In the late nineteenth century, General Theological Seminary professor Francis J. Hall claimed that University of the South professor and fellow Anglican, William Porcher DuBose, subscribed to a kenotic Christology. The goal of this thesis is to evaluate whether this characterization of DuBose’s incarnational theology is warranted. The thesis begins with an exploration of DuBose’s Christology with its personalistic, progressive, and Spirit-based Incarnation. Next Hall’s traditional understanding of the Incarnation, with a Christological union that safeguards attributes of both the divine and human natures, is examined, along with an overview of Hall’s anti-kenotic arguments. Because the Christology of German theologian Isaak August Dorner is the model for DuBose’s theology, and given that Dorner himself was avidly anti-kenotic, a survey of Dorner’s theology follows in the hope that it may illumine elements in DuBose’s Christology that point away from Kenoticism.Circling back to Hall’s claim that DuBose embraces a kenotic Christology, each feature in his theology that resonates with Kenoticism is considered. The conclusion is reached that DuBose’s incarnational theology, with its personalistic view of reality and the gradual union of human and divine natures in Christ, does not fulfill the essential feature of a kenotic Christology – the abandonment or suspension of some attributes of the Logos during the Incarnation. Finally, DuBose’s underlying theological motivation – to articulate an ethical Christological union rooted in mutuality, self-consciousness, and freedom – is presented as an expression of Christian mysticism, although the Personalist worldview that forms the basis of this divine-human union is incongruous with his sympathy for the Confederate South.