Continuing to examine the final address of President Washington, we come across this passage:
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. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: 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 peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
For an agnostic such as myself, this might be considered to be a problematic passage. However, as science has clarified over the years, humanity may be capable of rational thought, but is not then necessarily a rational species. By this I mean that over the millenia, mankind has survived, not because of rationality, but because the species has found behavior patterns which permitted it to survive. Now, I suspect that one could prove that those behavior patterns are, or at least were, rational in that the behavior permitted the survival of humanity – but only in the context that the behavior developed. As contexts change, however, a behavior with positive survival results may see those results become negative; survival value, as with morality (and on another day I might argue they are congruent), is eternally subjective – if I may indulge in clashing metaphors.
But patterns are important, because they may be followed without thought, and by doing so, precious time may be saved. Whether it’s measured in millisecond reaction times or in months, an ingrained reaction permits the deployment of precious time on other issues for which no good patterns are you available, at least so long as the patterns keep you alive.
The entire structure of morality is a large and, for many, highly intimidating problem, difficult to resolve, especially when one is scrabbling for existence. Religion provides a convenient and fairly well-proven set of prescriptions for behavior, hanging off of the hand of an entity with the power – and demonstrated bad temper – to blast transgressors. By fairly well proven, I mean that most sects have been around long enough to have a proven evolutionary track-record of survival characteristics. Furthermore, the communal characteristics usually found in such are salubrious to what was then considered the American enterprise. Ideals of honesty and fair-dealing are antithetical to the powers that were in England at the time; a reaction towards the other end of the spectrum is both understandable and, in my opinion, an important part of a settled, peaceful society.
On reflection, I realize that President Washington never mentions theology, that well-spring of religious evil. He is entirely practical in his call for adherence to religion; nor does he name one, thus avoiding the foolishness of warring sects. Whether or not he realizes it, he spares the population, much of it ill-equipped intellectually or chronologically, the daunting task of building a morality, using convenient moralities to instill attitudes in the citizenry conducive to a peaceful nation, as they, in their damaged ways, boost honesty, peace, generosity, caring for the poor, and several more such public ventures. Much like the behavior patterns developed millenia ago, they have had a proven value, and presumably will continue to do so, even if they come entangled with problematic behaviors and, more often, vulnerabilities, as demonstrated by today’s predatory televangelist community.
As perhaps a final point, distinguished by the today’s general opportunistic rejection of learning and science, and in my argument’s favor, President Washington has the following advisement following directly upon his religious advice:
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
His encouragement of the public betterment through education is an inadvertent rebuke to those who confine themselves to prayer when it comes to hard decisions; a rebuke to those who seek only entertainment and turn their faces from the public business1; a rebuke, in short, to those who prefer theology over knowledge of the world.
1In a truly odd juxtaposition, President Washington would be in the position of reprimanding rocker Alice Cooper, who famously once said,
I am extremely non-political. I go out of my way to be non-political. I’m probably the biggest moderate you know. When John Lennon and Harry Nilsson used to argue politics, I was sitting right in the middle of them, and I was the guy who was going ‘I don’t care.’ When my parents would start talking politics, I would go in my room and put on The Rolling Stones or The Who on as long as I could to avoid politics. And I still feel that way. [Rolling Stone]
