Interesting and thought provoking read which examines the religious origins of slavery, morality,, and motivation behind its widespread practice. The book features the perspectives of three men, John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, and George Whitefield. I enjoyed the author’s reflection on how perspective, experiences, and cultural beliefs of the time strongly influence the lens through which these men justified slavery. Overall, this was a good read.

Christendom finds itself confronted with many challenges in terms of its legacy. One especially heinous aspects of that legacy was the implicit acceptance of, or even outright participation in, the system of chattel slavery developed in the Americas in the early modern period.

This reckoning proves especially necessary among the conservative Protestant/Evangelical camps, especially in regard to many of those whom they deem to be their champions and heroes of the faith.

Sean McGever reckons well with that legacy in Ownership: The Evangelical Legacy of Slavery in Edwards, Wesley, and Whitefield.

The author well focused on these three people on account of their ongoing influence in Evangelicalism: the Reformed remain entranced with Edwards’ theological expositions, Wesley was often championed for his later antislavery views and lauded as a catalyst for abolition, and Whitefield is recognized as one of the most prolific - and prolifically successful - preachers of all time, and no doubt influenced the practice of preaching before multitudes which has proven pervasive ever since.

The author approaches these issues with appropriate humility, integrity, but also moral fervency. In their own way each character ends up embodying certain trends and tendencies.

John Wesley was born first and lived longest. The author profiles Wesley in terms of what made him influential and prominent and in terms of the issue of slavery. The author takes Wesley down many notches in terms of his anti-slavery advocacy: he well demonstrated how Wesley had firsthand experiences of American chattel slavery many decades before his anti-slavery agitation, and at that time did not seem nearly as morally bothered by it. Wesley thus represents the “person of the age” who accepted chattel slavery as just part of the order of things until he came into contact with those who made forceful arguments against its inhumanity and its practice. The author shows how Wesley was thus influenced by many prominent Quaker antislavery advocates. Yes, Wesley’s tract against slavery in 1774 would prove a lightning rod and would be part of what catalyzed the abolitionist movement, but it came toward the end of Wesley’s life and did not seem to reflect his attitudes much earlier than it. Wesley’s change of heart is commendable; but it took quite a while.

The author well demonstrates how slavery was just part of Jonathan Edwards’ world. His parents owned a couple of slaves; he would own a couple of slaves; he would give his slaves as part of his inheritance to his children. He did not find it morally objectionable. The application of what Edwards would preach would not make an impact on Edwards himself, but it would on his son who would become an antislavery agitator. One cannot extricate Edwards from the legacy of white supremacy and slavery. The author did well at showing how one can still appreciate his contributions to theology while confessing and lamenting how he had no moral scruple about owning human beings. His son’s departure from his position belies any attempt to excuse Edwards as a “man of his time.”

George Whitefield’s example is perhaps the most distressing. The author well demonstrated how Whitefield found slavery morally problematic until he needed money and support in order to realize his great dream of establishing an orphanage in the colony of Georgia. It is hard to reconcile how Whitefield could have justified such evil in his attempt at doing something which, at least in theory, was laudable and honorable, supporting orphans by means of the unpaid labor of many Black people.

One thing I appreciated about the author throughout was his attempts at emphasizing the humanity of the slaves owned by Edwards and Whitefield and his ability to maintain moral horror at their behaviors. Far too often their affirmation of chattel slavery is admitted and passed over with almost clinical disembodiment and distance, trying to “sanitize” what ought to be deeply distressing and troubling. The author will not allow you to justify, rationalize, or look away.

I’m sure many will deride the author and his work as “woke,” but it is anything but. Many will attempt to deflect by suggesting the author would want to eliminate or “cancel” these men of the faith, but such would prove fallacious: the author desires to do anything but. The author wants Evangelicals to honor the legacy of what these men said and did. But you cannot celebrate them for their virtues and attempt to diminish or suppress their vices in commending, neglecting, and/or profiting from chattel slavery and prove honest with them and their legacy. Ownership goes a long way for White Evangelicalism to properly grapple with the dark side of their heroes.

Thanks to NetGalley and IVP for the ARC!

Sean McGever’s "Ownership: is an effective exploration of Christianity’s complicated history with slavery, appropriately more concerned with a reckoning than a reconciliation.

The author provides detailed portraits of John Wesley, John Edwards, and George Whitefield, examining how their lives were largely marked by ambivalent or worse—actively pro-slavery—stances. The result is a book that feels like a necessary contrast to the endless, “Yes, but think of all the good they did” takes that populate evangelical thought. I found the section on Edwards particularly interesting, as he argued for a kind of class-based hierarchy even in heaven.

There are no tired justifications here. McGever refuses to play into the many simplifications people fall back on, such as the argument that “Biblical slavery was different," or that “the Bible condemns slavery.” Instead, his research leads him deeper into the issue, noting that the Bible was an active point of contention for abolitionists, and even early Christians—like Augustine—who thought slaves were mistreated still thought liberation was wrong. The issue, McGever argues, was rarely ignorance—it was willful oversight. Wisely, the author is also quick to point out that early abolitionist movements by Quakers were initiated by enslaved people themselves.

I admire McGever’s take here, which invites readers to reflect on their own complicity. If historical figures were willing to ignore such glaringly problematic beliefs, what are comparable modern issues that people will be ashamed of in the future? How can people proactively take accountability for the present before it becomes the past? This is where the legacy of John Wesley becomes instructive. For the majority of his life, he was passive about slavery before eventually speaking out against it. It was, of course, much later than it should have been, but it was still a conscious pivot from how he had lived his life.

The end of the book is perhaps a bit too tidy, but maybe it needs to be for people to take action. Ultimately, "Ownership" is a call for readers to view legacy—even ugly legacy—as starting point for action, taking and ascribing accountability as necessary.

Sean McGever has written a thorough and thought-provoking work about three of the heroes of Evangelical Christianity and their views on slavery. It is both a direct investigation into the the history of these men and an examination of the thoughts of them and their influences on the issue of slavery during their ministries and beyond. It is a good reminder to see our heroes as they really were, not how "hallowed" we wish they were. They were men who had their own flaws. Men who didn't always get it right then or now. The author reminds us that we would be wise to remind ourselves that we are all people who are flawed by sin and remember that we are all in need of a savior and the change that He along can bring into our lives. I would highly recommend this book to every serious believer.

I am not a Christian, but I am someone who is very interested in the moral "blind spots" we may have. History shows us that many otherwise decent people do things that would horrify us today and, as McGever points out, it's silly for us to think that future generations won't be astonished by some of the things that we condone today. His specific interest is in how three prominent early evangelicals approached chattel slavery. Edwards and Whitefield both owned other humans. Wesley's opposed slavery, but only towards the end of his life.

Without ever excusing their profound failures, McGever explores the world into which these men were born. The end result is that we may be prompted to think about how the world we were born into may be leading us to faulty moral conclusions (and in fact, this prompting is made explicit in the final chapter, which is designed for Christian reflection, but also gave me a great deal to think about).

I think the target audience -- white evangelical Christians -- will find this book both interesting and useful, especially if their spiritual or intellectual life hasn't included much reflection on slavery, race, or discrimination. But even if you fall outside this group, you may find this book worthwhile. McGever is a good writer, has an excellent understanding of the lives of these fascinating men, and the topic is something I think we all could benefit from thinking about.

I received a copy of this book from Net Galley.

An unsettling but important book. I found the reflections on Wesley the most compelling and necessary, both grateful for his eventual change of heart and yet disappointed by the "too little, too late" approach he took to abolition. Worth reading and reflecting on!