Christianity which Christ founded did not lead a rebellion against slavery, either as an institution, or even the practice of slave-owning by its followers and adherents. Instead, to the early Christians, many of whom were slaves at the time of their conversion to Christianity, it clearly stated –

approach, and more, concerning slavery is illustrated to us in Apostle Paul's letter to Philemon which was incorporated into our New Testament as one of the founding documents of Christianity.

Philemon, whose family home was the meeting place of a local congregation of Christians, had slaves working in that house, one of whom we know directly from Paul's letter to him. In addition, commentator Adam Clarke deduces that Philemon's son, Archippus, was the pastor of this church which met in their family home. So here was a special opportunity to show a new social structure as would characterise Christianity if there was any such idea.

Christianity did not need a new social structure to grow. It neither expressed itself in social structure nor based its communal character on social structure. Its essence was rooted in changed persons whose attitudes and behaviour expressed the values of God's heart through them toward others. Christianity could thus grow in slave-quarters as freely as it could grow in the market place of public debate.

even more importantly, the New Testament taught believers that the wide social distinction existing between slaves and free persons in the society of which they were a part was to be utterly disregarded – within the caring-love relationships of the Christian community. All social distinctions of class were simply not to be regarded by Christianity. They had no relevance whatsoever within the relationships between Christians.

was absolute social equality within Christianity!

In this world of early Christianity, the vast population of slaves, which was constantly replenished simultaneously by war-captives, slave-trade and natural procreation, was a very significant factor in social distinction. For instance, in law this social differentiation expressed itself in the differing value of individuals for compensation payments in the case of assault: differences in value which were expressly banned within the fellowship of the Christian community.

For this reason, Paul therefore instructs the slave-owning-Christian Philemon to accept back his run-away slave, no longer as a slave but as his own brother. He writes –

in following centuries, as Christianity's primitive impetus slowed into that of a respectable religion, the freeing of one's slaves became simply seen as a pious act (going the 'extra-mile') rather than as a moral obligation. The Church Council of Gangra in 340, in response to the Manichean/Eustathian heresy decreed that –

This decree became a canon of the Catholic Church and continued to be quoted for more than a thousand years. Arising from this attitude, St Basil required in his monastic rule (c.370 AD) that runaway slaves be sent back to their masters and that in such circumstances the slave should not be freed but learn submission to seek the master's forgiveness, except in the case of a tyrannical master who breaks the moral law. In this St Basil uses Paul instruction to Philemon whilst ignoring the clear instruction concerning the change in Philemon's relationship to Onesimus to that of a brother in the flesh.

St John Chrysostom follows Basil's ideas and defers this change in relation between Master and slave to after death in Heaven. St Augustine around the year 400 took this further, and in clear contradiction of Paul's teaching in 1 Cor.7:21 (quoted above) instructs Christian slaves not to seek 'manumission'/freedom (Enarratio in Ps.CXXIV, n.7. Migne Patr. Lat. 37, 1653-4.)

today, some Christian denominations, such the Anglican, Catholic, and Orthodox, hold that in addition to the New Testament teachings which contradicted this practice, the patristic tradition of these early centuries constitutes an 'authoritative' basis for Christian practice. (Slavery fell away within these denominations more from changes in the thinking of the world around them than from the character of the Christian gospel). This is much the same as many Jewish religious leaders in the time of Jesus exalted a supposed oral-law as authoritative in interpreting and so subverting the written Word of God. This adherence to tradition was a constant hindrance to the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, as it has also been to the work of His Holy Spirit in the Christian centuries.

slavery continued within the Church. For instance, in 572 the Bishop of Le Mans bequeathed ten persons as his assets to his church: being – a couple with a small child; four manservants; two maidservants; and a boy who cared for a herd of horses (Duby 1974:31). Slaves were variously described in Latin as servi, ancillae and by the neuter noun mancipia, which more vividly expressed their status as objects rather than persons. In this so-called 'Christian' Europe of the sixth to eighth centuries, there was no aristocratic household, either secular or religious which did not possess persons as slaves.

The rationalisation in the thinking of Christianity at this time, concerning the patent conflict between its New Testament principles and its practical disregard of these in its conduct, produced a number of influential statements by Christian leaders. This corruption of New Testament teaching is expressed by such leading figures as –

than this rationalisation, this St Isidore of Seville even insisted that any bishop who frees a slave of the Church must make compensation to the Church (4th Council of Orleans), and that if such a bishop has presumed to do so without compensating the Church, his successor may recall the freed persons and enslave them again to the Church. This ruling is incorporated into the canons of the Church.

In Milan in 775 a Frankish boy could be bought for twelve solidi, whereas the cost of a horse was fifteen solidi (Duby 1974:31); but there were glimmerings of light. At the Synod of Chelsea in Saxon England in 816 it was decreed that at the death of every bishop all his English slaves were to be freed, and each bishop and abbot who attended his funeral had to emancipate three slaves and give each one three solidi (Canon 10. Mansi 14, 359). And then, at the Council of Armagh in 1117, the Irish bishops ordered that in every part of Ireland the English slaves should be freed (Mansi 22, 123-4).

comments on these centuries as they progressed that –

Christianity's social effect was to be dimly seen in the gradual recognition of the family rights of slaves, but the real change came about primarily through economic factors.

During the seventh century it became more profitable to owners of large estates to marry off some of their slaves, settle them on a smallholding which they would be responsible for cultivating, feeding their families, and raising their children until they then became of working age. They were still slaves, but this semi-independent system was often more economically sustainable. The system relieved the master of the costs of slave maintenance, and generated more enthusiasm for work among a servile labour-force, thus increasing productivity and ensuring labour replacement as their children grew to working age.

from this then, and from the sale of slaves on the markets of the southern and eastern Mediterranean of those acquired from war in Europe, slaves became increasingly rare on European markets and their price increased accordingly. This further strengthened the incentive for European slave owners to raise their own slaves locally. A growing strictness in the Catholic Church against the enslavement of Christians may also have aided the trend toward scarcity.

This smallholding-process eventually led to a decrease in the amount of land available for direct exploitation, an increase in the number of tenants, and subsequently a softening in the sharp divisions between slave and free persons. However, as the last elements of slavery began to fade, the increasing number of peasants became more exploited by an aristocratic class which validated its lordship from their ability to protect their peasants who thus owed them labour-service.

slavery continued as a legal penalty in areas of Christian influence.

At the same time, the moral legitimacy of slavery from birth from a slave-mother continued to be accepted and defended, even though the slave-offspring was guilty of no personal sin.

Apart from economic factors then, it must need wait for a process of spiritual recovery in the history of Christianity for the issue of slavery to begin to be dealt with.

consequence of various spiritual renewal movements in Britain, from at least 1727 English 'Quakers' (Society of Friends) had begun to express their official disapproval of the slave trade and promote reforms. An informal group of six Quakers pioneered the British abolitionist movement in 1783 when the London Society of Friends' yearly meeting presented its petition against the slave trade to the English parliament, signed by over 300 Quakers.

On the evangelical wing of the Anglican church, William Wilberforce, who was part of this continuing intensely personal spiritual renewal, writes in his private journal in 1787 that –

In 1791, Wilberforce introduced the first Bill in the British Parliament to abolish the slave trade, but it was easily defeated by entrenched interests. Subsequently, almost every year Wilberforce introduced a parliamentary motion in favour of abolition. In 1807 the British Parliament voted to abolish the trade in slaves (not slavery itself) and enforce this through its maritime power.

The end of slavery itself followed slowly, as agreements were concluded by the British Colonial Office and the various semi-autonomous colonial governments. After further British parliamentary legislation, slaves in all of Britain's colonies were emancipated in 1838. But slavery continued on a large scale in the United States of America until the South was defeated in the American Civil War in 1865.

is yet to be fully realised within Christian practice and so remains, not a structural problem of society, but an issue of the direct transmission of the love of God which is poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit whom He has given to us (Rom.5:5) –