I am writing this article on “Presidents’ Day,” but I am doing so under protest. George Washington was born on February 22, 1732. In 1879, the United States made his birthday a federal holiday. In 1968, however, Congress passed the “Uniform Monday Holiday Act” that moved the celebration of Washington’s birthday to the third Monday of February.

Since Abraham Lincoln was born on February 12, many states have combined the two into “Presidents’ Day,” which is the case in my home state of Texas. Fortunately, in my view, numerous states still recognize this day as “George Washington Day” or “Washington’s Birthday.” In the city of Laredo, Texas, the Washington Birthday Celebration lasts the entire month.

With all due respect to Mr. Lincoln and our other presidents, George Washington deserves to be recognized by our nation on a specific day. Were it not for him, there likely would not be a “United” States of America to do so.

The reasons speak not only to our past but especially to our future.

 “Separate them if it be better”

By any measure, George Washington occupies a unique place in our national story.

As commander in chief of the Continental Army, he led his troops to eventual victory over the unquestioned superpower of the day. This despite the fact that most of his soldiers were farmers and merchants with no formal military training; the British fielded much larger numbers of professional soldiers along with the world’s strongest navy.

After winning our independence, Gen. Washington presided over the Continental Congress that created our Constitution, then became our first president (the only person ever elected by unanimous vote of the Electoral College).

However, the nation he led was not sure it was a nation. The thirteen colonies were widely disparate in culture and economics, united primarily in their opposition to King George III and their quest for independence from his despotic rule.

Our Declaration of Independence was titled, “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America” (note the lower case “united” and upper case “States”). The resolution adopted the declaration, “That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States.” Independence did not, in fact, create one nation, but thirteen.

During the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, the West threatened to secede from the East. At the end of Thomas Jefferson’s first term, New England threatened to secede over his economic and political stances. He responded: “Whether we remain in our confederacy, or break into Atlantic and Mississippi confederacies, I do not believe very important to the happiness of either part.” He added, “Separate them if it be better.”

Blue cities within red states

We live in a day that seems as divided by partisan politics and cultural issues as ever. We are not just “blue” states and “red” states but blue cities and towns within red states and vice versa. A record-high 80 percent of US adults believe Americans are greatly divided on the most important values, while only 18 percent believe our country is united.

There was a day when Americans could find unity in their shared religiosity, but a smaller percentage of us now claim a church membership than ever before. Those with no religious preference outnumber any other single religious demographic.

Additionally, a recent poll reported that two-thirds of US adults believe this is the lowest point in our nation’s history that they can remember; 76 percent said the future of the nation is a significant source of stress in their lives.

Do these facts correlate with our declining religious commitment?

I believe George Washington would say so.

An annual tradition worth emulating 

Since 1896, it has been an annual tradition for a current member of the US Senate to read Gen. Washington’s Farewell Address in honor of his birthday. I believe this is something every American would profit from doing as well.

There was no constitutional requirement for President Washington to step down after two terms, and he faced significant pressure not to do so. To announce his decision not to seek a third term, he presented his Farewell Address in a newspaper article on September 17, 1796. In it, he stated:

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.

His reasoning is compelling: a consensual democracy requires a consensual morality. The Dutch diplomat Hugo Grotius (1583–1645) noted more than a century earlier:

A man cannot govern a nation if he cannot govern a city; he cannot govern a city if he cannot govern a family; he cannot govern a family unless he can govern himself; and he cannot govern himself unless his passions are subject to reason.

However, can our “passions” be “subject to reason”? Our first president would say no. Continuing with his Farewell Address:

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be sustained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of particular structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Why was he right?

How Americans can “unite” today

After the Fall, the “will to power” has dominated human nature (cf. Genesis 3:5). We will therefore use the political process as a means to our ends. We will place our state ahead of the federal, our community ahead of the state, and ourselves ahead of all.

Consequently, America will remain a “united” nation only if we learn to subject our personal ambitions to the national good and serve a cause greater than ourselves. And we can consistently do this only when we experience the unconditional, selfless love of God and then share it with others: “We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19; cf. Galatians 5:22).

In this light, is knowing Christ and making him known not the single greatest service we can render our nation? Is experiencing his love and then paying forward his grace not the most transforming gift we can give?

In 1789, George Washington issued America’s first “Thanksgiving Proclamation.” In it, he called on Americans to render their gratitude to God as “the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be.”

He believed that our disparate nation would then “unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country.” And that we would “unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations” (my emphases).

Can the “United” States of America flourish unless we embrace our first president’s wisdom?

Can you?

Denison Forum

It’s a sign of our times when a movie is so sexually immoral that even reading reviews of it can veer toward the pornographic. But such is the case with Wuthering Heights, the film adaptation of the Emily Brontë novel that was released Friday to a very mixed reception.

One reviewer calls the film an “abomination.” Another calls it an “insult” to the novel’s characters and describes its sex scenes as “truly exhausting.” The New Yorker portrays some of these scenes in ways I will not reproduce here and hope you won’t read.

To switch “art” forms: the latest Sports Illustrated “Swimsuit Edition” is out. The magazine has been doing this since 1964, sometimes in nearly pornographic ways. This year’s edition does something new, however: it features six wives and girlfriends of prominent NFL players. Among them is Brittany Mahomes, whose husband is an iconic superstar widely considered one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time.

As with Wuthering Heights, I will neither link to the images nor view them myself. One reason is obvious: Jesus warned us that “everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). We are therefore told to “flee from sexual immorality” (1 Corinthians 6:18), a command I intend to obey.

But the other reason is less obvious and constitutes the theme of my article today.

The three marks of a revolution

Last Thursday, I referred to the LGBTQ advocacy strategy I have been describing for years in books and articles: normalize unbiblical immorality, legalize it, stigmatize those who disagree, and criminalize such disagreement.

A reader responded by pointing me to a similar way of describing this strategy that I had not seen. In Reinventing Liberal Christianity, the British theologian Theo Hobson describes the three marks of a revolution:

1. What was universally condemned is now celebrated.
2. What was universally celebrated is now condemned.
3. Those who refuse to celebrate are condemned.

As a means to advancing such a “revolution,” the first step is to normalize “what was universally condemned.” We are reticent to celebrate what we consider aberrant, so we must be convinced that what we thought was aberrant is actually normal.

With regard to sexual immorality, the enemy does this in two ways.

From models to mothers

The first is modeled by the women modeling very revealing swimwear in Sports Illustrated. In the past, athletes, actresses, and professional models have typically been the subjects of the annual publication. This year, however, the magazine chose wives and girlfriends of athletes, some of whom are known for their public roles as wives and mothers.

One result is the supposition that if “normal” people engage in activities we would have considered immoral, it must be normal for us to do the same.

The second way immorality is normalized is illustrated by Wuthering Heights and its extremely aberrant sex scenes. Even reading the reviews, it is clear to me that these are activities “normal” people would not even consider.

My concern is not that those who see the movie are now more likely to do what the characters did. It is that they will think, “If people do things like this, my more ‘normal’ sins must not be as sinful as I thought.”

And when any activity becomes normalized in society, we can expect society to want it to be legalized. We saw this with marijuana legalization, which the New York Times strongly advocated but now admits has “caused a rise in addiction and other problems,” with widespread hospitalizations and chronic psychotic disorders.

Nonetheless, it is natural for us to want to legalize what we consider normal behavior, then to stigmatize those who disagree and even to criminalize such disagreement. As Hobson noted, in this third stage of a revolution, “Those who refuse to celebrate are condemned.”

Two practical responses

Given the extreme pervasiveness of sexualized images and behavior in contemporary culture, spanning the gamut from advertising to music to television to movies to Super Bowl halftime shows (again, I won’t link to examples), how are Christ followers to respond?

First, we should see all temptations as a step from what seems “normal” and innocuous into what will become disastrous and deadly. Jesus warned us that “everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin” (John 8:34). And “sin when it is fully grown brings forth death” (James 1:15). Lust becomes adultery, which becomes the destruction of our family and the ruin of our public witness and ministry.

As I heard a pastor say and often quote: sin will always take you further than you wanted to go, keep you longer than you wanted to stay, and cost you more than you wanted to pay. If you think you’re exempt from this satanic strategy, you of all people are most susceptible to it.

Our second response is to turn to the only source of true victory: “Walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Galatians 5:16, my emphasis). Jesus taught us, “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all” (John 6:63). Paul was blunt: “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Romans 8:8).

Clearly, we cannot rely on our sinful nature to defeat our sinful nature. How then do we “walk by the Spirit”?

• We begin the day by submitting our lives to him (Ephesians 5:18), reading God’s word so the Spirit can use it to shape our minds and guide our steps (Hebrews 4:12), and drawing close to Christ in worship so he can make us like himself (2 Corinthians 3:18).
• We “walk” through the day by practicing his presence: we pray about all we encounter (1 Thessalonians 5:17) and turn every temptation immediately to him for his strength and help (1 Corinthians 10:13; Romans 13:14).
• If we fall, we immediately seek his forgiveness and restoration (1 John 1:9).

When we “walk in the light, as he is in the light” (1 John 1:7), we experience our Father’s best in every dimension of our lives (cf. Galatians 6:7–8). As the biblical scholar Spiros Zodhiates noted,

“Peace of heart is the natural outcome of purity of heart.”

Will you experience such “peace” today?

Quote for the day:

“If your goal is purity of heart, be prepared to be thought very odd.” —Elisabeth Elliot

Our latest website resources:

• James Van Der Beek’s death and the path to true hope
• Notre Dame professor advocates for abortion: Responding to her argument with scientific facts and a grieving heart
• Is your church a part of the friendship recession? How biblical, covenantal friendships can help
• Super Bowl recap, AI shakes Wall Street, Trump’s Obama video, Epstein fallout & Winter Olympics
• Should churches use AI? What role does Artificial Intelligence play in the church, and what are the risks?

Denison Forum