A Discourse Delivered before the Ladies of the Mt. Vernon Association of the Union, at Pohick Church, Truro Parish, Fairfax County, Virginia on the Thirtieth Day of May, 1886
by Philip Slaughter, D.D., Historiographer of the Diocese of Virginia
Daniel Webster said: “America furnished the character of Washington, and if she had done nothing more, she would deserve the respect of mankind.’’
James Russell Lowell said:
“Virginia gave us this imperial man—This unblemished gentleman:—What can we give her back but love and praise?’’
I trust that I shall not be deemed presumptuous if I add: the Colonial Church gave Washington to Virginia, to America, and to the world; and if she had done nothing else she would deserve well of the country and of mankind. He was born in her bosom, baptized at her altar, trained in her catechism, worshipped in her courts, and was buried with her offices. She signed him with the sign of the cross, in token that he should not be ashamed of the faith of Christ crucified, but manfully fight under His banner against sin, the world, and the devil, and continue Christ’s faithful soldier and servant unto his life’s end. By this sign he conquered—not only the independence of his country—but he conquered himself, thus realizing the proverb of Solomon, “He who ruleth his own spirit, is better than he who taketh a city.’’ Such a man’s character is worthy of study…. [I]t is not my intention to recount Washington’s weary wanderings in the wilderness, nor to rehearse the dramas of the French War and the American Revolution, “the battles, sieges, fortunes that he passed, and his hairbreadth ‘scapes in the imminent deadly breach.’’ It is enough to say, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, that he did more than any other man, and as much as any one man could do, to achieve our independence. Nor shall I attempt to expound the Constitution, over whose making he presided as master-workman…. According to Bancroft, “Without him the Union would never have been formed,’’ and the grand discovery of ‘89, a machine of self-government, would never have been put in motion. Nor will I speak of his election to the Presidency, except to say that he did not climb into the presidential chair by crooked ways; nor did he, like a supple serpent, insinuate himself into it from below; but he descended into it from above, like an eagle to his eyrie, as if sent from Heaven in answer to the unanimous prayers of the people. Rather will I describe how gladly and how gracefully he came down from the mount, turning his sword into a ploughshare, and returning to the shade of his old oaks; not blinded by gifts, not retiring on a pension, for Washington had thanks and nought beside, save the “all-cloudless glory to free his country.’’ Such a character is worthy of thoughtful study. No amount of treatment can exhaust its interest. . . .
Lord Brougham [said] Washington “was the greatest man of this, or of any, age. The veneration in which his name is held, will be a test of the progress the human race has made’’. . . .
When it was determined to run up the Washington Monument to a height overtopping all other monuments, as Washington surpasses other men, it became necessary to deepen and widen the foundation to enable it to bear the superadded weight. So it seems to me that we must seek a broader and firmer foundation for his colossal character than the shifting sands of earth. After the best study of which I am capable, I am convinced that the bed-rock upon which it rests is Faith. Not faith like that of Timoleon in the fickle Goddess, Fortune, nor like that of Mohammed in a fixed fate, nor like that of Napoleon in his star. Not faith like that of some modern scientists in an unreasoning, unmoral force at the back of, or inhering in, physical phenomena, and evolving out of them, by mechanical motion and chemical affinities, all moral phenomena — but faith in a personal God who created the heavens and the earth, and who made man after His own image, who upholds all things by the word of His power, watches over them with His parental providence, and blesses them with His super-abounding bounty. But he was not a mere natural religionist, believing that God had only written His name and attributes in an alphabet of stars upon the blue pages of heaven, and in picturesque illustrations upon the green pages of earth, and in mysterious characters upon the table of the human heart. He believed that God no longer dwelt in a light inaccessible which no man can approach unto and survive the vision, but that He had manifested Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, and that, instead of being blinded and blasted by the vision, we can look with delight upon the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. In fine, he believed in the Bible and in the Apostles’ Creed as the best summary of the faith, and in the Catechism as one of the best expositions of those duties to God and to our neighbor, which he exemplified in his daily life. All which propositions will be proved and illustrated in the progress of this discourse.
It will be interesting to trace Washington’s Christian character to its first germination and to observe the influence of its surroundings upon its development. . . .
Washington was of the cavalier stock, renowned in English story. But limiting our view to the paternal root of the family in Virginia, we find John Washington a planter, a burgess, and commander of the county of Westmoreland in 1658, and giving his name to the parish in which he lived, the first instance of the appropriation of the name to any place in America.
But, what is more to our purpose, we have a summary of his Christian creed in his own words, viz.: “Being heartily sorry for my past sins, and earnestly desiring forgiveness of the same from Almighty God through the merits of Jesus Christ my Saviour and Redeemer, I trust to have full forgiveness of all my sins and be assuredly saved, and at the general resurrection my soul and body shall rise with joy.’’
Lawrence, son of this John and his wife, Anne Pope, married Mildred Warner. . . . Augustine, son of Lawrence and Mildred (born 1694), married (March 6th, 1730) for his second wife, Mary Ball, of Lancaster. Around White Chapel church, in St. Mary’s parish, Lancaster, there are many tombstones, most of which are inscribed with the name Ball, and epitaphs attesting, in the words of one of them, that they “died in steadfast faith in Christ, and in the hope of a joyful resurrection.’’ They were the descendants of William Ball, the first of the family in Virginia. One of the family, as early as 1729, petitioned the General Assembly that the county courts should “provide for the instruction of a certain number of young gentlemen, Virginians born, in Divinity.’’ Seven of them were vestrymen of the parish,. . . . Such was the maternal stock from which our Washington sprang. In the family Bible (still extant) is the following entry:
“George Washington, son to Augustine and Mary, his wife, was born ye 11th [old reckoning] day of February, 1731-2, about 10 in the morning, and was baptized the 3d of April following, Mr. Beverly Whiting and Capt. Christopher Brooks, Godfathers, and Mrs. Mildred Gregory, Godmother.’’
It was the good fortune of Washington to have in his father a man of sense, who took special pains, both by precept and example, to train his son in moral habits and to teach him religious principles. Even if we do not accept literally what have been called (without evidence) the myths of Mason Weems, yet some of them are supported by other testimony, as the diagram on which seed was sown, which, when coming up, spelled in green letters “George Washington,’’ to teach him that Providence, and not chance, ruled in nature.
It was his misfortune to lose his father when the son was but ten years of age; but that Providence which he ever devoutly acknowledged gave him in his elder brother, Lawrence, a wise counselor. Lawrence inherited Mt. Vernon, which he called after the admiral of that name, with whom he served in the expedition against Carthagena. Lawrence was educated at Oxford, but, having a military turn, he entered the army. George often visited him at Mt. Vernon, and when his health failed accompanied him to the West Indies. Lawrence often rehearsed for George the story of his life in arms, and the latter greedily devoured his discourse. It was thus that his military genius was awakened. He practiced feats of arms with the old soldiers whom Lawrence attracted around him, developing that robust manhood and skill in fence which was an unconscious preparation for the great part he was to play in the dramas of the French War and the American Revolution.
But it was the peculiar felicity of Washington to have a devout Christian mother, the greatest blessing God gives to man. Some one has said that behind every great man is a great woman, his mother. And that sagacious observer, the First Napoleon, said, “the future of a child is the work of his mother.’’ The mother presides. . . over the spring of life. She is indeed the spring whence the stream flows, and has the power of giving it a direction which will issue in Paradise or in perdition. . . .
The mother of Washington was an old-fashioned Virginia matron, with strong common sense, great administrative talent, fearing God and having no other fear, a firm believer in the righteousness of the rod; and yet those qualities were blended with a kindness whose overflow was only restrained by a sense of duty, so that Lawrence Washington, of Choptank, a cousin and schoolmate of George, said that he did not know whether he was more impressed with awe by her dignity or with sensibility to her softer qualities.
It was to this Christian woman, who, by precept and example, commanded her children and her household after her to keep the ways of the Lord, that Divine Providence committed the early training of a man of whom Gladstone has lately said: “He is the purest figure in history.’’ And she laid the foundation of his character with stones from the brook which “flowed fast by the oracles of God.’’ Wakefield, the family seat, . . . is between Bridge’s and Pope’s creeks, which last gave the name to Pope’s Creek Church, in which the family worshipped and Washington was baptized. Even the sexton of the church had something to do with his education, he having been the teacher in an old field school in which our hero learned the rudiments of grammar and arithmetic.
One of his schoolmates, Lewis Willis. . ., tells a characteristic story of him. He says that while the other lads were playing bandy or ball George was generally behind the door ciphering. His ciphering-book (so called) is now at Mt. Vernon.
The Bible and the Prayer-book were text-books in those primitive times. I remember in my childhood to have heard a very old gentleman, who was a contemporary of Washington, say that in the last century proficiency in the Bible was a test of scholarship; that a man who had only read half the Bible was only half educated; but that Washington was well educated, he having read and studied both the Old and the New Testaments.
It was while under the influence of his mother and pastor at Pope’s Creek Church, and afterwards at the Washington farm, opposite Fredericksburg, that he formed those habits of daily reading the Bible, of habitual attendance at public worship, of keeping holy the Sabbath day, which characterized his whole life, as is attested by his wife, by Mr. and Miss Custis, inmates of his house, and by his brother officers in the army. It was then, too, that he was indoctrinated in those duties toward his neighbor so clearly set forth in the Catechism — such as honoring his father and mother; obeying the civil authority; bearing no malice in his heart; hurting no one by word or deed; being true and just in all his dealings; keeping his hands from picking and stealing; his tongue from evil speaking, lying and slandering; his body in temperance, soberness, and chastity; not coveting other men’s goods; learning and laboring truly to get his own living, and to do his duty in that state of life unto which it should please God to call him.
One of the earliest illustrations we have of the impress made upon his mind by these teachings, is in some rules of conduct drawn up by him, and still extant in his own handwriting. Here are three of them: “When you speak of God or of His attributes, let it be seriously and with reverence.’’ “Labour to keep alive in the heart that spark of celestial fire called Conscience.’’ “Honour and obey your parents, whatever may be their condition.’’ This last rule was put to a severe test when, with the ship in view and his baggage aboard, he sacrificed, at his mother’s command, his passionate wish to enter the navy as a midshipman. This is a signal instance of the consequences which sometimes flow from a single act of obedience. Had he disobeyed his mother and gone to sea, humanly speaking, the course of history might have been reversed, and this colossal America of ours, with her head whitened by the snows of Canada and her feet in the land of flowers, stretching her right hand to the Atlantic and her left hand to the Pacific to welcome to her bountiful bosom the refugees from all climes, might never have been set free.
Among the influences which are powerful factors in the development of minds and morals, are books; and we long to know more of the contents of the family library. Besides the Bible and the Prayer-book, we know that he had, and read with his mother, “Discourses upon the Common Prayer,’’ and Sir Matthew Hale’s “Contemplations — Moral and Divine;’’ the latter of which is still preserved at Mt. Vernon, and bears the marks of diligent reading. “A precious document,’’ says Irving. “Let those who wish to know the moral foundation of his character, consult its pages. Its admirable maxims sank deep into the mind of George, and were exemplified in his conduct through life.’’
Having imbibed from Hobby, the sexton and head of the “old field’’ school, the contents of his cranium, and spent some time with his brother at Mt. Vernon, he went back to Wakefield, then owned by his brother Augustine, where he attended a school of a higher grade under Mr. Williams, and in two years perfected himself in the art of surveying.
Returning to Mt. Vernon, he found himself in a social circle of high-bred men and accomplished women. Not far from Mt. Vernon was Gunston, the seat of the Masons, a family which has contributed so many eminent men to the councils of the country, and among them, the great author of the “Bill of Rights.’’ Nearer still was Belvoir, the seat of the Hon. William Fairfax, a soldier and a man of letters, whose daughter was the wife of Lawrence Washington…. Here, too, he met Thomas Lord Fairfax, the proprietor of the princely plantation, “The Northern Neck,’’ including all the land between the Rappahannock and Potomac Rivers, from their mouths to their head-springs in the mountains, amounting to five million acres. Lord Fairfax was an old soldier, and a scholar who had contributed some papers to the elegant pages of the “Spectator.’’
By these associations Washington’s views were enlarged, and his manners and tastes refined. Lord Fairfax, a man nearly sixty, took a fancy to the youth of 16 years of age, and induced him to accompany him to his rustic “Greenway Court’’ in the valley of Virginia. From this centre they explored his vast domain in the wilderness, and Washington, for a doubloon a day became a surveyor of the trackless wilds, recording in his diary his arduous and romantic adventures. At Greenway Court, he tells us, he studied the history of England, and regaled himself with the papers of the Spectator, and in chasing the wild deer to the music of his Lordship’s hounds. This was in 1748. In the records of the county of Culpeper may be seen to this day the following entry: July 20th, 1749 — George Washington, gentleman, produced a commission from the president of William and Mary College, appointing him surveyor of this county, which was received; and thereupon “took the usual oaths to his majesty’s person and government, and took and subscribed the abjuration oath and test, and then took the oath of surveyor, according to law.’’
In 1751 he accompanied his brother, Lawrence, who was in consumption, to Barbadoes. Here he caught the small-pox, which left its impress upon his face for life. Lawrence returned home and died the 26th day of July, 1752, aged 34…. Although but 20 years old, George was left executor of his brother’s will, and after the death of his wife and daughter, inherited his estate, including Mt. Vernon. And now began that active career in the field and in council, which lasted almost to the day of his death. His first commission was an Embassy to the French and Indians in the North West, in which he incurred many perils by land and by water in the wilderness, and from the heathen. At 22 years of age, he was first lieutenant colonel and then commander of the Virginia forces. His friend, William Fairfax, wrote to him, “I will not doubt your having public prayer in camp, especially when the Indians are present.’’ Washington had a sharp correspondence with Gov. Dinwiddie, occasioned by the latter’s delay in sending him a chaplain. To Gov. Fauquier, who succeeded Dinwiddie, he repeats his complaint of the latter, saying: “The law provides for a chaplain to our regiment; common decency demands it. I flatter myself you will appoint a sober, serious man for the duty.’’ In the absence of a chaplain he conducted prayers in camp himself, at Fort Necessity, at the Great Meadows, and in the Alleghanies. This is attested by his aid, Col. Temple. When Braddock was killed, Washington read the burial service by the light of a torch, and writing of the battle to his brother, he said: “By the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all probability or expectation; for I had four bullets through my coat and two horses shot under me, and yet escaped unhurt.’’ In 1758 the reduction of Fort Duquesne terminated the campaign and the military career of Washington, who resigned his commission, and was married at the “White House,’’ 6th January, 1759. He now took his seat in the House of Burgesses. The speaker (Robinson), by order of the house, returned thanks to him for his distinguished military services to the colony. Washington rising to reply, blushed, trembled, and could not utter a word. The speaker relieved his embarrassment by saying pleasantly: “Sit down, Mr. Washington. Your modesty equals your valor, and that surpasses the power of any language I can command.’’ While Washington was in public life it was easy to feel his spiritual pulse; its beatings were indicated in all the public documents he issued. But after his marriage, except when the General Assembly was in session, he was enjoying otium cum dignitate at Mt. Vernon, until the independence bell began to ring. This is just the interval during which links are wanting in the chain of evidence. But luckily, I have lately found them in the old vestry book of Truro, which has been lost to public view from time immemorial, and which enables us to supply the missing links. This precious record discloses the fact that, during this interval, he and George Mason, and the Fairfaxes, Alexander Henderson, and the McCartys, and others, were active official Church workers, busily engaged in building those historic edifices known as Payne’s and Pohick churches, in sending their friend and neighbor, Lee Massey, to England for orders, and in buying a glebe, or fitting up a rectory with all comfortable appurtenances for their pastor. It is pleasing to see how punctual he was at the vestry meetings, having been first made a vestryman in October, 1762. In 1763, with George W. Fairfax as his associate, he was church warden. . . . [A recounting of his many acts of official church service follows in Slaughter’s original discourse.]
But now men began to scent the smoke of battle from afar, and conventions and congresses were the order of the day. In 1774 the House of Burgesses, of which he was a member, appointed a day of fasting and prayer, and we find at that date this entry in his private diary: “Went to church and fasted all day.’’ In September of the same year he was in Philadelphia, a member of the First Congress, and he says in his journal of the first three Sundays that he went three times to Episcopal churches and once to the Presbyterian, Quaker, and Roman Catholic churches, that being the first opportunity he had of observing some of these modes of worship. On taking command of the army in 1775 he issued an order requiring of “all officers and soldiers punctual attendance on divine service, to implore the blessing of Heaven on the means used for our safety and defence.’’ In 1776, Congress having set apart a day of humiliation, he commanded a strict obedience to the order of Congress that “by unfeigned and pure observance of their religious duties they might incline the Lord and giver of victory to prosper our arms.’’ He sternly forbade, on pain of the lash, gambling, drunkenness, and profane swearing — “wicked practices,’’ he said, “hitherto but little known in the American army’’ — and he adds: “We can have but little hope of the blessing of God if we insult Him by our blasphemies, vices so low and without temptation that every man of sense and character detests them.’’
He describes the bloodless evacuation of Boston and the surrender of Burgoyne as signal strokes of “that divine providence which has manifestly appeared in our behalf during our whole struggle.’’ In 1778, after the battle of Monmouth, he tells his mother “all would have been lost but for that bountiful providence which has never failed us in the hour of distress.’’ To General Nelson he says; “The hand of Providence has been so conspicuous that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more than wicked that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations.’’
In 1781 he wrote to General Armstrong: “The many remarkable interpositions of the divine government in our deepest distress and darkness have been too luminous to suffer me to doubt the issue of the present contest.’’
When peace was proclaimed in April, 1783, he issued an order from Newburgh commanding the chaplains with the army “to render thanks to God for His overruling the wrath of man to His own glory and causing the rage of war to cease.’’ He calls it a “morning star heralding in a brighter day than has hitherto illumined this Western hemisphere.’’ “Thrice happy are they who have done the meanest office in creating this stupendous fabric of freedom and empire, and establishing an asylum for the poor and oppressed of all nations and religions.’’ On June 18th he issued a letter to the Governors of the States, which concludes with the “earnest prayer that God may have you and the States over which you preside in His holy protection; that He would incline the citizens to obedience to government, to entertain a brotherly love for one another, for their fellow-citizens of the United States in general, and particularly for those who have served in the field; that He would be pleased to dispose them to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion, without an humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation.’’
In his Farewell Address to the army, November 2d, 1783, he gives them his benediction and invokes for them “Heaven’s choicest favours both here and hereafter.’’ In resigning his military commission to Congress, he says: “In this last act of my official life I consider it my indispensable duty to commend the interests of our dear country to the protection of Almighty God and those who have the superintendence of them to His holy keeping.’’
In his Farewell Address to the people of the United States, which the British historian Alison pronounced “unequalled by any composition of uninspired wisdom,’’ he said words which have been quoted all around the globe: “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who shall labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness—these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them. A volume would not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of a peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.’’
In a letter to Mr. Smith, of Connecticut, who had applauded his services, he replied: “To the Great Ruler of Events, and not to any services of mine, I ascribe the termination of our contest for liberty. I never considered the fortunate issue of any measure adopted by me in the progress of the Revolution in any other light than as the ordering of Divine Providence.’’
To these might be added many like confessions of faith from his private letters and from nearly every public document issued by him from the beginning to the close of his career, as soldier and statesman; there is nothing like it in the history of Christendom.
Now let us look for a moment at the impressions made by his daily life on those who were nearest to him, in his home, in his parish, in the field, and in the councils of the country. I hold in my hand a catalogue of nearly two hundred funeral sermons and orations, etc., delivered on the occasion of his death. Many of them I have read, and from them a volume of testimonials could be collected illustrating his Christian creed and character. A few citations from this cloud of witnesses must suffice.
General Harry Lee said: “First in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen—sincere, humane, pious. The finger of an overruling Providence, pointing at Washington as the man designed by Heaven to lead us in war and in peace, was not mistaken. He laid the foundations of our policy in the unerring principles of morality based on religion.’’
Major Jackson, his aid, speaks of the radiance of religion shining in his character and of his being beloved by the ministers of religion. The Honorable Mr. Sewall, of New Hampshire, said: “To crown all his virtues, he had the deepest sense of religion. He was a constant attendant on public worship and a communicant at the Lord’s table. I shall never forget the impression made by seeing this leader of our hosts bending in this house of prayer in humble adoration of the God of Armies and the author of our salvation.’’ The Rev. Mr. Kirkland, of Boston, said: “He was known to be habitually devout.’’ His pastor, Rev. Lee Massey, trusted and beloved by George Mason and George Washington, testifies: “He was the most punctual attendant at church I have ever known. No company ever prevented his coming, and his behaviour was so reverential as to greatly aid me in my labors.’’ Bishop Meade, who was intimate at Mt. Vernon and with Mr. Massey’s family, says they affirmed that “Washington was a communicant.’’ We have seen that he chose a pew next to the communion table; and Miss Custis, a member of the family, attests that “her grandmother, Mrs. Washington, told her often that General Washington always communed with her before the Revolution.’’ G.W.P. Custis, Washington’s ward and a member of the family, says, in his printed reminiscences: “Washington was a strict and decorous observer of the Sabbath. He always attended divine service in the morning, and read a sermon or some portion of the Bible to Mrs. Washington in the afternoon. On Sunday,’’ Mr. Custis says, “there were no visitors to the President’s house except relations, and Mr. Speaker Trumbull (Mr. Trumbull was a devout Christian) in the evening; so that if the bell rang the porter knew it to be the `Speaker’s bell,’ as it was called.’’ To this statement of Mr. Custis, his editor, Lossing, thoroughly versed in the family history, appends this note: “Washington was a member in full communion with the Protestant Episcopal Church.’’ The doubt which has been expressed by some persons on this point has arisen, I think, from the conceded fact that he did not always commune, as attested by Bishop White, while Congress sat in Philadelphia, and by Miss Custis as to Alexandria, after services ceased at Pohick Church. In explanation of this fact I would suggest that it was the custom of the Colonial Church only to administer the communion at Christmas, Easter, and Whitsuntide, and the people fell into the habit of limiting their communion to these occasions. The canons of the English Church only required the communion to be administered three times a year. This is made probable by the express declaration of General Porterfield to General Samuel Lewis, both of whom were known by many persons now living to have been men of spotless truth: “General Washington was a pious man, a member of the Episcopal Church. I saw him myself on his knees receive the Lord’s Supper at Philadelphia.’’ Porterfield, being brigade inspector, often waited on Washington in the army, and going once without warning to Washington’s headquarters, he says: “I found him on his knees at his morning devotions.’’ He added: “I was often in Washington’s company under very exciting circumstances and never heard him swear or profane the name of God in any way.’’
And now as to his habits in New York. Major Popham, a Revolutionary officer much with Washington, and whose high character is attested by Bishop Meade and Dr. Berrien, of Trinity Church, New York, in a letter to Mrs. John A. Washington, of Mt. Vernon, affirms that he attended the same church with Washington during his Presidency. “I sat in Judge Morris’ pew, and I am as confident as a memory now laboring under the pressure of 87 years will serve, that the President often communed, and I had the privilege of kneeling with him. My elder daughter distinctly remembers hearing her grandmamma, Mrs. Morris, mention the fact with pleasure.’’. . . .
He is known, as a general rule, to have spent an hour every morning and evening in reading the Bible and in private meditation and prayer. His prayers, often audible, were overheard by members of the family, and his aids, Col. Temple, and Gen. Knox, and Gen. Porterfield, and his nephew and private secretary, Robert Lewis, attest his habits in this particular — unquestionable evidence of the firmness of his faith and the reality of his communion with God.
Of those who have most thoroughly studied Washington’s history, having access to the family papers and leaving no source of intelligence unexplored, are Bancroft, Sparks, Irving, Lossing, Marshall, Bishop Meade, Dr. McGuire, and Winthrop; and we will let them sum up the conclusions they have reached.
Bancroft says: “Washington was from his heart truly and deeply religious. His convictions became more intense from the influence of the great events of his life upon his character. We know from himself that he could not but feel that he had been sustained by the all-powerful Guide and Dispenser of human things. He was a member of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and belonged decidedly to the party of moderation.’’
Sparks says: “He was Christian in faith and practice, and he was habitually devout. He was charitable and humane; liberal to the poor, kind to those in distress. His reverence for religion was seen in his example, in his public communications, and in his private writings.’’
Chief Justice Marshall, his fellow-soldier and his biographer, says: “He was a sincere believer in the Christian faith, and a truly devout man.’’
Lossing says: “He was a member in full communion of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and a vestryman of Truro and Fairfax Parishes.’’
Irving says: “Washington attended church every Sunday, when the weather and roads permitted. His demeanor was reverential and devout. He and his wife were both communicants.’’
And R.C. Winthrop, who was orator at the laying of the corner-stone of the Monument, and also at its dedication, says: “True to his friends, true to his country, and to himself; fearing God, believing in Christ, no stranger to private devotion, or to the holiest offices of the Church to which he belonged; but ever gratefully acknowledging a divine aid and direction in everything he attempted, and in everything he accomplished. What epithet, what attribute, could be added to that consummate character to commend it as an example above all other characters in human history?’’
Lavater, who had made a profound study of physiognomy, says: “A man’s looks, words and actions are the alphabet which spells character.’’ We have heard Washington’s words, and seen his actions by the light of history. His person was as majestic as his character. He was six feet two inches high in his prime, and strength and grace were blended in his figure. Stuart, who painted his portrait so often, says there were features in his face totally different from any he had ever seen. Hiram Powers, the American sculptor, told me in his studio in Florence that he had compared the head of Washington with all the antique busts in the galleries, and it surpassed them all. Moustier, the French minister, describing him at his inauguration, said: “Nature, which had given him the talent to govern, distinguished him from all other men by his appearance. He had the look and the figure of a hero.’’ The wife of Mr. Adams, speaking of him as he appeared to a woman’s eye on the same occasion, said: “He looks a temple made by hands divine.’’
Washington was a Mason,1 and if we apply to his character in a moral sense, the rules applied by that order to his monument, we shall find it square, level and plumb. Its distinguishing features were a sense of duty and self-control. His passions were by nature strong, and yet, in general, he had complete mastery of them. He ruled his own spirit as men harness electricity and steam, and make them do their work. He struck the golden mean between extremes. He was a Virginian, but not a sectionalist. He was an American, and yet, like Socrates, a citizen of the world. He was an Episcopalian, and yet, to use his own words, he always “strove to prove a faithful and impartial patron of genuine vital religion’’ wherever found; and he so demeaned himself that all Christians honored and revered him. The Presbyterians, Lutherans, Episcopalians, and Methodists sent him addresses of confidence and admiration, and the Baptist University at Providence, Rhode Island, conferred upon him the degree of Doctor of Laws. Bishops Coke and Asbury (Methodist) visited him at Mt. Vernon, 1785, and Dr. Coke records in his diary: “He is a plain country gentleman, polite and easy of access, and a friend of mankind. I was loath to leave him, for I greatly love and esteem him, and if there was not pride in it I would say, we are surely kindred spirits, formed in the same mould.’’ Socially he was intimate with P.E. Bishop White, and the R.C. Bishop Carroll, and his pastors, Drs. Griffith and Massey, and the Rev. Bryan Fairfax. He seems to have lived in a serene atmosphere above the clouds of sectarian jealousy, sectional hate, and national pride, which so obscure our vision, and hide from us the boundless landscape of truth.
In considering Christian character it is not fair to make the prevailing type of religion in one generation a Procrustean bed, to which men of past generations must be fitted, before they are recognized as Christians. Time and place weigh heavily upon all men. To be born in a particular degree of latitude is to be an American or a Chinaman. To be born in a particular epoch is to have the dominant opinions and manners of that epoch. If Washington had been born in Paris, or Napoleon in America, the outcome of each might have been very different from their history as it is written. So the type of religion varies with time and place. Between St. Augustine at one end of the scale and John Bunyan at the other, there are many degrees, and all within the limits of saving faith. The inward spiritual grace was the same, but the outward expression of it in the life varied with time and circumstance. . . .
Here again, I think, our Hero struck the golden mean. For in commending to his countrymen morality he warned them against the error of supposing that morality could live long unless it was rooted in religious principle. He was not a metaphysician, but a man of action all his life. So he added to his faith virtue, knowledge, temperance, godliness, brotherly kindness, charity. His first wish, he said, “is to see the whole world at peace, and its inhabitants one band of brothers, striving who should contribute most to the happiness of mankind.’’
When commanding a company at Alexandria in his youth, a warm contest took place for the Assembly between a Mr. Ellzey and G.W. Fairfax. Washington, the friend of Fairfax, said something offensive to Mr. Payne. . . Payne resented it by knocking Capt. Washington down with his cane. The latter, next morning, sent a letter to Payne, which, instead of being a challenge, as was anticipated, was a magnanimous acknowledgment that he was in the wrong, and they were ever after fast friends. Later in life he forbade La Fayette’s challenging a British officer to fight a duel, and by pleasant raillery laughed him out of the notion.
During the Revolution, he directed one of his agents (Peake) to keep one corn-house for the use of the poor, and instructed his steward (Lund Washington) never to allow the poor to go from his house hungry, and directed him to spend $250 of his money per annum in charity. He gave the use of several farms to the homeless; established a charity school at Alexandria; gave $10,000 to what is now Washington and Lee University; educated young men at college; made provisions for orphans, and for aged and infirm servants.
Let no one suppose that I am trying to paint a perfect portrait. Humanum est errare. The sun has its spots. And those whose taste leads them to look at these through magnifying glasses, must allow us the liberty of rather rejoicing in the light and warmth and bliss in which he bathes all nature. There is but one spotless page in history; it is that which records the life and death of the spotless Lamb of God.
Neither let it be suspected that we deem the authority of Washington needed to buttress Christianity. As well might it be said that the satellites which the sun attracts around him, and which reflect his light, uphold that great luminary. The sun is self-poised, and shines by his own light, and so does Christianity. They both uphold their satellites instead of being supported by them. If Washington, and Henry, and Marshall, and Mason, and the Lees and Randolphs, and George Nicholas and Archy Cary, and Pendleton and Nelson, and Page and other stars in the Colonial Church constellation, bring the laurels they reaped in the fields of their fame and lay them as humble offerings upon the altar of Christ, we gratefully accept the offerings, but give the glory where it is due.
…[W]hen [Shakespeare] enunciates the “king-becoming graces,’’ — Justice, Verity, Temperance, Stability, Purity, Perseverance, Mercy, Humility, Devotion, Patience, Courage, Fortitude, — it seems to me like a presentiment and a prophecy of our “king of men’’ by universal suffrage. For to possess these qualities is to be a king, whether called so or not; and if Washington had sat for the portrait, it could not have been more true to the life.
Mont Blanc, the highest peak in the Alps, has been called the Monarch of Mountains, “crowned long ago with a diadem of snow.’’ It seems to me to be a fitting symbol of the man, who, by common consent, has been crowned “king of men.’’ What could be purer than a crown of driven snow, “fanned and bolted o’er and o’er,’’ by all the winds of heaven? Under the microscope, each particle of snow is a six-rayed star, and when the sunlight falls from heaven upon them, each star shines, and all of them together glow with a radiance which surpasses infinitely the lustre of all the jewels which glitter on all the crowned heads on earth. No one who has ever seen the sun rise or set on the Alps, will ever forget the beauty and the glory of that splendid transfiguration. Thus are the character and career of Washington “diademed with rays divine.’’
And so I conclude with Tennyson’s imitation of the motto on the crest of the Washingtons — Virtus sola nobilitas.
Howe’er it be, it seems to me,
‘Tis only noble to be good;
Kind hearts are more than coronets,
And simple faith, than Norman blood.
* * *
ENDNOTES
1 Masonry was much different in Washington’s day than today. While joining a local lodge as a young man, he was not active most of his life. On September 25, 1798, Washington wrote a reply letter to Rev. G.W. Snyder, who thought he presided over a Masonic Lodge, stating: “The fact is, I preside over none, nor have I been in one more than once or twice within the last thirty years.’’ (The Writings of George Washington, by Jared Sparks, Vol. XI, Boston: Russell, Shattuck, and Williams, 1836, p. 315.)
