The Relation Between Slavery And Religion

Deep in the heart of the American South, slavery, along with the slave breaking and auctioning businesses, was in full swing. Plantations were known to be home of the most strict, demanding, and cruel slave masters around. Although all overseers and masters of slaves are undeniably evil, those who were religious had a particular sting that came along with their whip and burn by the words of their tongues that was incomparable to that of others. Corrupting the minds of young innocent children and ignorant adults, incapable of knowing a world much better. Religious slave masters are the worst type of master because they are hypocrites, use religion and the Bible to justify abuse, and they twist ideas about religion leaving a negative connotation
In the words of Frederick Douglass, “We have man-stealers for ministers, woman whippers for missionaries, and cradle-plunders for church members. The man who robs me of my earnings at the end of the week meets me as a class-leader on Sunday morning to show me the way of life and path of salvation” (Douglass 100). Douglass tries to explain how the men that lead him and control him often times go against what they preach and act as if there is an exception. Another example of this would be how white men would place importance on family values but denied slaves of that same loving and supporting structure. “The elimination of family terms was only the most salient example of the more general tendency in the language of slavery to destroy the meaning of all words except "master" and "slave." The meaning of other words was always a function of these two social meaning of other words was always a function of these two social names, this single, invariable social context, for the master could interrupt any discourse by invoking this privileged context at any time” (Kibbey). The masters stripped the slaves of every decent respect and right they held so dear to
Religious slave masters were undeniably worse than regular ones because they used their religion and the Bible to justify their abuse. An example of this would be when Douglass says “prior to his conversion he relied upon his own depravity to shield and sustain him in his savage barbarity; but after his conversion he found religious sanction and support for his slaveholding cruelty” (Douglass 56). One scholar said: “the earlier offense has gone without comment, although Douglass mentions a more venial adjustment of rhetorical course earlier in the chapter when he pauses to include the phrase, ‘But to return to Mr. Freeland, and to my experience’ (79). The phrase implies another subtle rhetorical apology- this time for relaying possibly superfluous testimonials about pious Mr.Hopkins, who always ‘found a way to justify the use of a lash’. (79)” (Chaney 1). They would take passages from the Bible and turn its words into a completely different meaning; slaves would not be able to know any better due to their depravity from