And even as he left office, after two terms of service, he had not forgotten the importance of religion and morality for the entire nation, including, “The mere Politician, equally with the pious man.”146 It is patent that Washington did not intend to be numbered with the “mere Politician.”
But the most explicit proof that Washington intended to be known as a man of piety is in his response to a sermon preached by Chaplain Israel Evans that made direct reference to General Washington.147 The general thanked Evans for his kind words, but he said that the words were only a “partial mention.” What had Evans left out in his description of Washington? The general went on to explain that the “the first wish of my heart” was to assist Evans in his “pious endeavours to inculcate a due sense of the dependance we ought to place in that all wise and powerful Being on whom alone our success depends.”148
Bronze Statue by Donald DeLue of George Washington praying, displayed at Freedoms Foundation at Valley Forge
Evans’ sermon had not mentioned Washington’s pious support for the gospel ministry of the chaplains. It was rare indeed for Washington to correct a clergyman. He did so here on the very matter that secularists deny—his heart commitment to piety and its gospel expression. In essence, he was declaring that he was not indifferent to revealed religion and that he ought not to be construed as what some today might call a “warm Deist.”
Strange that the scholars who are so insistent in making Washington a Deist, have not considered what he himself said on this instance to a clergyman who had failed to affirm the heartfelt support of the chaplain’s “pious endeavours.” It leaves one wondering who is guilty of propaganda instead of serious scholarship—either that or it is a case of sloppy scholarship. If we are permitted, we would like to borrow the words of Steiner, but we will employ them consistently with Washington’s words about his personal piety. “Revising history to pull our founding father into the Deist tent is merely propaganda” indeed.
“ACQUAINTED WITH MY HEART:” THE EVIDENCE OF WASHINGTON’S PIETY
To fully understand Washington’s piety, we must become acquainted with his heart, as Alexander Hamilton had. He wrote to his close confidant Alexander Hamilton, “you and some others who are acquainted with my heart.”149 To become such intimates of Washington’s heart, we need to discover what was first in his heart, what brought ardor and fervency to his soul, what his soul abhorred, what he wished for, what wounded his feelings. As unlikely as it may appear at first blush, it is possible to discover such things because he left a rich collection of personal letters and written documents that give us just such information.
What was in Washington’s heart? We’ve already seen that the “first wish” in Washington’s “heart” was to aid the “pious” ministry of the chaplains, like Israel Evans, who was advancing the honor of God.150 While a wish always comes from the heart, it is not necessarily a prayer. But when the word “devout” is used in context with a wish, it is turning a heartfelt longing into the form of a prayer. The word “devout” implies something that is “deeply religious; pious, displaying reverence or piety, sincere; earnest.”151 It is clear from Washington’s use of the word that it is a synonym for a prayer. Writing to Edmund Pendleton,
Your friendly, and affectionate wishes for my health and success, has a claim to my thankful acknowledgements; and, that the God of Armies may enable me to bring the present contest to a speedy and happy conclusion, thereby gratifying me in a retirement to the calm and sweet enjoyment of domestick happiness, is the fervent prayer, and most ardent wish of my Soul.152
Similarly writing to Landon Carter, Washington used the phrase, “the first wish, and most fervent prayer of my Soul.”153
Somehow secularists have overlooked the fact that Washington used the word “devout” some sixty two times. Some forty six times he used the word “devout” and “wish” in the same context. On nineteen occasions Washington employed “wish” and “prayer” in the same context. And what’s truly significant is that Washington openly used the word “devout” of himself. For example, on six instances he wrote, “I devoutly hope,” “I devoutly wish,” or “I devoutly pray.” Secularists who deny that Washington was devout must answer the question of how they can deny Washington’s consistent self testimony of being devout.
Washington wanted to have both a pure heart154 and a sincere heart.155 He was conscious of the sin of ingratitude: “I am much concern’d, that your Honour should seem to charge me with ingratitude for your generous, and my undeserved favours; for I assure you, Hon’ble Sir, nothing is a greater stranger to my Breast, or a Sin that my Soul abhors, than that black and detestable one Ingratitude.”156
But what was in Washington’s heart? What did he wish for from his soul? What were his deepest feelings? Only on a few occasions did he openly declare them for posterity. For after all, one of his wishes was to be utterly private and unnoticed as he concluded his life: “For I wish most devoutly to glide silently and unnoticed through the remainder of life. This is my heartfelt wish; and these are my undisguised feelings.”157 Nevertheless, Washington’s pen revealed the inner thoughts of his heart and soul on a few occasions. And these are the things that were deepest in his heart and soul:
• his children,158
• his dearest friends,159
• the approval of his fellow citizens,160
• his return to Mount Vernon to stay,161
• to conclude the war with speed and success,162
• retirement and Elysium [the abode of the blessed after death in classical thought],163
• the gradual abolition of slavery.164
But along with these, there was one unifying, pious desire. His duties to his God constituted the heart language of Washington’s soul.
Gentlemen: While you speak the language of my heart, in acknowledging the magnitude of our obligations to the Supreme Director of all human events; suffer me to join you in celebration of the present glorious and ever memorable Æra, and to return my best thanks for your kind expressions in my favour….
For my own part, Gentlemen, in whatever situation I shall be hereafter, my supplications, will ever ascend to Heaven, for the prosperity of my Country in general; and for the individual happiness of those who are attached to the Freedom, and Independence of America.165
It is precisely this well-hidden burning passion of emotions and affections,166 coupled with the sacred fire of piety in Washington’s heart and soul, that caused him to openly confess his hurt feelings by the cursing, swearing, and oaths of his men. The language of his heart bristled when the language of his soldiers defiled the language of his heart:
Many and pointed orders have been issued against that unmeaning and abominable custom of Swearing, not withstanding which, with much regret the General observes that it prevails, if possible, more than ever; His feelings are continually wounded by the Oaths and Imprecations of the soldiers whenever he is in hearing of them.
The Name of That Being, from whose bountiful goodness we are permitted to exist and enjoy the comforts of life is incessantly imprecated and profaned in a manner as wanton as it is shocking. For the sake therefore of religion, decency and order the General hopes and trusts that officers of every rank will use their influence and authority to check a vice, which is as unprofitable as it is wicked and shameful.167
Washington seems to have given these orders not only “for the sake of religion, decency and order,” but also for the sake of his own “pious entreaties,” “fervent prayers,” and “most ardent wishes of his Soul.”
When one becomes acquainted with the heart of Washington, he discovers something much more than a “warm Deist,” that is:
• Unless Deists are known for ardent and devout wishes, fervent prayers, and hearts that speak the language of one’s infinite obligations to God.
• Unless Deists are those that abhor the “black and detestable sin” of ingratitude, that devoutly hope, that devoutly wish, that devoutly pray and find their feelings wounded by those who do not honor the name of the divine source of every blessing in life.
• Unless Deists are those who long from the first wish of their hearts to help Christian clergymen in their “pious endeavors to inculcate a due sense of the dependence we ought to place in that all wise and powerful Being on whom alone our success depends.”
If that is what a “warm Deist” is, then such should come and worship at a Christian church, for they will be most welcome indeed.
EIGHTEEN
George Washington and Prayer
“...That the God of Armies may Incline the Hearts of my American Brethren to support, and bestow sufficient abilities on me to bring the present contest to a speedy and happy conclusion,…is the first wish, and most fervent prayer of my Soul.
”
George Washington, April 15, 1777
1
One night during the Revolutionary War, a kindly couple who lived near the woods close to the Hudson River took in a stranger. He sought shelter at the home of this farm couple because of a severe thunderstorm. During the night, the man came to check on his guest’s room and overheard him in audible prayer. The next day, when the stranger was to leave, he revealed his identity. It was General George Washington himself.2 This story that Washington was found in prayer was told over and over by different sources and in different places. Are these accounts true, or are they, as Paul Boller and others hold, mere pietistic legends?
Clearly, Washington did not wear his religion on his sleeve in the midst of his life of action and leadership. Was he a man of prayer? We believe the evidence demonstrates that George Washington was a man of prayer. It also appears clear to us that he followed the historic Christian practice of secret prayer, as taught in such texts as Matthew 6:5,6. Edward M’Guire, who wrote a biography of George Washington in 1836, attempting to highlight his Christian faith, makes the following pointed remark: “He who prays habitually in secret, furnishes the best possible evidence of his sincerity. Such a one cannot be a dissembler. He has regard to no eye, but that of his Maker.”3
But this means we have an interesting challenge in our investigation of Washington’s religion. How can one establish the reality of a man’s prayer life if it was largely done in secret? Alleged secret prayers, since they are unobserved, could be no prayers at all. To start our discussion, it is relevant to note one fairly credible written record that evidences the prayer life of Washington. Bishop William Meade printed a letter from General Lewis, of Augusta County, Virginia, to the Reverend Mr. Dana, of Alexandria, dated December 14, 1855.
Reverend and Dear Sir: - When (some week ago) I had the pleasure of seeing you in Alexandria, and in our conversation the subject of the religious opinions and character of General Washington was spoken of, I repeated to you the substance of what I had heard from the late General Robert Porterfield, of Augusta, and which at your request I promised to reduce to writing at some leisure moment and send to you. I proceed now to redeem the promise. Some short time before the death of General Porterfield, I made him a visit and spent a night at his house. He related many interesting facts that had occurred within his own observation in the war of the Revolution, particularly in the Jersey campaign and the encampment of the army at Valley Forge. He said that his official duty (being brigade-inspector) frequently brought him in contact with General Washington. Upon one occasion, some emergency (which he mentioned) induced him to dispense with the usual formality, and he went directly to General Washington’s apartment, where he found him on his knees, engaged in his morning devotions. He said that he mentioned the circumstance to General Hamilton, who replied that such was his constant habit.4
Is there evidence in the writings of Washington to substantiate his alleged prayer life?
THE DAILY SACRIFICE
In the 1890s, a small book of handwritten prayers was found among some of George Washington’s effects. Some scholars purported that these were in Washington’s own handwriting. Some proposed that he had authored them. Others claimed he merely copied them. Regardless of the confusion over their authorship, they were considered by many to be authentic. This seemed to advance the argument over Washington’s faith in the Christian direction, especially since these prayers were marked by a deep Christian piety. But are they authentic? Evangelicals today often quote these prayers with the assertion that they are his. The reality, however, is that we cannot prove that at this juncture.
Meanwhile, we can prove within reason a host of other points related to the prayer life of Washington, including his use of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. And note well, the alleged Washington prayer book, known as The Daily Sacrifice, contains prayers which in tone, theology, and piety are quite similar to the 1662 Church of England’s Book of Common Prayer.
Again, we take the minimalist facts approach here. Since it can be demonstrated that Washington used that liturgical guide, we prefer to promote that book rather than The Daily Sacrifice, which cannot be proven to be authentically his. There is no doubt, however, that this handwritten prayer guide was in his possession, since it was found among his effects. There is doubt as to whether it was in his handwriting. Boller diminishes the significance of these prayers being in Washington’s effects by arguing that while such a “book” was found among his papers, writings by Deist Thomas Paine were also found in his library. Moreover, how do we know he even read them?
