I recently wrote an article that includes a section on Quaker history regarding slavery. I quote Katharine Gerbner several times. I would love to hear what you think of it. Here's the section: Another book, historian Katharine Gerbner’s Christian Slavery: Conversion and Race in the Protestant Atlantic World, claims, “It was through the mouths of ministers that the brutal slave laws…were enunciated, year after year.” Anti-slavery writers belonged to a very tiny minority in church history. Their views were not adopted by groups of Christians until the 17th century Quakers. And, yet, as Gerbner notes, there were thousands of Quaker slave owners. Believers often point to the denomination of the Quakers as leaders in the abolition movement. The National Park Service explains, “The 1688 Germantown Quaker Petition against slavery was the first protest against African American slavery made by a religious body in the English colonies.” Consider the timing of this: at the beginning of the Enlightenment and at almost the same historical moment as England’s 1688-89 Glorious Revolution when the philosopher John Locke was writing about natural rights in his Second Treatise of Government. New visions of human rights were ruminating in pockets within Europe and America. PBS notes, “In 1776, Quakers were prohibited from owning slaves, and 14 years later they petitioned the U.S. Congress for the abolition of slavery.” The majority of them were pro-slavery until the mid-1700s, long after Enlightenment humanism had begun to change the ethical views of various intellectuals. Gerbner has noted that the 1688 document was written by Quakers of Dutch and German descent, but not signed by members of this sect from an English background. She clarified this in an interview by stating, “The protest was fascinating, but I quickly became more interested in the fact that it was rejected by the English Quakers in Philadelphia.” As Encyclopedia.com describes the Quaker movement against slavery: “The early history of antislavery in America consisted primarily of the agitation of certain British and American Quakers, but even in this group antislavery sentiments grew slowly because many wealthy Quakers were slave-holders. Only by the mid-1700s, when the Society of Friends faced a severe internal crisis brought on by the effects of the Great Awakening and the Seven Years War, did opposition to slavery increase measurably among Quakers. It was not until the 1780s that the major Quaker meetings could announce that their membership was free of slaveholders.” A similar conclusion can be drawn from a summary given in the interview with Gerbner mentioned above: “Some of the first ‘antislavery’ Quakers, like Morgan Godwyn, actually based their arguments on racist claims, and encouraged Friends to exclude Africans from their households completely. Conversely, slave-owning Quakers sometimes went farther than others in arguing for spiritual equality - but they did so in order to defend slavery. Recognizing the complexities of early Quaker debates on slavery helps to explain why it took a century for Friends to disown slave-owners in their meetings.” She mentions that several Quaker anti-slavery tracts from the late 17th century and early 18th century were in large part motivated by racial discomfort in that they promoted abolition as a way to exclude black people from white Quaker communities. These writings de-emphasize the point of equal human rights for all people and instead focus on the need to separate the races. Social historian J. William Frost spent much of his career dedicated to studying the history of the Quakers (Society of Friends). He remarked: "Friends have long been somewhat puzzled, perhaps even embarrassed, that the two most prominent 17th-century Quakers, George Fox and William Penn, made so slight a contribution to the Quaker-led early antislavery movement….the Penns bought and sold slaves and hired the labour of other slaves…Because Fox never addressed the morality of slavery per se, his writings on slavery could be used by conservative slave-owning Friends in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1701 to silence the abolitionists….At a time when a considerable number of Pennsylvania Quakers questioned the morality of slavery, the conservatives in control of the press saw in Fox’s acceptance of slavery a means of neutralising the nascent anti-slavery movement." The full article is titled, "The Bible Clearly Supports Chattel Slavery Based On Race And Gender". It can be found by searching for "Disagreements I Have With Christianity Andy Rhodes".

Thanks for doing this episode on Christian Slavery and I look forward to purchasing this book by Katherine Gerbner.

Thank you for being a vessel in the Kingdom and spreading this knowledge... much appreciated!

Very informative thank you for this!

Great information!

Currently reading this book now,; it's a great book!

Very interesting. I must have this book.

In Deuteronomy if a slave ran away from its master you were not to return the slave to his or her master but let them dwell among you for you were slaves in Egypt. Wonder what they thought of that.

Let's just focus on 'spiritual slavery'... the other slavery is not such a big deal.

Sorry but your guest did not say truth about Christian slavery. It seems people jump in the midle of subjects with their own opinion not based on the fact and history. First your Dr confuse two things. The theology of " Christian cannot be enslaved by christian" and the theology of "christian can enslave who is not christian". "SLAVE " was basicaly applied to eastern european people who were enslaved by christian in 13th century AD. Even today some of group are still called slave. When the eastern european converted to christianisme, then European Christian went to Africa to enslave African. Even the concept of "appartheid " applied in south Africa is from protestant Calvinist initiated in Holland (Dutchland). She has not been honnest if she is really study Christianity history. Many have Dr but not honnest and that is very sad.

While insightfully, I pause with the decision or choice of becoming a christian Slave. Slaves were entice by the alor of "Freedom" as a way out of physical bondage. Dr. Gerbner repeatedly said "they converted of the promise of freedom". Again there's only "Hope" to becoming free through this religion, not believing in this dogmatic belief. Again if we listen to Dr. Gerbner's explanation for baptism and conversion, it brought a sense of community; not believing to this faith.

Name of ship that brought AFRICANS to AMERIKKKA was called JESUS

Ok boomers

Again, misleading and heavily biased information from this channel. Doesn't make me think highly of Jude 3.

I've never known a Christian Slave owner. How could anyone be called a Christian and own slaves? I find the two diametrically apposed, how about you? Everwhere Christianity was proclaimed and actually followed, slavery disappeared! Every race at one point in history has been enslaved to another race or even their own. Slavery is terrible there's no dispute of that fact, however rehashing it over and over profits little and creates further division among free people. Is it a wonder that the racial tension in the USA and abroad is continually burning? Let's face it, when the fire is stoked and continually fueld it will continue to burn, just like the continued hatred that's never been allowed to die out. Stop feeding the fire folks!