TEN
George Washington on Character and Honor
“It gives me real concern to observe ... that you should think it Necessary to distinguish between my Personal and Public Character and confine your Esteem to the former.”
George Washington, 1775
1
“While we are zealously performing the duties of good Citizens and soldiers we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of Religion. To the distinguished Character of Patriot, it should be our highest Glory to add the more distinguished Character of Christian.”
George Washington, 1778
2
This book is dedicated to accurately portraying Washington’s religion by a thorough examination of his own words. Through our studies of the man, we have come to the conclusion that part of the difficulty in understanding his religious views is due to his generally non-disclosing personality, coupled with the deep moral commitments that formed his character. Washington, both by temperament and by his personal principles, was a private man. How then can we accurately assess his personal religious views more than two centuries later?
In this chapter, we will explore Washington’s character and his emphasis on honor. His concern for character and honor contributed to his deep reluctance to speak of himself. Because Washington’s principled silence about himself was coupled with his natural shyness, there is a striking connection between Washington the man and the monument that bears his name—tall, majestic, silent, and seemingly impersonal. But did Washington’s inwardness and typical silence about the beliefs of his heart mean that he did not have a Christian faith? We believe that Washington’s character and personality have been misinterpreted by skeptics and secularists. They claim that his apparent silence on matters of personal religion implies that he did not believe nor live as a Christian. However, we are convinced that to interpret Washington in this way does injustice to the man and is an injustice to his character.
THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT AND ITS SYMBOLIC MESSAGE
It seems to us that the Washington monument is almost as much of a monument to our culture’s view of George Washington as it is to Washington himself. The 555-foot-high obelisk is a fitting symbolic declaration of the profound significance of our founding father. After all, Washington was the single dominating figure of our nation’s creation. But the statue’s towering, faceless height also seems to suggest a transcendent unknowable personality. The highest message of the monument at its very pinnacle declares, “Laus Deo” or “Praise to God!” Yet this lofty message at its crowning height is invisible to all who stand below looking on high. Similarly, the many inner messages of the monument that are found chiseled in stone along the ever-rising stairs, such as, “Search the Scriptures,” “Holiness to the Lord,” “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it” are left unread, since the mandated way to the top is by speeding elevator, and the daunting and contemplative walk up the stairs is typically closed. All of this adds to the general ignorance Americans have of George Washington’s character, personality, faith, and values.
But Washington’s seeming unknowability has something to do with his own personality and character as well. Like his monument, he was strikingly attractive and toweringly tall for his day. Yet his quiet, shy, and other-focused demeanor, coupled with his elevated sense of the dignity of rank and office, typically kept his inner thoughts and feelings at a distance from many, if not most of those who occupied his life’s activities. But with careful study, we believe we can uncover a great deal of the heart and soul of the man, even though he has been and continues to be draped with the mantle of an almost impenetrable glory from the past and the calloused indifference of the present. In this book we seek to explore the inner staircase of Washington’s soul. By careful consideration of the many records of his life that he left for posterity, we plan to show that the highest aspirations of his heart were truly intended to offer Laus Deo!
THE PRIMACY OF CHARACTER IN WASHINGTON’S WRITINGS
A careful study of Washington’s use of the word “character” shows that it was profoundly important to his view of human conduct. The word itself appears almost fifteen hundred times in his writings. Even his strenuous critic, Loyalist Reverend Jonathan Boucher, tutor of Washington’s stepson, had to admit that Washington had a respectable character. “I did know Mr. Washington well, and though occasion may call forth traits of character that never could have been discovered in the more sequestered scenes of life, I cannot conceive how he could, otherwise than through the interested representations of party, have ever been spoken of as a great man. He is shy, silent, stern, slow and cautious; but has no quickness of parts, extraordinary penetration, nor an elevated style of thinking. In his moral character he is regular, temperate, strictly just and honest.”3
The breadth of Washington’s use of the word “character” is remarkable. It encompasses the character of officers4 and other army officials,5 militia men,6 prisoners,7 deserters,8 as well as the character of the entire Continental Army.9 It’s clear that to Washington, character mattered.10 His letters touched on the character of those to whom he was writing11 and extended to national character,12 the protection derived from a good character,13 the character of political divisions,14 the character of his employees,15 politicians,16 judges,17 governmental positions,18 and the defense of others from injurious aspersions.19 He addressed character in terms of business partners and business transactions,20 foreign affairs,21 wars,22 and schools.23
His reflections on character also reached to matters of the character of friends,24 of appropriate suitors of his family members,25 and of Christian conduct.26 In this light, one can understand why things that impacted his own character were of deep concern to him as well.27 This is especially well illustrated in his September 21, 1775, letter to Governor Jonathan Trumbull. Gov. Trumbull was also a clergyman. Washington’s response to the Governor shows that he considered one’s public and private character to be inseparable, and that they should both reflect the highest standards:
It gives me real concern to observe...that you should think it Necessary to distinguish between my Personal and Public Character and confine your Esteem to the former.28
After a careful explanation of the military realities facing the American army, Washington ended his letter to the Governor with this ironic conclusion: “I am, with great Esteem and Regard, for both your Personal and Public Character, sir, etc.”29 [emphasis added] As a result of this pointed exchange, Washington and Trumbull became fast friends, with deep, mutual respect for their public and private characters. This was evident when the Reverend Gov. died a few years after the War. Washington wrote to his son Jonathan Trumbull on October 1, 1785:
My dear Sir: ...You know, too well, the sincere respect and regard I entertained for your venerable father’s public and private character, to require assurances of the concern I felt for his death; or of that sympathy in your feelings for the loss of him, which is prompted by friendship.30 (emphasis added)
From his earliest years in the military, Washington had become deeply concerned for the continuity between one’s private and public character, because he believed that a man’s character ultimately made the difference in a crisis. He recognized this from his earliest military command in 1756. In his first command, he wrote to Gov. Robert Dinwiddie explaining, “I have been obliged to suspend Ensign Dekeyser for Misbehavior till your pleasure is known. See the proceedings of the enquiring Court. His Character in many other respects has been infamous.”31 His concern for character became even more apparent in the midst of the many trials of the American Revolution.
A TIME WHEN CHARACTER MATTERED
If there ever was a time when character mattered, it was in Washington’s role in the birth of America. If he had operated with a different set of moral values and a different personal character, America would have had a king or dictator instead of a federal Constitution and representative government.32 Perhaps even worse, America would never have begun at all.
Consider a pivotal incident where Washington’s character changed the direction of America. This occurred at the end of the Revolutionary War, when the American troops were at Newburgh in New York. Although overjoyed with the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown, the American troops were restive, since they had rarely been paid. Moreover, Congress’ ability to pay in the future was uncertain.
A treacherous solution to this fiscal crisis dawned on some of the officers and insinuated itself into the thinking of others. The army could simply seize power and rule. They had the organized firepower. They could make the great Washington their new King. If Washington were to refuse to accept the crown, the army could stubbornly refuse to disband until they had wrung the guarantees of payment from the impoverished Congress. Either way, the only true barrier to their plan was Washington.
On March 4, 1783, Washington wrote to Alexander Hamilton of the looming dangers. He warned of an American civil war between Congress and the Army because of the financial crisis. Congress was even entertaining the idea of disbanding the unpaid Army to save expenses. Washington’s worries and the strength of his own character are both revealed as he reflected on “...the danger that stares us in the face on account of our funds.” In ominous language, he evaluated the solution contemplated by Congress:
Our finances are in so deplorable a state at this time . . . The danger, to which the Army has been exposed, to a political dissolution for want of subsistence, ... no observations are necessary to evince the fatal tendency of such a measure....It would...end in blood. Unhappy situation this! God forbid we should be involved in it.33
The weight of the possibility of yet another war put tremendous strain on Washington and his hope for America’s future.
The predicament in which I stand as Citizen and Soldier, is as critical and delicate as can well be conceived. It has been the Subject of many contemplative hours. The sufferings of a complaining Army on one hand, and the inability of Congress and tardiness of the States on the other, are the forebodings of evil,...but I am not without hope.34
What was Washington’s solution? His plan in the short term “as Soldier” was to prevent a civil war by simply continuing to do the right thing. Then, to truly resolve the problem, “as Citizen” he would seek a just solution for his soldiers from the financially strapped Congress. To do this, he began to call for a stronger and a more united Congress. Washington launched an idea that eventually resulted in the Constitutional Convention that finally met in Philadelphia in 1787.
Be these things as they may, I shall pursue the same steady line of conduct which has governed me hitherto;...the prevailing sentiment in the Army is, that the prospect of compensation for past Services will terminate with the War... for it is clearly my opinion, unless Congress have powers competent to all general purposes, that the distresses we have encountered, the expence we have incurred, and the blood we have spilt in the course of an Eight years war, will avail us nothing.35
Alexander Hamilton knew Washington’s character well. In this context, he had opportunity to express his absolute confidence in Washington’s unwavering character to a gathering of political leaders who were concerned with the growing unrest of the army. In James Madison’s “Note of Debates in the Continental Congress,” February 20th, 1783, Hamilton’s remarks are summarized:
...it was certain that the army had secretly determined not to lay down their arms until due provision and a satisfactory prospect should be afforded on the subject of their pay; ...Mr. Hamilton said that he knew Genl. Washington intimately and perfectly, ...that his virtue his patriotism and firmness would, it might be depended upon, never yield to any dishonorable or disloyal plans into which he might be called; that he would sooner suffer himself to be cut to pieces; that he, (Mr. Hamilton), knowing this to be his true character, wished him to be the conductor of the army in their plans for redress, in order that they might be moderated and directed to proper objects, and exclude some other leader who might foment and misguide their councils;36
WASHINGTON’S EPIC-MAKING SPEECH “TO THE OFFICERS OF THE ARMY”
Washington recognized the possibility of a military coup and of the anonymously called meeting of the officers. But he chose not to attend. Instead, Washington called his own meeting, where he gave one of the most important speeches he ever delivered. As the meeting of his officers began, a few simple words and gestures began to melt their hardened hearts of protest. Col. David Cobb recounted the scene:
When the General took his station in the desk or pulpit, which you may recollect, was in the Temple, he took out his written address from his coat pocket, and his spectacles, with his other hand, from his waistcoat pocket, and then addressed the officers in the following manner: “Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray, but almost blind, in the service of my country.”; This little address, with the mode and manner of delivering it drew tears from [many] of the officers.37
Washington’s March 15, 1783, speech was simply entitled, “To the Officers of the Army.” By his words of moral leadership and example of uncompromising character, Washington simultaneously gave birth to the American tradition of the peaceful transition of power and a civilian-led military. Bespectacled Washington reasoned:
Gentlemen: By an anonymous summons, an attempt has been made to convene you together; how inconsistent with the rules of propriety! how unmilitary! and how subversive of all order and discipline, let the good sense of the Army decide. In the moment of this summons, another anonymous production was sent into circulation addressed more to the feelings and passions, than to the reason and judgment of the Army....the Address is drawn with great Art,...it is calculated to impress the Mind, with an idea of premeditated injustice in the Sovereign power of the United States, and rouse all those resentments which must unavoidably flow from such a belief....to take advantage of the passions, while they were warmed by the recollection of past distresses,...this dreadful alternative, of either deserting our Country in the extremest hour of her distress, or turning our Arms against it, has something so shocking in it, that humanity revolts at the idea....Can he be a friend to the Army? Can he be a friend to this Country? Rather, is he not an insidious Foe?38
