CHAPTER 2
1 WGW, vol. 30, 9-28-1789.
2 Ibid., vol. 12, 8-20-1778.
3 Noah Webster, 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language.
4 “It seems as if parents of the Christian profession were ashamed to tell their children anything about the principles of their religion. They sometimes instruct them in morals, and talk to them of the goodness of what they call Providence, for the Christian mythology has five deities- there is God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, the God Providence, and the Goddess Nature.” Thomas Paine, Age of Reason, Luxembourg, 8th Pluviose, Second Year of the French Republic, one and indivisible. January 27, O. S. 1794. Part I.
5 Crane Brinton in The Shaping of Modern Thought (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963), p. 137.
6 Thomas Paine’s criticism of prayer can be found in Age of Reason, Luxembourg, 8th Pluviose, Second Year of the French Republic, one and indivisible. January 27, O. S. 1794. Part I. “Yet, with all this strange appearance of humility and this contempt for human reason, he ventures into the boldest presumptions; he finds fault with everything; his selfishness is never satisfied; his ingratitude is never at an end. He takes on himself to direct the Almighty what to do, even in the government of the universe; he prays dictatorially; when it is sunshine, he prays for rain, and when it is rain, he prays for sunshine; he follows the same idea in everything that he prays for; for what is the amount of all his prayers but an attempt to make the Almighty change his mind, and act otherwise than he does? It is as if he were to say: Thou knowest not so well as I.”
7 WGW, vol. 31, 6-19-1791. On June 19, 1791, Washington wrote to Tobias Lear showing his still high regard for Paine’s writings: “I should like to see Mr. Payne’s answer to Mr. Burke’s Pamphlet [ WGW note: This was Paine’s reply to Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the French Revolution, which constituted what was afterwards the first part of The Rights of Man.]; if it is to be had….”
8 For the friendship that Washington originally had toward Paine, see his letter to Richard Henry Lee on June 12, 1784: Dear Sir: Unsollicited by, and unknown to Mr. Paine, I take the liberty of hinting the services, and distressed (for so I think it may be called) situation of that Gentleman. That his Commonsense, and many of his Crisis’, were well timed, and had a happy affect upon the public mind, none I believe who will recur to the epochas at which they were published, will deny: that his services hither to have passed off unnoticed, is obvious to all; and that he is chagrined and necessitous, I will undertake to aver. Does not common justice then point to some compensation? He is not in circumstances to refuse the public bounty. New York, not the least distressed, or most able State in the Union have set the example. He prefers the benevolence of the States individually, to an allowance from Congress, for reasons which are conclusive in his own mind, and such as I think may be approved by others; his views are moderate; a decent independency is, I believe, the height of his ambition; and if you view his services in the American cause in the same important light that I do, I am sure you will have pleasure in obtaining it for him. I am, etc. WGW, vol. 27, 6-12-1784.
For his appreciation for Common Sense, see Washington’s letter to Joseph Reed, January 31, 1776, “A few more of such flaming arguments, as were exhibited at Falmouth and Norfolk, added to the sound doctrine and unanswerable reasoning contained in the pamphlet Common Sense, will not leave numbers at a loss to decide upon the propriety of a separation.” WGW, vol. 4, 1-31-1776.
9 James Thomas Flexner, George Washington Anguish and Farewell (1793-1799) (Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1969), p. 323.
10 Washington’s policy was not to answer a letter or charge that he believed to have the wrong “tenor.” See his July 28, 1795, letter to the Boston Selectmen. WGW, vol. 34, 7-28-1795.
“Gentlemen: In every act of my administration, I have sought the happiness of my fellow-citizens. My system for the attainment of this object has uniformly been to overlook all personal, local and partial considerations: to contemplate the United States, as one great whole: to confide, that sudden impressions, when erroneous, would yield to candid reflection: and to consult only the substantial and permanent interests of our country.
Nor have I departed from this line of conduct, on the occasion, which has produced the resolutions, contained in your letter of the 13 [instt.]
Without a predilection for my own judgment, I have weighed with attention every argument, which has at any time been brought into view. But the constitution is the guide, which I never will abandon. It has assigned to the President the power of making treaties, with the advice and consent of the senate. It was doubtless supposed that these two branches of government would combine, without passion, [and with the best means of information], those facts and principles upon which the success of our foreign relations will always depend: that they ought not to substitute for their own conviction the opinions of others; or to scorn expect truth thro’ any channel but that of a temperate and well-informed investigation.
Under this persuasion, I have resolved on the manner of executing the duty now before me. To the high responsibility, attached to it, I freely submit; and you, gentlemen, are at liberty to make these sentiments known, as the grounds of my procedure. While I feel the most lively gratitude for the many instances of approbation from my country; I can no otherwise deserve it, than by obeying the dictates of my conscience. With due respect, &c.”
The note of WGW on this date explains: Addresses of disapprobation of Jay’s Treaty, urging that it be not ratified, poured in upon the President from cities, towns, and counties in nearly every State. The earliest being that from the Selectmen of Boston, dated July 13, and the last coming from the citizens of Lexington, Ky., in their meeting of September 8 (forwarded September 10). To most of these addresses the same answer was returned as that to the Boston Selectman, July 28. The text of the addresses, with the president’s answers, are entered in the “Letter Book” in the Washington Papers. On the “Letter Book” copy of the resolutions of the citizens of Petersburg, Va., August 1, Washington has noted: “Tenor indecent. No answer returned.” On the “Letter Book” copy of the resolutions of the inhabitants of Bordentown, Crosswicks, Black Horse, and Reckless Town, N. J., Washington has noted: “No answer given. The Address too rude to merit one.” The copyist’s note to resolutions of the citizens of Laurens County, S. C., is “The foregoing Resolutions & ca.? were sent under a blank cover, by (it is supposed) Jno. Matthews Esqr. No notice has been taken of them.” On the “Letter Book” copy of the remonstrance and petition of the citizens of Scott County, Ky., August 25, Washington has noted: “The Ignorance and indecency of these proceedings forbad an answr.” On the “Letter Book” copy of the address from the citizens of Lexington, Ky., Washington has noted: “It would now [be] out of time to answr this address when reed Novr. Indecent besides.”
11 Boller, George Washington & Religion, p. 60.
12 We will address Washington’s many titles for “Deity” in a subsequent chapter, “Washington’s God: Religion, Reason and Philosophy.”
13 Washington wrote to Reverend Samuel Miller from Philadelphia on August 29, 1793, “Sir: It is but a few days since that I had the pleasure to receive your polite letter of the 4 instant, which accompanied the Sermon delivered by you on the 4 of July, and I beg you will accept my best thanks for the attention shewn in forwarding the same to me.” The Title page declares:
A SERMON PREACHED IN NEW YORK, JULY 4TH, 1793
BEING THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE
INDEPENDENCE OF AMERICA:
At the Request of the Tammany Society, or Columbian Order
by SAMUEL MILLER, A.M.
One of the Ministers of the United Presbyterian Churches, in the City of New York
To The Tammany Society, Or Columbian Order
Whose Principles of Association
Merit the Highest Applause –
And Whose Patriotic Exertions
Demand the Warmest Gratitude
of Every American –
THIS SERMON
Delivered published at their Request,
Is respectfully dedicated,
By their Fellow-Citizen,
The Author
In Society, July 4, 1793.
RESOLVED, That the Thanks of this Society by returned to the Reverend Mr. SAMUEL MILLER, for his elegant and patriotic Discourse, delivered by him, before the Society, this Day.
ORDERED, That Brothers Rodgers, Mitchell, and Ker, Be a Committee to wait on Mr. Miller, for this Purpose, and to request a Copy for the Press.
A true Copy from the Minutes, BENJAMIN STRONG, Secretary
ADVERTISEMENT
THE following Discourse is published, almost verbatim, as it was delivered, excepting the addition of the Notes. It was compiled on very short Notice – amidst many pressing Avocations – and, consequently, in great Haste. These Circumstances, together with the want of Abilities and Experience in the Author, must apologize for its indigested and defective Appearance.
C H R I S T I A N I T Y
the GRAND SOURCE, AND THE SUREST BASIS
of P O L I T I C A L L I B E R T Y:
A SERMON.
