OCR Text |
Show J98 LIBERTY AND SLAVERY. appearance of so great an evil. He should not, for a moment, have permitted himself to s~nd before the world in the simple and unexplamed attitude of one who had sent back a fugitive slave to his master. No honest abolitionist would permit himself to appear in such ~ light. lie would acorn to occupy such a position. Hence, we repeat, if St. Paul were an abolitionist at heart, he should have let it be known that, in sending Oncsimus back, he was moved, not originally by the principles of bis own heart, but by the desire and request of tl1e fugitive himself. By such a course, he would bave delivered himself from a false position, and spared bis friends among the abolitionists the necessity of making awkward apologies for his conduct. Thirdly, the positions of Mr. Barnes are not merely sheer assumptions; they are perfectly gratuitous. For it is easy to explain the detel'mination of St. Paul to send Oneaimus back, without having recourse to the supposition that Onesimus desired him to do so. Such determination was, indeed, the natural and necessary result of the well-known principles of the great apostle. He had repeatedly, and most emphatically, inculcated the principle, that it is the ' ARGUMENT I"RO:\l THE SCRIPTURES. 199 duty of slaves to "obey their masters," and to "count them worthy of all honor." This duty Onesimns had clearly violated in running away from his master. If St. Paul, then, had not taught Onesimus a difterent doctrine from that which he had taught the churches, he must have felt that he had done wrong in abscond; ng from Philemon, and desired to repair the wrong by returning to him. "It is," says Mr. Barnes, "by no means necessary to suppose that Paul felt that Oncsimus was under obligation to return." But we must suppose this, unless we suppose that Paul felt that Onesimus was under no obligation to obey the precepts which he himself had delivered for the guidance and direction of all Christian servants. We shall now briefly notice a few other of Mr. Barnes' arguments, and then dismiss this branch of the subject. "If St. Paul sent back Onesimus," says he, "this was, doubtless, at his own request; for there is not the slightest evidence that be compelled him, or even urged him, to go." We might just as well conclude that St. Paul first required Onesimns to return, because there is not the slightest evidence that Oneaimus made any such request. "Paul," says Mr. Barnes, "had no power to |