I wrote this in Trey’s comments and I reproduce it here slightly altered:

Citing J. H. Thornwell’s opposition to the Union seems like a really bad idea, even if he happened to be right.  Thornwell said that one reason the South must secede was because the Federal government would not allow slavery to extend West. He made slavery the essence of the Southern identity saying that the Feds were in effect dictating that Southern men who moved westward do so not as Southern men but as Northern men (the book I read on this was entitled The Metaphysical Confederacy).

I simply cannot stand Thornwell. Thornwell was, in fact, one of the top most important apologists for slavery as well as the South.  He is known to secular historians of the period because of his fame on this issue. His name blackens the reputation of the PCA and I wish we would forget him. At least in Dabney’s case, if one must have a Southern Presbyterian hero, I find actually worthwhile theology. Thornwell’s legacy is simply to make Presbyterians into wet-baby baptists as a matter of principle.

When one finds oneself opposed to the expanded power of the Federal Government, one finds oneself holding a position espoused by all sorts of uglies like Mormon polygamists, skinists, “Christian” polygamists, and other human trash. My strategy is to ignore them. I think we would all be better off doing the same with Thornwell. I’d use Lord Acton or someone who has a deserved reputation for loving justice rather than Thornwell.