The contribution of the American Baptist missionaries towards social transformation, particularly their involvement towards the liberation of the oppressed people in north-east India, is acknowledged by all. Needless to say, they brought the greatest social transformation upon the life of the people. Being enlightened by the liberative motifs of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, they stood for the cause of the poor and the oppressed. When the missionaries came to northeast India in the 19th century, they found many dehumanizing practices that were prevalent all over the region like the slavery system. They fought against this evil system. We can say that one of their greatest achievements was the abolition of slavery system in the region. Here, | would like to highlight, in brief, the American Baptist missionary’s contribution to this particular aspect.
In the United States: Before the event of the Great Awakening in the West, many theologians saw the politics, business, and other secular matters as evil which had nothing to do with religion. They looked upon slavery as something which did not affect religion and so without any question, many people owned slaves. In fact, it was an accepted practice and even the ministers of the church owned slaves. According to James Cone, a back theologian, in 1844, 200 Methodist travelling preachers owned 1,600 slaves and 1,000 local preachers owned 1,000 slaves in the United States. Robert Torbet, a Baptist historian, also reported that in the South Carolina approximately one-third of the Baptist laymen and two-fifths of the ministers were slave-holders. This indicates that slavery was not a theological issue. As a matter of fact, theologians of that time failed to relate the issue of slavery as a human bondage, an unjust system. Pointing out the theological approach of that time, James Cone wrote:
The Negro was taught that his enslavements due to the fact that he had been cursed by God. His very colour was a sign of the curse which he had received as a descendant of Ham. Parts of the Bible were carefully selected to prove that God had intended that the Negro should be the servant of the white men and that he should be a hewer of wood and a drawer of water.
This shows the tolerance and propagation of slavery system. A general theological notion of the people was that “God who has cursed them to be servants and that they serve Jesus Christ while they are at work for their master”.
However, the evangelicals, especially the Baptists, who came from the lower class in society but socially sensitive people recognized the system of slavery as a theological problem. Theologians like John Wesley in England and the missionaries like Nathan Brown, E.W. Clark, Miles Bronson, etc. in north-east India understood the slavery as a theological issue. John Wesley’s book, Thought on Slavery, is a significant 6 Dalit Voice work. Nathan Brown who even opposed mission receiving contributions iron American slave-owners, became prominent in the anti-slavery movement in America in 1850s. Their theological approach was that “a Negro is a child of God, a brother man, an immortal soul for whom Jesus Christ died”.
(b) In North East India: The practice of slavery was very common all-over north-eastern region. This evil practice was very common in Assam since the time of the Ahom’s. In 1830, a census, which gave the population of lower Assam as 3,50,000 estimated that of these 27,000 were slaves. It was said that in 1837, David Scott, a British administrator, released 12,000 slaves in Kamrup alone, and 10,000 from the Singphos and the Khamis tribes. These figures give us clear evidence that the practice of slavery was very dominant in the society. Just like any other commodity, slaves were bought and sold openly. Concerning the price of slaves, h.K. Bar pujari recorded thus;
The price ranging from about twenty for an adult male of good caste; to three rupees for a low caste girl. A Koch boy cost twenty-five rupees, a Kalati fifty.
Ahom slave owners: It was also said that the Ahom nobles sometimes used slaves as gifts to present to his nobles and spiritual advisers.
The practice was very common among the Naga community also. Almost all the Naga tribes, e.g. the Aos, the Lothas, the Rengmas, etc. used to own slaves. Among the Aos, it was said that the warriors’ villages like Lungkhum, Uagma, Chuchuyimlang, etc. used to possess hundreds of slaves. Owning many slaves was considered prestigious and the society gave honour. and respect to those who owned many slaves.
The slaves were treated not as persons, but as commodities. They were sold and bought openly. W.C. Smith in his book, The Ao Tribe of Assam had recorded the price of slaves among the Ao Nagas like this:
It was a general practice to sell children into slavery for debts that ranged all the way from the value of a pig, or even less, up to the value of six or seven cows. After this first sale the slaves might be passed on from village to village.
Often slaves were served the food which was given to domestic animals. When a slave could not work any longer due to ill health, he/she was killed. During head-hunting, if the owner could not get any head, then he would kill one of his slaves. Because to come back without any head to village was considered as shameful on the part of man. Again, during war time, when a village lost the battle, the villagers used to give away slaves as price o redeem the village from the enemies’ attack. A person automatically lost one’s clan right when he/she becomes slaves. Female slaves were not allowed even to be tattooed. Slaves could not marry and set up house on their own. They had to live in their masters’ houses. The owner was on no account allowed to have sexual relation with his own, female’s slaves. In case, the slave becomes pregnant, abortion was used or the child was disposed of immediately after birth. Indeed, the condition of the slaves were miserable and deplorable.
A person could easily be reduced to slave. The reasons were: first, parents used to sell their children in times of individual distress or general scarcity; secondly, adult men and women sometimes sold to discharge debis of their parents, brothers and sisters or relatives; thirdly, free woman who married to slave also became slave of her husband’s owner; fifthly, prisoners of war or those captured in war became slaves; sixthly, a person who had committed offence against the community and could not afford the fine demanded became slave; and seventhly, male and female slaves were left to mate as they liked, the children of such union turned to slave.
British Supported slavery: Surprisingly, however, the British administrators did not recognize the slavery system as evil practice, an unjust system. They thought that it was a part of social custom of the people. This position becomes clear when Sir Roberi Reid wrote:
Not the least important question in connection with our assumption of direct administration over the Aos is that of slavery, an institution which in the domestic form prevails widely throughout the tribe. Some rich men are said to possess as Many as ten or twenty slaves. Slaves are not allowed to marry, nor to possess property; and children borne (sic, born) by female slaves are usually put to death. It is obvious such a. State of things cannot be allowed to continue in British territory, but the question arises – is Government to declare at once all slaves emancipated or should we leave the institution to disappear by slow, but equally certain, method of refusing to enforce the supposed rights of slave-owners? The later system was that adopted, | presume unconsciously, by Government in the Kuki country, where slavery was, however, not so widespread as among the Aos, and the result has been that slavery has entirely disappeared.
The above quotation shows the attitude of the British administrators. They were not very keen to stop slavery outright but they rather accepted it as a part of social custom of the people. It was the American Baptist who recognized, first, the slavery system as inhuman practice. They appealed continuously to the Government to repress the slavery system at once, and preached the Gospel which gives liberty to the captives. They strongly voiced; saying;
Christ proclaimed liberty for the captives, and any gospel which ignores this grand principle, though preached by an angel from heaven, is another gospel that of Christ. Freedom and Christianity move on together, through all the world’s history.
Hence, the missionaries were responsible for prohibition of slavery.
Theological motivations: The Great Awakening during the 19th century among the evangelical Christians in the West inspired people to be conscious of the understanding of the Word of God in relation to Dalit Voice social life. The evangelicals became enlightened that Christianity could not exist without taking into consideration the social issues. They perceived both sin and salvation as a social reality. Regarding the evangelical social sensitiveness, Alter wrote:
The British and American Protestant missionaries came to India with a heritage of social activism and with a zeal to reform and regenerate the life of the people among whom they served. They conceived of the missionary movement as a great liberating force, called into being by God to rescue men and women through the power of the Gospel from sin, ignorance, false religion and oppressive social customs and practices.
Therefore, the Baptist, missionaries fought against any activity that dehumanized human beings. They found the slavery system totally contrary to the teaching and practice of Christian faith. Therefore, they stood for the cause of slaves, the oppressed people.
The Baptists, the socially conscious evangelical and egalitarian American, “gave a bias in favour of the masses over against the elite”. They identified themselves with the interest of the exploited masses especially with those of slaves over against the oppressive elite, because a person who is created in God’s own image should not be oppressed and denied the right.
The great heritage of social activism certainly made the Baptist missionaries to oppose the slavery system because it was inhuman and oppressive. The theological rationale behind their involvement in various. social issues may be summarized in the following ways: Firstly, they saw Christians as called out community who have a responsibility to extend God’s mission, that is, to fight against injustice. Secondly, “In Christ, there is no Brahmin and outcaste, slave and landlords, man and woman, rich and poor, but ail are same. Everyone has got freedom to enjoy his or her own rights. Hence, oppression and dehumanization of one’s fellow being should not be tolerated in the society. Thirdly, they perceived the saving work of Christ as breaking the fetters of bondage, a transforming weapon to create new humanity. Jesus came to this world so that humankind may be liberated from alienation, sin and oppression. Fourthly, they saw the very essence of God as love. “God is loving, not simple, love is one of the attributes of God. but theat God is love. This very love has been manifested on the cross, a love which is selfless, enduring and sharing. Therefore, the ultimate duty of the Christian is to love our Lord and live a life of love in action. One cannot love God, if we do not love others especially those who are exploited and dehumanized.
