The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass- A Christian Response Paper

The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: A Christian Response Paper

            The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an autobiography by Frederick Douglass, unfolds the slavery conditions that had happened at the beginning of the 19th century. Born into plantation slavery sometime in 1817 or 1818, Douglass was separated by his mother, Hailey Bailey, and was later transferred to a Hugh Auld’s house in Baltimore. During Douglass’ time in Hugh’s household, he was educated by Hugh’s wife, Sophia Auld, to read. Since Hugh believed that it was unlawful to teach a slave to read, Hugh hindered Sophia to teach Douglass further. Through time, Sophia lost her kindness and became the ‘typical’ cruel slave owner.

In this paper, I will first argue that Douglass does not provide an objective view of Christian slavery because of the slavery life that he had experienced. Hence, it is exposed to subjectivity. Second, by looking at the inhumane treatment that the slave master had done to the slaves, in particular, Douglass’ case, I, therefore, agree that someone cannot own slaves and be a genuine Christian. Third, I found that Frederick Douglass’ arguments are indeed compelling and mostly valid in view of the fact that the book was a narrative of his own life. Thus, it is our task to evaluate and discern as a Christian in the 21st Century whether it is right to justify slavery as a part of the Christian worldview or not.

Throughout the time of slavery, it was a common thing for white slaveholders to have sex with black women slaves. “…and make a gratification of their wicked desires profitable as well as pleasurable; for by this cunning arrangement, the slaveholder, in cases, not a few, sustains to his slaves the double relation of master and father” (Douglass, 13). Merely an act of satisfying the lust, the result of that horrifying exploitation is Douglass. In addition to the exploitation of his mother, Douglass was raised in a place where he was treated unfairly by his surroundings, including his own “Christian” father and white brothers: “…for, unless he does this, he must not only whip them himself, but must stand by and see one white son tie up his brother, of but few shades darker complexion than himself, and ply the gory lash to his naked back” (Douglass, 14).

 With all the brutal events that Douglass was exposed to as a child, it would be hard to ignore the prejudices that Douglass must have had against Christian slavery. “The leading trait in his character was meanness; and if there were any other elements in his nature, it was made subject to this” (Douglass, 39). In this excerpt, Douglass had even subjected every character of his slaveholder as meanness. Notwithstanding that every human’s fundamental nature is still good because we are all created by the image of God. “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). Since God is light of goodness, all of His creations are also fundamentally good. It may be very difficult for a Douglass to see the goodness in his master, slaveholder, or any white people, but goodness must have still existed regardless. Thus, Douglass’ had provided a subjective perspective instead of an objective view of Christian slavery.

           The word “slave” means a person who works very hard without proper remuneration or appreciation (Merriam Webster). Frederick Douglass’ narratives had displayed us the true depiction of the meaning of slaves. In addition to the unfair treatment by the white father and brothers that I had mentioned in the previous paragraph, slaves did not receive an adequate amount of clothes, shelter, and food: “Their yearly clothing consisted of two coarse linen shirt, one pair of linen trousers…the whole of which could not have cost more than seven dollars…There were no beds given the slaves unless one coarse blanket is considered such, and none but the men and women had these” (Douglass, 17). If we reflect on ourselves and think about the pairs of clothing that we have yearly, it does not make any sense for a laborer to only get the seven-dollar worth of clothes for all the season. By simply looking at the wages given by the slaveholders to the slaves, we can clearly see how underpaid the slaves were. For 1 Timothy 5:8 pointed out: “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” A genuine Christian would know that everyone should be treated fairly, and hence if the slaveholders in Douglass’ era hadn’t provided them with sufficient providence, then they are “worse than an unbeliever.”

The subjectivity of Douglass’ argument does not mean that his argument is invalid and not compelling. With Frederick Douglass’ narrative, I have gotten the opportunity to understand a snapshot of the harsh life of the slaves. The details of Douglass’ speech, action, and feelings depicted in the narrative have made me be in Douglass’ position in a moment. “You will be free as soon as you are twenty-one, but I am a slave for life! Have not I as good a right to be free as you have?” (Douglass, 32). The way Douglass approached the reader by asking “ifs” questions encourage the readers to think in his position. What if we were in Douglass’ position and therefore, we are confined to the world of slavery forever? Wouldn’t that be miserable?     

Nevertheless, compelling arguments does not always mean that it is based on all valid reasons. In Douglass’ case, some aspects showed invalidity because the argument is only written with hatred. In the appendix part of the book, Douglass realized that “I find, since reading over the foregoing narrative, that I have, in several instances, spoken in such a tone and manner, respected religion, as may lead those unacquainted with my religious views to suppose me an opponent of all religion” (Douglass, 75). Because of the exposure that he had undergone during his lifetime, the objectivity of Douglass in looking at the Christian has been damaged. However, some parts are indeed based on valid reasons, such as in the case of the exploitation of slaves by “slaveholding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering” (Douglass, 75). Hence, although some arguments are invalid, it is agreeable that most of his opinions are valid.

In conclusion, Frederick Douglass’ Narrative had given the chance for the readers to have a glimpse of slavery life in the 19th Century. Compelling and mostly valid arguments were put forward by Douglass because the narratives were about himself as a slave. True, however, that the arguments were not objective concerning Christian slavery. There was a lot of hatred, which was understandable in the case of Douglass, that was involved in the writing of his narrative. Henceforth, it could be still be concluded that slavery is not a Christian-like thing to do because it involved injustice, exploitation, and unfair treatment toward other humans.