“No, my countrymen; let us prefer to suffer present affiction for righteousness’ sake rather than to incur the future punishment of national guilt. Let us keep our skirts clear. We can only do this by maintaining our identity as a people. And is this impossible? There is a race, which, coming down through the centuries enveloped with antagonistic influences and hostile nationalities, has stood out in perpetual protest against amalgamation with other peoples, and today preserves its characteristics, as the current of the great Western River flows into, without blending with, the multitudinous waters of the Gulf. Even so must we hold to our identity, or, as a people, we are undone. We may perish if we attempt it; perish we must, as a Southern race, if we do not. It is now almost the only hope that is left us.”
I post this because in the ARP Moderator’s report on Kinism they try to suggest that Girardeau would have agreed with the Benjamin Glasers of the world. In the ARP Moderators report they have the following to say about Girardeau,
We do not need to be on a side in the unrelated theological debates of the late Nineteenth century to see the point being made; that every Presbyterian, in fact, did not agree on racial issues before 1950, or even 1900. Similarly, John Girardeau dealt critically with Dabney’s view of black men and women in the South.23
All because Girardeau disagree with Dabney on how the issue of the freed slaves should be handled does not mean that Girardeau was an Alienist or would be on the side of the idiots like Glaser, Webbon, Poplin, et. al. when it comes to the Kinist issue. Indeed, a cursory reading of Girardeau makes it clear that Girardeau’s views were Kinist. The ARP cannot claim Girardeau as somehow supporting their idiotic ramblings on race and Kinsim.
