Slaveholder religious conversion made slave treatment harsher, not gentler.

Evidence

Not only was Douglass incensed at the deep hypocrisy within white Christianity but also his own lived experience had convinced him that Christianity’s central contribution to chattel slavery was to make it less, not more, humane. When Douglass came to live with his owner Thomas Auld at St. Michaels, Maryland, in 1832, he described him as a man without religion and without kindness. He was arbitrary in his demands, quick to punish, and, worst of all, he and his wife did not provide his slaves with enough to eat despite the presence of abundant food in the household. The couple was, as Douglass put it bluntly, “well matched, being equally mean and cruel.” In the fall of that year, Auld attended one of the many Methodist camp meetings that were common rural events of the period and had a conversion experience. He became a zealous Christian, praying three times a day, and soon became a Sunday school class leader and an “exhorter” at revival meetings, where, Douglass reports, “he proved himself an instrument in the hands of the church in converting many souls.” — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long, 245

Categorization

• SEED: The specific mechanism — the master who was merely mean becoming crueler once he had a ‘religious duty’ frame — is a sharp case study of religion legitimating rather than curbing power, useful as an evidence paragraph in an essay.
• XREF: Connects to Jones’s governing thesis in White Too Long that white Christian identity functioned not as moral correction but as theological ratification of white supremacy. — connects to: Religious conversion made slaveholders more cruel, not less — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long: The Legacy of White…, 246; Religion supplied slaveholders moral sanction rather than conscience for cruelty — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long: The Legacy of White…, 246; Religious blessing of slavery severed white Christians’ natural moral restraint — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long: The Legacy of White…, 251 (+2 more)
• ADDENDUM: This falsifies the popular ‘religious influence humanizes’ assumption in a way that parallels how the sacrifice article shows ritual logic overriding proximate human empathy.

Broader Connections

• Religious conversion made slaveholders more cruel, not less #corroborates (0.95) — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long, 246
• The most devout slaveholders were reputedly the most brutal slavers #corroborates (0.92) — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long, 249
• Religion supplied slaveholders moral sanction rather than conscience for cruelty #expands (0.90) — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long, 246
• Religious blessing of slavery severed white Christians’ natural moral restraint #expands (0.80) — Robert P. Jones, White Too Long, 251