Instapundit is getting flak for (let's see now, I hope I get this right....) attributing to George Washington language written into the Treaty of Tripoli during his presidency, but which was not ratified until after his term, when it passed the Senate with little debate -- when John Adams was president.

The language in question recited that "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

What's the big deal here? The government wasn't founded on the Christian religion -- whether Washington said so or not. George Washington would certainly have presented his treaty to Congress had he been president. Why such sensitivity? Why do so many people want to make the founders more "religious" than they were? I'm glad we have the Constitution, because such unpatriotic ingrates sure as hell can't read things into that. God is not mentioned anywhere -- not even in the presidential oath, which is spelled out. At the time the Constitution was adopted, clergymen complained to Washington that there should be a mention of Jesus Christ. As was typical of the man, he gave them a very polite, dignified, brush-off.

Never once did George Washington call himself a Christian or mention Jesus Christ publicly. Check it out in the George Washington Papers (link via Clayton Cramer).

So, now we must decide whether this is a tempest in a tea pot, a mountain morphed from a molehill, or a distinction without a difference. Am I, a philosophical pantheist, supposed to care?

Contrary to what some might imply, George Washington was no atheist. Like most of the founders, he was a Deist. Deists believe in God. While he recognized the importance of religion and religious virtues in general, he scrupulously avoided entangling religion with politics, and I wish some of his purported followers would do the same.

Religious intolerance was very much on the minds of the founders, and they wished to avoid it. Benjamin Franklin, in his essay "Toleration," wrote:

"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. These found it wrong in the Bishops, but fell into the same practice themselves both here [England] and in New England."

Franklin was pressed by clergymen about the specifics of his beliefs, and gave the following answer:

"You desire to know something of my religion. It is the first time I have been questioned upon it. But I cannot take your curiosity amiss, and shall endeavour in a few words to gratify it. Here is my creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by His providence. That He ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render Him is doing good to His other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental principles of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do in whatever sect I meet with them.

"As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of Morals and his Religion, as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the Truth with less trouble. I see no harm, however, in its being believed, if that belief has the good consequence, as probably it has, of making his doctrines more respected and better observed; especially as I do not perceive that the Supreme takes it amiss, by distinguishing the unbelievers in His government of the world with any particular marks of His displeasure.

"I shall only add, respecting myself, that, having experienced the goodness of that Being in conducting me prosperously through a long life, I have no doubt of its continuance in the next, without the smallest conceit of meriting it... I confide that you will not expose me to criticism and censure by publishing any part of this communication to you. I have ever let others enjoy their religious sentiments, without reflecting on them for those that appeared to me unsupportable and even absurd. All sects here, and we have a great variety, have experienced my good will in assisting them with subscriptions for building their new places of worship; and, as I never opposed any of their doctrines, I hope to go out of the world in peace with them all."

[Benjamin Franklin, letter to Ezra Stiles, President of Yale, shortly before his death; from "Benjamin Franklin" by Carl Van Doren, the October, 1938 Viking Press edition pages 777-778 Also see Alice J. Hall, "Philosopher of Dissent: Benj. Franklin," National Geographic, Vol. 148, No. 1, July, 1975, p. 94]

I can handle that. Fundamentalists (and maybe a few atheists) obviously can't.

Why the uproar over whether Washington himself made a simple statement which reflected the position of his admininistration -- and of the United States Constitution? Yelling at Glenn Reynolds (who must go through a ton of material to generate his work product) for a mere techicality strikes me as grounded in a much deeper resentment. Might it be that what the critics really fear is the truth of the statement itself? The issue -- that the United States government made this statement when it was run by its very founders -- is larger than George Washington (or Glenn Reynolds).

On a lighter note, I offer something to cheer everyone up: conclusive proof that George Washington was a Pagan!

Only here at Classical Values will you learn the real truth: that this country was founded as a Pagan nation!

(That last site has some serious quotes from the founders, too!)

Finally, let us not forget the blatantly Pagan Washington Monument:

Because The Washington Monument represents a Christless approach, it is, therefore, a Satanic monument to world government. It is in DEFIANCE of the real kingdom number FIVE, Christ's never ending kingdom. Masonry, the making of hewn stones, is a political expression of the Baal worship conducted by the Babylonians, Egyptians, and pagan Rome. Therefore, political masonry is one half of the pincer attack on world society - the other half being the Roman religion as expressed in the New Age, classical Catholicism, or even Marxism (a religion). Since both Masonry and Catholicism are forms of Baal Worship, all the parties in pursuit of world government are anti-Christian, though there many individuals who are deceived.

Honor our Classical Values!