n\n      Johnson, Robert, a pastor of Baptists in Washington, D. C.,\n          282\n\n      Johnson, W. B., a Baptist preacher in the District of\n          Columbia, 240\n\n      Johnson, Bishop W. D., an A. M. E. minister of educational\n          tendencies, 278\n\n      Jones, Absalom, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 74;\n        differing ideas of, 75;\n        rector of St. Thomas, 75, 94\n\n      Jones, C. C., interest of, in the enlightenment of Negroes,\n          153-155\n\n      Jones, Joshua H., a substantial supporter of Wilberforce, 264\n\n      Jones, R. E., a bishop of the M. E. Church, 299\n\n      Jones, Thomas, escape of a slave preacher from, 72\n\n      Jones, William, a pioneer C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      Jordan, L. G., interest of, in business, 282;\n        foreign mission work of, 296\n\n\n      Keith, George, promoter of religious training, 18\n\n      Kennedy, Dempsey, an anti-slavery preacher, 173\n\n      Kentucky, the Emancipating Baptists in, 34-36;\n        Negro Baptists in, 119-120\n\n      Kirkland, Colonel, a friend of George Liele, 44, 45\n\n\n      Lambert, William, a pioneer Methodist preacher, 81;\n        troubles with the A. M. E. Zion Church, 81;\n        relations with Richard Allen, 80-82\n\n      Lane, Isaac, a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Lane, John W., a C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      Lane College, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Latin element, missionary spirit of, 2\n\n      Law, Josiah, a preacher to Negroes, 155\n\n      Lawton, Bristol, a minister in Savannah, 117\n\n      Leadership in the Negro church, 280-281\n\n      Lee, George W., achievements of, 244\n\n      Lee, Bishop, President of Wilberforce, 238\n\n      Legislation, reactionary, 131-132\n\n      Lemon, William, a Negro Baptist preacher in Virginia, 53\n\n      Lexington, Kentucky, the Baptist Church in, 86;\n        Negro Baptist Church in, 119\n\n      Liberty County, Georgia, instruction of Negroes in, 165\n\n      Liele, George, preacher at the Silver Bluff Church, 42;\n        efforts of, in Savannah, 43-45;\n        in Jamaica, 44-45\n\n      Lincoln University, development of, 203\n\n      Lindsay, the work of, in New Jersey, 12\n\n      Literature for religious instruction, 166\n\n      Livingston College, the establishment of, 205-206\n\n      Locke, a white minister interested in Thomas Paul, 88\n\n      Locke, John, the philosophy of, influential, 25\n\n      Locke, Richard, the work of, among Negroes, 11\n\n      London Freedmen's Aid Society, the work of, 208\n\n      Lott Cary Convention, organization, 262-263\n\n      Love, E. K., a popular preacher in Georgia, 240\n\n      Louisville, Negro Baptists in, 119\n\n\n      MacIntosh County, Georgia, instruction of Negroes in, 165\n\n      Macsparran, Dr., a worker among Negroes at Narragansett, 17\n\n      McClaskey, John, an adviser of the A. M. E. Zion Church, 79\n\n      McDonald, James, a co-worker with Negroes in Florida, 118\n\n      McKall, Basil, a preacher of power, 104\n\n      McLemore, James, an evangelist among Negroes, 137\n\n      McQueen, Steven, a preacher in Savannah, 116\n\n      McTyeire, interest of, in the Colored Methodist, 195\n\n      Management of the Church, the, questioned, 254\n\n      Manchester, Virginia, large Negro Baptist church in, 111-112\n\n      Manly, Governor Charles, a student under John Chavis, 70\n\n      Mangum, P. H., a student under John Chavis, 69\n\n      Mangum, W. P., a student under John Chavis, 69\n\n      Manning, J. M., a friend of the freedmen, 213\n\n      Mars, John N., an anti-slavery Methodist preacher, 173\n\n      Marsh, Jacob, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Marshall, Abraham, organizer of the Savannah Baptist Church,\n          48\n\n      Marshall, Andrew, a noted Baptist preacher in Savannah, 112;\n        troubles of, 113-115;\n        work of, 112-118\n\n      Martin, J. C., denominational work of, 297\n\n      Martin J. Sella, an eloquent preacher, 238\n\n      Maryland, Catholic workers among Negroes in, 4-5\n\n      Massachusetts Episcopal Association, the efforts of, 211\n\n      Mather, Cotton, interest of, in slaves, 15-16\n\n      Matthews, John, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Mayo, A. D., the efforts of, 214\n\n      Meacham, J. B., a pioneer Negro preacher in St. Louis, 120\n\n      Meade, Bishop, interest of, in the instruction of Negroes,\n          151-152\n\n      Methodist and Baptist attract Negroes, 196-197, 217\n\n      Methodists, African, in the North, 120-122;\n        school statistics of, 203\n\n      Methodist Episcopal Church, position on slavery in 1784, 29;\n        pioneer work among Negroes, 26-31;\n        division of, on slavery, 123-124;\n        interest of, in Negro uplift, 158-159;\n        in the Civil War, 186-187, 189-192;\n        attitude of, toward the Negroes, 188-192, 258-259;\n        qualified recognition of Negroes, by, 191-192, 193-197\n\n      Mifflin, Warner, the memorial of, 38\n\n      Migration of Negro Methodists and Baptists, 122\n\n      Miles, W. H., one of the first bishops of the C. M. E. Church,\n          196\n\n      Miller, George Frazier, an Episcopal rector of Brooklyn, 277,\n          304\n\n      Miller, Kelly, opinion of, referred to, 280-281\n\n      Miller, Thomas, pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78\n\n      Miller, William, a pioneer preacher among the Methodists, 78;\n        elected bishop of the A. M. E. Zion Church, 105;\n        death of, 105\n\n      Missionaries, the attitude of the early, among Negroes, 1-2;\n        in the West Indies, 26-27\n\n      Missionary work, the lack of, in America, 21;\n        impeded in Africa, 309-311\n\n      Mississippi, the Presbyterians of, interested in the Negro,\n          155\n\n      Mixed churches, procedure in, 132-133\n\n      Mobile, a Negro church in, 118;\n        establishment of the Anthony Street Church in, 135\n\n      Monks, Capucin, protest of, 3\n\n      Montague, Justice James, favorable to Andrew Bryan, 49-50\n\n      Montgomery, Alabama, Negro Baptists in, 118\n\n      Moore, Matthew, the pastor of whites and Negroes, 44\n\n      Moore, Bishop, election of, 105;\n        retirement of, 105\n\n      Morehouse College, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Morris Brown University, the establishment of, 205\n\n      Morris, E. C., head of the National Baptist Convention, 261\n\n      Morris, Rev. Mr., a preacher in Virginia, 135\n\n      Moses, Rev. Mr., a worker among Negroes in Virginia, 53\n\n      Mound Bayou, mixed Baptist Church in, 86\n\n      Muir, a worker in Kentucky, 38\n\n\n      National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women\n          and Children, the efforts of, 307\n\n      National Baptist Convention, 201;\n        the fight of, against white Baptists, 257-264\n\n      National Freedmen's Relief Association, the work of, 207\n\n      Neal, Rev. Mr., the labors of, in Dover, 12\n\n      Neau, Elias, the work of, among Negroes in New York, 12-14\n\n      Negro Baptists, connection of, with white Baptists, 201\n\n      Negro Church, the, socialized, 266-285;\n        a place for recreation, 267-268;\n        educational institution, 268-273;\n        a welfare agency, 273-277;\n        leadership in, 280-281;\n        the criticism of, 302-303;\n        its present situation, 300-313\n\n      Negro ministers, restrictions upon, 131;\n        the authority of, 278-279;\n        unique position of, 281-282;\n        still numerous, 304-305;\n        in conflict with southern white ministers, 305-306;\n        a redeeming force, 301\n\n      Negro schools established after the Civil War, 203-219\n\n      Negroes, the religious point of view of, 146-147\n\n      New England Missionary Convention, the, 200\n\n      New England, missionary work of, among Negroes, 15-17;\n        Negro churches in, 121\n\n      New Haven, Connecticut, Negro Congregational Church in, 99\n\n      New Jersey, the conversion of Negroes in, 12\n\n      New York, the instruction of Negroes in, 12-15\n\n      New York City, the Abyssinian Baptist Church in, organized,\n          88-89\n\n      Newman, Rev. Mr., preaching of, to Negroes in North Carolina,\n          9-10\n\n      Norman, M. W. D., a preacher of power, 282\n\n      North, Negro Baptists in, 120, 122\n\n      North Carolina, the instruction of Negroes in, 9-10;\n        the work of the Quakers in, 18;\n        Negro Baptists of, organized the first State Convention,\n            199-200\n\n      Northern philanthropy, change in, 263-264\n\n      Northwestern Baptist Convention, 200\n\n      Northwestern Freedmen's Aid Commission, the work of, 207\n\n\n      Ohio, Negro Baptists in, 122\n\n      Olivet Baptist Church, the success of, 278-279\n\n      Olmsted, F. L., comment of, on religious instruction, 149-151;\n        interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      O'Neal, J. B., ideas of, as to Negro uplift, 164\n\n      Opinions, differences of, a difficulty, 19-20\n\n      Osborne, Justice Henry, favorable to Andrew Bryan, 49\n\n\n      Paine, Bishop Robert, interest of, in Colored Methodists,\n          195-196\n\n      Paine College, the establishment of, 205\n\n      Palmer, founder of the Church at Silver Bluff, 41-42\n\n      Pamphlet, Gowan, a preacher of the Negro race in Virginia, 53\n\n      Panama, de Luna Victoria, a bishop in, 4\n\n      Parsippany, Presbyterian School at, 152\n\n      Patterson, Robert, an elder in Kentucky, 38\n\n      Paul, Thomas, a pioneer Negro Baptist preacher in New England,\n          88-91;\n        work of, in Boston, 88;\n        efforts of, in New York, 89-90;\n        missionary efforts of, 90-91\n\n      Payne, Bishop Daniel A., early work of, 171-172\n\n      Payne, C. H., religious work of, 230;\n        in politics, 230-231\n\n      Penn, William, interest of, in Negroes, 18\n\n      Pennington, J. W. C., the achievements of, 178-179\n\n      Pennsylvania Freedmen's Relief Association, the efforts of,\n          207\n\n      Pennsylvania, the missionary movement in, 11-12\n\n      Perkins, R. J., a pioneer preacher of West Virginia, 240\n\n      Perry, Rufus L., religious and educational work of, 242-244\n\n      Peru, a Negro bishop in, 4\n\n      Peter, Jesse, the work of, in reviving the Silver Bluff\n          Church, 42\n\n      Petersburgh, Virginia, Baptist Church in, 53, 85\n\n      Philadelphia, the Negro Baptist Church of, established, 86;\n        proslavery element in, 86-87\n\n      Philanthropy, northern, change in, 263-264\n\n      Phillips, C. H., a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Phillips, Doc., a pioneer Negro preacher, 137\n\n      Pierce, Edward L., interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Pioneer Negro preachers, 40-70\n\n      Poindexter, James, a pioneer Negro Baptist preacher in Ohio,\n          122;\n        religious efforts of, 223;\n        in politics, 223-224\n\n      Politics, the call of, 220-246\n\n      Polk, Bishop, attitude of, toward the instruction of his\n          slaves, 149-151\n\n      Pontier, Samuel, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78\n\n      Porteus, Bishop, interest of, in the salvation of Negroes, 7\n\n      Portsmouth, Virginia, Negro Baptist church in, 54-55, 111\n\n      Powell, A. C, a preacher with a following, 282\n\n      Preachers, Negro, pioneer work of, 40-70;\n        educational work of, 168-169;\n        as spokesmen of the Negroes, 169;\n        interested in colonization, 170;\n        in the underground railroad, 170, 171;\n        in the press, 171\n\n      Preachers, Negro Pioneer, 40-70\n\n      Preachers of versatile genius, 167-184\n\n      Presbyterians, interest of, in Negroes, 97-98;\n        failure to win Negroes, 98;\n        position on slavery and the Negro, 36-39;\n        position of in 1782, 36-37;\n        pacifist letter of, 38-39;\n        the attitude of, on slavery, 124-127, 128, 130;\n        interest of, in the instruction of Negroes, 152-158;\n        schools of, 203, 204, 205;\n        educational work of, 210;\n        attract Negroes, 256\n\n      Price, J. C., the record of, 206;\n        the education of, 217\n\n      Primitive Baptist Church, Negroes separate therefrom, 192\n\n      Princeton, John Chavis at, 68\n\n      Proctor, H. H., church institutional work of, 276\n\n      Progressive Baptists, the separation of, from whites, 259-264\n\n      Progressive ideas in the Negro church, 247-265\n\n      Protestant Episcopal Freedmen's Commission, aid of, to\n          Negroes, 211\n\n      Protracted meetings among Baptists, 143-144\n\n      Providence Baptist Association, organization of, 122\n\n      Pugh, the work of, among Negroes, 12\n\n\n      Quakers, the efforts of, among Negroes, 17-19\n\n      Quinn, W. P., a successful missionary, 101;\n        elected bishop, 101\n\n\n      Race prejudice in the church, 305-309\n\n      Ranford, of Chowan, a preacher to Negroes, 9\n\n      Ransom, R. C., head of the Institutional Church, Chicago, 276;\n        an editor, 297\n\n      Ray, Charles B., the work of, 173-174\n\n      Recent growth of the Negro church, 286-299\n\n      Recent statistics of the Negro church, 286-299\n\n      Reddick, M. W., a preacher of influence, 282\n\n      Relation of the individual to the church, differing ideas as\n          to, 251-252\n\n      Relations of whites and blacks in churches, 132-134\n\n      Religion, differing ideas of, 250-251\n\n      Religious education as a preparation, 202-219\n\n      Religious instruction revived, 148-166\n\n      Revells, Hiram R., sketch of, 183-184\n\n      Rice, an elder in Kentucky, interested in the Negro, 38\n\n      Richard, a slave preacher, the escape of, 72\n\n      Riddle, J. M., a minister in California, 278\n\n      Riot of Negroes in New York in 1812, 14\n\n      Rippon, Dr., testimony of, as to Andrew Bryan, 51\n\n      Roberts, Isaac, a preacher in Savannah, 117\n\n      Roberts, John W., a Negro made bishop to Africa by the\n          Methodists, 189\n\n      Roberts, R., the missionary work of, 100\n\n      Rockefeller, John D., interested in the preaching of Charles\n          T. Walker, 245\n\n      Roger Williams University, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Rogers, E. P., a preacher before the Civil War, 179;\n        poem of, on the Missouri Compromise, 179\n\n      Rose, David, friend of Lemuel Haynes, 62\n\n      Ross, the work of, in Pennsylvania, 11\n\n      Rush, Christopher, a pioneer in A. M. E. Zion Church, 85;\n        election of, as bishop, 102;\n        the success of, 102-103\n\n      Ryland, Robert, pastor of Negro church in Richmond, 111-112;\n        work of, among Negroes, in Richmond, 135;\n        promoter of religious instruction\n        among Negroes, 161-163;\n        comment on, 162-163\n\n\n      Samuels, an early C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      Sandiford, Ralph, interest of, in Negroes, 18\n\n      Sandoval, Alfonso, protest of, in behalf of Negroes, 3\n\n      Savannah, resolutions of the Baptist Association of, on Andrew\n          Bryan, 53;\n        the Baptist Church in, 85;\n        the churches of, 115-117\n\n      Sayre, J., the work of, among Negroes in New York, 15\n\n      Schism among white Methodists, effect of, on Negro Methodists,\n          83-84-85;\n        in the Methodist Church, 123-124, 127-128, 130;\n        in all churches, 123-147;\n        in the Negro Baptist Church, 297-298\n\n      Schismatic movement in Negro church, 247-265;\n        results from, 257-258\n\n      Scott, Daniel, a preacher in Philadelphia, 121\n\n      Scott, June, a pioneer Methodist preacher, 78;\n        schismatic efforts of, 79-80\n\n      Secker, Bishop, sermon on conversion of Negroes, 7\n\n      Sewell, Jonathan, interest of, in slaves, 16\n\n      Shaw, Francis F., interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Shaw University, the establishment of, 203\n\n      Simmons, William J., religious efforts of, 223;\n        in politics, 223\n\n      Simpson, Hagar, a member of the Baptist Church in Savannah, 45\n\n      Simpson, Smart, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n      Slaves indoctrinated, 3\n\n      Smith, Bishop C. S., educational efforts of, 297\n\n      Smith, George, an Emancipating Baptist, 35\n\n      Socializing the Negro church, 266-285\n\n      Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts,\n          organized, 6;\n        the work of, 6-22\n\n      South Carolina, Negroes in, instructed, 7;\n        a Negro school in, 8;\n        Negro Baptists in, 112;\n        Methodists in, interested in Negro uplift, 158-159\n\n      Southern Baptist Convention, 200\n\n      Sovereigns of Europe, change of attitude of, toward Negro, 2\n\n      Spain, decrees of, as to indoctrinating slaves, 3\n\n      Spanish sovereigns, missionary spirit of, 1\n\n      Spencer, Peter, a pioneer Negro preacher, 76\n\n      Spywood, election of, as bishop, 104-105\n\n      St. George Methodist Episcopal Church, in Philadelphia,\n          trouble in, 73\n\n      St. James, an Episcopal Church established in Baltimore, 96\n\n      St. Louis, Negro Baptists in, 120\n\n      St. Phillips Church, episcopal, established in New York, 94-95\n\n      St. Thomas, an episcopal church established in Philadelphia,\n          94\n\n      Statistics on Negro membership in mixed churches, 146;\n        of Freedmen Aid Societies, 206-208;\n        of the Negro church, 286-299\n\n      Stevens, David, a preacher of power, 104\n\n      Stewart, John, a pioneer Negro preacher in Ohio, 58-61\n\n      Stewart, Rev. Mr., a missionary in North Carolina, 10\n\n      Stiles, Ezra, interest in the Negro, 36\n\n      Storer, Bellamy, interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Stokes, W. H., a forceful preacher in Richmond, 241\n\n      Stoupe, the work of, in New York, 15\n\n      Straight College, the establishment of, 204\n\n      Stratton, Daniel, a pioneer preacher of West Virginia, 240\n\n      Struggle between the conservative and the progressive in the\n          Negro church, 247-265\n\n      Sturgeon, W., the work of, among Negroes, 11-12\n\n\n      Taft, William H., interested in the preaching of Charles T.\n          Walker, 245\n\n      Talented Negroes in conflict with the conservatives, 247-265\n\n      Talladega College, the establishment of, 203-204\n\n      Tanner, Bishop B. T., comment of, 92-93;\n        a power in the A. M. E. Church, 239\n\n      Tanner, C. M., an African Methodist preacher in Washington,\n          240\n\n      Tapsico, Jacob, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 75\n\n      Tarrant, Carter, an Emancipating Baptist, 35\n\n      Taylor, Charles, the work of, in New York, 15\n\n      Taylor, Rev. E., interest of, in the enlightenment of Negroes,\n          7-8\n\n      Teague, Collin, a co-worker of Lott Cary, 139-140\n\n      Tennessee, Baptists in, 119;\n        George Bentley's work in, 137\n\n      Terrell, L., pastor of Negro Baptist Church in Lexington, 119\n\n      Thiergood, R. T., an early C. M. E. worker, 196\n\n      Thomas, Samuel, a teacher of Negroes, 7\n\n      Thompson, Abraham, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church,\n          78-79;\n        schismatic efforts of, 79-80, 81\n\n      Tindley, C. A., a preacher of power, 244\n\n      Toronto, Negro Baptists in, 122;\n        Methodists in, 122\n\n      Tougaloo University, the establishment of, 204\n\n      Transylvania, the Presbytery of, concerned with the Negroes,\n          38\n\n      Trujillo, a Negro bishop in, 4\n\n      Turner, Bishop H. M., religious work of, 232;\n        in politics, 232-234\n\n      Turner, Nat, the effect of the insurrection of, 52, 69\n\n      Turpin, London, a co-worker of Morris Brown, 76\n\n\n      Uncle Jack, a Negro pioneer preacher, 55-56\n\n      Union American Methodist Episcopal Church organized, 107\n\n      Union Church of Africans, organized, 107\n\n      Union Seminary, the forerunner of Wilberforce, 205\n\n      Unwritten law as to holding Christians slaves, 4\n\n      Usher, J., the work of, among Negroes, 16\n\n\n      Vanderhorst, R. H., a pioneer preacher in the C. M. E. Church,\n          196;\n        elected bishop, 196\n\n      Varick, James, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78;\n        elected bishop, 85;\n        death of, 102\n\n      Vaughn, Richard, a preacher in Philadelphia, 121\n\n      Vermont Avenue Baptist Church, 282\n\n      Vesey, a supporter of Negro missions, 13\n\n      Vesey, Denmark, the effect of the insurrection of, 78\n\n      Vices, so-called, 253\n\n      Victoria, Francisco Xavier de Luna, a churchman of Negro\n          blood, 4\n\n      Virginia, Quakers in, 17-18;\n        Emancipating Baptists in, 32-34;\n        Negro Baptists in, 53-54:\n        reactionary laws of, 131\n\n      Virginia Theological Seminary and College, the establishment\n          of, 206\n\n\n      Waldron, J. M., church institutional work of, 276;\n        in politics, 312\n\n      Walker, C. T., a preacher of power, 245-246\n\n      Walker, William, opposition of, to work of John Stewart, 60\n\n      Walters, Bishop A., church work of, 311-312;\n        in politics, 312\n\n      Ward, Samuel R., record of, 182-183;\n        Frederick Douglass' opinion of, 183\n\n      Watcoat, Richard, recognition of Richard Allen by, 73\n\n      Waters, Edward, ordained assistant bishop, 101\n\n      Webster, Thomas, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 75\n\n      Wells, Richard, a useful minister in Richmond, 240\n\n      West Indies, missionaries to Negroes in, 4\n\n      Western Colored Baptist Convention, organization of, 122\n\n      Western Freedmen's Aid Commission, the work of, 207\n\n      Western University, the establishment of, 205\n\n      Wesley, John, the position of, 26\n\n      White, J. T., in politics, 225;\n        religious efforts of, 225\n\n      White, Sampson, a pioneer preacher in the Baptist Church,\n          110-111;\n        preaching of, in New York, 121;\n        pastor of the Gillfield Baptist Church, 136\n\n      White, W. J., a successful minister, 240\n\n      White, William, a co-worker of Richard Allen, 74-75\n\n      White man's standard, an influence, 252-253\n\n      Whitefield, George, the position of, on the Negro, 26\n\n      Whitmore, the work of, in New York, 14\n\n      Whittier, John G., interest of, in the freedmen, 212\n\n      Wilberforce University, the establishment of, 205\n\n      Williams, John A., a pioneer preacher in the A. M. E. Zion\n          Church, 104;\n        a noted revivalist, 104\n\n      Williams, L. K., popular pastor in Chicago, 278;\n        social work of, 278-279\n\n      Williams, Peter, a pioneer in the A. M. E. Zion Church, 78;\n        rector of St. Phillips in New York, 94-95;\n        his lack of force, 95\n\n      Williams, Richard, a supporter of Richard Allen, 75\n\n      Williams, R. S., a bishop of the C. M. E. Church, 240\n\n      Williamsburg, Virginia, the Baptist Church in, 1785, 53\n\n      Williamson, Edward, a supporter of Richard Allen, 76\n\n      Willis, J. E., a preacher of power, 282\n\n      Willis, Joseph, a pioneer preacher in the South, 86\n\n      Wood River Baptist Association, organization of, 122\n\n      Woods, R. C., progress of the Virginia Theological Seminary\n          under, 264\n\n      Woolman, John, efforts of, for enlightenment of Negroes, 18\n\n      Worlds, J. J., a pioneer preacher of North Carolina, 240\n\n      Worship, mode of, questioned, 254-255\n\n      Wortham, Dr. James F., a student under John Chavis, 70\n\n      Wright, R. R., editor and publisher, 297\n\n\n      Yates, a worker in Pennsylvania, 11\n\n      Young Negroes in conflict with the old in the church, 247-249\n\n\n\n\n[Transcriber's note: Original spelling variations have not been\nstandardized. Underscores have been used to indicate _italic_ fonts.\nFootnotes have been collected at the end of the text, followed by the\nIndex. \"THE FIRST COLORED BAPTIST CHURCH IN NORTH AMERICA\" [in the\ncaption of the image] is listed as \"The Oldest Negro Baptist Church in\nthe United States\" in the list of illustrations.]","title":"The History of the Negro Church","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":80521}