Denominational Splits Over Slavery : Methodist, Baptists, & Presbyterians

Slavery was the defining issue which split three major Protestant denominations in the first half of the 19th century. The Methodist Church split to form the Methodist Episcopal Church, The Baptist Church to form the Southern Baptist Convention, and Presbyterians to form the New School Presbyterian Church.[1] Each of these three major groups had their similarities in regards to their divisions, but there were also important differences between them, the deciding factor for their demise was that of slavery, an issue that would also split the country in later decades. Not only were these groups faced with the difficult decision of whether slavery fit their moral standards or not, but they also had to address the religious aspect of the peculiar institution as well. The pro-slavery groups within these divisions were known for their use of biblical passages which supported their decisions in support of slavery, while the anti-slavery halves used the overarching teachings of Christianity and the commandment to “you’re your neighbor as yourself” as their backing. To some, it seemed that slavery was simply “the straw that broke the camel’s back,” but it was so much more than that. Slavery was the defining issue within these denominations which would not be resolved until after the entire country took a stand on it.






There have been many schisms throughout the history of Protestantism with America as the breeding ground for this sort of activity. An idea set forth during the early 19th century, giving power to the common man through political rights, has made the schisms among churches extremely prominent in American society. The idea that Protestantism gives the individual the right to have a personal relationship with God has made for many divisions and different interpretations among denominations. America stands for freedom and equality, a concept oftentimes addressed in a religious format. This freedom and equality became an even larger issue in the decades leading up to the American Civil War. How could a country built on the concepts of freedom and equality justly enslave an enormous group of people for hundreds of years?






Three major denominations split dramatically during the mid 19th century. Although these churches had many issues, including theology and sectionalism, the issue of slavery cannot simply be thought of as the last straw for each of these groups, it was an institution that was too tightly woven into the southern society, where half of the church members of any given group resided, and yet, at times, greatly opposed by the other half in the north. “Ninety-four percent of southern churches belonged to one of the three major bodies that were torn apart”[2] and slavery was the defining problem between them.






Some historians say different divisions, not directly addressing slavery, were made between groups in the north and south prior to the Civil War and that general sectionalism was the culprit in divisions amongst denominations,[3] but slavery seemed to be the underlying issue the entire time. Along with Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians, who all formally divided before the Civil War, there were also problems within Lutheran and Episcopalian Churches that never formally tore them apart.[4]






The Presbyterian Church is the most documented of these three divisions, but also can be considered the most difficult to digest due to the complexities that lay behind the issue of slavery. The Presbyterian Church split apart at General Assembly meetings in 1837 and 1838, while the Baptists and Methodists did not split until 1844 and 1845.[5] These General Assemblies met once a year to decide important issues and keep uniformity in theology.[6] Some historians have made the case that the Baptist and Methodist schisms occurred strictly over the problem of slavery; however, the Presbyterian split was more deeply rooted.[7] It is important to take a look at this split and appreciate its complexity to see exactly where slavery fit in to the entire picture. Although some historians have made the case that the dramatic, final split among the Presbyterian Church occurred in 1857, but there were also schisms in 1837-1838 that could be attributed to slavery as well.[8]






Many churches of the day did not feel the need to talk about the issue of slavery; for fear that it would divide an otherwise sacred and pure bond between congregation members. Most churches in America at the time did not talk about this peculiar institution, and the Presbyterian Church in particular made it very clear that politics would not be discussed since they believed it would only end in negative situations, not helping the spiritual growth or wellbeing of the congregations. Even though Presbyterians agreed that politics should not be intertwined with the Church, those who opposed slavery believed that the issue was not simply a political one. Slavery was a moral issue more than a political once; therefore it should be discussed within the Church. Generally, the Church did stick to their ideals against speaking about politics, but they could not enforce this rule when it came down to the issue of slavery.[9]






The Presbyterian Church’s membership numbers were much greater in the North than in the South, but strangely enough, those in political leadership positions in the South tended to be of the Presbyterian Church. According to documentation on leadership of the Confederacy during the Civil War, about 60% were Presbyterian.[10] The attempts at not discussing slavery within the Presbyterian faith could be attributed to the fear of losing important members in the South who were in political leadership positions.






The Presbyterian Church was less susceptible to the negative attributes democracy could bring to a church due to their rich historical tradition and the use of firm moral beliefs and doctrines.[11] Their Calvinist roots helped them escape the schisms that could have been brought on by democracy, but they did not succeed forever. The Calvinist doctrine of predestination did not always come across well with the American democratic idea that anyone can rise from rags to riches. This concept which dominated the Jackson era of politics in America helped the common man to realize their place in a democratic society. Everyone could be involved in politics and could change the course of their country, and then everyone was able to have their own opinions regarding religion as well, making America more susceptible to denominational schisms in the first place. This issue could also be contributed to part of the split within the Presbyterian Church.






The state of Missouri was faced with the issue of slavery in their churches as well. Not only did each of these major denominations have issues within their churches, but also between each other. In the Presbyterian Church Papers at the Missouri Archives, Methodist preachers forbid members to hear Baptist sermons, as well as scolding Presbyterians in general.[12] “Disturbances with abolitionists” were an issue in the Missouri area as well, with one account of a reverend being ordered to leave the country, and another who left to Illinois after giving anti-slavery sermons.[13]






One present division that was growing within the Presbyterian Church before the schisms that took place in 1837 and 1838 was the split between “New School” and “Old School” thinking. The New School thinkers were focused in the Midwest during this time, alongside many abolitionist groups. Due to their close proximity to anti-slavery groups, it was not surprising that these folks were the ones who began to urge the Church to make a decision about slavery. They were more susceptible to the anti-slavery cause than Old School thinkers who were not directly affected by these causes.[14] New School thinkers were starting to do away with the Calvinist idea of predestination and even attracted Congregationalists, who believed people could influence God, while the Old School thinkers strictly would not compromise on church structure or major doctrines.[15] Old School thinkers also believed that it would be best to dissociate with slavery, but not to outright speak against it, creating another division among these two groups. This tactic of not directly speaking against it, but slightly hinting at its immorality, came from the strength that was growing with the Presbyterian Church. Old School thinkers saw the rapid growth of the Church during the early 1800s and did not want to change anything that would possibly endanger the overall success of the church, while New School thinkers wanted to reach across denominational lines.[16]






In the 1818 General Assembly of the Presbyterians, it was determined that “the voluntary enslaving of one portion of the human race by another was utterly inconsistent with the law of God.” However, after that declaration, the Church began to move away from the issue of slavery in attempts not to anger their Southern followers, forbidding discussion of the issue again until 1836.[17] In the end, separation of church and state, an issue that has been part of the very founding principles of American society, was the downfall of the Presbyterian Church in particular.[18] By ignoring the issue of slavery, Presbyterianism made their inevitable split in 1837. By attempting to stay neutral or at least to ignore the problem in the end did not work in their favor.






The Baptist Church split into the Southern Baptist Convention before the Civil War along the Mason-Dixon Line. It is the only of these three major denominations that remains divided to this day.[19] Baptists, like the Presbyterians, generally tended to avoid the topic of slavery, but in 1840, an American Baptist Anti-Slavery Convention began addressing the issue. The demonstration that decided the final split involved the issue of whether missionaries would be allowed to own slaves, a hypothetical question asked to the mission board by southern Baptists. Historians believe it truly began with a Baptist Board of Foreign Missions firing a slaveholding Cherokee Indian from being a missionary to his people; however, it is questionable whether or not he actually owned slaves because he died before the investigation was complete and no other action was taken.[20] Southern Baptists left the Church officially in 1845 after approval at the North Carolina State Convention.[21]






It was a common idea among Baptists in the south regarding a slave owner as a “father of his slaves” and those who supported it used the Bible to consent for Christians to own slaves.[22] To many, most notably the Baptists, the Bible was their defense of slavery. Southerners had many bible verses that they used in their defense, but oftentimes they took them out of context. In Ephesians 6:5, it says “slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling” and in Titus 2:9, “tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect.” Richard Furman, President of the Baptist State Convention in South Carolina 1822, in his letter to the Governor John Wilson, stated that “slavery, when tempered with humanity and justice, is a state of tolerable happiness; equal to that which many poor enjoy in countries reputed free.”[23] Before their split in 1845, Baptists often had difficulties deciding what sort of treatment of slaves was acceptable, attempting to make slaveholders as godly as possible by trying to put some sort of moral regulations in place alongside the institution of slavery.[24]






Within the Methodist Church, the issue of slavery was addressed very differently than in the Presbyterian and Baptist churches. Methodists had been addressing the issue since the late 18th century, while Presbyterians and Baptists preferred to ignore the issue, fearing division. At the Methodist General Conference of 1804, slaveholding was made legal under certain conditions; however big slave owning states such as the Carolinas and Georgia were made exempt from any possible rules set forth by the Church regarding slavery.[25] Generally, during the Methodist Conferences in the early part of the 19th century, slavery was acceptable as long as the slaveholders were “respectable” by being “humane and just.”[26] At the Tennessee Conference of 1816, it was explained that the Church could not force its members to free their slaves since slavery was legal in America and the Church did not believe they could enforce the right to place their authority higher than the government.[27] At one point, the Methodists banned slavery from church-goers, but not preachers or other elders. This did not go over well and was decided against at the next year’s annual conference.[28] In 1820, the decision was made that only the General Conference was allowed to make decisions about slavery, not the annual state conferences.[29] Methodists outright stated that its members should not denounce slavery because “many New England fortunes were amassed from the slave traffic” and those in charge of the Church were afraid of losing money and members due to divisions over slavery. Methodist preachers were well-known for condemning abolitionists[30] and between 1836 and 1840, numerous preachers in New England were expelled due to their stance in favor of abolition.[31]






The reason for Methodists’ obsession with the monetary side of things becomes very apparent when one looks at the numbers regarding the cotton industry in the South. The early part of the 19th century saw tremendous growth of cotton production, explaining the shift from Methodists’ initially active role in the slavery discussion and their later move to limit the discussion of the issue of slavery. An influx of small farmers who eventually became richer and richer with the growth of King Cotton, were continuing to join the Church, making it increasingly difficult for leaders to outright oppose slavery, at the risk of losing members, and not to mention, their monetary contributions.[32]






In order to continue a common and mutual interest between preachers and the congregation, church leaders also began to obtain slaves, ceasing their anti-slavery stances.[33] Their sermons were also restricted during this time. Preachers were not allowed to choose any passages about liberation, such as in the book of Exodus. Stories would be limited to anything regarding servants obeying their masters. In some congregations for a time it was even frowned upon to convert slaves, since religious equality could one day put the idea of social and economic equality into the minds of the slaves.[34]






By 1840, Methodists in Tennessee completely banned any debate over the issue, essentially giving those living in slave states the right to own slaves, based on what the government had to say about slavery, not the Church.[35] Slavery was the defining issue at the heart of the Methodist schism and in 1844 slave-owning southerners left the Methodist Church, creating the Methodist Episcopal Church South.[36]






Small divisions that never led to full schisms were found within both Lutheran and Episcopal churches, closer to and during the Civil War. German immigrants who came to make large establishments in Missouri were predominantly anti-slavery.[37] Many belonged to what is now called the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, but was then known as the German Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States before 1947.[38] The teachings of this Church were to neither approve nor condemn slavery, making for small divisions within congregation members because they did not approve of the abolitionist movement.[39] The Episcopal Church adopted a similar policy, not giving much of an answer about the issue of slavery in either direction, in fears of causing a schism like they had seen among other churches of the day.[40]






In each case, slavery was the culprit of division. Anti-slavery Presbyterians chose to go on their own way, but the pro-slavery sides of the Methodists and Baptists were the ones to leave their churches. After much discussion, over decades, Methodists faced division, losing their southern, pro-slavery half, and the Baptists, whose attempts at ignoring the whole issue failed when their southern, slave-owning side left as well.






Protestantism is full of divisions and various church organizations, making for 20,000-30,000 different Christian denominations in the world today. There have always been schisms since Martin Luther, but specifically in America, slavery played a major role within a few of these cases. The Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptists schisms were all directly related to the institution of slavery. Although they had their own individual issues within each church, slavery is their commonality and the real breaking point for each group.






The era of Jacksonian politics brought many changes to America. With increased political awareness and involvement, people all over the country were able to voice their opinions more readily. The common man was well aware of his rights and freedoms, taking advantage of them and using them at his own discretion. With this newfound sense of freedom and a love for individualism, the country was able to prosper and grow, even in the religious realm. New denominations took ground quickly, some as the result of divisions regarding slavery. This institution would also prove to divide the entire country, but not before it made great scars on some of the most dominant Christian denominations as well.






Slavery is the definitive culprit in the division amongst the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Baptist Churches prior to the American Civil War. These divisions also influenced many other denominations, but never to the extent of these three. Slavery was an incomparable issue religiously and politically for the entire country. The Methodist schism was without a doubt wrought with the issue of slavery, through decades of discussion within the church walls. Presbyterians and Baptists also faced the same issues, but took a rather different approach to the situation. Although not all churches divided due to the issue at hand, the divisions and tensions were still felt throughout many churches across the country. These three major denominations split over the core issue of slavery. Although there has been a history of denominational splits since the beginning of Protestantism, the period leading up to the American Civil War was particularly hectic for both religion and the entire country in regards to the peculiar institution.









_________________________________________________________________






Bibliography






"Abolition and the Splintering of the Church." PBS. http://www.pbs.org/thisfarbyfaith/journey_2/p_5.html (accessed April 22, 2013).




Adams, Elizabeth T. "Divided nation, divided church: The Presbyterian schism, 1837-1838." Historian 54, no. 4 (Summer92 1992): 683-696. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




“A Religious Defense of Slavery.” Religious Defense of Slavery (January 10, 2009): 3. Academic Search Elite EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




"Broken churches, broken nation." Christian History 11, no. 1 (February 1992): 26. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




Burke, Daniel. "Gay debate mirrors church split on slavery." National Catholic Reporter 46, no. 21 (August 6, 2010): 7. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




Capizzi, Joseph E. "FOR WHAT SHALL WE REPENT? REFLECTIONS ON THE AMERICAN BISHOPS, THEIR TEACHING, AND SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES, 1839-1861." Theological Studies 65, no. 4 (December 2004): 767-791. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




Church Papers, Presbyterian. August 26, 1816. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Methodist.



Church Papers, Presbyterian. July 23, 1818. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Methodist.



Circulars Collection. August 7, 1839. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – First Presbyterian.




Goen, C. C. “Broken Churches, Broken Nation: Denominational Schisms and the Coming of the American Civil War” Mercer, 1985.

“History of the LCMS." The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. http://www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=463 (accessed February 14, 2013).



Posey, Walter Brownlow. "Influence of Slavery upon the Methodist Church in the Early South and Southwest." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 17, No. 4. p. 530-542. JSTOR. (accessed April 22, 2013).



Journals & Diaries, Rev. Nathaniel L. Rice. 1829-1832. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Presbyterian.




Krull, Kim Plummer. "Uncovering History." The Lutheran Witness. http://witness.lcms.org/pages/wPage.asp?ContentID=559&IssueID=34 (accessed April 23, 2013).



Lane Collection, William Carr. January 28, 1845. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Episcopal.



Leonard, Bill J. "Slavery and Denominational Schism." Ministry Matters. http://www.ministrymatters.com/all/article/entry/1572/slavery-and-denominational-schism



Loest, Rev. Mark. "The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod at One Hundred and Fifty Years." Lutheran History. http://www.lutheranhistory.org/lcms/synod150.htm (accessed April 23, 2013).



McLoughlin, William G. “The Cherokee Baptist preacher and the Great Schism of 1844-45 : a footnote to Baptist history.” Foundations24, no. 2 (April 1, 1981): 137-147. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April 22, 2013).



Missouri History Papers. June 19, 1838. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Protestant.



"Missouri United Methodist Archives." Central Methodist University. http://www.centralmethodist.edu/library/moumcarchive.php (accessed February 14, 2013).



Oast, Jennifer. “The Worst Kind of Slavery: Slave-Owning Presbyterian Churches in Prince Edward County, Viriginia.” Journal of Southern History 76, no. 4 (November 2010): 867-900. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).




Pierce, Biswajit. "The Summative History of the Episcopal Church Regarding Slavery and Segregation." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/dojustice/j352.html (accessed April 23, 2013).




Reynolds, David S. “Waking Giant: America in the Age of Jackson” 123-174. New York: Harper Perennial, 2009. (accessed March 6, 2013).




Slawson, Douglas J., and Stafford Poole. “Church and slave in Perry County, Missouri, 1818-1865” Studies in American Religion vol. 21. New York: Lewiston, 1986. (accessed March 6, 2013).






Webb Collection. April 16, 1855. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Baptist.







__________________________________________________________



[1] Pierce, Biswajit. "The Summative History of the Episcopal Church Regarding Slavery and Segregation." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/dojustice/j352.html (accessed April 23, 2013).


[2] "Broken churches, broken nation." Christian History 11, no. 1 (February 1992): 26. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).


[3] Leonard, Bill J. "Slavery and Denominational Schism." Ministry Matters. http://www.ministrymatters.com/all/article/entry/1572/slavery-and-denominational-schism


[4] Ibid


[5] Adams, Elizabeth T. "Divided nation, divided church: The Presbyterian schism, 1837-1838." Historian 54, no. 4 (Summer92 1992): 683-696. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013), 683.


[6] Ibid, 286


[7] Ibid, 683


[8] Ibid, 683


[9] Adams, 684


[10] Ibid, 685


[11] Ibid, 686


[12] Church Papers, Presbyterian. August 26, 1816. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Methodist.


Church Papers, Presbyterian. July 23, 1818. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Methodist.


[13] Missouri History Papers. June 19, 1838. Missouri Historical Society. Churches – Protestant.


[14] Adams, 688


[15] Ibid, 687


[16] Ibid, 688


[17] Ibid, 689


[18] Ibid, 696


[19] Burke, Daniel. “Gay debate mirrors church split on slavery.” National Catholic Reporter 46, no. 21 (August 6, 2010): 7. Academic Search Elite, EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).


[20] McLoughlin, William G. “The Cherokee Baptist preacher and the Great Schism of 1844-45 : a footnote to Baptist history.” Foundations24, no. 2 (April 1, 1981): 137-147. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed April 22, 2013).


[21] "Abolition and the Splintering of the Church." PBS. http://www.pbs.org/thisfarbyfaith/journey_2/p_5.html (accessed April 22, 2013).


[22] “A Religious Defense of Slavery.” Religious Defense of Slavery (January 10, 2009): 3. Academic Search Elite EBSCOhost (accessed March 6, 2013).


[23] “A Religious Defense of Slavery”


[24] Posey, Walter Brownlow. "Influence of Slavery upon the Methodist Church in the Early South and Southwest." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 17, No. 4. p. 530-542. JSTOR. (accessed April 22, 2013). 535.


[25] Posey, 535


[26] Posey, 535


[27] Ibid., 536


[28] Ibid., 536


[29] Ibid., 536


[30] Ibid., 537


[31] Ibid., 539


[32] Posey, 537


[33] Ibid., 539


[34] Ibid., 540


[35] Ibid., 540


[36] Ibid., 542


[37] Krull, Kim Plummer. "Uncovering History." The Lutheran Witness. http://witness.lcms.org/pages/wPage.asp?ContentID=559&IssueID=34 (accessed April 23, 2013).


[38] Loest, Rev. Mark. "The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod at One Hundred and Fifty Years." Lutheran History. http://www.lutheranhistory.org/lcms/synod150.htm (accessed April 23, 2013).


[39] Krull


[40] Pierce