Katie Denton

Bacon points in her discussion of African American female abolitionists to “the dual forces of racism and sexism constituted unique constraints” (165) that these women faced as they felt the societal push to conform to traditional gender roles even as they tried to give voice to their concerns.  Given the inherent tension, how did African American female rhetors create the ethos necessary to be heard?  As these women navigated the public domain, they adapted a variety of strategies to gain authority, one of which was to invoke a religious stance.  Two such instances of religion as the basis for ethos are Maria W. Stewart’s “Lecture Delivered at the Franklin Hall” (1832) and Victoria Earle Matthews’ “The Awakening of the Afro-American Woman” (1897).  Stewart and Matthews enact religious stances in different ways, but in both cases, religious appeals serve, among other functions, to create authority.

Stewart opens her lecture (as Bacon points out) by situating herself in a prophetic role: “Methinks I heard a spiritual interrogation—‘Who shall go forward , and take off the reproach that is cast upon the people of color?  Shall it be a woman?’” (6). This invocation lends authority to Stewart in that it provides a foundation that justifies Stewart’s speech in the first place.  Stewart had to justify herself on two accounts: that she was speaking up publicly, and that she was addressing a “promiscuous audience.”  To do so without being discounted altogether, Stewart provided what would be considered by some a sound reason—divine inspiration and moral obligation.  This religious stance pervades the entire speech.  When Stewart speaks of prejudice, for example, she asks, “Why is this cruel and unfeeling distinction?  Is it merely because God has made our complexion to vary?” (7).  By relying on religion, Stewart also asks her audience to consider the commonalities of humanity; in this case, that we were all created by God, and that if we create a hierarchy of values, we are placing judgment on God’s creation.  Throughout her speech, the prophetic tone serves to remind listeners that the changes Stewart advocates may bring about a better vision of both this life and the next.  As she ends her speech, she reinforces this by again invoking a “seer” stance: “Methinks our oppression is soon to come to an end” (10).  Offering parallels between Scriptural moments and the present, Stewart invites listeners to consider how to move forward to bring about a more spiritually harmonized reality.

Matthews also takes on a religious stance in direct response to the audience she is addressing.  In this case, Matthews is speaking at a Protestant convention, so a religiously oriented speech would meet the expectations of her listeners.  Matthews’ speech calls for more direct, politically oriented action, but since she would be discounted without appropriate backing, she invokes the notion of Christian responsibility.  If the common ground for the audience is Christianity, should not one, according to Matthews, consider one’s Christian responsibilities?  Matthews describes many concepts as Christian, including the nation, home, government, and the law.  In so doing, she is implying a connection between duty, or of “doing the right thing” and these various spheres.  In each case, Matthews calls for listeners to consider themselves Christians first and members of each of these realms second.  In light of this perspective, Matthews calls for action, as one must apply Christian virtues and values in order to best serve God in each of the domains she describes as Christian.  In contrast to Stewart, who invokes Christianity to create the authority to speak and be heard by a mixed audience, Matthews attempts to offer a politicized agenda legitimized through a Christian sense of direction.