Church of Christ Opposition to Women’s Right to Vote: A Look Back and Echoes Today

See Steve Gardner, “10 Churches of Christ Where Women Speak in the Assembly: List and Links (Part 1),” AuthenticTheology.com (March 26, 2019); Steve Gardner, “Most Church-of-Christ Colleges No Longer Exclude Women from Leading in Chapel Worship Service: A List of Schools and Their Approach to Chapel” AuthenticTheology.com (May 9, 2018); and Steve Gardner, “David Lipscomb, Church of Christ Foundational Leader: “All the Teaching of the Bible is Against Women Speaking in Public” (It Gets Worse),” AuthenticTheology.com (April 12, 2018), and material cited therein.

For a discussion of 1 Timothy 2:12, see Steve Gardner, “10 Churches of Christ Where Women Speak in the Assembly: 1 Timothy 2:12, “Teach or Usurp Authority” (Part 3),” AuthenticTheology.com (April 9, 2019).

Regarding Curse of Ham, etc., see, e.g., David Lipscomb, “Noah’s Curse Upon Ham, &c” Gospel Advocate (1868), pp. 460-462.  Lipscomb responds to a letter asking about “Noah’s prophecy” in  Genesis 9:25ff.  Lipscomb refers to the curse as “a very abject and degrading servitude” (but also recognizes it “may mean literally, Shem shall serve Japheth and  Canann shall serve Shem. A servant of a serving race.”).  Ibid., 460-461.  He then explains that the evils of this curse, like most all of God’s curses, continue only as long as the sinful course of behavior of the cursed family continues. What is that sinful course of behavior?  He says he is unsure of the exact characteristics of Ham’s behavior, but that it was “probably the mere out-cropppings of an irreverential beastiality” (he was likely referring to beastiality in the sense of humans displaying the traits of beasts or something along  those lines, not in  the sense of humans having sex with animals).  Ibid., 461.  Lipscomb also says that such behavior “has marked [Ham’s] family since, and especially the family of Canaan.”  Ibid.  Lipscomb does say that Christians ought not be the ones to inflict evil.  Ibid., 462.

Lipscomb says “The Churches of Christ, in every section where the colored people exist, ought to make an earnest and resolute effort to reach the colored people in their midst, and bring them under the purifying and elevating influence of the religion of the Son of God.”  Ibid., 462.  He goes on to say “And if they are still suffering from the curse of Noah, it is because they are still walking  in the sins that brought the curse.”

He goes on to say that “The Gospel can deliver them from the sins, and thus deliver them from the curse that the sins bring.  What a crown of joy at the last day, to have been God’s instrument in delivering a race from a curse hanging over them since the days of Noah.”  Ibid., 462.

It what seems to be a dismissal or rejection of post-Civil War efforts or a post-Civil War complaint about the emancipation of slaves, Lipscomb says “It is vain, it is setting God at defiance to attempt violently to relieve from the curse while we leave them in the sins that produce the curse.  Sometimes, in efforts to do this, the manner of inflicting the curse is changed, but the curse is never removed by such changes, almost universally rendered more dire and fearful.  There is but one way to deliver our fellowmen from the curse of God–deliver them from the sin that calls down  the curse, and then God will see that the curse is removed.”  Ibid., 462.

It seems to me that since Lipscomb sees the Curse of Ham as removable, then if he views part of men having authority over women as part of the curse related to the fall — which he appears to, as he relates it to God telling women they can’t lead because of what Eve did, etc. — then it,  too, is removable.  See, for example, some discussion by Dr. Leonard here:  https://baptistnews.com/article/twin-doctrines-of-slavery-and-complementarity-time-for-evangelicals-to-budge-on-biblical-interpretation/.

Also see Flavil Hall, “Don’t Beeloud the Christian Faith,” Gospel Advocate (June 16, 1921), p. 564 (“The sage should be careful how he reflects upon the divine inspiration of Moses, lest he, in this respect, make of himself what he sometimes calls others-a chimpanzee.  Have not the men of knowledge and observation been beholding the fulfillment of the prophecy of Noah, recorded by Moses (Gen. 9:25-27), in all ages since the distinction of races became an established fact?  Has not a curse rested upon the Hamitic nations? Have they not been cursed with abominable idolatries and vices?  Have they not been “servants of servants,” abject servants to others. Think of Egypt and her ruins, and of Africa, the Dark Continent.”)  (For more on Flavil Hall, see http://www.therestorationmovement.com/_states/georgia/hall,fj.htm.)

Also see H. Leo Boles, “Cain–Concluded,” Gospel Advocate (September 26, 1918), pp. 916-917 (“There are some sins that originated with the family of Cain which have cursed the human family for many generations. Noah had three sons–Shem, Ham, and Japheth.  Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives were all that were saved from the flood. Many scholars have expressed it as their judgment that Ham married a descendant of Cain. One of Ham’s sons was named “Canaan.”  Upon this son Noah pronounced the curse, and said: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” (Gen. 9: 25.) The Canaanites came from Canaan. They represented. as wicked a race of people as have ever disgraced the earth. “Canaanite” is a synonym in biblical history for wickedness and corruption.  Sin in every form, in its most gigantic proportions, has been found among the Canaanitish people. If the conjecture be true that they are descendants of Cain, then Cain becomes the father of the most wicked race of people that ever lived.”).

Tolbert Fanning, “Unity of the ~Human Race Disproved by the Hebrew Bible.” By Dr.
Samuel .A. Cartwright, of New Orleans (Book Review), Vol. VI, No. 10, Gospel Advocate, (October 1860) (“Our conclusion is that God made man, —made of one blood all nations to dwell on the earth; and yet we pretend not to say that the color· of negro race has been produced by climate. At present, we care not to offer an argument as to any characteristic view of the races, but we give it as our conviction, formed upon what we regard sufficient examination, that the negro is the direct descendant of Ham and who was cursed by the Almighty with a black skin, kinky hair, flat nose, and all that distinguishes him from them, father of the red race of Eastern and Southern Asia or Japheth, the father of the Northern and Western white race.”)

T. Fanninng, “Duty of Christians in Reference to the Political Crisis of 1861,” Gospel Advocate, Vol. VII, No. 2 (February 1861), at 36 (“We do not deny, that the controversy between the North and South is of an exclusively religious character. Be it so. We as Christians should labor to adjust difficulties by peaceable means. Indeed, we are permitted to employ no weapon but the sword of the Spirit,–the Jerusalem blade. True, extreme men in the North say that holding
Africans in slavery ” is a damnable sin per se.” What shall we do? Meet the question like men, and Christians. Let us hear their strongest arguments, and if we are committing sins so heinous as to shut us out of the eternal mansions, let us confess and forsake our evil deeds. But if it should appear upon examination, that while we have suffered greatly on account of the slavery that has been entailed upon us by Europe and the North, we have done more in the last eighty years to humanize, civilize, and christianize the negro race, and enlighten benighted Africa than all the world besides, has done to in thousands of years, let the facts be set forth, and let the world see our true potion. The controversy is upon us, and the teachers of religion must meet the issues. The storm has been raised mainly by preachers, and it must be quieted by the ministers of God. Mere politicians cannot accomplish the work. We must meet the scrupulous on the arena of sound logic and truth, and put them to flight, or yield all that is demanded. …  the black clouds of death that have been rising under the influence of infidel aml higher law teachers such as Theodore Parker, Wendell Philips, Waldo Emerson, Henry Ward Beecher, Orville Dewey, Horace Greely, William H. Seward ….”).

***

On Slavery: See, e.g., T. Fanning and W. Lipscomb “Elements of Moral Philosophy” (Book Review), Gospel Advocate, Vol. V, No. 9 (September 1859) (“the countless injuries, physical, intellectual and moral, sustained by the white race, compared with the advantages which accrue to the blacks …”).

Cf. David Lipscomb, Gospel Advocate (1866) (“Churches and individuals should see that Sunday schools for their benefit, with faithful and competent teachers, are provided. They should have preaching for their especial benefit, but should also be encouraged to attend the services of the whites. The pious and intelligent
of the blacks should be encouraged to preach. …. We received them from their native shores, degraded, ignorant, brutish savages, despite the abuse heaped upon the relationship. (It had its uncomely deformity (. The worst enemies of the relationship testify that they had under our influence, grown to be intelligent pilots, valuable
guides, and trustworthy military informers, and were possessed of the
qualities of moral, enlightened, and in many instances, refined, cultivated
and Christian men and women. Our influence over them and upon them
as a race, for the past, has gone to history with a record of which we may
not be ashamed. Let us not mar the record of the past by a failure to
do our duty to the same weak, suffering and inoffensive race, because
they merely accepted a change in their relationship that they could not
have refused, if they would, and which, to have refused when offered
them, would have been to have acted contrary to every impulse and aspiration
of human beings. Christianity demands our efforts still to benefit,
improve, elevate and above all Christianize the negro in our midst.”)

**

David Lipscomb, “The Negro,” Gospel Advocate (April 17, 1866), at 248-251 (extensive discussion)

***

“They came from Africa a few generations past, very ignorant and degraded.  By the institution of slavery they were brought into contact with a more enlightened civilization and though greatly elevated and improved by this association they are still ignorant and find especial delight in the excitement of their fleshly animal feelings, and have but little appreciation of the truly exalted and spiritual religion of Christ.  Reason with them lies dormant and a great number are not susceptible to the calm and dispassionate appeals to their reason, and through it their hearts.

Hence they were more readily attracted by the grosser forms of fleshly excitement manifested by our Baptist and Methodist friends than by the refined and calm developments of a purer faith and quiet resolute obedience to the laws of God.  The Jerks, dreams, sights professed to be seen by Baptists and Methodists and accepted as part of their religion, accorded much more nearly with the wild superstitions brought by the negroes from Africa, and still retained to a goodly extent by the descendants.  Hence they flocked to Methodists and Baptists while except in some neighborhoods where they were more highly cultivated than usual, Christian teachers could not reach them.”

This difficulty existed while they were in state of slavery, and still exists in a stat of freedom.  Since they were freed, other difficulties present themselves.  The first is, owing to the evil influence of political emissaires, who came in the cloak of religion, who for selfish and sordid ends embittered the mind of the freedmen against the whites of the country.  This feeling became so bitter and undiscriminating toward all native whites in this country, that except in isolated cases, it has been almost impossible for the whites of this country, of either Baptist, Methodist, or Christians to reach them. …  But [God] placed [the blacks] among the Southern people, first through the institution of slavery.  In that institution they were brought from a state of almost brutish barbarism up to one of comparative enlightenment and civilization.  We doubt if a people ever were more elevated in the same length of time from a position so low, or, if any other institution would have been so effective, in elevating a people so cast down as the institution of slavery, or if any other people than the Southern people were so well fitted in character, both by their virtues and faults, for conducting such a institution for the benefit of the lowly class. …”   David Lipscomb, “Questions from a Colored Brother,” Gospel Advocate (December 2, 1869), at 1091 – 1094.

***

“While claiming to feel an interest in the welfare and improvement of the African race second to that of none in the land, we must bear our testimony of truth, that the highest degree of intelligence and civilization reached by the African race for two thousand years has been reached through the institution of slavery as found in the Southern States.”

“The institution of slavery then has been no disadvantage to the black.  It found him scarce a remove above the brute, it has been him a civilized, Christian man.  In our judgment it has been a disadvantage to the white and to society at large, in the development of the country in its full intellectual, pecuniary, and numerical strength.  We make this record with no view view of defending the institution, and with a complete antipathy in any way to its re-establishment.  We think it probable that the relationship had accomplished all for the negro that it could accomplish, so that in the overrulings of Providence it was taken out of the way—destroyed, let us all hope, to make a higher development of Christian civilation, both to the white and black, than could be attained in the relationship.  That this may be the result let us all humbly pray, and, in harmony earnestly work.  Let us admire too the wisdom of our Father, who overrules the wickedness of man to accomplish his own ends.  The African, in his native land, was ignorant, degraded, brutish.  His associations were there such that it was impossible to elevate him.  He must be taken from those associations and transplanted into more favorables ones.  The wicked cupidity of our ancestors, both in Old and New England, was used by God as the instrumentality to bring the negro to a more favored land.  When he reached the continent of America, a people fond of ease, luxury and lax in its habits was found ready to receive and take charge of him, not for the negroe’s good, but from the selfish desire to enable themselves to live the life of ease and leisure which they coveted.  A providence of God may have arranged this, for the very faults of the Southern people made them light task-masters—-whereas the constitution, surroundings,and chief excellences of our New England friends have ever made them hard task-masters and exacting rules.  So then Yankee avarice and enterprise stole the negro from his home of degradation, brought him under circumstances of peculiar cruelty to his state of slavery. Southern indolence, love of ease and leisure retained him in bondage, with some regulations irreconcilable with right—and God, through the wickedness of man, elevated him, and has, we hope, prepared him for a higher state of civilization and improvement.  Our earnest advice to the African would be learn that man is frail and weak, and in these matters of his enslavement, his continuance in bondage, and his emancipation, they have all acted from selfish and interested motives, but that God has overruled these to his profit, and for his benefit.  Therefore, in the spirit of Christian kindness and love, he should accept whatever privileges and favors he enjoys with thankfulness as from God, with enmity and bitterness toward none, seeing that these apparently bitter providences toward him have all resulted in benefit and blessing to his race.  Let him be careful lest the apparent good result in real detriment to his kindred and color.               …”  David Lipscomb, “Notes of Travel,” Gospel Advocate, at 584-585 (1867).

**

“The Hamitic races sprang from Ham. The exact location of these races is hard to determine. It is known, though, that Egypt was called “the land of Ham.” (Ps.
106: 21, 22.) Also some of the early settlers in Canaan were descendants of Ham, and some of the descendants of Ham dwelt in Mesopotamia. (Gen. 10: 6-19.)”  C.A. Norred, “The Beginnings of the Nations,” Gospel Advocate, page 231 (March 9, 1933).

**

“What is the lesson of it all? Do you conclude that you should mistreat your Hamitic brethren? Noah did not say it would be right for his two older sons to enslave the younger. Surely no one can justify the harsh treatment he has received. Even the courts will defend him. The man who beat the native head down till he died was tried before the court. Much more is it true that Christians must treat their brethren according to the Golden Rule. Neither Jesus nor any of the apostles said, “Cursed be Canaan.” Neither can we as Christians say, “Cursed be Canaan.” The redemption of the cross included Canaan. Whatever be the misfortune of Canaan, we must “bless, and curse not.” That the youngest of Noah’s sons has become the weaker brother is evident, but for this reason he makes all the stronger appeal for our help.”  J.M. McCaleb, “On the Trail of the Missionaries No. 19,” Gospel Advocate, page 1131 (November 28, 1929).

“Now we turn for a moment to the Hamitic nations, and
we naturally turn our thoughts to Africa. Here the accent
is very different. God uses personality so exquisitely and
so variously. Here is a letter written from an African tribe
addressed to the “teachers of Europe.” It says: “We are
those who went astray, but the Lord did not leave us. He sought us with perseverance, and we heard his call and
answered. Now we are his slaves.” It is so simple, and
almost lil;:e the apostle John. ” Now we are his slaves,
having no other master at all. Behold, we tell you a word
{)f truth. We bad t.hree teachers. One is in Europe; an·
-other has gone to Ikung; and this one who stays with us,
his furlough is due, and his works are many.”
How quaintly and how beautifully put-” his fur1ougb
is due, and his wo·rlrs are many!” ” If he goes to rest
in Europe, with whom are we left? It is good that you
should send us teachers who will cause us to be full
of the words of the Father. Friends, what do you run
.away from? Death? Or the long distauce? What did the
Lord command? He said, ‘ Go, and preach the gospel in
all the world.’ We have a desire to hear your teachings
in the teaching of the Jehovah God ; and we have a thirst
to see you in the eyes; but we have not the opportunity. We
llave not the opportunity here below; but we shall have in
heaven. In the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost,
one God.” (Missionary Review of the World, December,
1906.) How tender and beautiful!”       R.H. Boll, “The Last Hour of Foreign Missions,” Gospel Advocate, page 601-602 (June 26, 1913).

“It is quite probable that the descendants of Ham, Sham and Japheth did not at tempt to divide and go into their appointed places in the earth, as reflected by Gen. 10, until after the great confusion of tongues at Babel. This story of the confusion of tongues giving us the account of how this division of the earth between the sons of Noah and/or their posterity was accomplished.” Willis G. Jernigan, “Confusion of Tongues,” Gospel Advocate, page 99-100 (February 12, 1959).

—

“The closing discourse at Knob Creek was made especially to the blacks.  A few had attended all the time and showed an anxiety to hear.  On consultation with the brethren, we announced that Friday night they should be especially invited to attend and the discourse should be for them.  One-half the house was given up to them.  It was pretty closely packed and they gave good attention.  The other side was about half filled with whites.  We were gratified at the movement, and thought everything went off well, but were disappointed and mortified that some of the most active and good brethren were greatly offended at the proceeding.  We regret that any brother or sister should throw obstacles in the way of preaching to the unfortunate of the earth.  We should much fear to meet our Maker with such a record.  He died to save them, we are professing to be his followers, yet are unwilling to allow them the use of the meeting-house in which to be taught they may be saved.  He could sacrifice his life for their salvation.  We are not willing to allow the use of a house builded for his worship for them one evening.  The contrast in spirit is too great here for reconciliation.”

“The fear seemed to be that they would get upon a social equality with us.  Such persons must have an idea there is very little between the races, if meeting occasionally in the house the whites use will make them equal.  Every house in the land was open to their use in the days of slavery.  We believe room and provisions for their hearing teaching ought to be made in every house that is built, to which room they ought to have exclusive use; from the interference of outsiders, and they should be encouraged just as the whites are to attend every service of the church.  This might be done as it used to be, by having a separate door in which they could enter, and occupy their own portion of the house, free from molestation by outsiders.  This should be done to protect them in their places in the house.  I do not think those who attended on that night, and hear what was spoken to the negroes, in a particle more danger of social affiliation with the negroes than those who refused to attend.  Another suggestion is, when a matter of this kind is mentioned in a congregation the consent of the congregation asked, the man who fails to object then is in honor bound to ever hold his peace.”

David Lipscomb, “A Trip to Maury and Hickman Counties,” Gospel Advocate (October 24, 1878), No. 42, page 661.

Notice regarding above:  “They” and “us”; assumption that black persons are not socially equal or equal; suggesting segregation within the church (separate door, separate place to sit, separated from white people); also notice that when asking for consent, it is only for the men (he earlier mentioned brothers and sisters, but the consent and objection is just for men).  This is a racist view, combining assimilation view and segregationist view.

—

“Who but the ignorant and uncivilized African could have been enticed into the slave traders’ ships by the beating of tin pans and the waving of red bandannas?”

G.C. Brewer, “Central Church of Christ, Chattanooga, Tenn.,” Gospel Advocate (January 25, 1912), page 101.

—

Responding to a letter to the editor (the letter itself, not shown here, is worth reading:

“… It is not true that rape and violence in the gratification of the lusts are peculiar to the negro. …  From the woman’s standpoint, seduction is worse than rape.  It is better that the body should be defiled by force than that she should be the guilty partner in her defilement.   …  The crime is human, and not brutal, and proves the negro is a human, not a brute.  …  When all, men and women, are in the same stage of civilization, the crime does not seem so hideous as when, as with us, the white women are refined and the negro men rough barbarians; but in all ages God regarded the crime worthy of death.

But the inequality of the races excites to the crime.  The negro is naturally ambitious of social equality. He feels this sexual intercourse is the acme of this equality.  His ambition excites his lust and he commits the crime.  It is his way at once of gratifying his lust and elevating his race.  Human ingenuity is exhausted on devising torture to deter from the crime.  Under false religious ideas received from the whites, he dies protesting he is ‘going home to glory.’  He persuades himself he is a hero and martyr for his race and is so regarded by other negroes.  …  [H]is torture, instead of deterring from, excites to, like crimes and sufferings by others of his race.

While the treatment given the negro criminal makes a hero and martyr of him in the eyes of himself and his race, it makes cruel cowards and demons of his tormenters.  Cruelty is a sure mark of cowardice; all, negroes and whites, instinctively recognize this.  For a thousand men to gloat over and torment a helpless victim, no matter how steeped in crime, makes them feel like cowards and depraves them.  The negroes know and feel this as well as the whites.

This course of lawless cruelty cultivates the very spirit that leads the negro to commit rape.  … The gratification of lust moves the negro; the gratification of vengenance and cruelty leads the whites to take lawless vengeance.  …

It is not that we are in danger of the curse of God; we are not suffering it.  This terrible crime, and the constant dread of it, is the penalty we are paying for keeping the negroes in our midst ignorant and depraved, using them for selfish ends instead of for their good.  If we are led by this curse to despise him as a brute and still further denounce and neglect him, the curse must be increased.  This is God’s order of dealing with man.  The only help I can see is an earnest trust in God as individuals and prayer to him for protection for the evils, connected with an earnest effort to lift up and benefit the negro.

The negro responds readily to kindness ….  His enfranchisement when unfitted for it was wrong to him.  Depriving him of it, however needful it be, will be felt by him as an effort to degrade and oppress him and will have, for a time, an evil influence on him.  His responds kindly to trust reposed in him. …

I believe were the State to pass a law requiring every one, white or black, guilty of attempted rape, to be castrated, ….  It would strip the criminal of his character of martyr and hero, and leave him an object of scorn and ridicule among his people, that none would desire to emulate.  ….

David Lipscomb, “The Negro — His Crimes and Treatment,” Gospel Advocate (September 19, 1901), page 600 (emphasis added)

See https://www.facebook.com/john.m.hicks.18/posts/10156746139581610 (discussion of same portion of GA)

---

Also responding to a letter to the editor:

I do not know what is meant by social relations in
the query. A few persons or a small portion of a
community cannot control the social rules or relations
of the community. A small number of people might
choose to associate on terms of equality with the
negroes, but they would of necessity cut themselves
off from the whites. They cannot associate with both.
When they cannot associate with both, with which
shall they associate?
Race distinctions and antipathies are strong. They
were recognized and to a goodly extent encouraged
by God through the early ages of the world, until they
were fixed and seemingly ineradicable. They exist
among the different tribes and nations of the earth,
even those of similar habits, color and physical make.
and intellectual and spiritual culture·. The antipathy
becomes greater as the physical and intellectual differences
increase. The antipathy was strong, in the days
of the Savior’s sojourn on earth, between the. Jew and
Gentile. Pete’r had that prejudice even toward other
children of Shem and of Abraham, then the descendants
of Jacob. When he went to the· house of Cornelius,
this feeling showed itself in his’ speech telling
them how it is an unlawful thing for a Jew to eat
with a Gentile. The strength of this feeling again
manifested itself at Antioch when he refused to eat
with his Gentile brethren; and Barnabas, who had
been raised among Gentiles, was carried away by the
same feeling. Paul reproved them for this. The natural
antipathy is greater between the white and negro
races. I do not believe it is possible to overcome it
to such extent as to lead to social relations as among
those of the same race. I think an effort to bring this
about would result in arousing more bitterness and
produce a wider separation.

While this is true, I do not doubt it is the duty of
Christians to teach and instruct the negroes and in every way encourage them to lives of godliness and righteousness and purity. …

The Bible never proposes to disrupt and change
social and political relations suddenly. It plants
truths in the heart, changes character and life, and,
as these are modified, fits for changed social conditions;
and these come gradually and almost imperceptibly.
T’o force them is to destroy them. Let the
negroes and the whites cultivate kindly and Christian
relations toward each other, help each other as they
can, and the social conditions will adjust themselves.”

David Lipscomb, “Are the Negroes Neglected?,” Gospel Advocate (June 14, 1906), page 377.

---

Letter to the editor response:

“The negro is among us and in our midst. We
should help him morally, mentally, and physically.
If we are in danger from his bodily diseases, wby not
from his moral contagion? There is always danger
when exposed. Unconsciously the whites will be influenced
by the weaker race. We may lift them up
more than they pull us down, but still their lives
will have some influence on our lives. As a self-

protection, if for no other reason, we should strive
to purify and elevate them. The responsibility is
upon us. The people of the North cannot solve the problem
for us. They do not understand the negro
as do we. They will not befriend him as do we. If
we would attain to that purity and usefulness that
we should as a people, we must help the negro• physically,
mentally. and morally.”

David Lipscomb, “The Condition of the Negro,” Gospel Advocate (August 16, 1906), page 516

—-

“A negro is reported to have committed suicide at Columbia, Tenn., from fear of being put back into slavery.  It is a sad commentary on the intelligence of the negro race, to find many who believe so senseless a political canard. …  Temperate speech and humane action will tend to disabuse the negroes of all ideas of ill-will on the part of the whites.”  “News of the Week,” Gospel Advocate (1884), page 747.

—–

“I understand that our sister holds the position that white preachers
should preach to the negroes only in the event that
the preaching cannot be done by negroes. I do not see
any reason for special objection to this position. All
preachers should preach the gospel where they can do so
most effectively, and should be prudent and wise in declaring
the message to the people. I believe if our sister
will encourage and help equip colored men for preaching
the gospel to their own race, and then encourage white
preachers to preach to the negroes when a negro preacher
cannot be found to do the preaching, that all consecrated,
devout Christians will cooperate with her in such work.
As she states the question, I can see no ground for division,
and feel sure that both white and black would do well to
work for the salvation of souls.”

J.D. McQuiddy, “Query Department,” Gospel Advocate (September 11, 1919), page 887.

—

David Lipscomb clearly in favor of having black persons worship with white persons if black persons wish to do so:

“If the right of one of a despised race to worship God among any Christians· is called
into question, the right should be maintained. To yield on this point is to encourage those who object, to sin. When the right of the humblest child of God
to worship with children of God is at stake, it is a sin to yield. It is a sin against the one rejected; it is a sin against those who reject the child of God; it is a sin against God.”

David Lipscomb, “The Negro in the Worship,” Gospel Advocate (August 1, 1907), page 489.

—

“Mission Work Among Negroes” was a recurring column / theme in the Gospel Advocate (1920s etc.) (Keeble et al.)

The used of the term “white church” was often made.

“Colored” was also a common term.

—

“Tolbert Fanning wrote in 1872 from Nashville:
‘Time was when thousands of the best informed colored people of the south lived in full fellowship as members of the church of Christ, with their white brethren. They prayed, sang, exhorted and broke bread together, as members of one family …. These
people sat with their white brethren many years in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. It was a joyful season.'”

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1753&context=leaven

—

Is Fanning’s “Religious Historian” periodical from the 1870s online?

—

Also see

http://www.fsop.net/Harvester/archives/2015_01_jan.html (quoting Daughtery, who quoted Fanning:  “The racial make-up of the churches of the Restoration Movement in the South was radically altered by the Civil War. Tolbert Fanning, editor of the Gospel Advocate, writing in 1872, described the difference, “Time was when thousands of the best informed colored people of the south, lived in full fellowship as members of the church of Christ, with their white brethren…Possibly, in no section of the earth, could so intelligent and cultivated colored Christians be found, as in the state of Tennessee.…Our colored brethren, some of whom at least we had aided in purchasing and setting at liberty…were completely alienated from us, and turned against us. The revolution [Civil War] was too sudden and too great, for the moral health of the freed people. They were induced to think, that all with whom they had formerly associated were oppressive, and enemies of the colored race.””)

See:  https://ohiovalleyrestorationresearch.com/theological-issues/15-race-relations-in-the-restoration-movement

—

http://icotb.org/resources/SRYGBIOS.pdf

—

David Lipscomb, “The Negro,” Gospel Advocate 248 (April 17, 1866), page 248-250

“In other words, whcu the earthly power that controls and regulates these matters, says you are a slave, discharge its obligations with fidelity, but when that same power says, you may be free,” use it rather.”  The same power and the same people that introduced slaves and slavery into our country, have destroyed it.  Whatever of sin attached to the introduction of the relationship or its destruction, and with its destruction the speedy annihilation of the race, is theirs, not ours.  But the sins committed in failing to regulate the relationship, while it existed among us, according to the law of God was ours.  The failure, too, to discharge our duties to a weak, helpless, ignorant and now truly oppressed people, turned loose in our midst, without protectors or advisers, will surely, my brethren, be ours.  …  But taken as a whole, their conduct during the years of passion and strife through which we have passed, has been commendable, and better than you would have anticipated they would have acted in the circumstances.”  “The negroes are here helpless and ignorant, perishing for lack of proper care attention to their comfort.  We have been their life-long associates, have played with them in childhood, toiled side by side with them in manhood, have provided for their wants in common with our own, have regarded them as members of our own households, have nursed them in sickness, have followed their relatives, and they ours, to the same burial ground, have wept around the same grave, have attended together the same meetings, sang the same songs, sat around the same communion table of our common Lord, and looked forward to one common hope of rest in the same blessed Heaven, and shall we suffer ourselves to be alienated from them or them from us for no act of theirs or ours?”

Also see ibid. at pages 153-154 (???) (describing how black persons participated in a gathering on a farm, taught to read in the Lipscomb household, and led singing, etc.??)

—

Thank you to Dr. John Mark Hicks for pointing to some of these resources.

---

Note Mormon Church, Church of Latter Day Saints, used to ban black people from ordination based on Curse of Ham and a passage from their Book of Abraham.  See https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/official-declaration-2-every-faithful-worthy-man?lang=eng

There is a historic relationship between the LDS and the Churches of Christ.

---

Directory of Church of Christ, Colored (1945?) — https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1390&context=crs_books&fbclid=IwAR2Ppzz8G_YRgcEzU6cRafpyU6JfV1tdcTGK7WS8rq5kJvYI4fA4s52fu-4

Would a white person say to a black person that the black person is equal to them  and has equal dignity but that God has ordained that the white person has permanent authority over the black person and is in headship over them?  Sounds like the curse of Ham, right?

***

“While the New Testament found slavery in existence and regulated it, in both the master and the slave, and there were believing masters, yet I believe the New Testament put in force principles that, in their working, must root out all slavery. … [Y]et the discipline and associations to which slavery subjected the negro have done more to Christianize and civilize him than any other influences and associations into which he has ever been brought. Yet I would be slow to say, in this, the New Testament indorsed slavery; it tolerated and regulated it.” — David Lipscomb, “Reading the Scriptures,” GA (Dec. 22. 1898), at 813.

***

As to slavery:  “Whilst we believe with Dr. R that Africans are much improved in every point of view in the South, this ia a partial view of the matter, well calculated to work mischief.  The subject can never have a proper estimate placed upon it till we carefully comopare the countless injuries, physical, intellectual, and moral, sustained by the white race, compared with the advantages which accrue to the blacks. …  Whilst then we are the apologist of no Northern or Souteern fanatacism, and whilst we  believe that the Northern Garrison, Parker, and Phillips’ abolotionism is subversive of every principle of our common country and the Christian religion, we are mortified at the sight of Southern books which give advantages to me not sound in government or religion. … and whether it is right or wrong , it is among us; its harmlessness is questioned by many of the best men in the world, as intimated, while we have providentially blessed the negro race, there are serious disadvantages accruing to the white man from American slavery …..”  GA (1859), at 259.

**

I have no political feelings. I was not a secessionist. I was
not an advocate of slavery. The first recollections
of my childhood were of the removal of the family
to Illinois so get away from slavery. They set free
the slates they felt at liberty to free and that were
willing to go with them. , The laws of Illinois forbade
the freed negroes remaining in the state. They
were obliged to carry them into the then territory of
Indiana. The family remained one year m Illinois,
near the present city of Springfield. During the year
my mother and three of her children were buried; at
the end of a year, my father and his three remaining
children returned to Tennessee. He owned slaves
after his return, but always regarded slavery as an
evil to the country and to the people. Th: s feeling
was cherished in the family. I very strongly imbibed
it, and, while having a strong feeling of sympathy
with the Southern people, said from the start, if the
war did nothing worse than free the slaves, I would
not complain at it;
I once told Elder Errett the difference between
myself and him was, I and my parents were willing
to free our own slaves; his conscience made him
anxious to free other people’s.
In 11860, I preached all through Middle Tennessee
that i~ was wrong for Christians to go to war, or to
e11cou~age the war spirit in others. My friends
thought that I endangered my life in so doing.
Once a man at the door, after I had preached, proposed,
if twelve men would join him, they would
hang me. But I was not interfered with, and I believe
had the respect of all thoughtful people so
soon as they saw I was honest in my positions-!
know I did of the officers of both armies.
While believing that slavery was an incubus and
hindrance to the Southern people, and at all times
willing to surrender all my interests in it to see it
abolished, the idea that the Southern people were
made vicious and diabolized-made like devils bv it
-above the Northern people, was a slander bor~ ot
a very narrow sectional hate. But the idea that
these · men, full of the bitterness of the war, as
shown by their acts, flushed with victory just at the
close of the war, thought of anything else in starting
the Standard than their political feelings, is
ridiculous. They had hardly thought of religion
for years, save as they could use it to promote the
war feeling.” — David Lipscomb, GA, (July 21, 1892), at 453.

**

“We have seen in political and clerical sermons the dogma fully set forth, that Slavery is absolutely right, — an unqualified creation of the Almighty.  Such extremes can but result in great mischief.  In all civilized countries men’s liberties are taken from them on most justifiable grounds.  We tear men from their families, white and black and incarcerate  them in prisons for life.  We may be told this is right, because such are not qualified to enjoy even the liberty of their person.  This is yielding all we ask.  If States north and south, east and east, deprive men of liberty because of lack of qualification to enjoy it, this slavery is incidental, and is employed generally, if not always for the special benefit of the enslaved, and always for the safety of those whose qualifications entitle them to rule over their fellows.  Our cnocl=clusion then is, that the right or wrong of enslaving our fellow creatures, is not absolute, but incidental, permitted by the Creator for wise purposes and it is often not only necessary but indispensable both for the governors and the governed.  But enough.  Our main purpose is to show, that we possess no law of right inferior to our countries constitution and legislation, and the government of God in the Bible.”  —  T.F., “The Higher Law,” Gospel Advocate (March 1861), at 70.

***

G.C. Brewer, “Does the Gospel Advocate Represent the Church of Christ Denomination? What Action Is the Church of Christ Going to Take in the Matter of Integrating the Races in the Schools?”, Gospel Advocate (July 14, 1955), at 593-594.

***

Barclay Key, “RACE AND RESTORATION: CHURCHES OF CHRIST AND THE AFRICAN AMERICAN FREEDOM STRUGGLE,” Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida (2007).

**

An article in the 1912 Gospel Advocate by one of the most successful Churches of Christ preachers of his time explains, for example, “there can be no disputing the fact that the Negro is our neighbor.”  The article then goes on to say “though I do not mean by this that there should be social intercourse between the races …” (thereby defining “neighbor” contrary to its natural meaning).  Price Billingsley, “Our Obligation to the Negro,” Gospel Advocate (December 5, 1912), at 1308.

And well into the mid-20th century, many Churches of Christ leaders used words like “equal” and “love” as ones allowing for discrimination based on race, including actively supporting segregation.  Harding University (then College) fought integration until very late, not doing so until 1963.

In a 1966 sermon, the recently retired president of Harding asserted that “Before God, all men are equal,” but “there is no reason to think the Lord wants a mixing of the races and the creating of just one mongrel race.”   Key paper, page 141.

“Negro equality runs high here.  Negroes ride in the same coach, go the same school, eat at the table with white people, and sometimes sleep in the beds of their white neighbors; all of which, I am glad to say, is not tolerated in ‘heathen Texas.'”  J.D. Tant, “In Kansas,” Gospel Advocate (Feb. 3, 1898), at 71.

“Some who raise a great outcry against negro equality at the same time not only equalize themselves with the negroes, but on the very lowest level. So prevalent is this sin of the white man in South Africa that a law has been passed making it a crime for a white man to have intercourse with a black woman. Not so long ago one of the high officials was up before the court for this offense.”  J.M. M’Caleb, “On the Trail of the Missionaries No. 14,” Gospel Advocate (September 26, 1929), at 922.

**

On to a different topic ….

I also spotted one statement that seemed to say  women voting might be OK if she did it while staying in her sphere, but this was contradicted by later articles.  See M.C. Kurfees, contributor and later associate editor of the Gospel Advocate, “Women Wearing Men’s Clothing, Smoking Cigarettes, and Bobbing Their Hair,” Gospel Advocate (April 15, 1926), p. 350 (“On the matter of voting, God does not give specific directions to either men or women. It is a civil matter to which, so far as mere rights are concerned, one has the same right as the other.  Woman should never, in doing anything whatever, get out of the place to which God has assigned her.  If she buys or sells a house, as surely she has a right to do, she should not go out of her proper sphere in conducting the transaction.  She should observe the same principle when she goes on a shopping mission or any other mission; and if she goes and casts her vote as she goes to a store to shop, she has no more, if at all, transcended her sphere than man has transcended his in the same act.  Of course, this point is involved in the Christian’s relation to, and dealings with, civil government; and where, in such matters, specific directions are not given to Christians, they are left to make their decision and to regulate their conduct on the general teaching of the Bible.”).

On McQuiddy, also see:  https://teva.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p15138coll27/id/626

Do these articles express, suggest, or indicate that a reason women should not be given the right to vote or participate in politics is that no Christian (male or female) should vote or participate in politics?  Of the 10 articles, eight do not seem to give any hint of this. Most all of them are such that if it was their view, you would have expected it to come up in their reasons. Many of them seemed to be firing all guns against woman suffrage. Two do. Neither say that Christian males should not vote, but seem to seek to dissuade them from doing so.

The first one, the James A. Allen article from ’07, is interesting in that it says the following:  “But to manifest public sentiment in the laws made by Congress is a question for the world to consider.  Christians have no time, and should have no inclination, to mix in the politics of a worldly government.  They can do the greatest good to the government and the nation if they will sanctify the Lord God in their hearts and set themselves for the advancement of Christian principles…. The nation is thus benefited through association with the Christians living in it.  He does the greatest good to the nation and to the world who consecrates all his energies wholly to God and who does the most to preach the gospel.”

Notice that it refers to a “greatest good” but does not express that greatest good as mutually exclusive of voting.  It also refers to Christians having not having “time” and an “inclination,” rather than they shouldn’t, etc.  Interestingly, its conclusion refers to the male pronoun in referring to “the Christians” and refers to “preach the gospel.” Allen had already expressed his view that 1 Tim 2:12 keeps women from speaking in public and that it’s the ” law of God, that the influence of woman must be exercised through man, and when she takes the reins in her own hands it works evil to both man and woman ….” So, it is possible that he had as an additional reason that Christians should not vote, but he doesn’t seem to refer to voting but to public political expression. It is not clear.

The last article, by H. Leo Boles in 1928, coming 8 years after the passage of the 19th Amendment, is a lot stronger, though it also does not come right out and say that Christian men should not vote.  It comes close.  Boles is asked “Should Christians vote or take an active part in elections?” He does not answer with a yes or no (he answers other, similar questions with a yes or no).  He says, instead, that “[t]he question of Christians’ voting is too complicated to be answered with a few lines ….”  The Scriptures completely furnish the man of God unto every good work. (2 Tim. 3: 17.)  We find no instruction in the New Testament concerning Christians’ voting and holding office. We do find that the kingdoms of this world, or human governments, belong to the prince of this world, which is the devil. The Lord’s people have been called out of the world; they have been separated from the world; and they have been given instruction to keep themselves “unspotted from the world.” They can best do this by following the Christ. Possibly many reforms are needed in the world, but God has ordained that his people should work in and through the church for the accomplishment of good. The Christian should want to work where he can accomplish the greatest good. The church is God’s ordained institution for accomplishing good in the world. A Christian is out of his spiritual element when he attempts to do good independent of Christ and the church, as much so as a fish is out of its natural element when on dry land or out of the water. There is as much reason for a Christian to try to do missionary work through a missionary society as there is for him to try to accomplish reforms or do good through political parties or human governments.”——-  So he does not say Christians should not vote, but he seems to seek to dissuade them from doing so. Boles does not seem to connect this to his answer about women voting, referring to her sphere.

McQuiddy’s articles are notable in that they do not seem to use such a basis at all and emphasizes the woman’s sphere, scripture, etc., in strident terms.  They are worth reading.

Isn’t a Christian opposing female suffrage and the 19th amendment a Christian participating in politics?! Also, I’ll leave aside for the moment the problems with (a) using a belief that Christians should not vote or participate in politics to (b) opposing non-Christians (women) from having the right to vote. 

Interesting map of the world showing dates women obtained the right to vote in each country:  https://brilliantmaps.com/womens-suffrage-world/

https://matadornetwork.com/read/year-women-became-eligible-vote-country/

https://www.amazon.com/Exercise-Informal-Within-Church-Christ/dp/0773450122/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=

Updated 11/6: Non-substantive edits for typos and clarity.  5/2020:  Clarity revisions, adjust to refer to 100 years ago August 2020; noted Tennessee voting in August 2020.