Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part Three


During his time at college, two major changes occurred in the direction of Hamilton's life. First, he changed his plan for a career. When he entered King's College, he did so with the intent of studying medicine. Several college mates would later recount how they would pass by the dorm-room of Hamilton, a natural workaholic, who was staying up late, pacing back and forth, memorizing the bones of the foot. Young Hamilton had the privilege of studying under one of the earliest pioneers in surgery at the time, and so Hamilton's knowledge of the human body, though never applied in his career, came in handy as a father who tenderly cared for the health of his children. Hamilton, in the middle of his attendance at college, suddenly changed his academic focus from the study of medicine to the study of law. The reasons for this sudden change could be manifold; Robert Troup, Hamilton's close friend and college roommate, was studying law under John Jay, so it is possible that Troup's studies lured Hamilton. About this time also, Hamilton expressed an increased concern for the public affairs of man rather than the physical health of man, although his medical studies did interest him throughout his life. In earlier years, he had been sympathetic to the crown of England, and felt that the colonists were merely in an uproar about taxation. His discussions with patriotic classmates, and especially those with Hercules Mulligan, in whose home Hamilton lodged during his college years, had convinced him that the British government, and not the American colonists, were at fault. His subsequent writings in favor of the cause of American independence show his astounding knowledge of the history of America, of their forms of government, of their colonial charters, and the legal relationship between America and Great Britain. It is also noteworthy that Hamilton, at the age of eighteen, had a profound understanding of both the science of law and the particulars of legal documents. This new political persuasion was not a departure from, but rather a direct result of, his conviction that the rights of mankind were granted to them BY GOD HIMSELF, and that because these rights were God-given, man had not authority to take them away.

"The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power." (1)
It is true that this statement does not directly contradict deism or theistic rationalism; however, this statement is perfectly in line with the Scripture, and therefore, Hamilton's above statement is biblical. Hamilton's above statement cannot be classed as "deistic" or "theistic rationalistic," because even though his statement does agree with the basic principles of both deism and theistic rationalism, he does not place man's reason above divine revelation, as deism and theistic rationalism both do. Hamilton's statement is biblical, because he acknowledges that man was created by God (Genesis 1:26-27), and that God gave man inalienable rights, since man was created in God's image. This concept is key to the understanding of our Founding Era, and, of more primary importance in our case, to understanding Hamilton's beliefs concerning his religion, and therefore his politics. Man is distinguished from the animals, by having been created in God's image. Being created in God's image means that man is capable of making choices between right and wrong, unlike the animals, who live their lives according to their God-given instinct. Because God has given man the power of choice, man has the ability to reason; for without reason, man can decide nothing for himself. The fact that man has been created in God's image also means that man has some sort of inherent value -- a value greater than animal or plant life, even though those things are also the creation of God. Man became "a living soul" (which implies the power of will, reason, and man's value) according to Genesis 2:7; therefore, man is more than just flesh and bones -- he has an eternal soul, so no other man has the right to take another man's life, unless a man should, by transgressing that right of others, forfeit his own right to life.

It has been assumed that Hamilton's mention of the idea of the "state of nature" makes him a theistic rationalist. I do not understand the logic of this assertion; however, I can say that Hamilton quite frankly rejected the humanistic idea of Thomas Hobbes' "state of nature" theory. Hamilton wrote to a tory opponent:
"There is so strong a similitude between your political principles and those maintained by Mr. Hobbes, that, in judging from them, a person might very easily mistake you for a disciple of his. His opinion was exactly coincident with yours, relative to man in a state of nature. He held, as you do, that he was then perfectly free from all restraint of law and government. Moral obligation, according to him, is derived from the introduction of civil society; and there is no virtue but what is purely artificial, the mere contrivance of politicians for the maintenance of social intercourse. But the reason he ran into this absurd and impious doctrine was, that he disbelieved the existence of an intelligent, superintending principle, who is the governor, and will be the final judge, of the universe. As you sometimes swear by Him that made you, I conclude your sentiments do not correspond with his in that which is the basis of the doctrine you both agree in; and this makes it impossible to imagine whence this congruity between you arises. To grant that there is a Supreme Intelligence who rules the world and has established laws to regulate the actions of His creatures, and still to assert that man, in a state of nature, may be considered as perfectly free from all restraints of law and government, appears, to a common understanding, altogether irreconcilable." (bold italics added) (2)
What God-given laws is Hamilton referring to? If the reader continues, he finds that Hamilton is referring to the "law of nature." Christians, theistic rationalists, and deists believe that this law is God-given. Hamilton cannot be proven one of the above with just this quote. However, if we take Hamilton's words in the context of what he believed throughout his life, it is very reasonable to assume that Hamilton was speaking from a Christian worldview. Hamilton never said anything that affirms his belief in theistic rationalism (i.e., that man's reason is superior to divine revelation). He did make statements, however, that affirm that he believed the opposite. These quotations have been cited on this blog, and one of them has been examined in a recent post; but I shall dig into the others in their chronological order. In the mean time, we shall examine Hamilton's religion during his college years and early involvement in the American Revolution. It is extremely unlikely that Hamilton became a theistic rationalist during his college years. Remember the testimony of his roommate Robert Troup, which was quoted in "Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part Two":
"'At this time,' Troup relates, 'the "General" was attentive to public worship, and in the habit of praying on his knees night and morning. I lived in the same room with him for some time, and I have often been powerfully affected by the fervor and eloquence of his PRAYERS. He had read many of the polemical writers on religious subjects, and he was a ZEALOUS BELIEVER in the FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES OF CHRISTIANITY. I confess that the ARGUMENTS with which he was ACCUSTOMED to JUSTIFY HIS BELIEF, have tended in no small degree to confirm my own FAITH IN REVEALED RELIGION.' " (capitals and italics added) (3)
* * *
In examining Hamilton's pamphlets in defense of the American liberty and independence, one notices the emphasis he places upon religious liberty, and its connection to true liberty in society:
"But being ruined by taxes is not the worst you have to fear. What security would you have for your lives? How can any of you be sure you would have the free enjoyment of your religion long? Would you put your religion in the power of any set of men living? Remember civil and religious liberty always go together: if the foundation of the one be sapped, the other will fall of course." A Full Vindication" (1774) (4)
"Is it not better, I ask, to suffer a few present inconveniences, than to put yourselves in the way of losing every thing that is precious? Your lives, your property, your religion, are all at stake. I do my duty. I warn you of your danger. If you should still be so mad as to bring destruction upon yourselves; if you still neglect what you owe to God and man, you cannot plead ignorance in your excuse. Your consciences will reproach you for your folly; and your children's children will curse you." (4)
"May God give you wisdom to see what is your true interest, and inspire you with becoming zeal for the cause of virtue and mankind!" (4)
"Good and wise men, in all ages, ... have supposed that the Deity, from the relations we stand in to Himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is indispensably obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever." The Farmer Refuted (1775) (4)

"No Protestant Englishman would consent to let the free exercise of his religion depend upon the mere pleasure of any man, however great or exalted. The privilege of worshiping the Deity in the manner his conscience dictates, which is one of the dearest he enjoys, must in that case be rendered insecure and precarious." Remarks on the Quebec, Part Two (1775) (5)

"The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. they are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power." The Farmer Refuted (1775) "The fundamental source of all your [tory's] errors, sophisms, and false reasonings, is a total ignorance of the natural rights of mankind. Were you once to become acquainted with these, you could never entertain a thought, that all men are not, by nature, entitled to a parity of privileges. You would be convinced that natural liberty is a gift of the beneficent Creator to the whole human race, and that civil liberty is founded in that, and cannot be wrested from any people without the most manifest violation of justice." The Farmer Refuted (1775) (6)
There is also another quick excerpt from Hamilton's pamphlets which is worth noting, as relates to his piety and morality. Some have argued, and do argue, that Hamilton was irreverent and impious in his youth, or that he thought less of religion and virtue as he advanced in years and became swept up in Revolutionary fervor. This is certainly not very arguable at this point in Hamilton's life.
In Hamilton's "A Full Vindication," he remarked:
"By Him—but, with your leave, my friends, we’ll try, if we can, to do without swearing. I say, it is enough to make a man mad to hear such ridiculous quibbles offered, instead of sound argument; but so it is,—the piece I am writing against [the Tory pamphlet written most likely by Samuel Seabury, Anglican clergyman] contains nothing else.

"When a man grows warm he has a confounded itch for swearing. I have been going, above twenty times, to rap out an oath, By Him that made me; but I have checked myself with the reflection, that it is rather unmannerly to treat Him that made us, with so much freedom." (7)
Hamilton's pamphlets had such a profound effect on New Yorkers, and were so well-written, that it was supposed that John Jay had authored them (Hamilton had merely signed his name as "A Friend to America").

At this point, George Washington Parke Custis, the adopted grandson of George Washington, and the son of John Parke Custis who attended King's College along with Hamilton, related in his book Recollections and Private Memoirs of Washington, page 342, Hamilton was running out of funds to continue his studies in college, and was considering returning to the West Indies. His patriotic friends in college, who had come to deeply appreciate his fervent patriotism, begged him to change his mind. They asked that he would remain, and use his talents to fight for the cause of American independence.
" 'Well, my friends,' said the gallant youth, 'if you are determined that I should remain among you, and take part in your JUST and HOLY cause, you must raise for me a full company of artillery.'" (emphasis added)
In 1776, Alexander Hamilton, at the age of nineteen, became the captain of the New York Artillery Company, a volunteer corps which comprised of any patriotic male New-Yorker willing to join. The company consisted of about thirty men, including some of Hamilton's patriotic college mates such as Robert Troup and Nicholas Fish (father of Hamilton Fish, named for guess-who, who later became Governor of New York). Hamilton knew how to manage the company well, having privately studied mathematics and artillery during his college years. During that time, he and several of his patriotic college mates had participated in a local militia company commanded by a Captain Fleming, an old veteran who had once fought with the British. Hercules Mulligan, Hamilton's friend and host, was also connected with this company, and related a somewhat humorous anecdote as the two were on a mission to confiscate 24 pieces of artillery to keep them from the British:
"I was engaged in hauling off one of the cannons, when Mister Hamilton came up and gave me his musket to hold and he took hold of the rope. . . . Hamilton [got] away with the cannon. I left his musket in the Battery and retreated. As he was returning, I met him and he asked for his piece. I told him where I had left it and he went for it, notwithstanding the firing continued, with as much concern as if the [Asia] had not been there." (8)
To avoid the notice of the college President, Hamilton and his fellow patriots would rise early, put on their green jackets with the words "Freedom or Death," no doubt taken from the speech which made Patrick Henry immortal, pinned to their lapels a tin heart on which was engraved "God And Our Right," pulled their muskets out from beneath their beds, and gathered to the green of St. George's Chapel, were they drilled. It was this company, named the "Hearts of Oak," which provided the experience and skills he needed as Captain of the New York Artillery Company. He embraced the work heartily, and his bravery and devotion won the hearts and loyalty of his men, who were all older than him. Until Baron von Steuben came a few years later and gave the Continental Army a system of articulate procedure and drilling, Hamilton's Company became renowned as the most efficient, courageous, well-disciplined, and calculated regiment which followed the Continental troops under Washington's command.

In my next post, we shall take a look at Hamilton's life and religion during the his years as a soldier during the Revolution.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part Two

In "Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part One," we left off on Hamilton's trip the United States, where he was to attend an American university. He arrived in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1773, where he finished up some business for his former employer Nicholas Cruger, and collected his wages. He then took a trip to New York City, where he presented the introductory letters from Doctor Knox to the Reverends Mason and Rodgers, who were to become valuable friends of Hamilton. Hamilton boarded in the house of Hercules Mulligan, a friend of both the ministers and possible of Hugh Knox. Hamilton and Mulligan became instant friends, and Mulligan recollected much of this friendship in his "Narrative of Alexander Hamilton" many years later. Hamilton's education, however, had hence far been so menial, that he needed to attend an academy in order to prepare himself for college. Hamilton continued his journey to New Jersey, where he attended Francis Barber's Academy, and hoped to attend a university. Upon his arrival in Elizabethtown (now just "Elizabeth"), New Jersey -- the hometown of the academy -- Hamilton gave the introductory letters that Knox had sent with him to William Livingston and Elias Boudinot, two influential (would-be) Founding Fathers and New Jersey statesmen. Hamilton spent time among the families of both these men, and both had a deep impact upon his education, and perhaps even his religious temperament. Both of these men were dedicated Christians, and even spent parts of their lives in some sort of ministry or theological pursuit.

William Livingston, though known for his statesmanship on behalf in New Jersey, grew up in New York state, along with his brother Philip Livingston (who signed the Declaration of Independence as a delegate from New York) and their cousin Robert R. Livingston (who was on the Committee which drafted the Declaration, and swore George Washington in as first United States President). At the tender age of fourteen, William ventured into the wilderness of western New York as an aide to a Christian missionary to the Mohawk Indians. William later moved to New Jersey, where he was apparently swept up in the fervor of the Great Awakening, and changed his denomination from the family denomination of Dutch Reformed to Presbyterian. He even went to the dangerous extent of publicly criticizing the Anglicans who opposed the leaders of the Great Awakening. This deed was indeed very dangerous because the Anglican denomination was the established church of England -- mother country -- and the head of that church was none other that the King of England; therefore, to publicly criticize his denomination came very close to committing an act of treason against the crown. William Livingston settled down in the town of Elizabethtown, where he lived at the time he boarded Hamilton in his home. Livingston, although not a licensed preacher, was nevertheless a layman pastor of a congregation in that town. Interestingly, he called himself a Calvinist, but openly rejected John Calvin's philosophy of predestination as unscriptural and reducing men to "mere machines" (On Two Wings, by Michael Novak; p. 153). So Livingston, who probably had a part in Hamilton's early education, most likely left the indelible stain of Christianity on young Hamilton.

Elias Boudinot had much in common with Livingston. Elias Boudinot,
too, was greatly influenced in favor of the Great Awakening. Like Hamilton, Boudinot was a direct descendant of a French Huguenot family, who had immigrated not to the West Indies, but to America, to escape the horrific persecution of Christians under the rule of Louis XIV. Boudinot was converted under the preaching of George Whitefield, and was baptized by Whitefield himself (1). Elias Boudinot went on to display himself as a strong believer in the Bible and in Christian evangelism. In later life, Boudinot became the first President of the American Bible Society (2), and earlier in life, he defended the Bible from the attacks of skeptics such as Thomas Paine. Boudinot appears to have been very familiar with the events of the Great Awakening as they occurred in New Jersey, for he wrote a biography of William Tennet, which is available from the New York State Library and elsewhere. Boudinot and Hamilton remained good friends for life. During the time when Hamilton was soldiering during the Revolutionary War, he and Boudinot, who was a member of the War Committee of the Continental Congress, often exchanged letters as to what really happened on the battlefield. Boudinot also served under Hamilton in the early years of the United States under the Constitution, as the director of the United States Mint. Boudinot, too, no doubt, left an indelible impression upon Hamilton's mind and soul concerning Christianity. John Church Hamilton wrote a footnote on page 48 of his History of the Republic of the United States, volume 1 (which book was a look at the Founding Era through the life and eyes of Alexander Hamilton and the writings of his contemporaries):

The excellent family of the Boudinots relate that he [Hamilton] occasionally made a family prayer in their presence.
Hamilton, after finishing a year at the academy, and now ready for college, had only to choose a university. According to Hercules Mulligan, Hamilton desired to attend Princeton University, for it was more "republican" in principle than the other colleges open to him in New York. Mulligan prepared an interview for Hamilton with the prestigious president of Princeton, the Reverend Doctor John Witherspoon, who was, like most of Hamilton's other mentors, a Presbyterian American patriot. During the interview, Witherspoon became deeply aware of Hamilton's intense mind and love for hard work, discipline, and study. Hamilton, however, made a request that Witherspoon was not certain would be granted: Hamilton said that it was his great desire that he would be able to work at his own pace, and be allowed to speed as quickly as his abilities permitted him through the course. Witherspoon, knowing that such was strictly against the policies of the university, presented Hamilton's request before the college board in hopes of squeezing Hamilton in as a unique admission to the university. His efforts failed, and a disappointed Witherspoon gave Hamilton his apologies, because he believed that Hamilton would have been "an ornament" to the academy.

And so Hamilton returned to New York City, where he attended King's College (after the Revolutionary War it was renamed Columbia University). Here, he would make a host of friends who would prove invaluable to him, and him to them. Among those friends was Robert Troup, who was Hamilton's roommate at the university. Years later, he recounted about Hamilton's character at college, to Hamilton's son John, who said:
'At this time,' Troup relates, 'the "General" was attentive to public worship, and in the habit of praying on his knees night and morning. I lived in the same room with him for some time, and I have often been powerfully affected by the fervor and eloquence of his prayers. He had read many of the polemical writers on religious subjects, and he was a zealous believer in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. I confess that the arguments with which he was accustomed to justify his belief, have tended in no small degree to confirm my own faith in revealed religion.' (3)
This is not the description of a deist or a theistic rationalist. Anyone who lives a life of prayer -- not just religious prayer, but powerful prayer, as Hamilton's were described above as being -- and defends the "Christianity", its "fundamental doctrines," and has the ability to defend "revealed religion" so as to strengthen someone else's faith in it, has to be a fervent Christian.

John Church Hamilton writes that "
a hymn of some merit written at this time, entitled 'The soul entering into bliss,' is preserved." (4) The exact date of writing is uncertain; John C. Hamilton dates it at the time that Hamilton was attending school in America, but the editors of The Papers of Alexander Hamilton date it October 10, 1772 (read their footnote at the bottom of the page) when Hamilton was still in the West Indies. Whatever the case, it was written after the 1772 hurricane, and, combined with the testimony of Troup, this writing refutes the theory, advocated by David Loth (discussed in the previous post) that Hamilton was insincere in his sudden outburst of Christian fervor in his "hurricane letter." Troup's testimony also collaborates with the claim of the Boudinot family that Hamilton was a praying man.

Samuel Smucker, a biographer of Hamilton, commented on Hamilton's college years. His comments were obviously based upon the evidence presented above:
Now also he experienced the most fervent religious emotions, examined the evidences of Christianity, and gave utterance to devotional feeling in prayers and hymns whose eloquence was long traditional. There was nothing morbid or fanatical in this phase of his college career; but, as with all natures rich alike in sensibility and in intelligence, as life and consciousness awakened, and their problems demanded solution, he meekly and ardently, and from a spiritual necessity, sought communion with Eternal Truth; and amid the excitements, the ambition, the daring speculations, the brave and absorbing enterprise, the glory and the errors of after years, the convictions thus borne in upon his youthful heart were never effaced. (5)
The next post, "Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part Three," will explore two important changes that occurred in Hamilton's life during his college years, and shall explore the religious basis of his early political expression.

NOTES:
(1) Original Intent: The Courts, the Constitution, and Religion, by David Barton; Appendix C: "Boudinot, Elias"

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part One

The debate has long raged over the religion of the Founding Fathers. One side asserts that all of the Founders were deists, while the other side claims that the Founders were Christians instead. At the same time, some claim that the Founders were perhaps neither of the above, but were rather something in between. In perusing the Founders writings, any unbiased mind finds that it would be very erroneous indeed to paint all of the Founders with a broad brush in regard to their religion; not all of the Founders believed exactly the same thing.

In the case of Alexander Hamilton, he has been portrayed as being all of the above each at a different point in his life. In the next several articles, we shall examine in depth both the claims and the evidence for and against those claims. Not being a long-time historian (yet), I continue to study this subject. However, I have studied intensely for the past 3-and-a-half years, and what my research has yielded thus far is more than what any historian or professor (that I have ever read) has henceforth revealed.

In this post, I wish to examine the early period of Hamilton's life, focusing particularly upon his religion.

Our narrative begins, of course, when Hamilton was born on the island of Nevis, which John Adams called "a speck more obscure than Corsica." (1) Obscure it was and still is, for it is hardly a pin-prick on a map, and most people in America would not be able to locate it, for many have never heard of it. The exact year of Hamilton's birth is still disputed. According to a legal document that was drawn up by the court of St. Croix (where Hamilton spent his childhood) upon the death of Hamilton's mother in 1768, Hamilton's birth was in 1755. Hamilton, however, claimed that he was born on January 11, 1757. It is difficult to discern which one is more accurate, but since my motto is "When in doubt, listen to the Founders themselves," I will use 1757 as a base for all figures of Hamilton's age.

Little of Hamilton's childhood is known, since he hardly wrote anything that has survived to this present day, and since he hardly ever spoke of his childhood to anyone. Hamilton, did, however, make an exception in one incident. John Church Hamilton, one of Alexander's sons, would later recollect:

"As an instance of which [AH's early education], rarely as he alluded to his personal history, he mentioned with a smile, his having been taught to repeat the Decalogue {the Ten Commandments] in Hebrew, at the school of a Jewess, when so small that he was placed standing by her side upon a table." (2)
Of the earliest writings of Hamilton which still survive (besides his famous letter to Edward Stevens, a childhood friend), are chiefly those which shed great light upon his religion. Most noticeable of these is a key writing, one which not only is key to discovering Hamilton's religion, but which writing itself is what brought Hamilton out of the Caribbean to America.

But before I introduce the letter, I will introduce the background of it.

Earlier that same year, 1772, a Reverend Hugh Knox from America arrived in on the island of St. Croix, apparently for the purpose of missionary work. At that time, the Caribbean Islands were notorious for their decadence and vice. The practice of the slave trade was the most horrifying on the seaports of the Caribbean Islands, dueling was frequent and gruesome, and all kinds of fornication, though generally looked down upon, prospered in the crowded port-cities of the Caribbean. Knox, who had personal connections to the newspaper editor of St. Croix, and well as to the illustrious New York/West Indian merchant Nicholas Cruger.

Ron Chernow's book Alexander Hamilton has shed some fascinating light upon the background of Knox. Knowledge of this background is significant to the study of Hamilton's life in two ways: (1) it sheds light upon Knox's religious and political convictions, and thus sheds light upon the man and mind who would influence Hamilton's earliest reflections on those two fields, and (2) Knox's background helps the student of Hamilton's life to see the bigger picture beyond Hamilton, and into the Providential plan that manifested itself throughout Hamilton's dramatic life.

Hugh Knox was born in Northern Ireland, and immigrated to the state of Delaware, where he became a schoolmaster. Chernow relates that Knox was at this time anything but fit for a preacher; Knox mocked the local pastor of the town, the Reverend John Rodgers, a friend of the Reverend George Whitefield, in order to impress his own friends. But one Sunday morning, as Knox sat in his church pew mocking to his friends beside him, the words of Rodger's sermon on repentance from dead works to faith toward God began to deeply move Knox. The result was his total transformation from the life of a skeptic, to a passionate believer who committed himself to the ministry. He went on to attend Princeton College (more commonly known at that time as the College of New Jersey), where he was ordained a Presbyterian minister. In one of histories great ironies, Knox's college tutor (who was then the president of the university) was Aaron Burr, Sr., Jonathan Edwards' son-in-law and the father of the very man who would murder Knox's greatest protege, Alexander Hamilton.

As will be demonstrated later, Knox made some very important connections in the Mid-Atlantic states, and most all of these people would go on to be leaders in local and national spheres as American patriots. But Knox felt the urge to leave that circle and confront the horrors and frights of tropical seaport decadence. He believed that God was calling him to leave the American continent and sail to the West Indies, in order to reach those who had been the victims of the most hideous forms of sin in those parts of the world. Little did Knox know that his giant leap of faith would result in a giant leap forward in the history of humankind.

Hugh Knox was not a total stranger when he arrived in the West Indies. A good friend of his, a merchant by the name of Nicholas Cruger, ran a business in both New York City and St. Croix. Cruger was proud of his fifteen-year-old employee, Alexander Hamilton, who only a year previously had come to Cruger seeking employment as a penny-less, home-less, name-less orphan, who was now capable of managing the business in Cruger's absence. Cruger introduced Hamilton and Knox to one another, and it was then that a life-long friendship developed that would prove extremely beneficial to both parties. Knox quickly observed Hamilton's sharp mind, which was constantly preoccupied with the timeless questions of human history and human nature. Knox took Hamilton under his wing, and fed Hamilton's keen appetite for knowledge, and his tireless ambition to study the history of human government. This desire of Hamilton never wained, for near the very end of his life, Hamilton expressed a desire to embark, with the help of several friends, upon a boldly ambitious project to spend the retiring years of his life in a thorough study of governments throughout human history to a close friend Chancellor James Kent, to whom Hamilton wished to assign the project of researching "ecclesiastical history." (3)

John Church Hamilton, in writing of Hamilton's early years and his relationship with Dr. Knox, of whom Hamilton probably spoke of to his own children, wrote:
"There is reason to believe, from the low state of education in the West Indies, that the circle of his [Hamilton's] youthful studies was very limited, probably embracing little more than the English and French languages, which he wrote and spoke with fluency. With a strong propensity to literature, he became a lover of books, and the time that other youths devote to classical learning, was by him employed in miscellaneous reading, happily directed by the advice of Doctor Knox, a respectable Presbyterian divine, who was delighted with the precocity of his mind, took a deep interest in its development.
"The fervent piety of this gentleman gave a strong religious bias ["bias" in the era of J. C. Hamilton's writing was not always used in the negative sense; it simply meant "leaning" or "inclination" or "preferred viewpoint"] to his feelings, the topics of their conversation opening to him [Hamilton] a glimpse of those polemical controversies which have called forth the highest efforts of intellect." (4)
Before Hamilton's mind was ever opened to the theories and ideas of "secular" philosophers from the Enlightenment, Hamilton was influenced by a Bible-believing preacher of the Gospel.

Christianity's influence on Hamilton through Knox is made clear in the famed "hurricane letter" which Hamilton wrote during the horrific hurricane that swept the island of St. Croix in 1772. The flow of Hamilton's writing indicates that he probably wrote this letter just as the hurricane was ravaging the town around him. For a young man with little or no security in life from his fellow man, to see the horrors of death around him (and young Hamilton definitely feared for his life at this point) must have certainly been a very unnerving experience. At this dreadful time, Hamilton had no one in whom to physically confide his feelings, except his father, whom Hamilton had not seen in six years. It probably gave Hamilton some comfort to express his feelings on paper, and then eventually send the letter to his father, which he did.

In the beginning of the letter, Hamilton gave a very vivid account of the hurricane, almost as if he were a reporter for the local newspaper. After giving his frightening descriptions, he then wrote down his thoughts and reflections as they came to him.
"Where now, oh! vile worm, is all thy boasted fortitude and resolution? What is become of thine[(original reads "they")] arrogance and self sufficiency? Why dost thou tremble and stand aghast? How humble, how helpless, how contemptable [sic] you now appear. And for why? The jarring of elements – the discord of clouds? Oh! impotent and presumptuous fool! how durst thou offend that Omnipotence, whose nod alone were sufficient to quell the destruction that hovers thee, or crush thee into atoms? See thy wretched and helpless state, and learn to know thyself. Learn to know thy best support. Despise[(original reads "despite")] thyself, and adore thy God. How sweet, how unutterably sweet were now the voice of an approving conscience; Then couldst thou say, hence ye idle alarms, why do I shrink? What have I to fear? A pleasing calm suspense! A short repose from calamity to end in eternal bliss? Let the Earth rend. Let the planets forsake their course. Let the Sun be extinguished and the Heavens burst asunder. Yet what have I to dread? My staff can never be broken – in Omnip[o]tence I trusted.

"He who gave the winds to blow, and the lightnings to rage – even him I have always loved and served. His precepts I have observed. His commandments I have obeyed – and his perfections have I adored. He will snatch me from ruin. He will exalt me to the fellowship of Angels and Seraphs, and to the fullness of never ending joys."
This selection reads like one of the impassioned sermons of the Great Awakening, and indeed, Hamilton's words show his great familiarity with Christianity and with the life and mindset of the believer. However, Hamilton knew then, as death looked him squarely in the eye, that such was not his case, and that he had not only death but hell itself to fear. He continued:
"But alas! how different, how deplorable, how gloomy the prospect! Death comes rushing on in triumph veiled in a mantle of tenfold darkness. His unrelenting scythe, pointed, and ready for the stroke. On his right hand sits destruction, hurling the winds and belching forth flames: Calamity on his left threatening famine disease and distress of all kinds. And Oh! thou wretch, look still a little further; see the gulph [sic] of eternal misery open. There mayest thou shortly plunge – the just reward of thy vileness. Alas! wither canst thou fly? Where hide thyself? Thou canst not call upon thy God; thy life has been a continual warfare with him.
"Hark – ruin and confusion on every side. 'Tis thy turn next; but one short moment, even now, Oh Lord help. Jesus be merciful!"
"
Thus did I reflect, and thus at every gust of wind 'till it pleased the Almighty to allay it. Nor did my emotions proceed either from the suggestions of too much natural fear, or a conscience over-burthened [sic] with crimes of an uncommon cast. I thank God, this was not the case. The scenes of horror exhibited around us, naturally awakened such ideas in every thinking breast, and aggravated the deformity of every failing of our lives. It were a lamentable insensibility indeed, not to have had such feelings, and I think inconsistent with human nature.
"Our distressed, helpless condition taught us humility and contempt of ourselves. The horrors of the night, the prospect of an immediate, cruel death – or, as one may say, of being crushed by the Almighty in his anger—filled us with terror. And every thing that had tended o weaken our interest with him, upbraided us in the strongest colours, with our baseness and folly. That which, in a calm unruffled temper, we call a natural cause, seemed then like the correction of the Deity. Our imagination represented him as an incensed master, executing vengeance on the crimes of his servants. The father and benefactor were forgot, an in that view, a consciousness of our guilt filled us with despair."
At this time, when Hamilton thought he had his last moments on earth, he cried out to God for another chance to be reconciled to God. Up to this point, Hamilton had respected Knox, and saw religion as good and useful, and perhaps even true. His letter indicates that he always knew and believed in the existence of God, and that he believed that the Bible was true. If Hamilton had not thought so, then he would not have been convicted, as this letter indicates he was.

Just as Hamilton believed that he was about to die as a result of the "wrath of the Almighty," and fervently prayed for mercy, the storm began to calm, and Hamilton knew that his prayer had been instantly answered.
"But see, the Lord relents. He hears our prayer. The Lighting ceases. The winds are appeased. The warring elements are reconciled and all things promise peace The darkness is dispell'd and drooping nature revives at the approaching dawn. Look back Oh! my soul, look back and tremble. Rejoice at thy deliverance, and humble thyself in the presence of thy deliverer."
This letter is indisputably Hamilton's own account of his spiritual regeneration.

Hamilton's letter then takes a sharp turn in a different direction. Instead of focusing his attentions upon himself, he then turned his attention to the welfare of his fellow man. His moving descriptions and reflections are a far cry from the Hamilton that has been portrayed in our current textbooks as a hater of the poor and a protector of the rich.
"Yet hold, Oh vain mortal! Check thy ill timed joy. Art thou so selfish to exult because thy lot is happy in a season of universal woe? Hast thou no feelings for the miseries of thy fellow-creatures? And art thou capable of the soft pangs of sympathetic sorrow? Look around thee and shudder at the view. ... Oh sights of woe! Oh distress unspeakable! My heart bleeds, but I have no power to solace! O ye, who revel in affluence, see the afflictions of humanity and bestow your superfluity to ease them. Say not, we have suffered also, and thence withhold your compassion. What are you[r] sufferings compared to those? Ye still have more than enough left. Act wisely. Succour [sic] the miserable and lay up treasure in Heaven" [Matthew 6:19-20; 19:21].
One biographer of Hamilton, David Loth, wrote that Hamilton's expression of concern for his own soul was temporary if it was genuine at all. Loth made this statement, but offered no evidence for his evidently erroneous assertion. Although many more recent biographers of Hamilton do not see Hamilton as having been a truly regenerate Christian throughout his entire life, I am not aware of their hearty support for this theory. There is much evidence against Loth's assertion in Hamilton's subsequent writings that the theory becomes impossible to defend. The evidence for this will be covered further covered in "Alexander Hamilton's Religion: Part Two," in its place in the chronology which not long after followed the "hurricane letter."

Hamilton did not intend for this letter to be viewed by the public. It was completely private correspondence with his father. However, Hugh Knox discovered a copy of it, and upon reading it, was fascinated by Hamilton's powers of writing and Hamilton's power to think deeply. He showed the letter to several of his own friends, who were of some wealth and influence, and they afterwards asked Hamilton for permission to publish it in the newspaper, for the purpose of giving a description of the late hurricane, and of collecting funds for Hamilton to be sent to a university in America. At first, Hamilton was hesitant to consent to his private and rather personal letter being published for the whole island to read; but Knox and the other gentleman convinced him, and the letter appeared in The Danish Royal Gazette. Funds were collected from the public, from Knox's congregation, and from one of Hamilton's relatives, and he set sail for America in August of 1773. Knox, who was still managing his ministry and congregation in St. Croix, did not accompany Hamilton, who sailed alone. However, Knox gave letters of introduction to several of his own friends back in America: William Livingston, Elias Boudinot, the Reverend John Rodgers, and the Reverend John Mitchell Mason, Sr. These men would become Hamilton's early American mentors, as well as staunch patriots upon the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War.

"Alexander Hamilton's Religion, Part Two," will cover Hamilton's religion over the first several years that he spent in America.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Fragment on the French Revolution

Alexander Hamilton wrote the following observations on the French Revolution at the time that the Revolution was sparking much controversy in the United States. The exact date on which Hamilton penned the following is not known, largely because this piece was never published, until it was discovered while Henry Cabot Lodge (whose 12-volume collection of Hamilton's works the following writing is taken) was preparing to publish his own set of Hamilton's writings. Another point about this writing is worth noticing. The incompletion of it, and the fact that it was never published, suggests that this is another surviving example of Hamilton writing down his thoughts on paper, without, necessarily, the intent of publishing them in a pamphlet or newspaper. This proves that the outrage expressed by Hamilton in the following over the French rejection of Christianity and their violent attempts to remove it from the face of the earth was not artificial. This writing was not conjured up by Hamilton for the purpose of convincing the public that he was a Christian statesman or to manipulate the public by using religious language; he never published it. Furthermore, not only in his public writings did he piously allude to Christianity; he did it more frequently in his private correspondence.

Here is what Hamilton wrote:

"Facts, numerous and unequivocal, demonstrate that the present ÆRA is among the most extraordinary which have occurred in the history of human affairs. Opinions, for a long time, have been gradually gaining ground, which threaten the foundations of religion, morality, and society. An attack was first made upon the Christian revelation, for which natural religion was offered as the substitute. The Gospel was to be discarded as a gross imposture, but the being and attributes of GOD, the obligations of piety, even the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments, were to be retained and cherished.

"In proportion as success has appeared to attend the plan, a bolder project has been unfolded. The very existence of a Deity has been questioned and in some instances denied. The duty of piety has been ridiculed, the perishable nature of man asserted, and his hopes bounded to the short span of his earthly state. DEATH has been proclaimed an ETERNAL SLEEP; "the dogma of the immortality of the soul a cheat, invented to torment the living for the benefit of the dead." Irreligion, no longer confined to the closets of conceited sophists, nor to the haunts of wealthy riot, has more or less displayed its hideous front among all classes.

"Wise and good men took a lead in delineating the odious character of despotism, in
exhibiting the advantages of a moderate and well-balanced government, in inviting nations to contend for the enjoyment of national liberty. Fanatics in political science have since exaggerated and perverted their doctrines. Theories of government unsuited to the nature of man, miscalculating the force of his passions, disregarding the lessons of experimental wisdom, have been projected and recommended. These have everywhere attracted sectaries, and everywhere the fabric of government has been in different degrees undermined.

A league has at length been cemented between the apostles and disciples of irreligion and of anarchy. Religion and government have both been stigmatized as abuses; as unwarrantable restraints upon the freedom of man; as causes of the corruption of his nature, intrinsically good; as sources of an artificial and false morality which tyrannically robs him of the enjoyments for which his passions fit him, and as clogs upon his progress to the perfection for which he was destined.

As a corollary from these premises, it is a favorite tenet of the sect that religious opinion of any sort is unnecessary to society; that the maxims of a genuine morality and the authority of the magistracy and the laws are a sufficient and ought to be the only security for civil rights and private happiness.

As another corollary, it is occasionally maintained by the same sect that but a small portion of power is requisite to government; that even this portion is only temporarily necessary, in consequence of the bad habits which have been produced by the errors of ancient systems; and that as human nature shall refine and ameliorate by the operation of a more enlightened plan, government itself will become useless, and society will subsist and flourish free from shackles.

If all the votaries of this new philosophy do not go the whole length of its frantic creed, they all go far enough to endanger the full extent of the mischiefs which are inherent in so wild and fatal a scheme, every modification of which aims a mortal blow at the vitals of human happiness.

The practical development of this pernicious system has been seen in France. It has served as an engine to subvert all her ancient institutions, civil and religious, with all the checks that served to mitigate the rigor of authority; it has hurried her headlong through a rapid succession of dreadful revolutions, which have laid waste property, made havoc among the arts, overthrown cities, desolated provinces, unpeopled regions, crimsoned her soil with blood, and deluged it in crime, poverty, and wretchedness; and all this as yet for no better purpose than to erect on the ruins of former things a despotism unlimited and uncontrolled; leaving to a deluded, an abused, a plundered, a scourged, and an oppressed people, not even the shadow of liberty to console them for a long train of substantial misfortunes, of bitter suffering.

This horrid system seemed awhile to threaten the subversion of civilized society and the introduction of general disorder among mankind. And though the frightful evils which have been its first and only fruits have given a check to its progress, it is to be feared that the poison has spread too widely and penetrated too deeply to be as yet eradicated. Its activity has indeed been suspended, but the elements remain, concocting for new eruptions as occasion shall permit. It is greatly to be apprehended that mankind is not near the end of the misfortunes which it is calculated to produce, and that it still portends a long train of convulsion, revolution, carnage, devastation, and misery.

Symptoms of the too great prevalence of this system in the United States are alarmingly visible. It was by its influence that efforts were made to embark this country in a common cause with France in the early period of the present war; to induce our government to sanction and promote her odious principles and views with the blood and treasure of our citizens. It is by its influence that every succeeding revolution has been approved or excused; all the horrors that have been committed justified or extenuated; that even the last usurpation, which contradicts all the ostensible principles of the Revolution, has been regarded with complacency, and the despotic constitution engendered by it slyly held up as a model not unworthy of our imitation.

In the progress of this system, impiety and infidelity have advanced with gigantic
strides. Prodigious crimes heretofore unknown among us are seen. The chief and idol of
* * * "
[The rest is wanting.] by Alexander Hamilton

Footnotes [of H. C. Lodge]
1. This fragment, now first printed, from the Hamilton MSS., vol. xv., p. 117, has no
date, but is of interest as showing the effect produced upon his mind by the French
Revolution, and why that great convulsion so affected and colored the views of the
Federalists and of the more conservative classes of every community.

SOURCE: "Fragment on the French Revolution," The Works of Alexander Hamilton, edited by Henry Cabot Lodge, volume 8

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Alexander Hamilton and Christianity: In HIS Own Words

Alexander Hamilton is not typically thought of as being a Christian, much less as a Christian statesman. He has shared the unfortunate fate of many of the Founding Fathers, who have been denounced by contemporary historians as deists who desired an strong secularist government kept from religion by the principle of "a wall of separation between church and state." However, a look into HIS writings reveals the zeal with he had for Christianity, and how he viewed the relationship between Christianity and government.

Now see Hamilton's own words on:
Christianity and government:

There is so strong a similitude between your political principles and those maintained by Mr. [Thomas] Hobbes, that, in judging from them, a person might very easily mistake you for a disciple of his. His opinion was exactly coincident with yours, relative to man in a state of nature. He held, as you do, that he was then perfectly free from all restraint of law and government. Moral obligation, according to him, is derived from the introduction of civil society; and there is no virtue but what is purely artificial, the mere contrivance of politicians for the maintenance of social intercourse. But the reason he ran into this absurd and impious doctrine was, that he disbelieved the existence of an intelligent, superintending principle, who is the governor, and will be the final judge, of the universe.
As you sometimes swear by Him that made you, I conclude your sentiments do not correspond with his in that which is the basis of the doctrine you both agree in; and this makes it impossible to imagine whence this congruity between you arises. To grant that there is a Supreme Intelligence who rules the world and has established laws to regulate the actions of His creatures, and still to assert that man, in a state of nature, may be considered as perfectly free from all restraints of law and government, appears, to a common understanding, altogether irreconcilable.
Good and wise men, in all ages, have embraced a very dissimilar theory. They have supposed that the Deity, from the relations we stand in to Himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is indispensably obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever.
This is what is called the law of nature, "which, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in obligations to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times. No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original."—BLACKSTONE.
Upon this law depend the natural rights of mankind: the Supreme Being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which to discern and pursue such things as were consistent with his duty and interest; and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
Hence, in a state of nature, no man had any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command or exact obedience from him, except that which arose from the ties of consanguinity.
Hence, also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact between the rulers and the ruled, and must be liable to such limitations as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man, or set of men, have to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people in their own despite, or to grasp at a more extensive power than they are willing to intrust, is to violate that law of nature which gives every man a right to his personal liberty, and can therefore confer no obligation to obedience.
The principal aim of society is to protect individuals in the enjoyment of those absolute rights which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature, but which could not be preserved in peace without that mutual assistance and intercourse which is gained by the institution of friendly and social communities. Hence it follows, that the first and primary end of human laws is to maintain and regulate these absolute rights of individuals."—BLACKSTONE.
~ From "The Farmer Refuted” (1775)
In order to do this the more satisfactorily I beg leave to adopt the definition given of an established religion by a certain writer who has taken great pains to evince the contrary. "An established religion," says he, "is a religion which the civil authority engages not only to protect but to support. …the characteristic difference between a tolerated and established religion consists in this: With respect to the support of the former, the law is passive and improvident, leaving it to those who profess it to make as much, or as little, provision as they shall judge expedient; and to vary and alter that provision, as their circumstances may require. In this manner the Presbyterians and other sects are tolerated in England. They are allowed to exercise their religion without molestation, and to maintain their clergy as they think proper. These are wholly dependent upon their congregations, and can exact no more than they stipulate and are satisfied to contribute. But with respect to the support of the latter, the law is active and provident.
~ On the Quebec Bill, No. II (1775)
There is yet another class of opponents to the government and its administration, who are of too much consequence not to be mentioned: a sect of political doctors; a kind of POPES in government; standards of political orthodoxy, who brand with heresy all opinions but their own; men of sublimated imaginations and weak judgments; pretenders to profound knowledge, yet ignorant of the most useful of all sciences — the science of human nature; men who dignify themselves with the appellation of philosophers, yet are destitute of the first elements of true philosophy; lovers of paradoxes; men who maintain expressly that religion is not necessary to society, and very nearly that government itself is a nuisance; that priests and clergymen of all descriptions are worse than useless. Such men, the ridicule of any cause that they espouse, and the best witnesses to the goodness of that which they oppose, have no small share in the clamors which are raised, and in the dissatisfactions which are excited.
~ Vindication Of the Funding System #1 (1791?)
Let me add as a truth—which, perhaps, has no exception, however uncongenial with the fashionable patriotic creed—that, in the wise order of Providence, nations, in a temporal sense, may safely trust the maxim, that the observance of justice carries with it its own and a full reward.
~ Camillus # 22 (1795)
Take my ideas and weigh them of a proper course of conduct for our Administration in the present juncture. You have called Congress. 'T is well.
When the Senate meets (which I should be glad to see anticipated), send a Commission Extraordinary to France. Let it consist of Jefferson or Madison, Pinckney, and a third very safe man, say, Cabot (or Jay).
Proclaim a religious solemnity to take place at the meeting of Congress.
~ To Secretary of War James McHenry (1797)

T'is now ascertained that Mr. Pinckney has been refused, and with circumstances of indignity. What is to be done? The share I have had in the public administration, added to my interest as a citizen, makes me extremely anxious that at this delicate crisis a course of conduct exactly proper may be adopted. I offer to your consideration, without what appears to me ceremony, such a course.
First.—I would appoint a day of humiliation and prayer. In such a crisis this appears to me proper in itself, and it will be politically useful to impress our nation that there is a serious state of things—to strengthen religious ideas in a contest, which in its progress may require that our people may consider themselves as the defenders of their country against atheism, conquest, and anarchy. It is far from evident to me that the progress of the war may not call on us to defend our firesides and our altars. And any plan which does not look forward to this as possible, will, in my opinion, be a superficial one. … I am also desirous of impressing the public mind strongly by a religious solemnity, to take place about the meeting of Congress. I also think the step intrinsically proper.
~ To Secretary of State Timothy Pickering (1797)

I would, at the same time, have the President to recommend a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer. The occasion renders it proper, and religious ideas will be useful. I have this last measure at heart.
~ To Timothy Pickering (1798)

But that the truth cannot be material in any respect, is contrary to the nature of things. No tribunal, no codes, no systems can repeal or impair this law of God, for by his eternal laws it is inherent in the nature of things.
~ Speech in Defense of Harry Croswell
Christianity and the Statesman's Duty:
Another and a very serious evil, chargeable on the system opposite to that proposed, is that it leads to frequent and familiar violations of oaths, which by loosening one of the strongest bands of society, and weakening one of the principal securities to life and property, offends, not less against the maxims of good government and sound policy, than against those of religion and morality.
~ Report on Public Credit
Reason, religion, philosophy, policy, disavow the spurious and odious doctrine, that we ought to cherish and cultivate enmity with any nation whatever. – Horatius (1795)
It is the fervent wish of patriotism that our councils and nation may be united and resolute. The dearest interests call for it. A great public danger commands it. Every good man will rejoice to embrace the adversary of his former opinions, if he will now by candor and energy evince his attachment to his country. Whoever does not do this, consigns himself to irrevocable dishonor. But it is not the triumph over a political rival which the true lover of his country desires—it is the safety and the welfare of that country; and he will gladly share with his bitterest opponent the glory of defending and preserving her. Americans, rouse—be unanimous, be virtuous, be firm, exert your courage, trust in Heaven, and nobly defy the enemies both of God and man! – The Stand # VI

How laudable was the example of Elizabeth, who, when she was transferred from the prison to the throne, fell upon her knees, and thanking Heaven for the deliverance it had granted her from her bloody persecutors, dismissed her resentment. "This act of pious gratitude," says her historian, "seems to have been the last circumstance in which she remembered any past injuries and hardships. With a prudence and magnanimity truly laudable, she buried all offenses in oblivion, and received with affability even those who acted with the greatest virulence against her." She did more, she retained many of the opposite party in her councils. – Phocion # I

Cherish good faith and justice towards, and peace and harmony with all nations. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct, and it cannot be but that true policy equally demands it. It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people invariably governed by those exalted views. Who can doubt that in a long course of time and events the fruits of such a conduct would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to the plan? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices? – Hamilton's Draft of Washington's Farewell Address

In all those dispositions which promote political happiness, religion and morality are essential props. In vain does he claim the praise of patriotism, who labors to subvert or undermine these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest foundations of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public happiness. Let it simply be asked, where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of moral and religious obligation deserts the oaths which are administered in courts of justice? Nor ought we to flatter ourselves that morality can be separated from religion. Concede as much as may be asked to the effect of refined education in minds of peculiar structure, can we believe, can we in prudence suppose, that national morality can be maintained in exclusion of religious principles? Does it not require the aid of a generally received and divinely authoritative religion? 'Tis essentially true that virtue or morality is a main and necessary spring of popular or republican governments. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to all free governments. Who that is a prudent and sincere friend to them, can look with indifference on the ravages which are making in the foundation of the fabric—religion? The uncommon means which of late have been directed to this fatal end, seem to make it in a particular manner the duty of a retiring chief of a nation to warn his country against tasting of the poisonous draught.
Cultivate, also, industry and frugality. They are auxiliaries of good morals, and great sources of private and national prosperity.
~ Farewell Address


Hamilton's Christian Beliefs and Slavery:
PRINCIPLES [of the New York Manumission Society]:
The Benevolent Creator and Father of Men having given to them all, an equal Right to Life, Liberty and Property; no Sovereign Power, on Earth, can justly deprive them of either; but in Conformity to impartial Government and Laws to which they have expressly or tacitly [by implication] consented --
OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY:
It is our duty, therefore, as Free Citizens and Christians, not only to regard, with Compassion, the injustice done to those, among us, who are held as Slaves, but to endeavor, by lawful Ways and Means, to enable them to Share, equally with us, in that civil and religious Liberty, with which an indulgent Providence has blessed these States; and to which these, our Brethren, are by Nature, as much entitled as ourselves ...
~ Minutes of the New York Manumission Society (of which Hamilton was a chief founder) of 1784
Christianity and the French Revolution:
How clearly is it proved by this that the praise of a civilized world is justly due to Christianity;—war, by the influence of the humane principles of that religion, has been stripped of half its horrors. The French renounce Christianity, and they relapse into barbarism;—war resumes the same hideous and savage form which it wore in the ages of Gothic and Roman violence.
~ “The War in Europe” (1799)

I agree with you in the reflections you make on the tendency of public demonstrations of attachment to the cause of France. 'Tis certainly not wise to expose ourselves to the jealousy and resentment of the rest of the world, by a fruitless display of zeal for that cause. It may do us much harm, and it can do France no good (unless indeed we are to embark in the war with her, which nobody is so hardy as to avow, though some secretly machinate it). It cannot be without danger and inconvenience to our interests to impress on the nations of Europe an idea that we are actuated by the same spirit which has for some time past fatally misguided the measures of those who conduct the affairs of France, and sullied a cause once glorious, and that might have been triumphant. The cause of France is compared with that of America during its late revolution. Would to Heaven that the comparison were just. Would to Heaven we could discern in the mirror of French affairs the same humanity, the same decorum, the same gravity, the same order, the same dignity, the same solemnity, which distinguished the cause of the American Revolution. Clouds and darkness would not then rest upon the issue as they now do. I own I do not like the comparison. When I contemplate the horrid and systematic massacres of the 2d and 3d of September; when I observe that a Marat and a Robespierre, the notorious prompters of those bloody scenes, sit triumphantly in the convention and take a conspicuous part in its measures—that an attempt to bring the assassins to justice has been obliged to be abandoned; when I see an unfortunate prince, whose reign was a continued demonstration of the goodness and benevolence of his heart, of his attachment to the people of whom he was the monarch, who, though educated in the lap of despotism, had given repeated proofs that he was not the enemy of liberty, brought precipitately and ignominiously to the block without any substantial proof of guilt, as yet disclosed—without even an authentic exhibition of motives, in decent regard to the opinions of mankind; when I find the doctrines of atheism openly advanced in the convention, and heard with loud applause; when I see the sword of fanaticism extended to force a political creed upon citizens who were invited to submit to the arms of France as the harbingers of liberty; when I behold the hand of rapacity outstretched to prostrate and ravish the monuments of religious worship, erected by those citizens and their ancestors; when I perceive passion, tumult, and violence usurping those seats, where reason and cool deliberation ought to preside, I acknowledge that I am glad to believe there is no real resemblance between what was the cause of America and what is the cause of France—that the difference is no less great than that between liberty and licentiousness. I regret whatever has a tendency to compound them, and I feel anxious, as an American, that the ebullitions of inconsiderate men among us may not tend to involve our reputation in the issue.
~ To an Unknown Recipient (1793)

In reviewing the disgusting spectacle of the French Revolution, it is difficult to avert the eye entirely from those features of it which betray a plan to disorganize the human mind itself, as well as to undermine the venerable pillars that support the edifice of civilized society. The attempt by the rulers of a nation to destroy all religious opinion, and to pervert a whole nation to atheism, is a phenomenon of profligacy reserved to consummate the infamy of the unprincipled reformers of France. The proofs of this terrible design are numerous and convincing.
The animosity to the Christian system is demonstrated by the single fact of the ridiculous and impolitic establishment of the decades, with the evident object of supplanting the Christian Sabbath. The inscriptions by public authority on the tombs of the deceased, affirming death to be an eternal sleep, witness the desire to discredit the belief of the immortality of the soul. The open profession of atheism in the convention, received with acclamations; the honorable mention on its journals of a book professing to prove the nothingness of all religion; the institution of a festival to offer public worship to a courtesan decorated with the pompous title of "Goddess of Reason"; the congratulatory reception of impious children appearing in the hall of the convention to lisp blasphemy against the King of kings, are among the dreadful proofs of a conspiracy to establish atheism on the ruins of Christianity,—to deprive mankind of its best consolations and most animating hopes, and to make a gloomy desert of the universe.
Latterly, the indications of this plan are not so frequent as they were, but from time to time something still escapes which discovers that it is not renounced. The late address of Buonaparte [sic] to the Directory is an example. That unequalled conqueror, from whom it is painful to detract, in whom one would wish to find virtues worthy of his shining talents, profanely unites religion (not superstition) with royalty and the feudal system as the scourges of Europe for centuries past. The decades likewise remain the catapulta which are to batter down Christianity.
Equal pains have been taken to deprave the morals as to extinguish the religion of the country, if indeed morality in a community can be separated from religion. It is among the singular and fantastic vagaries of the French Revolution, that while the Duke of Brunswick was marching to Paris a new law of divorce was passed, which makes it as easy for a husband to get rid of his wife, and a wife of her husband, as to discard a worn-out habit. To complete the dissolution of those ties, which are the chief links of domestic and ultimately of social attachment, the journals of the convention record with guilty applause the accusations preferred by children against their parents.
It is not necessary to heighten the picture by sketching the horrid group of proscriptions and murders which have made France a den of pillage and slaughter; blackening with eternal opprobrium the very name of man.
The pious and moral weep over these scenes as a sepulchre [sic] destined to entomb all they revere and esteem. The politician who loves liberty, sees them with regret as a gulf that may swallow up the liberty to which he is devoted. He knows that morality overthrown (and morality must fall with religion), the terrors of despotism can alone curb the impetuous passions of man, and confine him within the bounds of social duty.
~ The Stand # III (1798; emphasis original)

What is there in that terrific picture [of the French Revolution] which you are to admire or imitate? Is it the subversion of the throne of the Bourbons, to make way for the throne of the Bonapartes [sic]? Is it the undistinguishing massacre in prisons and dungeons, of men, women, and children? Is it the sanguinary justice of revolutionary tribunals, or the awful terrors of a guillotine? Is it the rapid succession of revolution upon revolution, erecting the transient power of one set of men upon the tombs of another? Is it the assassinations which have been perpetrated, or the new ones which are projected? Is it the open profession of impiety in the public assemblies, or the ridiculous worship of a Goddess of Reason, or the still continued substitution of decades to the Christian Sabbath? Is it the destruction of commerce, the ruin of manufactures, the oppression of agriculture? Or, is it the pomp of war, the dazzling glare of splendid victories, the bloodstained fields of Europe, the smoking cinders of desolated cities, the afflicting spectacle of millions precipitated from plenty and comfort to beggary and misery? If it be none of these things, what is it?
~ Address to the Electors of the State of New York (1801)

Facts, numerous and unequivocal, demonstrate that the present ÆRA is among the most extraordinary which have occurred in the history of human affairs. Opinions, for a long time, have been gradually gaining ground, which threaten the foundations of religion, morality, and society. An attack was first made upon the Christian revelation, for which natural religion was offered as the substitute. The Gospel was to be discarded as a gross imposture, but the being and attributes of GOD, the obligations of piety, even the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments, were to be retained and cherished.
In proportion as success has appeared to attend the plan, a bolder project has been unfolded. The very existence of a Deity has been questioned and in some instances denied. The duty of piety has been ridiculed, the perishable nature of man asserted, and his hopes bounded to the short span of his earthly state. DEATH has been proclaimed an ETERNAL SLEEP; "the dogma of the immortality of the soul a cheat, invented to torment the living for the benefit of the dead." Irreligion, no longer confined to the closets of conceited sophists, nor to the haunts of wealthy riot, has more or less displayed its hideous front among all classes.
Wise and good men took a lead in delineating the odious character of despotism, in exhibiting the advantages of a moderate and well-balanced government, in inviting nations to contend for the enjoyment of national liberty. Fanatics in political science have since exaggerated and perverted their doctrines. Theories of government unsuited to the nature of man, miscalculating the force of his passions, disregarding the lessons of experimental wisdom, have been projected and recommended. These have everywhere attracted sectaries, and everywhere the fabric of government has been in different degrees undermined.
A league has at length been cemented between the apostles and disciples of irreligion and of anarchy. Religion and government have both been stigmatized as abuses; as unwarrantable restraints upon the freedom of man; as causes of the corruption of his nature, intrinsically good; as sources of an artificial and false morality which tyrannically robs him of the enjoyments for which his passions fit him, and as clogs upon his progress to the perfection for which he was destined.
As a corollary from these premises, it is a favorite tenet of the sect that religious opinion of any sort is unnecessary to society; that the maxims of a genuine morality and the authority of the magistracy and the laws are a sufficient and ought to be the only security for civil rights and private happiness.
Fragment on French Revolution (unknown date of authorship)

If, happily, the possession of the power of our once-detested government shall be a talisman to work the conversion of all its enemies, we shall be ready to rejoice that good has come out of evil. But we dare not too far indulge this pleasing hope. We know that the adverse party has its Dantons, and its Robespierres, as well as its Brissots and its Rolands; and we look forward to the time when the sects of the former will endeavor to confound the latter and their adherents, together with the Federalists, in promiscuous ruin.
In regard to these sects, which compose the pith and essence of the anti-federal party, we believe it to be true that the contest between us is indeed a war of principles—a war between tyranny and liberty, but not between monarchy and republicanism. It is a contest between the tyranny of Jacobinism, which confounds and levels every thing, and the mild reign of rational liberty, which rests on the basis of an efficient and well-balanced government, and through the medium of stable laws shelters and protects the life, the reputation, the civil and religious rights of every member of the community.
~ Address to the Electors of the State of New York (1801)
God's Providence in History:
With these impressions, with a firm reliance on the blessing of Providence upon a government framed under circumstances which afford a new and instructive example of wisdom and moderation to mankind; with an entire conviction that it will be more prudent to rely, for whatever amendments may be desirable in the said Constitution, on the mode therein prescribed, than either to embarrass the Union or hazard dissensions in any part of the community by pursuing a different course, and with a full confidence that the amendments which shall have been proposed will receive an early and mature consideration, and that such of them as may in any degree tend to the real security and permanent advantage of the people, will be adopted: We, the said delegates, in the name and behalf of the PEOPLE of this State, Do, by these presents, assent to and RATIFY the Constitution aforesaid, hereby announcing to all those whom it may concern, that the said Constitution is binding upon the said people according to an authentic copy hereunto annexed.
~ Draft of Proposed Ratification of the US Constitution (1788)

The two armies, now equally willing to try the fortune of a battle, met and engaged near Guilford Court-House. All that could be expected from able disposition towards insuring success, promised a favorable issue to the American arms. But superior discipline carried it against superior numbers and superior skill. Victory decreed the glory of the combat to the Britons; but Heaven, confirming the hopes of Greene, decreed the advantage of it to the Americans. Greene retired; Cornwallis kept the field. But Greene retired only three miles; and Cornwallis, in three days, abandoning the place where the laurels he had gained were a slender compensation for the loss he had suffered, withdrew to Wilmington on the sea-coast.
~ Eulogium for Major-General Nathanial Greene (1789)

Fellow-citizens, we beseech you to consult your experience and not listen to tales of evil, which exist only in the language, not even in the imaginations, of those who deal them out. This experience will tell you, that our opposers have been uniformly mistaken in their views of our Constitution, of its administration, in all the judgments which they have pronounced of our public affairs; and, consequently, that they are unfaithful or incapable advisers. It will teach you that you have eminently prospered under the system of public measures pursued and supported by the Federalists. In vain are you told that you owe your prosperity to your own industry, and to the blessings of Providence. To the latter, doubtless, you are primarily indebted. You owe to it, among other benefits, the Constitution you enjoy, and the wise administration of it by virtuous men as its instruments. You are likewise indebted to your own industry. But has not your industry found aliment and incitement in the salutary operation of your government—in the preservation of order at home—in the cultivation of peace abroad—in the invigoration of confidence in pecuniary dealings—in the increased energies of credit and commerce—in the extension of enterprise, ever incident to a good government well administered? Remember what your situation was immediately before the establishment of the present Constitution? Were you then deficient in industry more than now? If not, why were you not equally prosperous? Plainly, because your industry had not at that time the vivifying influences of an efficient and well-conducted government.
~ Address to the Electors of the State of New York (1801)

And whereas, notwithstanding we have, by the blessing of Providence, so far happily escaped the complicated dangers of such a situation [total bankruptcy and complete national dissolution], and now see the object of our wishes secured by an honorable peace, it would be unwise to hazard a repetition of the same dangers and embarrassments in any future war in which these States may be engaged, or to continue this extensive empire under a government unequal to its protection and prosperity.
~ Resolutions for a General Convention (1783)

"The state and progress of the Jews," Hamilton remarked elsewhere, "from their earliest history to the present time, has been so entirely out of the ordinary course of human affairs, is it not then a fair conclusion, that the cause is an EXTRAORDINARY ONE -- in other words, that it is the effect of some great providential plan? The man who will draw this conclusion, will look for the solution in the Bible. He who will not draw it ought to give us another fair solution."
~ History of the Republic of the United States, as Traced in the Writings of Alexander Hamilton and His Contemporaries, John Church Hamilton, volume 7, page 711
Hamilton's Christian Faith:
I have examined carefully the evidence of the Christian religion;and, if I was sitting as juror upon its authenticity, I should unhestitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I have studied it, and I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man.
~ History of the Republic of the United States, as Traced in the Writings of Alexander Hamilton and His Contemporaries, by J. C. Hamilton, volume 7, page 790

The triumphs of vice are no new thing under the sun, and I fear, till the millennium comes, in spite of all our boasted light and purification, hypocrisy and treachery will continue to be the most successful commodities in the political market.
~ To Richard Harrison (1793)

He [Gouverneur Morris] asks, "Why distrust the evidence of the Jews? Discredit them, and you destroy the Christian religion." Has he forgotten what this race once were, when, under the immediate government of God himself, they were selected as the witnesses of his miracles, and charged with the spirit of prophecy? or how they changed when, the remnants of the scattered tribes, they were the degraded, persecuted, reviled subjects of Rome, in all her resistless power, and pride, and pagan pomp, an isolated, tributary, and friendless people? Has the gentleman recurred to the past with his wonted accuracy? Is it so, that if we then degraded the Jews, we destroy the evidence of Christianity? Were not the witnesses of that pure and holy, happy and Heaven-approved faith, converts to that faith?
~ Speech before the New York Supreme Court in the case Le Guen v. Gouverneur and Kemble (1800)
SOURCE: History of the Republic of the United States, as Traced in the Writings of Alexander Hamilton and His Contemporaries, John Church Hamilton, volume 7, page 711

Arraign not the dispensations of Providence, they must be founded in wisdom and goodness; and when they do not suit us, it must be because there is some fault in ourselves which deserves chastisement; or because there is a kind intent, to correct in us some vice or failing, of which, perhaps, we may not be conscious; or because the general plan requires that we should suffer partial ill. In this situation it is our duty to cultivate resignation, and even humility, bearing in mind, in the language of the poet, 'that it was pride which lost the blest abodes.' To an unknown recipient, April 12, 1804

I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ.
~ Confession of faith before Reverend John M. Mason, who recorded it in a letter (July 18, 1804) to the New York Evening Post
SOURCE: The Complete Works of John M. Mason, D. D., volume 4, p. 525

Alexander Hamilton said, upon being asked by the Reverend Benjamin Moore "Do you sincerely repent of your sins past? Have you a lively faith in God's mercy through Christ, with a thankful remembrance of the death of Christ? And are you disposed to live in love and charity with all men," answered: "With the utmost sincerity of heart I can answer those questions in the affirmative – I have no ill will against Col. Burr. I met him with a fixed resolution to do him no harm – I forgive all that happened."
~ SOURCE: Letter by Reverend Benjamin Moore to William Coleman of the New York Evening Post (July 12, 1804)

Thanks for Reading!