What do you think?
Rate this book
Letters to Catherine E. Beecher: In Reply to an Essay on Slavery and Abolitionism, Addressed to A. E. Grimke
Excerpt from Letters to Catherine E. Beecher: In Reply to an Essay on Slavery and Abolitionism, Addressed to A. E. Grimke
If every Slave has a right to freedom, then surely the man who withholds that right from him to-day is a man-stealer, though he may not be the first person who has robbed him of it. Hence we find that Wes ley says - J Men-buyers are exactly on a level with men-stealers.' And again Much less is it possible that any child of man should ever be born a slave.' Hear also Jonathan Edwards - 4 To hold a man in a state of slavery, is to be every day guilty of robbing him of his liberty, or of man-stealing.' 'and Groti us says Those are men-stealers who abduct, keep, sell or buy slaves or freemen.'
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
If every Slave has a right to freedom, then surely the man who withholds that right from him to-day is a man-stealer, though he may not be the first person who has robbed him of it. Hence we find that Wes ley says - J Men-buyers are exactly on a level with men-stealers.' And again Much less is it possible that any child of man should ever be born a slave.' Hear also Jonathan Edwards - 4 To hold a man in a state of slavery, is to be every day guilty of robbing him of his liberty, or of man-stealing.' 'and Groti us says Those are men-stealers who abduct, keep, sell or buy slaves or freemen.'
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
142 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1838
About the author
Angelina Emily Grimké
25 books10 followersPolitical activist, women's rights advocate, supporter of the women's suffrage movement, and besides her sister, Sarah Grimké, the only known white Southern woman to be a part of the abolition movement.
Not to be confused with Angelina Weld Grimké, her grand-niece, also a writer.
Not to be confused with Angelina Weld Grimké, her grand-niece, also a writer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
December 3, 2021
Woah, woah! Please ladies! Take it easy! 😂
Grimké's reply to Beecher addresses two main points: abolitionism and gender equality.
In this review, I am going to mention some of her interesting debates:
Grimké believed that whatever it is morally right for a man to do, it is morally right for a woman to do.
"...I recognize no rights but human rights--I know nothing of men's rights and women's rights; for in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female."
She referred to Christian doctrine to support her claim. She declares that woman never was given to man (which reminded me of a bitter verse I read in Quran years ago); that "she was created, like him, in the image of God, and crowned with glory and honor."
She appears to be a faithful and wise woman whose doctrine, in her own words, can be summarized as this:
"The investigation of the rights of the slave has led me to a better understanding of my own. I have found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of morals in our land—the school in which human rights are more fully investigated, and better understood and taught, than in any other. Here a great fundamental principle is uplifted and illuminated, and from this central light, rays innumerable stream all around. Human beings have rights, because they are moral beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral nature; and as all men have the same moral nature, they have essentially the same rights. These rights may be wrested from the slave, but
they cannot be alienated. Now if rights are founded in the nature of our moral being, then the mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To suppose that it does, would be to deny the self-evident truth, that the ‘physical constitution is the mere instrument of the moral nature.’ To suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch, and humbling the moral into a slave; making the former a proprietor, and the latter its property. When human beings are regarded as moral beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the summit, administering upon rights and responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is morally right for man to do, it is morally right for woman to do. Our duties originate, not from difference of sex, but from the diversity of our relations in life, the various gifts and talents committed to our care, and the different eras in which we live."
***
Honestly, reading these two essays written by prominent women of early 19th century helped me to have a better understanding of cultural, social, and political status of America. If you enjoy debates between two "friends" who try to oppose each other respectfully, you can read Beecher and Grimké letters.
***
It is worthy of attention that Grimké was a Southern lady and Beecher a Northen one, yet Grimké showed stronger devotion and faith to human rights. This advocates using labels to judge whether someone is good or bad is ridiculous.
***
I think Americans better look at their history and be proud to have such women at those ages, who had not only right to think but also speak in favor of justice. I believe instead of making fuss over a dead action, slavery, 21st century Americans should see how those dark ages helped men and women to question their position and see a wider image of humanity; to see how many women, like Grimké, urged to think beyond domestic problems and demand their rights as well. See how those cruel years yield in not only freedom of slaves but also suffragettes movements in following years. Those bitter times were a blessing in disguise, for nothing, even evil, happens for no reason. So, instead of fighting for no reason, Americans should appreciate their history and learn from it.
Grimké's reply to Beecher addresses two main points: abolitionism and gender equality.
In this review, I am going to mention some of her interesting debates:
Grimké believed that whatever it is morally right for a man to do, it is morally right for a woman to do.
"...I recognize no rights but human rights--I know nothing of men's rights and women's rights; for in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female."
She referred to Christian doctrine to support her claim. She declares that woman never was given to man (which reminded me of a bitter verse I read in Quran years ago); that "she was created, like him, in the image of God, and crowned with glory and honor."
She appears to be a faithful and wise woman whose doctrine, in her own words, can be summarized as this:
"The investigation of the rights of the slave has led me to a better understanding of my own. I have found the Anti-Slavery cause to be the high school of morals in our land—the school in which human rights are more fully investigated, and better understood and taught, than in any other. Here a great fundamental principle is uplifted and illuminated, and from this central light, rays innumerable stream all around. Human beings have rights, because they are moral beings: the rights of all men grow out of their moral nature; and as all men have the same moral nature, they have essentially the same rights. These rights may be wrested from the slave, but
they cannot be alienated. Now if rights are founded in the nature of our moral being, then the mere circumstance of sex does not give to man higher rights and responsibilities, than to woman. To suppose that it does, would be to deny the self-evident truth, that the ‘physical constitution is the mere instrument of the moral nature.’ To suppose that it does, would be to break up utterly the relations, of the two natures, and to reverse their functions, exalting the animal nature into a monarch, and humbling the moral into a slave; making the former a proprietor, and the latter its property. When human beings are regarded as moral beings, sex, instead of being enthroned upon the summit, administering upon rights and responsibilities, sinks into insignificance and nothingness. My doctrine then is, that whatever it is morally right for man to do, it is morally right for woman to do. Our duties originate, not from difference of sex, but from the diversity of our relations in life, the various gifts and talents committed to our care, and the different eras in which we live."
***
Honestly, reading these two essays written by prominent women of early 19th century helped me to have a better understanding of cultural, social, and political status of America. If you enjoy debates between two "friends" who try to oppose each other respectfully, you can read Beecher and Grimké letters.
***
It is worthy of attention that Grimké was a Southern lady and Beecher a Northen one, yet Grimké showed stronger devotion and faith to human rights. This advocates using labels to judge whether someone is good or bad is ridiculous.
***
I think Americans better look at their history and be proud to have such women at those ages, who had not only right to think but also speak in favor of justice. I believe instead of making fuss over a dead action, slavery, 21st century Americans should see how those dark ages helped men and women to question their position and see a wider image of humanity; to see how many women, like Grimké, urged to think beyond domestic problems and demand their rights as well. See how those cruel years yield in not only freedom of slaves but also suffragettes movements in following years. Those bitter times were a blessing in disguise, for nothing, even evil, happens for no reason. So, instead of fighting for no reason, Americans should appreciate their history and learn from it.
January 18, 2017
Grimke's letters are in a response to an essay that Beecher had written (addressed to Grimke) on how women shouldn't participate in the abolitionist movement--rather scandalously for the time, Grimke and her sister addressed mixed gender crowds when they spoke and Angelina was the first woman to speak before a state legislature; and Beecher also complained that the abolitionists were too aggressive or radical in their demands. Grimke fired off a series of letters in the newspapers about how necessary abolition was, that their tactics were achieving results, and that women just like men needed to speak out against injustice when they saw it. Although most of the letters are concerned with slavery and the general abolitionist movement, two of Grimke's quotes on the role of women got a lot of attention:
"whatever it is morally right for a man to do, it is morally right for a woman to do. I recognize no rights but human rights – I know nothing of men's rights and women's rights; for in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female."
"I believe it is the woman's right to have a voice in all the laws and regulations by which she is to be governed, whether in Church or State: and that the present arrangements of society, on these points, are a violation of human rights, a rank usurpation of power, a violent seizure and confiscation of what is sacredly and inalienably hers."
"whatever it is morally right for a man to do, it is morally right for a woman to do. I recognize no rights but human rights – I know nothing of men's rights and women's rights; for in Christ Jesus, there is neither male nor female."
"I believe it is the woman's right to have a voice in all the laws and regulations by which she is to be governed, whether in Church or State: and that the present arrangements of society, on these points, are a violation of human rights, a rank usurpation of power, a violent seizure and confiscation of what is sacredly and inalienably hers."
September 27, 2024
Women's rights and all that jazz
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews