tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post3734501285514397405..comments2024-03-10T10:54:59.776-07:00Comments on Ben Witherington: "Amazing Grace"-- The Story of William WilberforceBen Witheringtonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06017701050859255865noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-17434007306895752762008-08-24T09:06:00.000-07:002008-08-24T09:06:00.000-07:00Recently I saw and enjoyed both "Amazing Grace" an...Recently I saw and enjoyed both "Amazing Grace" and "Armistad" and would give both 5 stars. Both show how economics were entertwined with morality. The former showed how Pitt and Wilberforce shrewdly passed an apparently "anti-French" law allowing English privateers to attack vessels (mainly American, probably) flying the French flag as one of convenience and this caught up English slavers also in the net, so that by the time the H of C votes, slavery is already a money loser and all MPs could feel virtuous about voting to abolish it. In the US, despite some state constitutions (like GA. set up as a British colony) forbidding slavery, the cotton gin of Eli Witney made cotton a profitable crop for the Southern US but only if slave labor were used, so the prohibition of slavery laws were ignored. The English continued to buy cotton big time from the US, even to the point of funding the Confederacy with cotton bonds. Only Prince Albert prevented the Brits from interevening in the Civil War on the side of the South. So economics still trumped morality if it involved big bucks for the Brits, just that slavery was by then someone else's problem. When the South lost, England's cotton mills turned to India and Egypt for raw material. The cotton bonds were worthless. Thomas Spande, Bethesda, MD<BR/><BR/>ps. The American Navy had active patrols off the coast of Africa long before the Civil War broke out (e.g. the Constellation was one, commissioned in 1858)to intercept slavers still trading with the Caribbean.thomas spandehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12503341012043989700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-74233452526091955642008-01-03T11:22:00.000-08:002008-01-03T11:22:00.000-08:00Have any of you read Bury the Chains by Adam Hochs...Have any of you read Bury the Chains by Adam Hochschild? I thought it was a pretty balanced view of Wilberforce being a faithful Christian but still a product of his culture, a history-changing crusader, but not the only one (Clark especially) leading the charge for abolition of the slave trade. I wish the stories of these brave Christians and others were more popular.Laurahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13891937774527394572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-17758235623330352642007-03-02T14:23:00.000-08:002007-03-02T14:23:00.000-08:00Ben,I've just discovered your blog site and have e...Ben,<BR/><BR/>I've just discovered your blog site and have enjoyed a number of your articles. I have been reading Hindmarsh's excellent book on John Newton, who advised Wilberforce during his time in London. Hindmarsh does say that he doesn't spend much time on Newton's involvement in the abolition movement, but refers readers to Roger Anstey, The Atlantic Slave Trade and British Abolition (London 1975) for more detail. I don't know about Wilberforce's motives, but it seems clear from Newton's writings that later in life he felt personally ashamed of his earlier role as a slave trader and that his opposition to it was on theological grounds. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the review: I'm looking forward to seeing the film.<BR/>Philip GardinerPhilip Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03893328468704081972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-25882472097029651112007-02-17T20:18:00.000-08:002007-02-17T20:18:00.000-08:00Might I recommend another book on this subject by ...Might I recommend another book on this subject by Adam Hochschild at Berkeley entitled "Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire's Slaves" (2005).<BR/><BR/>Looking forward to taking leaders in our church to this film and discussing Biblical perspectives on justice, politics, and faith. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the post.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07356161337279729102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-9124538344941399152007-02-17T18:40:00.000-08:002007-02-17T18:40:00.000-08:00This is the 'jaundiced historian' in reply. The p...This is the 'jaundiced historian' in reply. <BR/><BR/>The pertinent passage from Moral Capital reads as follows:<BR/><BR/>"Abolition of the slave trade for the Evangelicals always was an end in itself, never merely an instrument. Their horror at the trafficking and enslavement of human bodies was genuine. Yet what gave the issue particular importance to the Evangelicals, what accounts for the peculiar energy they invested in the campaign, were the edifying habits that might follow from righteous labor, the moral lessons they hoped men and women would draw from fighting public sins. The Evangelicals' turn against the slave trade was not simply an eruption of benevolence. It was also a considered, strategic choice, an opening salvo in a wider campaign against nominal Christianity that they advanced at once on several fronts." (pages, 388-389).<BR/><BR/>I'll be happy to be proven wrong, of course, but that will require evidence and argument, not assertion and assumption.Chris Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14116762404655334246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-30577052261223322552007-02-16T13:17:00.000-08:002007-02-16T13:17:00.000-08:00Ben:I enjoy your blog very much.I heard you speak ...Ben:<BR/>I enjoy your blog very much.<BR/>I heard you speak about James and the ossuary a while back at Lovers Lane UMC in Dallas.<BR/><BR/>One slight correction: I believe Wesley called slavery that "execrable" sum of villainies, not "inexorable." I'm looking forward to seeing "Amazing Grace."Don Yeagerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07173264290918288672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-56713069750642052342007-02-16T01:58:00.000-08:002007-02-16T01:58:00.000-08:00Ben,The Wilberforce who opposed Huxley was a much ...Ben,<BR/><BR/>The Wilberforce who opposed Huxley was a much later man, 'Soapy' Sam Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford. There is a lot of mythology and propaganda surrounding that encounter too, but that is another story.<BR/><BR/>The idea that William Wiberforce has something to apologise for because he was a member of the landed gentry seems to me bizarre. On that reckoning most of the leaders of the American Revolution were similarly tarred.<BR/><BR/>In the 18th Century only landowners could become Members of Parliament. Many of the social reformers of that time were enobled; think of Lord Shaftesbury and the Countess of Huntingdon. They, nevertheless, began a great work of reform that, far more than either the French or American revolutions, changed civilization for the better.<BR/><BR/>I am astonished that Wilberforce is not better known in America. I can only imagine it is because America at the time was so committed to slavery, the very cause he opposed so strongly.Terry Hamblinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06346629921055055879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-75299799639159256192007-02-15T18:58:00.000-08:002007-02-15T18:58:00.000-08:00You are welcome Shawna, and I will share one more....You are welcome Shawna, and I will share one more. My college Bible prof, Bernard Boyd was in seminary with Bruce Metzger in 1938 taking the same Hebrew class. He said it was like men among boys. Metzger whizzed through all those languages with his photographic memory, while everyone else struggled.....Ben Witheringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06017701050859255865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-30117619353112188302007-02-15T17:34:00.000-08:002007-02-15T17:34:00.000-08:00Dr. Witherington, your article about Bruce Metzger...Dr. Witherington, your article about Bruce Metzger on CT was wonderful. I am a Greek geek who will always be indebted to the work he did. I wish I could have met him. Thank you for sharing your memories.Shawna Atteberryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12752697766813703698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-58126357783863159722007-02-15T04:17:00.000-08:002007-02-15T04:17:00.000-08:00Thanks for this thorough review, and for the quali...Thanks for this thorough review, and for the quality of your blog in general. I visit from time to time and have been educated as a result.Marciahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09655129514017134176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-76258188288614772452007-02-15T01:29:00.000-08:002007-02-15T01:29:00.000-08:00We need more genuine heroes like Wilberforce and W...We need more genuine heroes like Wilberforce and Wesley... rare men of conscience who found a way to work within the institutions of their day to translate Christian ideals into practical and beneficial social action. We're indebted to them.James Garthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13658184692527152706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-59679435898740869022007-02-14T20:40:00.000-08:002007-02-14T20:40:00.000-08:00Dr Witherington,By no means was there need to apol...Dr Witherington,<BR/><BR/>By no means was there need to apologize. I wanted to engage with you a bit on this because I recognize that you think these things through as a Christian scholar. (I attempted to send an email through your website but it bounced?)<BR/><BR/>I agree, British society was stratified. But my point was that even the Commons was still occupied by the highest ranking or most wealthy of British society, so that MPs of both houses had more in common than not. Many MPs who were landed gentlemen sat in the Commons, including virtually all the 'prime ministers' of the period like William Pitt (eventually Lord Chattham). I'm still a little unclear why Wilberforce being a commoner would be particularly relevant?<BR/><BR/>JD Walters,<BR/><BR/>I'd like to think I can read, thanks. Dr Witherington pointed to other information about Wilberforce relevant to any consideration, yes, but did not really engage with the substance of the historian he subsequently refuted. That may of course be my own fault by reducing Brown's work to one sentence, which obviously does a 450 page book an injustice.<BR/><BR/>I'd also like to think I'm sincere, thanks. To suggest that Wilberforce saw abolitionism as a means to a larger end does not necessarily commit one to denying his altruism per se. That's just a matter of basic logic, dispute it if you wish.Kenneth Sheppardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13980807652776654724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-51197593640105385812007-02-14T14:51:00.000-08:002007-02-14T14:51:00.000-08:00ben-- thanks for the good press on amazing grace. ...ben-- thanks for the good press on amazing grace. glad to get to see the movie with you.John David Walthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16326982392034399479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-10101107796890502442007-02-14T13:37:00.000-08:002007-02-14T13:37:00.000-08:00Well Brother Sheppard I seem to have misunderstood...Well Brother Sheppard I seem to have misunderstood your thrust so I apologize. You are of course right that idol worship in the Evangelical Church can be an issue. Wilberforce, like Wesley was not a 'lord' nor related to nobility. The basic social distinction in that culture was between commoners and lords of the realm. Now of course commoner could do well for themselves economically but they could never be lords, unless knighted for something. The stratification of that society is hard for us to really grasp, but that was the basic distinction. <BR/><BR/>Blessings,<BR/><BR/>BenBen Witheringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06017701050859255865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-37672200336755838122007-02-14T11:41:00.000-08:002007-02-14T11:41:00.000-08:00The book referenced by Dr. Witherington on Wilberf...The book referenced by Dr. Witherington on Wilberforce is officially titled "Amazing Grace:William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery" and is by Eric Metaxas.<BR/><BR/>For the record."Nick"https://www.blogger.com/profile/06155986199115437170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-54828281162315777772007-02-14T11:30:00.000-08:002007-02-14T11:30:00.000-08:00Dr Witherington,Does attacking Brown's work as tha...Dr Witherington,<BR/><BR/>Does attacking Brown's work as that of a "jaundiced" historian, ad hominem I might add, somehow call into doubt his argument? You'd have to take issue with his method and his material before I'd be convinced otherwise. Furthermore, I didn't say it was a *mere* means to an end. To imply that taking something as a means makes it somehow less valuable or real is only persuasive if you judge altruism by some sort of Kantian moral standard. At any rate, my comment was directed more at what Evangelicals often do with these kinds of movies, more than a defense of what I take to be Brown's excellent (though obviously not flawless!) book. <BR/><BR/>As an aside: In what sense was Wilberforce a commoner? Because he belonged to the House of Commons? He was after all a gentleman merchant who owned land (at least according to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography), which puts him on the social scale far above the commoner/average Briton. I'm not really sure what him being 'common' is supposed to be doing in terms of his altruism. Are they supposed to be related? <BR/><BR/>And I've yet to see the movie, which may significantly alter my opinion. But I've been in enough evangelical churches around this continent to recount the number of times Wilberforce and Wesley are uncritically lauded in sermons. After all, the Bible presents many figures in moments of triumph and failure. Can't we do this with our heritage as well? Wouldn't it be a worthwhile reminder, to go alongside a movie like this? This is, I suppose, what I really meant to be getting at.Kenneth Sheppardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13980807652776654724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-42986807048799001212007-02-14T07:13:00.000-08:002007-02-14T07:13:00.000-08:00Brother Shepherd: I must confess that I am very u...Brother Shepherd: <BR/><BR/>I must confess that I am very unpersuaded by Christopher Brown's argument on this point. I would urge you to read the new book just out with Harper Collins by Metaxa on Wilberforce. I do not think that Wilberforce could ever be accused of seeing opposition to slavery as a mere means to an end. This would be quite unfair as Wilberforce was more deeply convicted on the issue than, say, Abraham Lincoln who famously once said that he would have taken a pass on abolition if that's what it would take to preserve the Union!<BR/><BR/>Wilberforce was even in danger of being charged with sedition during the French revolution for sticking to his guns on the slavery issue. In addition, "the Reform of Manners" was an 18th century buzz phrase for moral reform involving issues like child labor, public schools, exchanging 'small beer' for 'spiritous liquors'in the taverns, all of which causes Wesley had already made a start in addressing with his orphanages and the like. <BR/><BR/>It is of course true that Wilberforce was hierarchial in his approach to government, as was Wesley. But Wilberforce was, and was treated in Parliament as a commoner. He was certainly not one who merely advocated 'noblesse oblige'. So it is quite unnecessary to accuse this movie of being guilty of over gilding the lilly or rank hagiography. <BR/><BR/>I am all for critical historiography, but not from a jaundiced historian who apparently doesn't know the difference between critical historiography and just skepticism and suspicion. <BR/><BR/>Blessings,<BR/><BR/>Ben W.Ben Witheringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06017701050859255865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-33934693740531073992007-02-14T06:32:00.000-08:002007-02-14T06:32:00.000-08:00Thanks for your endorsement Ben. It is fun to hea...Thanks for your endorsement Ben. It is fun to hear from a theologian/biblical scholar on his take early. Knsheppard's comment is also a good one I think.<BR/><BR/><I>Andy Rowell<BR/>Taylor University<BR/>Department of Biblical Studies and Christian Ministry<BR/><A HREF="http://www.andyrowell.net/" REL="nofollow">Blog: Church Leadership Conversations</A> </I>Andy Rowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15317283478472718864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-37521320486364010602007-02-14T06:26:00.000-08:002007-02-14T06:26:00.000-08:00Do those social implication include the fact that ...Do those social implication include the fact that Wilberforce was deeply conservative and hierarchical in his social outlook, and arguably looked upon slavery as a means to an end - namely, the reformation of manners and the reconstitution of the British Empire? This, at least, is the argument of American historian Christopher Brown's book, *Moral Capital*. While I haven't seen the movie, I dread the now ubiquitous use Wilberforce is going to be made by Evangelical pastors - as if he wasn't used enough already. As I've posted personally, I think this kind of movie needs to be supplemented by the reality of critical historical information, so that Christians don't fall into the hagiographic trap of mythologizing figures of their past. And it seems to me there are already enough Christian myths to go around, with even more troubling implications.Kenneth Sheppardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13980807652776654724noreply@blogger.com