What do you think?
Rate this book
Dabney On Fire: A Theology of Parenting, Education, Feminism, and Government
Robert Lewis Dabney (1820–1898) was one of America’s greatest theologians. He was a Southern Presbyterian pastor, professor, philosopher, chaplain, church leader, author, and biographer of Stonewall Jackson. Among Dabney’s many gifts was his ability to predict the future, which resulted from his razor-sharp logic and thorough understanding of the world around him. Nowhere was Dabney more prophetic than in his writings on public theology, where he sought to apply the Bible to cultural and political issues in society. In addition to an introductory chapter, Dabney On Fire contains four of Robert Lewis Dabney’s greatest essays, in which he expounds upon the significance of parents, the failure of public schools, the dangers of feminism, and the limits of civil government. Dabney’s fiery style shines through, as this first-rate thinker and conservative stalwart puts forth the Bible’s teaching on these issues and critiques his opposition. These essays will inspire parents of young children, equip Christians dealing with secular thought, and challenge all who assume modern views of equality.
134 pages, Kindle Edition
Published May 12, 2019
8 people are currently reading
164 people want to read
About the author
Robert Lewis Dabney
153 books42 followersRobert Lewis Dabney (March 5, 1820 – January 3, 1898) was an American Christian theologian, a Southern Presbyterian pastor, and Confederate Army chaplain. He was also chief of staff and biographer to Stonewall Jackson. His biography of Jackson remains in print today.
Dabney studied at Hampden-Sydney College and the University of Virginia (M.A., 1842), and graduated from Union Theological Seminary in 1846.
He was then a missionary in Louisa County, Virginia, from 1846 to 1847 and pastor at Tinkling Spring, Virginia from 1847 to 1853, being also head master of a classical school for a portion of this time. From 1853 to 1859 he was professor of ecclesiastical history and polity and from 1859 to 1869 adjunct professor of systematic theology in Union Theological Seminary, where he later became full professor of systematics. In 1883, he was appointed professor of mental and moral philosophy in the University of Texas.
By 1894 failing health compelled him to retire from active life, although he still lectured occasionally. He was co-pastor, with his brother-in-law B. M. Smith, of the Hampden-Sydney College Church 1858 to 1874, also serving Hampden-Sydney College in a professorial capacity on occasions of vacancies in its faculty. Dabney, whose wife was a first cousin to Stonewall Jackson's wife, participated in the Civil War: during the summer of 1861 he was chaplain of the 18th Virginia regiment in the Confederate army, and in the following year was chief of staff to Jackson during the Valley Campaign and the Seven Days Battles.
After the Civil War Dabney spoke widely on Jackson and the Confederacy. He continued to hold racial views typical in the South before the Civil War, and his continued support of slavery in speeches and a book published after the war and his strong loyalty to the Confederacy until the 1890s made him a visible figure in the post-war South (Hettle, 2003).
While at the University of Texas he practically founded and maintained the Austin School of Theology (which later became Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary), and in 1870 was Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States.
Major works
Memoir of Rev. Dr. Francis S. Sampson (1855), whose commentary on Hebrews he edited (1857);
Life of General Thomas J. Jackson (1866)
A Defense of Virginia, and Through Her, of the South, in Recent and Pending Contests Against the Sectional Party (1867), an apologia for the Confederacy.
Lectures on Sacred Rhetoric (1870)
Syllabus and Notes of the Course of Systematic and Polemic Theology (1871; 2nd ed. 1878), later republished as Systematic Theology.
Systematic Theology (1878)
Sensualistic Philosophy of the Nineteenth Century Examined (1875; 2nd ed. 1887)
Practical Philosophy (1897)
Penal Character of the Atonement of Christ Discussed in the Light of Recent Popular Heresies (1898, posthumous), on the satisfaction view of the atonement.
Discussions (1890-1897), Four volumes of his shorter essays, edited by C. R. Vaughan.
Dabney studied at Hampden-Sydney College and the University of Virginia (M.A., 1842), and graduated from Union Theological Seminary in 1846.
He was then a missionary in Louisa County, Virginia, from 1846 to 1847 and pastor at Tinkling Spring, Virginia from 1847 to 1853, being also head master of a classical school for a portion of this time. From 1853 to 1859 he was professor of ecclesiastical history and polity and from 1859 to 1869 adjunct professor of systematic theology in Union Theological Seminary, where he later became full professor of systematics. In 1883, he was appointed professor of mental and moral philosophy in the University of Texas.
By 1894 failing health compelled him to retire from active life, although he still lectured occasionally. He was co-pastor, with his brother-in-law B. M. Smith, of the Hampden-Sydney College Church 1858 to 1874, also serving Hampden-Sydney College in a professorial capacity on occasions of vacancies in its faculty. Dabney, whose wife was a first cousin to Stonewall Jackson's wife, participated in the Civil War: during the summer of 1861 he was chaplain of the 18th Virginia regiment in the Confederate army, and in the following year was chief of staff to Jackson during the Valley Campaign and the Seven Days Battles.
After the Civil War Dabney spoke widely on Jackson and the Confederacy. He continued to hold racial views typical in the South before the Civil War, and his continued support of slavery in speeches and a book published after the war and his strong loyalty to the Confederacy until the 1890s made him a visible figure in the post-war South (Hettle, 2003).
While at the University of Texas he practically founded and maintained the Austin School of Theology (which later became Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary), and in 1870 was Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States.
Major works
Memoir of Rev. Dr. Francis S. Sampson (1855), whose commentary on Hebrews he edited (1857);
Life of General Thomas J. Jackson (1866)
A Defense of Virginia, and Through Her, of the South, in Recent and Pending Contests Against the Sectional Party (1867), an apologia for the Confederacy.
Lectures on Sacred Rhetoric (1870)
Syllabus and Notes of the Course of Systematic and Polemic Theology (1871; 2nd ed. 1878), later republished as Systematic Theology.
Systematic Theology (1878)
Sensualistic Philosophy of the Nineteenth Century Examined (1875; 2nd ed. 1887)
Practical Philosophy (1897)
Penal Character of the Atonement of Christ Discussed in the Light of Recent Popular Heresies (1898, posthumous), on the satisfaction view of the atonement.
Discussions (1890-1897), Four volumes of his shorter essays, edited by C. R. Vaughan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
April 27, 2022
Dabney's sermon on Parental Responsibilities satisfied my curiosity regarding the perseverance of families. For if God, at large, preserves christian families, then christianity truly is a war of none other than fertility as Genesis so commands. For if God preserves individuals, and God preserves the Church, how would he not also preserve families for his divine purposes? For "The Christian family is the constituent integer of the Church," and family units are composed likewise of individuals.
His sermon on education was built upon the foundation of the beliefs about parenting. He directly attacked the dichotomy of separation of mental education and spiritual education exposing that debate as "a great gulf fixed." In summary of his arguments, he posits "doubtless God has deposited the duty in the safest place, [parents]."
The sections on Feminism and Civil government were of no lesser quality than the first two sections. He linked the roots of Feminism to the Civil War which was a new idea to me and interesting to consider.
The relevancy of these writings so many years later is a proof to the insight of a man who could see past his own time and who could logically theorize correct outcomes of certain ideologies pursued to their natural end. As he puts it, "The Creator has made man, in spite of himself, a logical animal; and consequences will work themselves out whether he designs it or not, to those results which the premises dictate."
His sermon on education was built upon the foundation of the beliefs about parenting. He directly attacked the dichotomy of separation of mental education and spiritual education exposing that debate as "a great gulf fixed." In summary of his arguments, he posits "doubtless God has deposited the duty in the safest place, [parents]."
The sections on Feminism and Civil government were of no lesser quality than the first two sections. He linked the roots of Feminism to the Civil War which was a new idea to me and interesting to consider.
The relevancy of these writings so many years later is a proof to the insight of a man who could see past his own time and who could logically theorize correct outcomes of certain ideologies pursued to their natural end. As he puts it, "The Creator has made man, in spite of himself, a logical animal; and consequences will work themselves out whether he designs it or not, to those results which the premises dictate."
March 20, 2022
Excellent stuff. This was my first time reading anything by Dabney and I'm now a fan. His stuff on Parenting, education and feminism was very good and provoked a lot of thoughts in my mind. Especially his predictions on the education system, that was spot on to what we are seeing today. His stuff on government was a little more difficult to comprehend compared to the other topics. Overall definitely a high 4 and I intend to read much more about him and more of his works.
January 21, 2024
This book is separated into 4 essays, which I will rate individually:
1. Parental Responsibilities (4/5)
2. Secularized Education (3/5)
3. Women's Rights Women (5/5)*
4. Civic Ethics (4/5)
*This is legitimately the best repudiation against feminism that I have ever read.
1. Parental Responsibilities (4/5)
2. Secularized Education (3/5)
3. Women's Rights Women (5/5)*
4. Civic Ethics (4/5)
*This is legitimately the best repudiation against feminism that I have ever read.
January 29, 2022
Robert Lewis Dabney (1820–1898) was a 19th century white-supremacist, slaveowner, Confederate soldier, and Southern Presbyterian seminary professor. A generation of reformed evangelicals (including John MacArthur and John Piper) endorsed Dabney for decades for his Calvinist theology, but didn’t say much about his hierarchical views of the family, the church, and society, a view that included endorsing slavery, resisting Black equality, and opposing the right of women to vote.
Enter Zachary Garris. Garris considers Dabney to be one of the “five greatest Christian men in history” and thinks that more people need to read him. Garris is not ignorant of Dabney’s views of social hierarchy—in fact, Garris thinks that it is precisely here that our generation needs Dabney the most. In an article titled “Remembering R. L. Dabney,” Garris said this: “Today’s conservatives should take heed of Dabney’s words. If they want to fend off the attacks of leftist progressivism, they must embrace genuine conservative principles. This starts with rejecting egalitarianism in all its forms and embracing the bedrock principle of hierarchy. We will find few defenses of hierarchy better than those contained in the writings of Robert Lewis Dabney.”
To that end, Garris has edited this this book, Dabney on Fire, collecting “four of Dabney’s greatest essays,” plus an introduction and a “recommended reading” list. The four Dabney essays are these: “Parental Responsibilities” (1870), “Secularized Education” (1879), “Women’s Rights Women,” (1871), and “Civic Ethics,” (1892, 1897). Garris’s preface explains that he published the book in “an effort to make Dabney’s essays accessible to a wider audience” (vii). Garris thinks these four essays in particular “have significant application for the modern reader”; “the subjects covered are timeless”; they will “challenge all who assume modern views of equality” (vii).
Garris lauds Dabney to his readers: “the man was an intellectual giant and a fiery writer. He should not be ignored” (viii); “Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898 A.D.) was one of Americas greatest theologians” (1); “his cultural and political writings read like prophecy. Ultimately, Dabney was that rare figure that the church so desperately needs in our own day—a Christian statesman” (2).
Garris lets us know from the first to the last page that this is a book with Southern sympathies. The book is dedicated “To the Southern Presbyterian Church.” His his short book recommendation list includes segregationist Morton H. Smith’s Studies in Southern Presbyterian Theology. Garris acknowledges in his introduction that Dabney was a Confederate, but he finds no issue with this: “Yet he has largely been forgotten, dismissed even by Christians because of his association with the Confederacy. However, we ignore Dabney to our own peril. He was both a first- rate thinker and a conservative stalwart” (2). In fact, one reads hints that Garris himself shares some of these sympathies. Garris refers to the American Civil War as “The War Between the States,” an idiosyncratic term used mainly by Confederate heritage groups (3). Confederate general Stonewall Jackson is “one of the greatest men produced by the Old South” (6). Dabney’s 1867 book A Defense of Virginia and through her of the South is “a response to abolitionism and vindication of Southern slavery in light of Scripture” (7).
The hint of Confederate sympathy in the introduction is given full throated defense in the essays Garris has collected. “Women’s Rights Women” was published in 1871 just a few years after the way, and Dabney argues fundamentally from a pro-Confederacy position against women’s suffrage. He rages against the “Yankees” who have “destroyed one Federal and eleven other State constitutions, have committed a half million of murders, and (dearest of all) have spent some seven thous and millions of dollars” (72). Again: “That mighty tide of progress which has already swept away the Constitution, and slavery, and States’ rights, and the force of contracts public and private, with all such rubbish, will soon dissolve your grievance also” (72).
Dabney compares women’s right to vote with another issue he detests: the abolition of slavery, and Black people voting: “It has been decided that all negro men have a right to vote : is not a Yankee white woman with her ‘smartness' and education as good as a stupid, ignorant, Southern black ?” (70); “Its prospect of triumph is greatly increased by this, that its Northern opponents (the only ones who have any power to oppose) have disabled themselves from meeting it by their furious Abolitionism” (74). All of these issues: the Confederacy, abolition, and Black franchise are connected to women’s suffrage for Dabney: “No words are needed to show hence that should either the voice of God or of sound experience require woman to be placed for the good of the whole society in a subordinate sphere, there can be no natural injustice in doing so. But these old truths, with their sound and beneficent applications, have been scornfully, repudiated by Abolitionism and Radicalism. The North cannot, will not, avow and appeal to them, because that would be to confess that the injured South was all the time right in its opposition to Abolition; and the conquerors will rather let all perish than thus humble their pride to the poor conquered victims” (75–76). Even though the essay is, ostensibly, on women’s rights, why waste a good opportunity to disparage Black people? “Nor will there be, under any future circumstances, either leader or party that will risk the odium of a movement to take away suffrage from the incompetent hands of the blacks, however clearly it may appear that they are using it for the ruin pf themselves and the country” (78). These passages are reprinted without comment or caveat from Garris in this remarkable essay. Women’s suffrage will, according to Dabney, “destroy Christianity and civilisation in America” (79).
“Civic Ethics” is a bit more philosophical (it was reprinted as a chapter in Dabney’s Practical Philosophy in 1897), but it still contains the same hierarchical views, and the same pro-Confederacy ideology a full three decades after the war. Dabney is sure to get in a plug for “the exercise of their [the states’] constitution right of secession” (99). He again protests against “female suffrage and ‘women’s rights’” (106), and the “American Jacobins” who have bestowed “universal suffrage on negroes” (107). Dabney does not mute his white-supremacy here in comparing Black voters to women: “By what plea can the right of suffrage be withheld from the millions of white American women, intelligent, educated, virtuous and patriotic, after it has been granted as an inalienable natural right to all these illiterate semi-savage aliens?” (107).
What does Garris think of Dabney’s racism? Even though Dabney explicitly gives voice to his white-supremacy on multiple occasions in these essays, Garris makes no comment on them either way, neither in the introduction, nor in any of the dozens of explanatory footnotes. However, in response to his article “R. L. Dabney Remembered,” a reader wrote in pointing out Dabney’s racism, and Garris responded there: “There are two issues raised in Mr. Whealton’s response. The first is whether biblical hierarchy extends to racial hierarchy. The Bible does not specifically address this. Though the Bible affirms that all humans are made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and that Jesus redeems people from every nation (Revelation 5:9), there is nothing in Scripture that teaches that all men are created equal. Dabney’s opinions about blacks reflect the thought of his time, but they are not rooted in Scripture as something like male headship in marriage is.
The second issue raised in Mr. Whealton’s response is whether we should judge dead men by current political standards…” (“Dabney's Blind Spot”).
Garris also includes Dabney’s essay on “Secularized Education” (1879). For context, this essay was part of the final volley in a years long assault on the Virginia state school system. To get Dabney’s full views on education, you really must also read “The Negro and the Common School” (1876), and then “The State Free School System” (1876). The arguments expressed in “Secularized Education” are mostly just a reprint of his “Fourth Letter” to William Henry Ruffner in 1876. Dabney bitterly resented the fact that tax dollars were being spent to help educate Black children through the public schools, and he gives full vent to his white-supremacy in those earlier articles. You can read “Secularized Education” alone, but you should know that it rests within a larger framework for Dabney.
The fourth essay (first in the book) is “Parental Responsibilities” and is the least objectionable of the group. It’s available for free online if you really want to read it (as are all four of the essays).
According to Garris, these are four of Dabney’s “greatest essays,” and are what we most need for our time. I couldn’t disagree more. By all means, read these essays by Dabney (look them up on Google Books) in order to begin to understand the roots of Southern Presbyterianism, neo-Confederacy, and the Christian Reconstruction movement. Read them to understand the worldview of Christian hierarchalists who fight against racial justice and women’s equality as if “Christianity and civilization” depended on it—they believe it does. But I can’t recommend this collection of essays as having any “application for the modern reader” other than as a cautionary tale.
Enter Zachary Garris. Garris considers Dabney to be one of the “five greatest Christian men in history” and thinks that more people need to read him. Garris is not ignorant of Dabney’s views of social hierarchy—in fact, Garris thinks that it is precisely here that our generation needs Dabney the most. In an article titled “Remembering R. L. Dabney,” Garris said this: “Today’s conservatives should take heed of Dabney’s words. If they want to fend off the attacks of leftist progressivism, they must embrace genuine conservative principles. This starts with rejecting egalitarianism in all its forms and embracing the bedrock principle of hierarchy. We will find few defenses of hierarchy better than those contained in the writings of Robert Lewis Dabney.”
To that end, Garris has edited this this book, Dabney on Fire, collecting “four of Dabney’s greatest essays,” plus an introduction and a “recommended reading” list. The four Dabney essays are these: “Parental Responsibilities” (1870), “Secularized Education” (1879), “Women’s Rights Women,” (1871), and “Civic Ethics,” (1892, 1897). Garris’s preface explains that he published the book in “an effort to make Dabney’s essays accessible to a wider audience” (vii). Garris thinks these four essays in particular “have significant application for the modern reader”; “the subjects covered are timeless”; they will “challenge all who assume modern views of equality” (vii).
Garris lauds Dabney to his readers: “the man was an intellectual giant and a fiery writer. He should not be ignored” (viii); “Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898 A.D.) was one of Americas greatest theologians” (1); “his cultural and political writings read like prophecy. Ultimately, Dabney was that rare figure that the church so desperately needs in our own day—a Christian statesman” (2).
Garris lets us know from the first to the last page that this is a book with Southern sympathies. The book is dedicated “To the Southern Presbyterian Church.” His his short book recommendation list includes segregationist Morton H. Smith’s Studies in Southern Presbyterian Theology. Garris acknowledges in his introduction that Dabney was a Confederate, but he finds no issue with this: “Yet he has largely been forgotten, dismissed even by Christians because of his association with the Confederacy. However, we ignore Dabney to our own peril. He was both a first- rate thinker and a conservative stalwart” (2). In fact, one reads hints that Garris himself shares some of these sympathies. Garris refers to the American Civil War as “The War Between the States,” an idiosyncratic term used mainly by Confederate heritage groups (3). Confederate general Stonewall Jackson is “one of the greatest men produced by the Old South” (6). Dabney’s 1867 book A Defense of Virginia and through her of the South is “a response to abolitionism and vindication of Southern slavery in light of Scripture” (7).
The hint of Confederate sympathy in the introduction is given full throated defense in the essays Garris has collected. “Women’s Rights Women” was published in 1871 just a few years after the way, and Dabney argues fundamentally from a pro-Confederacy position against women’s suffrage. He rages against the “Yankees” who have “destroyed one Federal and eleven other State constitutions, have committed a half million of murders, and (dearest of all) have spent some seven thous and millions of dollars” (72). Again: “That mighty tide of progress which has already swept away the Constitution, and slavery, and States’ rights, and the force of contracts public and private, with all such rubbish, will soon dissolve your grievance also” (72).
Dabney compares women’s right to vote with another issue he detests: the abolition of slavery, and Black people voting: “It has been decided that all negro men have a right to vote : is not a Yankee white woman with her ‘smartness' and education as good as a stupid, ignorant, Southern black ?” (70); “Its prospect of triumph is greatly increased by this, that its Northern opponents (the only ones who have any power to oppose) have disabled themselves from meeting it by their furious Abolitionism” (74). All of these issues: the Confederacy, abolition, and Black franchise are connected to women’s suffrage for Dabney: “No words are needed to show hence that should either the voice of God or of sound experience require woman to be placed for the good of the whole society in a subordinate sphere, there can be no natural injustice in doing so. But these old truths, with their sound and beneficent applications, have been scornfully, repudiated by Abolitionism and Radicalism. The North cannot, will not, avow and appeal to them, because that would be to confess that the injured South was all the time right in its opposition to Abolition; and the conquerors will rather let all perish than thus humble their pride to the poor conquered victims” (75–76). Even though the essay is, ostensibly, on women’s rights, why waste a good opportunity to disparage Black people? “Nor will there be, under any future circumstances, either leader or party that will risk the odium of a movement to take away suffrage from the incompetent hands of the blacks, however clearly it may appear that they are using it for the ruin pf themselves and the country” (78). These passages are reprinted without comment or caveat from Garris in this remarkable essay. Women’s suffrage will, according to Dabney, “destroy Christianity and civilisation in America” (79).
“Civic Ethics” is a bit more philosophical (it was reprinted as a chapter in Dabney’s Practical Philosophy in 1897), but it still contains the same hierarchical views, and the same pro-Confederacy ideology a full three decades after the war. Dabney is sure to get in a plug for “the exercise of their [the states’] constitution right of secession” (99). He again protests against “female suffrage and ‘women’s rights’” (106), and the “American Jacobins” who have bestowed “universal suffrage on negroes” (107). Dabney does not mute his white-supremacy here in comparing Black voters to women: “By what plea can the right of suffrage be withheld from the millions of white American women, intelligent, educated, virtuous and patriotic, after it has been granted as an inalienable natural right to all these illiterate semi-savage aliens?” (107).
What does Garris think of Dabney’s racism? Even though Dabney explicitly gives voice to his white-supremacy on multiple occasions in these essays, Garris makes no comment on them either way, neither in the introduction, nor in any of the dozens of explanatory footnotes. However, in response to his article “R. L. Dabney Remembered,” a reader wrote in pointing out Dabney’s racism, and Garris responded there: “There are two issues raised in Mr. Whealton’s response. The first is whether biblical hierarchy extends to racial hierarchy. The Bible does not specifically address this. Though the Bible affirms that all humans are made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and that Jesus redeems people from every nation (Revelation 5:9), there is nothing in Scripture that teaches that all men are created equal. Dabney’s opinions about blacks reflect the thought of his time, but they are not rooted in Scripture as something like male headship in marriage is.
The second issue raised in Mr. Whealton’s response is whether we should judge dead men by current political standards…” (“Dabney's Blind Spot”).
Garris also includes Dabney’s essay on “Secularized Education” (1879). For context, this essay was part of the final volley in a years long assault on the Virginia state school system. To get Dabney’s full views on education, you really must also read “The Negro and the Common School” (1876), and then “The State Free School System” (1876). The arguments expressed in “Secularized Education” are mostly just a reprint of his “Fourth Letter” to William Henry Ruffner in 1876. Dabney bitterly resented the fact that tax dollars were being spent to help educate Black children through the public schools, and he gives full vent to his white-supremacy in those earlier articles. You can read “Secularized Education” alone, but you should know that it rests within a larger framework for Dabney.
The fourth essay (first in the book) is “Parental Responsibilities” and is the least objectionable of the group. It’s available for free online if you really want to read it (as are all four of the essays).
According to Garris, these are four of Dabney’s “greatest essays,” and are what we most need for our time. I couldn’t disagree more. By all means, read these essays by Dabney (look them up on Google Books) in order to begin to understand the roots of Southern Presbyterianism, neo-Confederacy, and the Christian Reconstruction movement. Read them to understand the worldview of Christian hierarchalists who fight against racial justice and women’s equality as if “Christianity and civilization” depended on it—they believe it does. But I can’t recommend this collection of essays as having any “application for the modern reader” other than as a cautionary tale.
July 24, 2022
Disturbing and unbiblical
The foundation of most of the arguments presented in this book is that there is a class of people morally and intellectually superior than everyone else. The author is, of course, a member of that superior class of people. Therefore every decision from voting rights to education should be placed in their hands because that is how God has ordained it.
Dabney takes for granted his status in this perceived superior class and makes no convincing justification (Biblically or morally) for its existence. To me, his hubris has more in common with satanic pride than the love and wisdom of Jesus.
The foundation of most of the arguments presented in this book is that there is a class of people morally and intellectually superior than everyone else. The author is, of course, a member of that superior class of people. Therefore every decision from voting rights to education should be placed in their hands because that is how God has ordained it.
Dabney takes for granted his status in this perceived superior class and makes no convincing justification (Biblically or morally) for its existence. To me, his hubris has more in common with satanic pride than the love and wisdom of Jesus.
August 1, 2022
From what I understood he was on point, from what I didn't understand, well I didn't understand it.
June 8, 2022
Solid on the whole. Some of the prose is stilted. I think his exegesis of Malachi and Luke concerning fathers and children is incorrect—Iain Murray has an excellent sermon on this somewhere—but the doctrine Dabney gives here is nevertheless biblical. His essay on women and feminism is by far the best and clearest of all, packed with some of the most incisive and well articulated thought I've encountered on the subject. Highly recommended. I appreciate his critique of Jacobinism and the Radical element, as well as his emphasis upon the goodness of natural hierarchical relations and the idiocy and iniquity of denying them. Good stuff.
The essay on the State is a mixed bag. He gives fair critiques of Erastianism proper, and of Chalmers and the problems of state-involved payment of the clergy. At the same time, he argues far too much via pragmatism and probabalism, and makes at least one or two contradictions in his thought. Likewise, he doesn't adequately deal with the fact that the state is inevitably a religious institution, regardless of whether one wants to call it secular or not; and so, both his statement that the establishment of religion tends toward Erastianism and his insinuation that this is bad, cannot hold up to basic biblical axioms: i.e. it is not whether there will be establishment of religion (or state-supported, state-enforced religion) but which.
The essay on the State is a mixed bag. He gives fair critiques of Erastianism proper, and of Chalmers and the problems of state-involved payment of the clergy. At the same time, he argues far too much via pragmatism and probabalism, and makes at least one or two contradictions in his thought. Likewise, he doesn't adequately deal with the fact that the state is inevitably a religious institution, regardless of whether one wants to call it secular or not; and so, both his statement that the establishment of religion tends toward Erastianism and his insinuation that this is bad, cannot hold up to basic biblical axioms: i.e. it is not whether there will be establishment of religion (or state-supported, state-enforced religion) but which.
March 24, 2022
Though written 150 years ago, the words God gave this Confederate Chaplain still rings true to us today. How is it that someone like Dabney could call for the inevitable removal of Christianity in public schools, when he grew up in a culture that was way more Christian than ours now? Because he knew his Bible.
Say what you want about the Southern cause, but if what Dabney says about the results of Reconstruction is true (so far he’s got a great track record), then we’re on (literally) one Hell of a ride to judgement.
All it takes for a culture to decline in giving God the glory in every area of life is to betray the basic principles of His word, no matter how good the cause may sound.
Say what you want about the Southern cause, but if what Dabney says about the results of Reconstruction is true (so far he’s got a great track record), then we’re on (literally) one Hell of a ride to judgement.
All it takes for a culture to decline in giving God the glory in every area of life is to betray the basic principles of His word, no matter how good the cause may sound.
March 13, 2025
I must confess Dabney often makes me question my cessationism
He, of course, is a man of his time. Not perfect
His last essay on Civil Ethics is good, but I am a little more theocratic than him. I think he unfairly waves off most of his tradition on political theology with the ole “erastian” slippery slope.
He, of course, is a man of his time. Not perfect
His last essay on Civil Ethics is good, but I am a little more theocratic than him. I think he unfairly waves off most of his tradition on political theology with the ole “erastian” slippery slope.
June 15, 2023
Finishing up after starting a while ago. Some good stuff, but quite academic! As always some bone-spitting, but good kernels and food for thought within.
January 28, 2025
Garris gives some commentary on and complied four essays of Dabney’s which were all prophetic of where society has went.
January 30, 2025
Dabney predicted many things correctly.
November 2, 2025
A lil’ Dab’ll do ya.
December 18, 2024
It is startling how profound and insightful Dabney can be at times, only to make you do a double take at the vile filth he is also capable of producing. He is certainly a thinker to be reckoned with, but he must be chopped apart as a man seperates gristle from a meaty steak, only the gristle is his racial prejudice. It is certainly a culture shock reading such statements from him and in a way, I'm glad that it's shocking because it shows how far society has come in the avenue of recognizing the inherent dignity of man.
February 25, 2025
This is a delightful introduction to Dabney. I've read some quotes from him but never any of his works, so I really appreciate how these four essays were collated and introduced in this short book. It's uncanny to read how many of his predictions from the 1870s on education, women's rights and feminism, and government have come true. Timeless and worth re-reading. I had to look up more words than I care to admit.
January 27, 2023
This is some of Dabney's essays from various publications collected in one spot.
If you want to know how we got where we are today, particularly with feminism and government then go read Dabney. He understood that by the late 1800s we had already planted the seeds that bear some of the ugly fruit we see in our country today. An excellent, thought provoking read.
If you want to know how we got where we are today, particularly with feminism and government then go read Dabney. He understood that by the late 1800s we had already planted the seeds that bear some of the ugly fruit we see in our country today. An excellent, thought provoking read.
December 25, 2025
R.L. Dabney's positions were controversial during the late 19th century and they have only grown more controversial in these latter days. Dabney applied biblical and systematic theology to the areas of government, ethics, education, and gender roles with a prophetic voice that foretells of the liberal drift of the last 100 years.
December 25, 2025
R.L. Dabney's positions were controversial during the late 19th century, and they have only grown more controversial. Dabney applied biblical and systemic theology to the areas of government, ethics, education, and feminism, with a prophetic voice that foretells of the liberal drift to come.
April 27, 2024
Dabney is a prophet.
May 22, 2024
Any one of these essays alone is worth the price of admission
August 28, 2024
Excellent intro to Dabney. You would think the man had a crystal ball!
March 6, 2025
Really great
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews