For much of Christian history, theology placed limits on slavery. In late antiquity and the medieval period, the prevailing teaching was that while it was permissible to enslave non-Christians — pagans, Muslims, or “heathens” — it was forbidden to enslave fellow Christians. This principle rested on the belief that baptism created spiritual equality, binding believers together as the body of Christ. To enslave another Christian was seen as a betrayal of that shared identity.

As a result, when most of Europe converted to Christianity during the Middle Ages, slavery declined within Europe itself. It was replaced largely by serfdom, which, though oppressive, allowed peasants certain rights and kept them distinct from slaves captured in warfare.

But this theological framework was soon challenged. Beginning in the fifteenth century, European expansion into Africa and the Americas created new demands for labor, especially in the plantation economies of the New World. Here, the older rule — “Christians cannot enslave Christians” — became an obstacle. Once Africans began to convert to Christianity, how could their continued enslavement be justified? The answer lay in a series of theological shifts that subordinated principle to profit.

1. Colonial Expansion and the Problem of African Slavery

When Europeans established colonies in the Americas and began trading along Africa’s coasts, the economic stakes rose dramatically. Sugar, tobacco, rice, and eventually cotton plantations required immense amounts of labor. Indigenous populations had been decimated by disease and warfare, and indentured European laborers were too few and too temporary.

Initially, Africans were targeted because they were not Christians, fitting the older model of permissible enslavement. But as missionaries converted Africans — and as African rulers like those of Kongo embraced Catholicism — the theological dilemma sharpened.........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)