Category: Kinism

The Wesleyans & Anglicans Were Also Kinists Originally… Everyone Was

Wesleyan Kinism;

“Everyone, therefore, that has a soul to be saved, is entitled to this good office from thee. Yet this does not imply, that it is to be done in the same degree to everyone. It cannot be denied, that there are some to whom it is particularly due. Such, in the first place, are our parents, if we have nay that stand in need of it; unless we should place our consorts and our children on an equal footing with them. Next to these we may rank our brothers and sisters, and afterwards our relations, as they are allied to us in a nearer or more distant manner, either by blood or by marriage. Immediately after these are our servants, whether bound to us for a term of years or any shorter term. Lastly, such in their several degrees are our countrymen, our fellow citizens, and the members of the same society, whether civil or religious.“

John Wesley
1787 Sermon on the ‘Duty of Reproving our Neighbor‘

Anglican Kinism

“But secondly, the same Native Country is another cement of Christian Charity. It must be some instinct in Nature, because the consent of all Mankind to love their own Nation, to value their birthright and the inheritance of their Fathers. When Moses spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew one of his Brethren, i.e., his own countrymen; in his tenderness he delivered the one,and out of too great indignation he slew the other. And when he went a second time and saw two men of the Hebrews strive together, he said to him who began the assault, ‘Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow? Is he thy brother an Israelite? This may provoke God to make you longer slaves in a strange land.’ Our Blessed Savior seems to have had a particular regard to the good estate of his own Nation, while he declared, that he was not sent, save to the ‘lost Sheep of the House of Israel’; while he wept over Jerusalem, and often visited Nazareth and Bethlehem, tho one would think, nothing could draw him thither but an impulse of natural affection; for he himself was sensible that the ‘Prophet had least Honor in his own Country’. St. Paul was another great example of inbred Love and Zeal for his Native Land, the goodly Heritage of his Ancestors. He was by Birth a true old Hebrew of the Hebrews, i.e., for many generations. He had indeed but little reason to be fond of that Birthright; for he was brought into great Perils by his own countrymen, and he had least to do with them, for his Mission was to be an Apostle to the Gentiles; yet Nature must break through all discouragements; wherefore, Act xxviii.19 tho’ plagued and oppressed by his fellow Jews, he had still a loving eye upon his dear Country, ‘I was constrained (says he) to appeal unto Ceasar, not that I had ought to accuse my Nation of’; and how much less would he have betrayed his Nation? Nay, what a rapture of zeal had he, Rom ix.3 ‘I could wish myself accursed or separated from Christ for my Brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites.’”

Rev. Dr. White Kennett
From Bishop Gilbert Burnet’s Exposition of the Church Catechism,
p. 20-21

More Anglican Kinism

“Quest. But who is your neighbor?

Answ. Every man, of what Nation or Religion soever he may happen to be.

Quest. Must you love all these alike?

Asnw. No. I must make a difference, according to the Degree of their worth, and of the Image of God that I see in them; and according to the Relation God has placed me in to them.”

Anglican Bishop Gilbert Burnet (1643-1715)
Exposition of the Church Catechism

Roger Scruton Channeling Edmund Burke on Rosseau… McAtee Observes Kinism

“The dead and the unborn are as much members of society as the living. To dishonor the dead is to reject the relation of obligation between generations.”

Roger Scruton

On Rousseau

Let us proceed to tease out some implications here;

1.) Of course this is nothing but the cream that rises to the surface from the doctrine called “Kinism,” which is itself merely Christianity as applied to social order functioning. There is not only a relation between kin who are living but also a relation between kin living and kin who have gone before. Without a honored continuity across the generations man becomes hyper-individualized with no sense of belonging to something greater than himself. This atomistic view of man is that which Carle C. Zimmerman, a Harvard sociologist, warned against in his book “Family and Civilization.” Indeed, I am convinced that Zimmerman would have thoroughly agreed with this observation from Scruton.

2.) Those who deny this truism are violators of the fifth commandment as Scruton’s second sentence clearly communicates. One simply can not deny Kinism and claim Christ. How can we honor our Father and Mother if we refuse to embrace them as present even if they no longer live among us? This is especially true if our Fathers were Christians.

3.) This observation fits in well with Hebrews 11, the Hall of faith. In that passage the recipients of the letter are being encouraged to press on in the faith in light of their Fathers and Mothers faithfulness. The heroes of the faith have passed on and yet we are to live in light of their faithfulness. They being dead, still speak.

4.) The only place left to go if one denies Scruton’s channeling of Edmund Burke is some form of cosmopolitanism. Cosmopolitanism eschews this wisdom in order to embrace the life of the rootless nomad, and the wandering Jew. Yet despite this truth, NAPARC churches are routinely persecuting men who embrace this expression of Kinism as given by Scruton. The most recent casualty is one Rev. Rick Appleton.

4.) Without this principle what evolves is an ugly generational selfishness embraced by each succeeding generation. Without this principle living is only about me, myself, and I. Again, the sense of belonging is almost impossible to re-create once lost.

5.) The only time we have authority to walk away from our forebears or walk away from our children is when our forebears are unfaithful to Christ in their traditions or when our children are unfaithful to Christ and His gracious Law-Word. To have to walk away from either of them for the sake of the King would be gladly done but done as with great tears and heaviness of heart. We would weep over their loss and our loss while rejoicing in gaining the Kingdom.

6.) In order to make this concrete keep in mind that all those “Christians” out there who are decrying Christian Nationalism, or Kinism; even often-times screaming “Racism” are in point of fact functionally denying the essence of this proverb. Those who deny this have to be considered at the very least “alienists” and at the worse, Enlightenment Liberals or Communists/Cultural Marxists.