1 Corinthians 7:21

“Thou wast called being a slave, care not for it; but if therewith thou mayest be made free, use it rather.”

Here in this domain is the extreme case which can be conceived. Few situations could appear so incompatible with Christian holiness, dignity, and freedom as that of a slave. But a multitude of evidences proves that Christianity had quite specially found access to persons of this class. But, abnormal as this position may appear, it will not remain beyond the victorious influence of the gospel. The spiritual elevation which faith communicates, places the believer above even this contrast: slave, free.

There is something heroic in the word of the apostle: care not for it. “Do not let this position weigh either on thy conscience or on thy heart!” Hofmann applies these words, not to the state of slavery, but to the counsel which the apostle has just given, in this sense: “Do not torment thyself with the counsel I give thee; it should not prevent thee from accepting thy liberty, if an opportunity of recovering it presents itself.” This explanation is not natural. For it is evident that it was his enslaved condition which would above all fill a Christian in this position with concern. The anxiety which Paul's order could cause him was only an effect of that which the position itself caused.

The second part of this verse has been understood in two diametrically opposite senses. The ancient Greek exegetes, and, among the moderns, de Wette, Meyer, Osiander, Kling, Reuss, Renan, Heinrici, Holsten, Edwards, Jean Monod (in a pamphlet published in connection with the American War on the subject of slavery), among translators, Rilliet, Oltramare, Segond, Weizsäcker, think that the apostle means: “But, though thou mayest become free, use rather (slavery).” Calvin, Neander, Hofmann, Bonnet, Beet give this meaning, on the contrary, to the apostle's words: “But nevertheless, if thou canst become free, profit by it (by accepting the advantage which is offered thee).”

The reasons ordinarily alleged in favour of the first interpretation are: 1. The conjunction εἰ καί, which signifies even if, although: “But although thou mightest become free, remain a slave.” 2. 1 Corinthians 7:22, which more naturally justifies the idea of remaining a slave. 3. The whole context, which rather calls for encouragement to remain what one is than to change his state. Renan compares Paul's counsel thus understood with the words of the sages of the time: “The Stoics used to say like St. Paul to the slave: Remain what thou art; think not of freeing thyself.” According to this interpretation, the Christian slave would be invited to refuse, should the case occur, the liberation which was offered him, and “to regard his state, to use Reuss' expression, as a means of education to salvation and as a special sphere of activity assigned to him.” But these reasons are far from seeming to me decisive. The form εἰ καί has not always the sense of even if or though. The two elements of which it is composed may remain distinct, so that the εἰ continues an if, and the καί an also. This is established by Passow by many examples (2.1540). We see this in our Epistle (1 Corinthians 4:7), and even in our chapter, in 1 Corinthians 7:11; 1 Corinthians 7:28, where the meaning of though would be absolutely illogical, and where the εἰ καί evidently signifies: If therewith, if however. A new fact (καί) presents itself, which gives a new aspect to the case. It is precisely so in our passage: “But if therewith (besides the internal liberty which thou possessest, or thy tranquillity of soul, thy οὐ μέλεσθαι), thou canst also become outwardly free...” (καί applying to δύνασαι γένεσθαι). It might even be asked whether, in the other sense, Paul would not have required to say: καὶ εἰ, and even if. On the connection with 1 Corinthians 7:22, see below. Finally, as to the context, it agrees perfectly with the second explanation, if this counsel be regarded as a restriction brought into the general rule. This is what is naturally indicated by the ἀλλά, but, for in the other sense it would require to be taken as an ἀλλά of gradation: but moreover; which is rather forced. We here find a restriction parallel to that of 1 Corinthians 7:15-16, which was also introduced by an adversative particle (εἰ δέ, but if). As, in these verses, the Christian spouse was authorized to deviate from the general rule and to separate from the heathen spouse who refused to remain with her; so in our verse the Christian slave, after having been exhorted to bear without a murmur the state of slavery, is authorized to take advantage of any opportunity which occurs of exchanging it for freedom: “But if, therewith, thou mayest be made free...”

The reasons which appear to me to decide in favour of this meaning are the following: 1. The natural regimen of χρῆσαι, make use of, after the words which immediately precede, If thou mayest be made free, is certainly: “make use of the possibility.” It is much less natural to go to the preceding sentence to borrow the idea of slavery. 2. The μᾶλλον, rather, which some oppose to this meaning, is on the contrary much more naturally explained if the apostle has in view the acceptance of liberty. He was well aware that the slave's situation might be such that he could legitimately prefer to remain in it. Hence it is that to his counsel to accept he delicately adds the word rather, which takes away from his words everything of an imperative character: “I would have thee in this case to incline rather to liberty.” From the rule so forcibly inculcated: to remain in his position, there might in fact arise this misunderstanding, that a slave should not think himself free to profit by an offer of emancipation; this is what the apostle wishes to avoid. 3. Could Paul reasonably give to the Christian slave the advice to remain a slave if he could lawfully regain his freedom? Is not liberty a boon? Is it not the state which accords with the dignity of man? one of the features, the fundamental feature perhaps, of God's image in man? No doubt the Christian slave possesses inward liberty; for the Lord has set him free, not only from condemnation and sin, but also from the yoke of external circumstances, which he can henceforth accept as a gift of God. Nevertheless it remains true, that enjoying liberty, he will be able as a rule to give himself more efficiently to the service of God. What would be said of a prisoner who should refuse liberation, alleging that in his prison he enjoys moral liberty? Or of a sufferer, who, being able to recover health, should refuse to do so for the reason that on his couch he possesses spiritual life? The apostle had too much wisdom from above, and also too much natural good sense, to give himself up to such exaggeration, which belongs to an unhealthy asceticism. Heinrici points out, rightly no doubt, the much more gentle and humane form which slavery had taken at that period. This is true: the master had no longer the right of life and death over his slave; but nevertheless he had the disposal of his person. And if the Christian could find strength in communion with Christ to overcome the temptations attached to such dependence, what an exaggeration would it be to bind him to reject an opportunity providentially offered of becoming free, and escaping from the cause of such conflicts! 4. Moreover, the apostle has himself clearly enough expressed his judgment on this question in the Epistle to Philemon; and all the torture to which Meyer subjects his words (see in his Commentary) does not avail to show that the apostle did not really and positively claim from Philemon the emancipation of Onesimus, who had become his brother by the common faith: “Knowing that thou wilt do even beyond what I say” (Phm 1:21). This passage may certainly be called the first petition in favour of the abolition of slavery. It is not by violent means, like servile wars, it is by the spirit which breathes in such words that Christianity has made and still makes the chains of the slave to fall. And as St. Paul could not contradict himself on this point, we may be assured that his thought was no other than this: “But if therewith (while consenting to live in the state of slavery, enjoying moral liberty) thou mayest become free, take advantage of it.”