John Rhodehamel’s new George Washington: The Wonder of the Age is a model biography in many ways. It features brisk writing and easy command of the facts of Washington’s life, without feeling the need to give a blow-by-blow of the first president’s career. It is one of the best short biographies of Washington that I know of.
My primary complaint with Rhodehamel is that he gives short shrift to Washington and religion. I say this not because I am confident that Washington was a traditional Christian, as I have written here before. But like many of the Founders, Washington’s connection to faith was complex and meaningful. You would not get that impression from Rhodehamel. He says little about religion, but when he does, he dismisses its significance for Washington.
I have no objection to Rhodehamel’s dismissal of certain myths about Washington’s piety, most notably what he calls the “cornball” depictions of Washington praying in the snow at Valley Forge, or the legions of accounts of Washington getting caught praying in other various spots. It seems almost certain that, if Washington did regularly pray, it would have been in private settings, and we don’t have reliable confirmation of those (mostly posthumous) accounts of the prayer sightings.
But that does not mean that religion was insignificant to Washington. He certainly spoke about Providence and God routinely, but most of the hints Rhodehamel gives about that are in quotes from Washington, such as when he told Continental Army troops that it had “pleased the Almighty ruler of the Universe propitiously to defend the Cause of the United American-States.” (Rhodehamel includes this quote, but does not comment upon the theology behind it.)
In some cases, Rhodehamel is determined to downplay or obfuscate religion in Washington’s life. For example, he spends considerable time dismissing (again, probably rightly) the idea that Washington ended his presidential oath with “So help me God.” Washington was too much a constitutional “literalist” to have done so. But Rhodehamel fails to mention that Washington placed his hand on a Bible (on loan from a Masonic Lodge!) when he swore the oath. That’s not prescribed by the Constitution, either, but it was probably more significant than whether he said “so help me God.” At least Rhodehamel concedes that church bells rang once the oath was taken, and quotes (again without comment) Washington’s invocation of the “sacred fire of liberty” in his inaugural address.
Rhodehamel is also strangely dismissive of the importance of Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address, which included perhaps Washington’s most significant comments on the public importance of religion. In the speech, Washington asserted:
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 should 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 to cherish them. . . . 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 peculiar structure, reason, and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
At the end, Rhodehamel insists that Washington died a secular death. Again, I do not object per se to Rhodehamel’s quotation of historian Joseph Ellis, who wrote that at Washington’s deathbed, there “were no ministers in the room, no prayers uttered, no Christian rituals offering the solace of everlasting life. . . . He died as a Roman stoic rather than a Christian saint.” Washington’s personal piety was veiled and enigmatic, at best. I personally think that Washington was a moderate Anglican Christian, but we just don’t know for sure. “Roman stoic” was undoubtedly part of the first president’s persona, but that fact does not explain the deep religious influences in Washington’s rhetoric and beliefs.
Some Christian history writers have tried to turn Washington into an uncomplicated devout Christian. Those efforts have been unsuccessful. But it is not plausible to turn Washington into an uncomplicated secular stoic, either.
Sign up here for the Thomas S. Kidd newsletter. It delivers weekly unique content only to subscribers.
