Today, of course, is that day when we remember the great founding President of the United States, George Washington. Tomorrow is Presidents' Day. I think it is interesting that Irving Kristol asked the question, "What ever happened to George Washington?" He doesn't even have a birthday celebration anymore, but has been absorbed in some amorphous thing called "Presidents' Day." There are few people here who don't remember when we celebrated George Washington's birthday.

Another writer asks, "How is it that reproductions of that marvelous portrait by Gilbert Stuart of George Washington, which for 150 years hung in the bedrooms of most of the children of our country, has practically vanished. . . tone and tint. When is the last time you went into a home and saw a picture of the great American hero, "the indispensable man," as he was called?

Presidents' Day is tomorrow. How many of you have read a positive article about George Washington in the newspapers recently. Ah, I'm afraid there have been few; if any, that have been written because the historical revisionists (those are the termites in the timber of civilization) really began thirty or forty years ago with the communist effort to destroy the greatness of America's foundations. Their efforts have been continued since the fall of communism by the atheists and by the ungodly and the immoralists — those who can't stand greatness. They have been very busy destroying the foundations of this country and replacing them with something that is vile with which they feel much more comfortable.

Professor E. Merrill Root, I think, describes this army of "boy scholars" better than anyone I have seen. He says:

They are always seeking to deflect truth and to shock men, to reverse and pull apart, to destroy by "debunking." They are not content with the truth, but lust for the trick; they seek fame by destroying fame. . . The Greeks had an image for it: There was a man of no merit, who therefore burned down the most beautiful of buildings, so that he might live in the fame of infamy. In the dawn of the Twentieth Century such men began to multiply in the land, raising and training a guerrilla army of smilers with the knife, hero-mockers, vivisectors of value, haters of life, "debunkers," pint-sized vandals of the mind, termites in the timbers of culture, who (having no greatness) resented all greatness. . . who, since they could not create, lusted to destroy. Like the fungus of decay, like the rust that eats pure metal, like the moths that devour the lustrous fabric (mere bellies with gray wings!) They lusted to devour and destroy and corrode and tarnish. They sought to shout a No to life and to love. And these "debunkers" were, and always are of the Devil's party. They act as they do because they are little, and know it; because they are sick, and know it. They cannot endure, that !there should be greatness, because they are not great; they cannot endure that there should be goodness, for they are not good. They cannot revere a master, for they are not artists. If they could see George Washington as he [was and] is, they could not bear to see themselves as they are; [therefore] they hate him because he shames them.

How apt is Professor Root's description of the historical revisionists of our time, who have nothing good to say and only seek fame by destroying the famous. And so we see that George Washington was really not some great hero; he was not even average; he was probably sub-normal. And we are told in various articles I have seen that he was not virtuous, he was not religious, he was not even a Christian — he was a deist. And he certainly was not great. Therefore, millions of paintings of the Founder of our country, the "Father of Our Country" have silently disappeared, because we have been made embarrassed by our own founding, and thus we have been destroyed by the destroyers of greatness.

Let us take a look, however, and see how true these things are. Was Washington a man of virtue and morality, or was he, as the "debunkers" say — the "debunkers" who seek only to say that virtue is a mask that covers hypocrisy because they know that they are hypocrites and have no real virtue and cannot stand the fact that it actually might exist in somebody else. So we hear. . . that he was not a virtuous man, that he never said, "I cannot tell a lie. I cut down the cherry tree." Now he probably didn't say that. That is one of the myths that has grown up around him, but the interesting thing is that the character of George Washington was such that it supported the myth. And the myth could be believed because George Washington was the kind of man who probably would have done that as a boy.

But there are other things the "debunkers" say. We are told that Washington had an affair with a woman. Why, we were not only told it, we were told it in Technicolor by Hollywood! Isn't it interesting that during his lifetime and at his death, it was said that his character was the "wonder of the world." And it waited for almost 200 years before Hollywood discovered that he really was nothing special at all. Isn't it interesting that those who knew him best saw his greatness, but those who never knew him at all can only see his weakness.

Abigail Adams, who spoke her mind very clearly about most everything, said this:

• He was. . . possessed of power, possessed of an extensive influence [and there is no doubt of that. Washington had more power and more influence than anybody in America in his day] but he never used it but for the benefit of his country. . . If we look through the whole tenor of his life, history will not produce to us a parallel.

Thomas Jefferson knew him well, and Jefferson said of him that he was a phenomenal character. He wrote:

• His integrity was most pure, his justice the most inflexible I have ever known. No motives... of friendship or hatred being able to bias his decision. He was, indeed, in every sense of the word, a wise, a good and a great man.
  
  
• It may truly be said that never did nature and fortune combine more perfectly to make a man great, and to place him in the same constellation with whatever worthies have merited from man an everlasting remembrance.

But the ignoramuses 200 years later who never knew Washington at all, of course, knew him far better than Thomas Jefferson, who labored for years with him to bring this nation into existence.

Washington was commander-in-chief of the defense forces of the, Commonwealth of Virginia when he was twenty-two years old. The debunking we hear is involved with removing all of the virtues from the man, replacing them with vices, or... twisting his virtues into things which were not true. In one survey of a dozen textbooks that are used today in our schools, you can find practically nothing good said about Washington—only one had any attempt at a balanced view of the man. What, indeed, happened to George Washington? He has been the victim of the "virtue vivisectors" of our time.

I wonder how many of you know that George Washington was a preacher? As commander-in-chief of the defense forces of Virginia as a colonel, he implored the government to send a chaplain for his army, a very considerable army I might add. But a chaplain could not be found who was willing to go out onto the frontier and brave the elements and place his life in jeopardy. And so, for the last two of those three years, George Washington, believing that worship was so important, conducted divine worship for his army every Sabbath day. Find that in your public school textbooks. I'd love to see it, but I don't think you will find it there.

Was he a man of virtue?

• Jeremiah Smith knew him well. He said, "He had all the genuine mildness of Christianity with all its force. He was neither ostentatious, nor ashamed of his Christian profession. He pursued in this, as in every thing else, the happy mean between the extremes of levity, gloominess, indifference and austerity. His religion became him. He brought it with him into office and he did not lose it there!”
  
  
• Mason L. Weems, an historian said, "The noblest, the most efficient element of his character was that he was an humble, earnest Christian."
  
  
• Cyrus R. Edmonds said, "The elements of his greatness are chiefly to be discovered in the moral features of his character."
  
  
• John Marshall, the famed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, said: "Without making ostentatious professions of religion, he was a sincere believer in the Christian faith and a truly devout man."

Did you read that in the papers this week? I sincerely doubt it, indeed. No, Washington was a man who sought to add to his faith, virtue. He was raised in a godly Episcopal home. He was taught the Scriptures and many other things about the Christian faith by his godly father, who was a vestryman in the Anglican Church. When Washington was but eleven years old his father died. His mother took over the teaching of her son, but required him at age eleven, from that time forward, at the death of his father, to conduct daily worship in their family in the place of his father.

Interestingly, when General Braddock died in the war with the French and the Indians, his men, because the Indians were pursuing them, wanted him to leave the body and run. Washington refused and demanded that he be buried. Not only that, he said they should bury him in the middle of the road. Many people gasped. They were horrified at such a thought. In the middle of the road? How undignified. But they later discovered the wisdom of that request. The wagons and cannons were dragged over the grave after it was sealed and the evidence of a grave was hidden from the Indians, who no doubt would have dug up the body, stolen the uniform and desecrated the corpse.

But who was to conduct the Christian funeral service? Colonel George Washington pulled from his pocket a small book, The Anglican Book of Worship and Prayers, and led the funeral service. How many of us would be willing, at the drop of a hat or a general, to lead the service.

Further, we are told today that Washington wasn't even religious. We are told he wasn't even a church member, or that he attended. The fact of the matter is, we find in his diary repeated references to the contrary: Sunday: "Attended church morning and night." Sunday: "Attended church." Sunday night: "Weather inclement. Not able to attend." That probably meant two to three feet of snow on the ground, and he had to ride anywhere from ten to forty miles on horseback to attend church at various times in his life.

He was elected to the vestry of three different churches. That is the Anglican equivalent of an elder. Now, I assure you, dear friends, that we are not accustomed to electing people to the office of elder in our church who are not members thereof. He was chosen as warden of one of the churches, another high position in the Anglican church. As I already said, he conducted worship.

Also, it is said that he never attended communion. Well, is that true or not? That is one of the twisted things. Actually, he decided at one point of his military career, when he was fighting with the British in the War of Independence that there was some conflict between his taking communion' and being involved in the killing of men. And so he absented himself from the communion service.

But, they say, there was no record of his ever taking communion. Is that right? Well, how about this: When he was in Morristown, New Jersey, there was no Anglican church and Sunday was hastening on. He heard that they were having one of their two communion services for the year that Sunday at the Presbyterian church. He journeyed to the manse of Dr. Johnes, pastor of the Presbyterian church he had decided to attend. Tying his bay horse near the door, he entered and asked the pastor if they were having communion that Sunday. He was told that they were, indeed. Washington wanted to know if an Episcopalian could participate, since some churches do not allow others to do so. "Most certainly," said the pastor. "Ours is not the Presbyterian table, General, but the Lord's table; and we hence give the Lord's invitation to all His followers of whatever name."

Said Washington, "I'm glad of it; that is as it ought to be; but as I was not quite sure of the facts, I thought I would ascertain it from yourself [I am sure any of you who have questions about communion always get on your horse and go to the parsonage before Sunday to clear up those questions! At least in thirty-nine years I have not had anyone do that. —  Dr. Kennedy] Washington joined the outdoor communion service under the trees. So, yes, there a record of the fact, before and after, that he did attend communion.

Then there are those who say, "Well, he may have been virtuous. He may even have been religious, but he was not even a Christian. Actually he was a deist." Tragically that lie is repeated over and over again. Unfortunately, the people who make that statement wouldn't know the difference between a deist and a Zoroastrian if they tripped over one, or else they know next to nothing about George Washington.

Was Washington really a Christian? What did he truly believe in his heart? Let me tell you one of the most amazing insights into the heart of the Father of our Country. On April 21-23, 1891, over 100 hundred years ago, there was sold at an auction in Philadelphia a remarkable collection of the personal possessions of George Washington which had been in the hands of his family heirs for generations. Among them was found a little manuscript book, the most precious gem there, which contained twenty-four pages filled with handwritten, carefully scribed prayers in Washington's own hand. This has been checked by handwriting experts. They are filled with beautiful, fervent, and evangelical language, the language of his faith and his religious beliefs. Ask yourself if these are the views of a Christian or a deist.

By the way, in case you don't know what the difference is, a deist believes in a watchmaker God—that God created the world, established natural law, and then took off on a long vacation and hasn't been heard from since—a God who never intermeddles in the affairs of this world. They are also Unitarians in that they deny the deity of Christ and the efficacy of His atonement, since Jesus Christ, if He is the divine Son of God, most definitely intermeddled in this world.

It is interesting. I know of no historical character in the history of America who gives more frequent testimonies to his belief in the providence of God than does George Washington. In fact, he says, "No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men than the people of the United States." At every step of the way in the formation of the country Washington attributed to the divine providence. He one time had four bullet holes in his coat and had two horses shot out from under him and yet survived. Did he say he was "lucky," or it was "fate," "chance"? No. He always ascribed his victories to the providence of God, and his failures to himself.

As I said, a deist does not believe in the atoning merit of Christ. Our text today talks about one who confesses his sins and is cleansed by the blood of Christ. And from Washington's diary come these words:

O most Glorious God, in Jesus Christ my merciful and loving father, I acknowledge and confess my guilt [ah, note well, Hollywood. You remember they created a mistress for him in the mini-series. I talked to one of our great historians who specializes in this area who told me they made that up out of whole cloth. There is not a shred of evidence of truthfulness in it. Well, here is one they missed. Here Washington is acknowledging his guilt. Take heed, Hollywood. You can make a new mini-series and present him as he really was with all of his faults —  Dr. Kennedy] in the weak and imperfect performance of the duties of this day I have called on thee for pardon and forgiveness of sins, but so coldly and carelessly, that my prayers are become my sin and stand in need of pardon. . .

Did you get that Hollywood? His prayers are his sin. I wonder how many people here have ever confessed the sinfulness of their prayers? Maybe you have confessed the sinfulness of the fact that you don't pray, but how many of you have confessed the sinfulness of the coldness of your prayers, and that they stand in need of pardon? His sin was a lack of what he perceived to be fervency in his own prayers. On note this one:

I have sinned against heaven and before thee, in thought, word, & deed; I have contemned thy majesty and holy laws. I have likewise sinned by omitting what I ought to have done, and committing what I ought not. I have rebelled against the light, despised thy mercies and judgments, and broken my vows and promises; I have neglected [the better things] the means of Grace, and opportunities of becoming better; my iniquities are multiplied, and my sins are very great. I confess them. 0 Lord, with shame and sorrow, detestation and loathing, and desire to be vile in my own eyes as I have rendered myself vile in thine. [Any of you ever pray that?] I humbly beseech thee to be merciful to me in the free pardon of my sins for the sake of thy dear Son, my only Saviour, Jesus Christ, who came not to call the righteous, but sinners unto repentance. Thou gavest thy Son to die for me.

And there are many, many, many, many more. They are as evangelical as prayers heard from the pulpit of almost any evangelical church in the world today. No, my friends, these are not the prayers of a deist. They are the prayers of a Christian.

How desperately we need heroes in our nation today.

         *Prayer: Father, may we be ashamed as we look at our own lives in the light of the life of the Father of this Country. We thank Thee, 0 God, that Thou hast given to us and created for us such a man with such a faith, both in Thy divine providence and Thy beloved Son, in whose blood and merit he trusted for all things. 0 God, help us to be more like him as he followed Thee. Bless our nation and call it back to godliness and faith and virtue, for Jesus sake. Amen.

Dr. James Kennedy bio:

A.B., University of Tampa;
M.Div., cum laude, Columbia Theological Seminary;
M.Th., summa cum laude, Chicago Graduate School of Theology;
D.D., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School;
D.Sac.Lit., Christian Bible College;
Ph.D., New York University;
Litt.D., California Graduate School of Theology;
D.Sac.Theol., Southwest Baptist University;
D.Humane Let., Campbell University.

He is listed in several dozen registries, including: "2000 Outstanding Intellectuals of the 20th Century"; "International Man of The Year 1999-2000" by the International Biographical Center in Cambridge, England, and the "1000 leaders of World Influence" by the American Biographic Institute.