Reading the Bible with the Founding

Fathers 1st Edition Dreisbach

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/reading-the-bible-with-the-founding-fathers-1st-edition
-dreisbach/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Presidents vs. the Press: The Endless Battle

between the White House and the Media--from the
Founding Fathers to Fake News Holzer

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-presidents-vs-the-press-the-
endless-battle-between-the-white-house-and-the-media-from-the-
founding-fathers-to-fake-news-holzer/

Bible nation the United States of Hobby Lobby Museum Of

The Bible.

https://textbookfull.com/product/bible-nation-the-united-states-
of-hobby-lobby-museum-of-the-bible/

The Catholic Study Bible New American Bible Revised

Edition Donald Senior

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-catholic-study-bible-new-
american-bible-revised-edition-donald-senior/

Fathers of the Lega Routledge Studies in the Modern

History of Italy 1st Edition Newth

https://textbookfull.com/product/fathers-of-the-lega-routledge-
studies-in-the-modern-history-of-italy-1st-edition-newth/
Reading theory now an ABC of good reading with J Hillis
Miller 1st Edition Dunne

https://textbookfull.com/product/reading-theory-now-an-abc-of-
good-reading-with-j-hillis-miller-1st-edition-dunne/

The Bible in Motion A Handbook of the Bible and Its

Reception in Film 1st Edition Rhonda Burnette-Bletsch

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-bible-in-motion-a-handbook-
of-the-bible-and-its-reception-in-film-1st-edition-rhonda-
burnette-bletsch/

The Basic Bible Atlas A Fascinating Guide to the Land

of the Bible 3rd Edition John A. Beck

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-basic-bible-atlas-a-
fascinating-guide-to-the-land-of-the-bible-3rd-edition-john-a-
beck/

Maternal grief in the Hebrew bible 1st Edition Kozlova

https://textbookfull.com/product/maternal-grief-in-the-hebrew-
bible-1st-edition-kozlova/

The Founding Myth Why Christian Nationalism Is Un

American Andrew L Seidel

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-founding-myth-why-christian-
nationalism-is-un-american-andrew-l-seidel/
i

Reading the Bible with the

Founding Fathers
ii
╇ iii

Reading the Bible with the

Founding Fathers
•••
Daniel L. Dreisbach

1
iv

1
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2017

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

CIP data is on file at the Library of Congress

ISBN 978–​0 –​19–​998793–​1

1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2
Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America
v

To the memory of John A. Dreisbach, my father,

who loved reading the Bible, and

For his grandchildren:

Hans, Sarah, Teresa, Lydia, Karen, Jordan, Maria, Richard,
Peter, Paul, Rose, Mollie, and Moriah
vi

In the beginning was the Word …

—​John 1:1
╇ vii

CON T EN T S

1. Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers:

An Introductionâ•…â•… 1

PART I: The Bible and Culture

2. The English Bible and American Public Cultureâ•…â•… 23
3. The Bible in the Lives of the Founding Fathersâ•…â•… 49
4. The Bible in the Political Discourse of the
American Foundingâ•…â•… 71

PART II: The Bible and Discourse

5. What Does God Require of Us? Micah 6:8 in the Literature of the
American Foundingâ•…â•… 97
The Bible in American History: Creating a Great Seal for the
New Nationâ•…â•… 105
6. A Defense of Liberty against Tyrants: The Bible, the Right of Resistance,
and the American Revolutionâ•…â•… 109
The Bible in American History: Benjamin Franklin’s Call for Prayer in the
Constitutional Conventionâ•…â•… 136
7. The Exalted Nation: Proverbs 14:34 and the Characteristics of a
Righteous Peopleâ•…â•… 145
The Bible in American History: The First Prayer in Congressâ•…â•… 159
8. When the Righteous Rule: Proverbs 29:2 and the Character of a
Godly Magistrateâ•…â•… 166
The Bible in American History: Proclaim Liberty throughout
All the Landâ•…â•… 186
9. Stand Fast in Liberty: The Use (and Misuse) of Biblical Symbols and
Rhetoric of “Liberty” in the American Foundingâ•…â•… 189

(â•›viiâ•›)
viii

( viii )  Contents

The Bible in American History: George Washington Takes the Presidential

Oath of Office   205
10. Under Our Own Vine and Fig Tree: Creating an American Metaphor for
Liberty in the New Nation   211

Afterword  229
Acknowledgments  235
Notes  239
Index  321
ix

Reading the Bible with the

Founding Fathers
x
1

C H A P T ER 1
w
Reading the Bible with
the Founding Fathers
An Introduction

Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, and
he will shew thee; thy elders, and they will tell thee.
Deuteronomy 32:7

The foundation of our Empire was not laid in the gloomy age of Ignorance and
Superstition, but at an Epocha when … the pure and benign light of Revelation, have
had a meliorating influence on mankind and increased the blessings of Society.
George Washington, Circular to the States, June 8, 1783

T he American founders read the Bible. Their many quotations from

and allusions to both familiar and obscure scriptural passages con-
firm that they knew the Bible from cover to cover. Biblical language and
themes liberally seasoned their rhetoric. The phrases and cadences of the
King James Bible, especially, informed their written and spoken words.
Its ideas shaped their habits of mind. Many founders were students of the
Bible, and a few even wrote Bible commentaries and learned discourses
on theology and Christian doctrine and practice.1 The Bible left its mark
on the political culture of the founding era. The political discourse of the
age—​both private and public—​was replete with quotations from, allu-
sions to, and the rhythms of the King James Bible. There were founders

(1)
2

( 2 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

who regarded the Bible as indispensable to the American experiment in

republican self-​government and liberty under law.
Following an extensive survey of American political literature from
1760 to 1805, political scientist Donald S. Lutz reported that the Bible
was referenced more frequently than any European writer or even any
European school of thought, such as the Enlightenment or Whig intel-
lectual traditions. Indeed, the Bible accounted for about one-​third of all
citations in his sample.2 According to Lutz, “Deuteronomy is the most
frequently cited book, followed by Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws.”3
Biblical sources figured prominently in the study even though Lutz
excluded from his sample most political pamphlets and tracts, includ-
ing many political sermons, that had no citations to secular sources. This
significantly undercounted biblical sources because “at least 80 percent
of the political pamphlets during the 1770s and 1780s were written by
ministers,” and, yet, Lutz included in his sample “only about one-​tenth of
the reprinted sermons” (by contrast, the sample included “about one-​third
of all significant secular publications”). If Lutz had not excluded so many
political sermons and had surveyed religious publications in equivalent
proportion to secular publications, then the percentage of biblical cita-
tions would have been markedly greater. Again, even though Lutz signifi-
cantly under-​surveyed religious publications, the Bible still “accounted for
roughly one-​third of the citations in the sample. … Saint Paul is cited
about as frequently as Montesquieu and [William] Blackstone, the two
most-​cited secular authors, and Deuteronomy is cited almost twice as
often as all of [John] Locke’s writings put together.” “About three-​fourths
of all references to the Bible” in Lutz’s survey came from printed political
sermons; however, had he surveyed only secular works, the Bible would
still have accounted for nine percent of all citations—​“about equal to the
percentage for classical writers.”4 The point is that, despite rational and
secular influences of the age, the Bible continued to figure prominently in
the political discourse of the American founding.5 The founders’ frequent
use of the Bible is no surprise because they lived in an overwhelmingly
Protestant culture and in a biblically literate society.6 Protestant theology
has historically placed great emphasis on the Bible as the revealed word of
God and authority in all matters of faith and practice. One would expect
politicians and polemicists in such a culture to invoke familiar authori-
tative and venerated texts in their public pronouncements. The extant
record suggests that the founders and their contemporaries knew the
Bible better than any other literary work.
Many scholars have described the founding era, sandwiched between
the momentous religious revivals known as the first and second Great
3

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 3 )

Awakenings, as an age of Enlightenment and rationalism, in which

“the founding generation,” according to political theorist Wilson Carey
McWilliams, “rejected or deemphasized the Bible and biblical rhetoric.” 7
Writing more specifically about the arguments and rhetoric Americans
used as they contemplated resistance to British colonial rule and, eventu-
ally, independence, historian John Fea asserted that, “when one exam-
ines the specific arguments made by colonial political leaders in the years
leading up to 1776, one is hard-​pressed to find any Christian or bibli-
cal language apart from a few passing references to God.” Rather, the
“most important documents” produced by Americans “focused more on
Enlightenment political theory about the constitutional and natural rights
of British subjects than on any Christian or biblical reason why resistance
to the Crown was necessary.”8 Historian Mark A. Noll observed “that the
nation’s founders were conversant with scripture,” which “should not be
surprising … for they lived at a time when to be an educated member of
the Atlantic community was to know the Bible.” He further contended,
however, that explicit references to Scripture or Christian themes “are
conspicuously absent in the political discussions of the nation’s early his-
tory. … In short,” Noll concluded, “the political figures who read the Bible
in private rarely, if ever, betrayed that acquaintance in public. … [T]‌he
Bible’s direct political influence was extremely limited, the occasions when
leaders turned to it for assistance in political reasoning extremely rare.”9
Did the founders avoid or repudiate biblical influences on their poli-
tics? Reports of the Bible’s demise in the founding era are controverted
by Professor Lutz’s study and ample illustrations in this volume. The
Bible continued to permeate both the private expressions and public pro-
nouncements of those who shaped the new nation and its civic institu-
tions.10 Compared to an earlier age dominated by Puritan divines, biblical
language in the founding generation’s political rhetoric may seem muted.
Nonetheless, late eighteenth-​century Americans remained biblically liter-
ate and, contrary to the claims of modern scholarship, the Bible contin-
ued to inform public culture. Biblical language pervaded the discourse of
not only pious founders, such as Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, John Jay,
Roger Sherman, and John Witherspoon, but also those figures most influ-
enced by the Enlightenment, including Benjamin Franklin and Thomas
Paine. No less a founding figure than George Washington opined in 1783
that Americans were fortunate that “[t]‌he foundation of our Empire
was not laid in the gloomy age of Ignorance and Superstition, but at an
Epocha when[,] … above all, the pure and benign light of Revelation, have
had a meliorating influence on mankind and increased the blessings of
Society.”11 There is little doubt that by “Revelation” he meant the Bible.
4

( 4 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

Why, then, has modern scholarship missed or dismissed the Bible’s

place in the political discourse of the founders? Often the most important
things in life, like the air we breathe, do not receive the attention they
merit because they are so pervasive and so much a part of our very exis-
tence that they are taken for granted. This may account for the historians’
inattention to the Bible’s place in the American founding. Biblical illiter-
acy, especially a lack of familiarity with the distinct phrases and cadences
of the King James Bible, may explain the failure of some scholars to rec-
ognize the biblical language in this literature. The founders often quoted
the Bible without the use of quotation marks or citations, which were not
necessary for a biblically literate society but the absence of which fail to
alert a biblically illiterate modern audience to the Bible’s invocation. Also,
scholars trained in the modern academy, with its emphasis on the strictly
rational and the secular, may discount biblical themes because they find
them less noteworthy or sophisticated than the intellectual contribu-
tions of the Enlightenment.12 There may even be a discomfort with or,
perhaps, hostility toward explicitly religious material and themes. Some
fear that mere acknowledgment of Christianity’s and the Bible’s influence
on the American founding will diminish the Enlightenment’s influence
and buttress the alleged theocratic impulses of some twenty-​first-​century
citizens. Moreover, some scholars find a focus on the God of the Bible and
biblical religion divisive or even offensive to twenty-​first-​century, secular
sensibilities. In an admonition seldom mentioned in the scholarly litera-
ture, for example, George Washington warned in his Farewell Address of
September 1796 that one who labors to subvert a public role for religion
and morality cannot call oneself a patriot.13 Such rhetoric, unexceptional
in its time, is discordant with the secular ethos of our time. Other found-
ers held views similarly out of step with secular academic and popular
sentiments of the twentieth and twenty-​first centuries, such as advocat-
ing state support for Protestant denominations and restricting the civil
and religious rights of Catholics, Unitarians, atheists, and Jews. In any
case, this book should put to rest the notion that the founding generation
ignored biblical language and themes in its political discourse.
To be sure, there were individuals in the founding era, as there seem to
be in every generation, who lamented that their contemporaries were not
as pious and biblically literate as previous generations. Some of the more
devout founding fathers bemoaned that the Bible was not more known in
their day, even among their fellow patriots. The Presbyterian minister and
chaplain to the US House of Representatives, Ashbel Green, recounted an
anecdote told by his mentor, John Witherspoon, the Presbyterian divine
and signer of the Declaration of Independence:
5

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 5 )

We remember to have heard the late Rev. Dr. Witherspoon mention the fol-
lowing occurrence, as having taken place in the Continental Congress that
declared American Independence. On an interesting discussion, a member
began his speech nearly in these words:—​Mr. President—​There is an old and
good book, which is not read as much as it ought to be—​I mean the Bible,
Sir—​which says, “Of two evils we should always choose the least.” The Dr. rose
hastily and said, Mr. President—​The gentleman will greatly oblige us, if he will
refer to chapter and verse. Members of Congress since their debates have been
in publick, have sometimes shown a pitiable ignorance, and at other times a
lamentable profaneness, by affecting a familiarity with the sacred scriptures,
or by grossly misapplying them.14

This lament notwithstanding, eighteenth-​century Americans lived in

a culture shaped by Christianity and its sacred text. The Bible, more than
any other written word, informed the world of the founding fathers and
the society around them. It was the most accessible book in eighteenth-​
century America and was among the most important sources of cultural
influence in the colonial and early national periods. It shaped the language.
It also informed education, letters, arts, law, and politics. The founding
generation wove biblical language, often without quotation marks or
explicit references, into the various written communications of daily life,
including public papers. Quotation marks and citations were unnecessary
to identify the source of words so familiar to a biblically literate people.
Starting with the first permanent English settlements, especially in
New England, Americans have apparently been more biblically literate
than their European contemporaries. In 1781, Benjamin Franklin, then
serving as the American Minister to France, wrote a letter to his old friend
the Reverend Doctor Samuel Cooper, pastor of Boston’s influential Brattle
Street Church. Some months before, the prominent Congregationalist
clergyman had sent Franklin a copy of the sermon he had delivered on
the commencement of the government under a new state constitution.15
The sermon, Franklin responded, gave him an “abundance of Pleasure,”
and he said he intended to translate and print the sermon for a European
audience. He explained, however, that he would need to insert biblical ref-
erences for European readers, even though such references were unneces-
sary for Cooper’s American audience:

It was not necessary in New England where every body reads the Bible, and is
acquainted with Scripture Phrases, that you should note the Texts from which
you took them; but I have observed in England as well as in France, that Verses
and Expressions taken from the sacred Writings, and not known to be such,
6

( 6 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

appear very strange and awkward to some Readers; and I shall therefore in my
Edition take the Liberty of marking the quoted Texts in the Margin.16

This book considers the place of the Bible in the lives and thoughts of
the founding fathers. The Bible, it is argued, was a vital source for the
language, themes, and ideas in the political discourse of the American
founding. Many founders revered the Bible as divine revelation and com-
mended its role in fostering the virtues required of a self-​governing peo-
ple.17 Others, such as Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas
Paine, either doubted the Bible’s divine origins or thought it had been cor-
rupted in its transmission across the centuries.18 Both pious and skep-
tical founders were familiar with the Bible, referred often to it in their
political discourse, and commended Jesus’s ethical teachings as recorded
in the Gospels. This book describes the Bible’s expansive influence on the
public culture and examines selected biblical texts that were frequently
mentioned in the political rhetoric of the founding era. And, perhaps most
important, it considers how the founding generation used the Bible in its
political discourse. This book, I believe, reaffirms the rather obvious point
that the Bible was important to the social, legal, and political thought
of the founding generation and a vital influence on the culture in which
they lived.
This book is about the Bible’s influence on the founders’ political dis-
course and their experiment in republican self-​government. Identifying
the sources and tracing the transmission of ideas are difficult tasks. What
does it mean to say an idea, principle, argument, model, theme, or rhe-
torical style was influenced by the Bible? It could, but does not necessar-
ily, mean that an idea embraced by the founders is original to the Bible.
It could mean that the founders encountered in Scripture ideas, themes,
and expressions they found useful in formulating, articulating, or vali-
dating their own political thoughts. It does not necessarily mean that the
Bible’s influence superseded or crowded out all other sources of influence
or that biblical influences did not coexist with multiple—​even seemingly
competing—​influences, such as classical and Enlightenment sources. The
founding generation drew on multiple sources, one of which was the Bible.
Many of their political and legal ideas were suggested by, reinforced by, or
coincided with biblical ideas. A claim of biblical influence can be compli-
cated by the fact that on certain issues biblical support was asserted for
differing—​even conflicting—​positions. Both defenders and opponents of
slavery, to give one notorious example, claimed to have found in Scripture
warrant for their respective positions. Substantiating claims of influence
is not always easy, but such claims can be buttressed by a subject’s explicit
7

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 7 )

acknowledgment of influence; references to an influential source in the

subject’s work; similarities of ideas, arguments, and expressions; or a sub-
ject’s documented exposure to an influential source.
The fact that a founder was “influenced” by the Bible does not indicate
whether he or she was a Christian or a skeptic—​both were influenced by
the Bible. To say that Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Paine was influenced
by the Bible, for example, is not to suggest that they abandoned their ratio-
nalist perspectives. It certainly does not mean that they believed the Bible
was God’s revealed word. It simply acknowledges that they added bibli-
cal notions to their arsenal of ideas and arguments. Orthodox Christians,
of course, had a special attraction to scriptural texts, and, it stands to
reason, they were more likely to take biblical ideas seriously than their
rationalist counterparts. A claim of biblical influence does not suggest
that the founders were theocrats intent on imposing a biblical order on
the polity. It no more follows that the founding generation was entirely
Christian merely because it was influenced by the Bible than it follows
that the founders were all rationalists because some prominent founding
figures were influenced by Enlightenment rationalism. Acknowledging
and studying the Bible’s influence enriches an understanding of the politi-
cal themes that informed the thought of the founders and their political
projects.
The mere fact that the founding generation frequently quoted from
and alluded to the Bible reveals little about the American founding or the
Bible’s influence on late eighteenth-​century political thought, except that
the Bible was a familiar and useful literary source. Furthermore, the mere
fact that an individual founder referenced the Bible tells us little about
whether or not this figure revered Scripture or, even, was a Christian.
Both Christians and skeptics incorporated biblical language and themes
into their rhetoric. Some polemicists have made the error of assuming
that selected founders were committed Christians based principally on
the number of quotations from and allusions to the Bible in that found-
er’s political discourse. Pamphleteer Thomas Paine illustrates the error of
this approach. He made frequent allusions to the Bible in his writings, yet
no figure of the founding era was more famously dismissive of orthodox
Christianity and its view of Scripture than Paine. A study of the Bible’s
place and role in the political culture and discourse of the age must be
attentive to the purposes for which biblical texts were invoked and the
contexts in which the founding generation turned to the Bible. Orators
and writers drew on the Bible for a variety of purposes. The diverse uses
ranged from the strictly literary and cultural to the essentially theological,
from the stylistic to the substantive. The careful reader of this literature
8

( 8 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

must be attentive to not only the fact that the Bible was referenced fre-
quently but also the purposes for which Scripture was used and how it
informed broader texts and themes.
Few historians dispute that Christianity and the Bible have influenced
to some extent the American people and their public culture. Yet, one
gains little understanding of Christianity’s vital contributions to the
development of American political and legal culture from reading stan-
dard histories of the American founding. Yes, Anglo-​A mericans are often
described as a “people of the book,” and, yet, scholars have given little
attention to how the Bible contributed in specific ways to the American
political experiment. Although some academics have noted in passing the
influence of the Bible, few studies have explored the specific biblical texts
that informed the themes and ideas of the American founding. In the last
century, especially, scholars have been slow to recognize the extensive use
of the Bible in the political literature and rhetoric of the founding. The
scant attention given to the Bible’s influence is in contrast to the extensive
scholarly literature on the influences of Enlightenment, republican, and
English common law ideas on the founders’ political thought. Identifying
specific biblical sources in the political literature of the founding era is a
useful exercise because, according to Donald S. Lutz, the Bible is promi-
nent and “highly influential” in the American political tradition and it “is
not always given the attention it deserves.”19 This study offers glimpses
into the role of the Bible—​and, by extension, Christianity—​in shaping
the political culture of the founding era.
In modern, secular America, the Bible is often relegated—​by pietistic
or secular impulses, disinterest, or government decree—​to the margins of
public culture. In our highly rationalistic and technological contemporary
culture, a veneration of Scripture is regarded by some elites as the preserve
of an unsophisticated and unlearned class of citizens. This was not true
of eighteenth-​century America. Indeed, twenty-​first-​century Americans
may find it difficult to appreciate the centrality of Christianity and the
Bible to many aspects of public life in this earlier era. This is particularly
true of the Bible’s place in the life of the mind. The Bible and bible-​based
texts were ubiquitous in elementary and secondary education, and they
were of special importance to literacy education. When studied in higher
education today, the Bible is typically reserved for specialty courses on
religion and theology, unlike eighteenth-​century colleges where the Bible
was a key textbook in many courses in the curriculum. The Bible was not
merely the literature of the unlearned and unsophisticated, as some schol-
ars view it today. Again, it is difficult to overstate the place of the Bible in
the lives and culture of eighteenth-​century Americans.
9

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 9 )

Perhaps stating the obvious, eighteenth-​century Americans related to

biblical themes and images differently than Americans today. The Bible
is replete with texts dealing with sowing and reaping, harvests, fam-
ines, fires, floods, pestilences, wildernesses, wild beasts, poverty, hunger,
feasts, diseases, death, manual labor, masters, and slaves. These pas-
sages understandably resonated with subsistence farmers in an agrar-
ian society, who dared not expect to live beyond what Americans today
would regard as middle age, and they resonated in ways that are difficult
for urban, affluent Americans living in a highly technological society to
appreciate. The words have not changed, but these terms were as poignant
and relevant to members of a preindustrial society as they are remote to
twenty-​first-​century Americans. Almost every line of the Bible reminds
us that “it is about the people of another time and place who belonged to
other kinds of societies from our own.”20 We read a text today that has
been uprooted from its original time, place, and languages. “It is a book
in exile.”21 Understanding Scripture today is unavoidably complicated by
the cultural distance of modern life from the worlds and societies of the
original biblical scribes.
The detachment of American history from its generative biblical cul-
ture impoverishes our understanding of the American experiment in
self-​government. What importance did the founding generation attach
to the Bible as a practical, sacred guide to the issues and challenges that
confronted them? In what ways did the Bible shape the founders’ percep-
tions of themselves, their times, and their political pursuits? How did bib-
lical literature inform their political thoughts and shape their vision for
republican self-​government? How did they use the Bible in their political
discourse? Did they use and interpret the Bible in conventional, orthodox
terms? What can we learn from the interaction between the text and the
interpreter? Which biblical passages appealed most to this generation?
These are some of the questions that animate this book, although, to be
sure, these questions will not be fully answered in the pages that follow.
Nonetheless, I hope this interdisciplinary study of history, religion, bib-
lical literature, law, and political thought will provide insights into the
place and role of Christianity in general and the Bible in particular in the
founding of the American republic and its public institutions. An exami-
nation of the confluence of biblical literature and American experience
offers insights into how the founders interpreted the Bible in ways they
thought were relevant to their concerns and how the Bible influenced
their times. This book attempts to describe and, to a lesser extent, explain
how the founding generation encountered, appropriated, grappled with,
and, ultimately, were shaped by selected passages of Scripture. Given the
10

(╛10╛)╇╇ Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

expansive primary literature from the American founding, this study is

intentionally illustrative and selective rather than systematic and com-
prehensive in its scope and themes.22

DEFINING TERMS

A few key terms merit brief definition at the outset of this study:
The terms “Christian” and “orthodox Christianity” are used frequently
in this book. What is meant by these terms? Many approaches with vari-
ous advantages and disadvantages have been used to define “Christian”
and “Christianity.” A Christian is a follower or disciple of Jesus Christ
(see Acts 11:26), one who accepts the essential doctrines of Christianity.
There was, scholars have noted, a consensus among the most popular
Christian denominations in the founding era as to what constituted
those core doctrines of the faith. As revealed in their creeds and arti-
cles of faith, leading denominations in eighteenth-╉century America—╉
Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists, Anglicans, Lutherans, and
Roman Catholics—╉shared belief in the divine origins and authority of
the Holy Bible, the Trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Birth,
original sin, atonement for the sins of fallen men through the sacrificial
shed blood and death of Jesus Christ on the cross, Jesus’s bodily resur-
rection from the dead, and a future state of rewards and punishments. 23
The terms “Christian” and orthodox or traditional “Christianity,” as used
in this book, refer to adherents of and adherence to these doctrines,
respectively. (There were, of course, individuals and groups from these
denominations that, by the eighteenth century, were beginning to aban-
don these core doctrines.)
The Protestant Reformation was a movement within Christianity that
began in early sixteenth-╉century Europe, led by, among others, Martin
Luther, Ulrich Zwingli, and John Calvin. The movement sought to reform
what was regarded as false teachings and corrupt practices in the Roman
Catholic Church of the age and return Christ’s church to its biblical ori-
gins. Protestant Reformers emphasized the importance of salvation by
faith alone, the authority of the Bible, and the priesthood of all believers.
The word “Reformed,” as used in this book in phrases such as “Reformed
theology” and “Reformed tradition,” refers primarily to that vein of the
Reformation associated with the teachings of John Calvin and his follow-
ers. Although adherents of the Reformed tradition hold many theological
positions in common with other Christians (especially other Protestants),
they emphasize the sovereignty of God over all creation, the divine
11

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 11 )

inspiration of Scripture and the authority of the Bible in all matters of faith
and doctrine, the radically fallen state of humankind, spiritual salvation
by God’s grace for those whom God has chosen, and the believer’s justifica-
tion before God solely through faith in Christ’s atoning work on the cross
and not through an individual’s efforts or good works. Reformed theology
and tradition figure prominently in this book because most Americans of
European descent at the time of independence, either by heritage or con-
viction, identified with the Reformed tradition. They included the New
England Congregationalists (descendants of the Puritans), Scotch and
Irish Presbyterians, French Huguenots, and Dutch and German Reformed
congregations.24 Furthermore, many influential founders were raised in or
affiliated with Reformed congregations.25 There were, it should be noted,
prominent founding figures, such as Thomas Jefferson, who opposed core
tenets of Reformed theology.26
The “Bible” is the Christian canon of sacred texts, comprising the Old
Testament and the New Testament.27 Most English Bibles of the eighteenth
century, including Protestant Bibles, also contained the books commonly
called Apocrypha. The Old Testament refers to the “Hebrew Bible” or
sacred literature that recorded the covenant between God and the people
of Israel prior to the advent of Jesus Christ. The New Testament, written
primarily in the Greek tongue, contains the writings of the evangelists
and apostles of Christ Jesus. The Bible is a “book of books,” a composite
work of diverse texts—​including law, history, wisdom literature, poetry,
songs, prophecy, biography, and epistles—​w ritten over a thousand-​year
period (or more) and collected in the fourth or fifth century after Jesus
into essentially the Bible Christians read today. Christians have tradition-
ally revered the Bible as the divinely inspired Word of God revealed to
humankind “for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Bible, orthodox Christians believe,
contains the whole counsel of God concerning the character of God and
the duties God requires of man. It ought, therefore, to be believed and
obeyed as the complete, authoritative expression of faith and practice.
The “Bible,” “Scriptures,” “Holy” or “Sacred” “Text,” and “Word of God” are
terms used interchangeably in this book (I often select the terms used
by those about whom I am writing). All biblical quotations in this book,
unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the Authorized (King James)
Version of the Bible, because this is the English-​language translation most
widely used in the American founding era.
Who are the “founding fathers”?28 Most Americans can readily iden-
tify a half dozen or so famous founders—​Benjamin Franklin, George
Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and
12

( 12 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

Alexander Hamilton. There is, however, an expansive fraternity of now-​

forgotten founders who made salient contributions in thought, word, and
deed to the construction of the American constitutional republic and its
institutions. I use the term “founding fathers” or “founders” broadly to
include an entire generation or two of Americans from many walks of life
who, in the last half of the eighteenth century and the early nineteenth
century, articulated the rights of colonists, secured independence from
Great Britain, and established new constitutional republics at both the
national and state levels. This company includes the approximately one
hundred patriots who signed the Declaration of Independence (1776) and/​
or the United States Constitution (1787).29 This definition also includes
members of the Stamp Act Congress; Continental and Confederation
Congresses; state legislative bodies of the period that debated and
declared independence, drafted state constitutions and declarations of
rights, deliberated the structure of a national union, and ratified the US
Constitution and Bill of Rights; Constitutional Convention of 1787; and
early federal Congresses under the US Constitution (especially the First
Congress which framed the national “Bill of Rights”).30 This expansive
definition includes a cast of thousands who played their patriotic part
at the local, state, and/​or national levels. Among them were citizen sol-
diers, elected representatives, political activists, polemicists, and patriot
preachers.
Is it appropriate to speak of the founding fathers as a collective group,
suggesting that they shared a worldview, objectives, and values? The
founders, to be sure, came from diverse backgrounds, and they had a wide
variety of views and interests. (The extent of that diversity is a topic his-
torians warmly debate.) They did not agree on all political and religious
questions, but they did hold many views in common. Most, for example,
eventually supported a republican form of government. They were united
in the belief that a self-​governing people must be a well-​informed and
virtuous people; thus, they encouraged education and religion, which
they believed nurtured these qualities. Almost all agreed that there was
a Supreme Being who intervened in the affairs of men and nations. They
believed God was the author of the rights of men; and the rights God had
granted to humankind, no man should take away. Most believed that
man was a fallen creature and, therefore, should not be entrusted with
unrestrained power over other human beings. Accordingly, they devised
a government system defined by the separation of powers, and checks
and balances (between the national and state governments and among
the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of civil government).
While acknowledging divergent opinions among the founders, this book
╇ 13

I n t r o d u c t i o n ╇╇ (╛13╛)

emphasizes religious themes and opinions shared by many in the found-

ing generation.
What is meant by the American “founding era”? The term, as used here,
covers the period between approximately 1760 and 1800, during which
Americans began to agitate for their full rights as Englishmen and, then,
to assert their claim to political independence from Great Britain and,
finally, to articulate the theory and develop the institutions that shaped
the state and national constitutions. This is the general time frame most
scholars (myself included) have in mind when they talk about the “found-
ing era.” As used in this study, however, the term is sufficiently flexible
to permit the inclusion of material outside these dates. In �chapter 5, for
example, I describe John Winthrop’s famous “city on a hill” sermon of
1630 as a “mission statement” for the new nation and count it among the
“founding” documents.

THE PAPER TR AIL

How do we know what the founders said? We know from the words they
left behind. Although their literal voices have long been silenced, their
words live on in extant documentary records. Many, but certainly not
all, founders were extraordinarily attentive to their place in history and,
recognizing the historical value of their papers and records, went to
great lengths to preserve them. The most famous founders—╉Benjamin
Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James
Madison, and Alexander Hamilton—╉left enough words that, even two
hundred years after their demise, archivists still labor to collect and tran-
scribe their papers, filling many scores of published volumes. 31 They were
keenly aware that they had been present at the creation of something
remarkable in human history. With an awareness of posterity’s judgment,
many recorded their recollections in contemporaneous journals and let-
ters or later in memoirs. Adams, Jefferson, and Madison, among others,
engaged in extensive and sometimes contentious correspondence about
the dramatic political events at the end of the eighteenth century. We also
learn what they said from other people’s contemporaneous accounts as
recorded in letters, journals, newspapers, or books. Legislative journals
and other state papers, such as the Journals of the Continental Congress
or Madison’s Notes of Debates in the Federal [Constitutional] Convention
of 1787, record resolutions, speeches, and official correspondence. All
of these sources contribute to an admittedly incomplete and, at times,
unverifiable record.
14

( 14 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

That said, some important founders, either by inattention or deliberate

design, left few papers to posterity. Many did not write an autobiography
or leave a journal that might have given succeeding generations a reveal-
ing self-​portrait of their characters, thoughts, and achievements. Some,
like John Witherspoon, chose to destroy some of their personal papers.
After her husband’s death, it is thought Martha Washington burned many
letters exchanged between her and George during their forty years of mar-
riage. For a variety of reasons, many less deliberate than these examples,
there are vast voids in the documentary record. History might have been
written differently had important figures, such as Samuel Adams, Patrick
Henry, John Jay, George Mason, Roger Sherman, and James Wilson, left
more papers, both public and private, for scrutiny by later generations.
The founders’ papers that were preserved and later archived and, still
later, published reflect evolving private and public perceptions of whose
contributions were consequential and, thus, whose papers were worthy
of preservation for future generations. An individual founder’s decision
to keep a journal, write a memoir or autobiography, or preserve cor-
respondence or other documents was an initial self-​assessment of the
importance of that founder’s contribution to some event and indicated
a desire to memorialize his or her role in history. Subsequent decisions
made by family, acquaintances, or executors to preserve or discard such
documents after an individual’s death were, similarly, a pivotal assess-
ment of whether or not the deceased’s activities were noteworthy. Even
before some had died, family members and others in society recog-
nized the importance of preserving papers associated with particular
founders. Unfortunately, the same generation failed to appreciate the
value of other founders’ papers and, thus, many were lost to history.
Decisions of still later historians and archivists to preserve and publish
a founder’s papers reinforced earlier decisions regarding which found-
ers were notable and which were not. Major papers publication projects
sponsored by universities and historical societies and funded by private
foundations and government initiatives, such as the National Historical
Publications and Records Commission, seemingly confirmed that the
subjects of these projects were the truly consequential founders. A fresh
review of history might lead one to conclude that previously discounted
or discarded papers of certain forgotten founders would be invaluable to
a well-​rounded understanding of the American founding. Regrettably,
however, decisions and accompanying actions made at various points in
the preceding two centuries have made it exceedingly difficult, if not
impossible, to recreate the historical record. More important, the steps
taken long ago to preserve or discard historical documents have shaped
15

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 15 )

how subsequent scholars have assessed the thoughts, words, and deeds
of the founders.
The student of the American founding must be mindful of the gaps and,
thus, potential distortions in the extant record. Many speeches, sermons,
and conversations were never transcribed (and, thus, preserved), and rec-
ollections of their content are, at best, uncertain. The written records left
by the founding generation are incomplete. Some founders kept meticu-
lous and extensive records, others were inattentive to the value of preserv-
ing their papers, and still others oversaw the destruction of important
documents. We are left with an incomplete picture, which, if one is not
careful, can perpetuate distortions of our understanding of the founders’
lives and times. There is a danger of perpetuating a bias or distortion by
giving greater attention or weight to those founders who left a substan-
tial paper trail (or, at least, words that address the topics and themes rel-
evant to this book) than to the founders who left few words. There is also
the danger of ascribing the recorded views of a few individuals to a much
larger group of which they were a part. One founder’s view on a given topic
is not necessarily representative of the views of other founders, much less
the entire founding generation. Similar problems arise with other docu-
mentary sources. For example, election sermons, many of which were pub-
lished, were a part of New England’s rich literary and civic tradition. They
were much less a part of the public culture in other regions of the country.
While published election sermons provide important insights into the
sentiments of New England’s clergy class and the messages they commu-
nicated to leading politicians, it might be a mistake to assume that these
same sentiments were shared and expressed by the clergy in other parts of
the country or that similar political sermons were preached to politicians
elsewhere. There is much to be learned from the extant written record, but
it is a mistake to read too much into a silent or absent record or to assume
that the written words that have been lost were the same in content as
those that are extant.

THE BIBLE IN THE POLITICAL CULTURE

OF THE AMERICAN FOUNDING

As a student of religion and politics in the American founding era, I spend

many hours in musty archives reading eighteenth-​century political docu-
ments, tracts, sermons, and the like. I have been struck by several bibli-
cal passages frequently cited in this literature or that were favorites of
influential founders. What is it about these texts that this generation of
16

( 16 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

Americans found so pertinent, so vital to their own time and place? What
does the founders’ recurrence to these scriptural passages reveal about
their worldviews and political thoughts, especially their perspectives on
the place of faith in public life and the prudential relationship between
religion and the civil state? These are some of the questions that prompted
me to write this book.
This study examines the place of the Bible in the political discourse
of the founding era. Drawing on state papers, pamphlets, newspapers,
political sermons, and private writings of the period, this book identifies
selected biblical passages frequently referenced in this literature. These
texts are examined in their biblical contexts, as well as in the historical,
political, and literary contexts in which eighteenth-​century Americans
used them. Of special interest is the question why these scriptural texts
appealed to the founding generation. These references to the Bible are
examined to determine whether they were used in a manner consistent
with their biblical context or whether these texts were removed from their
original context for some immediate political or rhetorical advantage. The
goal of this book is to combine credible historical research and careful tex-
tual analysis with basic biblical scholarship and political theory.
The three chapters in Part I consider, respectively, the Bible’s influence
on public culture, the place of the Bible in the lives of the founders, and
how the founders used the Bible in political discourse. The first of these
chapters surveys the Bible’s impact on the public culture of the colonial
and early national periods, giving special attention to how the English
Bible (especially the King James Version) influenced linguistic develop-
ment, literacy education, education more generally, and public law. The
second examines the Bible’s place in the lives of the founders—​what they
said about the Bible, how it shaped their education, how it inspired vari-
ous Bible projects (including the establishment of Bible societies), and how
the Bible framed their views on politics and civil government. Drawing
on some of the most familiar political rhetoric of the times, the third and
final chapter in Part I examines the founders’ diverse uses of the Bible in
political discourse, ranging from the strictly literary and cultural to the
profoundly theological.
Each chapter in Part II profiles a specific biblical text or thematically
related texts popular in the literature of the era and meditates on the
lessons that can be learned from both the biblical texts and the found-
ers’ uses of these texts. Among the biblical texts and topics examined are
“covenant lawsuit” texts, such as Micah 6:1–​8, that explicate the covenant
relationship between God and a righteous nation; various texts, such as
Acts 5:29, that were interpreted to authorize resistance to tyrannical
17

I n t r o d u c t i o n    ( 17 )

civil magistrates, notwithstanding familiar biblical injunctions to sub-

mit to civil authorities (for example, Romans 13:1–​2); “covenant nation”
texts, such as Proverbs 14:34, that promise divine blessings for righ-
teous nations; various texts, including Proverbs 29:2 and Exodus 18:21,
that set forth the necessity for, and standards of, godly civil magistrates;
selected texts, such as Galatians 5:1 and 2 Corinthians 3:17, that invoke
the language of “liberty” and were appropriated by patriotic Americans
to express their aspirations for political liberty; and George Washington’s
favorite biblical phrase, the ancient Hebrew blessing and prophetic vision
found in Micah 4:4 and other Old Testament texts, in which every man
sits in safety “under his vine and under his fig tree.” Finally, interspersed
among the chapters in Part II are short vignettes I have called “The Bible in
American History,” which describe episodes in the founding era framed by
the Bible or specific biblical texts. These brief narratives include an account
of the first prayer in the Continental Congress, Benjamin Franklin’s
impassioned plea for prayer in the Constitutional Convention, and George
Washington’s use of the Bible at the first presidential inaugural ceremony.
This book illustrates that the Bible was featured prominently in the
political discourse of the American founding. It was a widely respected
and referenced text, although some well-​ k nown skeptical founders
questioned its divine origins or the authenticity of the text transmit-
ted through the centuries. The Bible shaped significant aspects of pub-
lic culture, including language, letters, arts, education, and law, and it
left its mark on the lives of individual founders. It was also thought to
offer insights into basic and enduring questions of political theory, such
as what is the role of civil government, what are the liberties and civic
responsibilities of citizens, and do citizens have the right to resist tyran-
nical rule? The Bible informed the way many late eighteenth-​century
Americans thought about human nature, civic virtue, social order, politi-
cal authority, the rights and duties of citizens, and other ideas vital to
the establishment of a political society. Many Americans in this genera-
tion thought the Bible was essential for nurturing the civic virtues that
give citizens the capacity for self-​government. The political discourse
of the age—​both spoken and written—​is replete with quotations from
and allusions to the Bible, and with language that resembles, imitates, or
evokes the distinctive intonations of the King James Bible. The founders
turned to the Bible for literary, rhetorical, and political reasons, in addi-
tion to religious reasons. For a well-​rounded understanding of the ideas
that informed the American founding, these biblical influences must be
studied alongside republican, Enlightenment, British constitutional, and
other intellectual influences.
18

( 18 )   Reading the Bible with the Founding Fathers

This book invites the reader to join the founders in reading the Bible
and considering its relevance to the political and legal crises they encoun-
tered. Accordingly, biblical texts in the founders’ discourse are highlighted
and referenced, even when the founders quoted from or alluded to the
Bible without citations. Because the book focuses on the founding genera-
tion’s uses and interpretations of the Bible, I have thought it better to let
the founders speak for themselves rather than for me to tell the reader
what the founders said or thought. For this reason, I have relied on direct
quotations from the founders and sometimes multiple quotations on the
same point when dealing with contested subject matter, and I have erred
on the side of providing too much rather than too little of a quotation so
the reader can assess the founders’ words in context. When quoting the
founders, I have in most instances retained the founders’ archaic and idio-
syncratic spelling, capitalization, and punctuation. Direct quotations are
supported by citations to primary sources or other reputable scholarship.
Let me say what this book is not about. This book does not make claims
about the interior faith commitments of the founding fathers, although it
is certainly true that many were devout Christians; it is also true that some
influential founders were skeptical of the central claims of Christianity.32
Nor do I argue that all the founders embraced the Bible as the revealed
word of God. Clearly, some did not.33 The central claim or thesis of this
book is not that America is a Christian nation. Whether America is or ever
was a “Christian nation” is an important, complex question that merits
scrutiny, but it is not the subject of this study.34 The book, however, offers
insights into the questions whether individual founders were orthodox
Christians or whether America was, in some sense, a Christian nation.
There was a variety of intellectual, political, and legal influences, apart
from the Bible, that informed the American founding. Among the influ-
ences scholars have identified and studied are Hebraic, classical and civic
republican, Protestant, British Enlightenment (including the Lockean lib-
eral and Whig perspectives), Scottish Enlightenment, and English com-
mon law and constitutional sources.35 This book’s focus on the Bible’s
impact on the political and legal cultures of the American founding is
not intended to discount, much less dismiss, other sources of influence
or schools of thought that shaped the American experiment. Rather, it
is my hope that casting a light on the Bible’s often ignored place in late
eighteenth-​century political and legal thought will provide a more com-
plete picture of the ideas that contributed to the founding.36
Twenty-​first-​century Americans are less familiar with the Bible and
less influenced by and articulate in discussing biblical ideas than their
seventeenth-​and eighteenth-​century forebears. Insofar as early North
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Letter-Forms.
INTRODUCTION.
In writing letters, or in preparing anything for the press, care
should be taken to write a plain, readable hand. Many a valuable
position has been lost because of poor penmanship, and many
worthy productions have been thrown into the waste-basket,
because they have been poorly written. Men of distinction can afford
to write a poor hand, to the inconvenience of friends, and the trouble
of printers, but, as a general rule, a poor writer labors under a great
disadvantage.
The following facts should be remembered in writing letters:—
1. A letter should not be written on half a sheet of paper, unless it
is a business letter.
 2. Business letters should be as brief as clearness will permit.
3. It is never allowable to write across a written page.
4. All unnecessary flourishes should be avoided.
5. Black ink is preferable, and it is more durable than any other.

THE ADDRESS.
INTRODUCTORY REMARK.

The most important part of letter-writing is to properly direct a

letter. During the past year, nearly 4,000,000 letters found their way
to the Dead Letter Office, 67,000 of which were misdirected. When
we consider the loss to business firms in not promptly receiving
important letters, the anxiety to friends and relatives in the delay of
expected letters, the expense to the government in sending them to
the Dead Letter Office, and in handling and returning them to the
writers, the proper direction of a letter becomes a matter of very
serious importance.

Definition.—The address consists of the title and name of the

person to whom the letter is written, the city and the state in which
he lives; as,—
Mr. William K. Bixby,
Houston,
Texas.

remarks.
1. Care should be taken to write the address in a clear, bold hand.
2. The usual titles are Mr., Mrs., Miss, and Master. The last title is used in
addressing a boy.
3. Esq. is sometimes placed after the name, instead of placing Mr. before. It is
used more especially with the names of lawyers, artists, and men of social
position. When Esq. is used, never use Mr.
 Position.—The title and name should be written about the middle
of the envelope, beginning on the left. Below the title and name, and
farther to the right, should be written the city; below the city, the
state.

remarks.
1. It is customary to abbreviate the name of the state. Great care, however,
should be taken to properly abbreviate the word. Some abbreviations are so
similar to each other that mistakes frequently arise:
2. The address should never be written diagonally.

Punctuation.—A comma should be placed after the name of the

person, and after the name of the city. A period should be placed at
the end.

remarks.
1. Mr., Mrs., Esq., Rev., Dr., Prof., Pres., Capt., &c., are all abbreviations, and
consequently the abbreviations should be indicated by a period. Miss is not an
abbreviation, and thus requires no mark after it. Messrs. is also an abbreviation. It
is used in addressing a firm, but it is frequently omitted.
2. If any part of a person’s name is abbreviated, a period should always be used
to indicate the abbreviation; as, John S. C. Abbott. The S. and C. without a period
really mean nothing.
3. Some place a comma between the parts of a person’s name. This, of course,
is incorrect. See p. 16 d.
4. All the words in the address should be capitalized, except prepositions and
articles.

Honorary Titles.—It is customary to give the professional title or

titles of the person to whom a letter is directed, and if he occupies
some responsible position, this also should be indicated in the
address; as,—
Rev. E. O. Haven, D.D., LL.D.,
Chancellor of Syracuse University,
 Syracuse,
N. Y.

remarks.
1. Honorary titles should be given for two reasons:—
(a) As a mark of respect.
(b) The address will be more readily recognized by postmasters, and the
letter will be more likely to reach its destination without delay.
2. When titles are written after a person’s name, a comma should be placed
after each title, for the reason that a comma would be necessary, if the title was
written out in full; as, A. M., D.D., LL.D.
3. Some writers make the mistake of placing a period after the first L in LL.D.
This title stands for Doctor of Laws, the LL. indicating the plural of Law. As the two
letters stand for one word, the period must necessarily be placed after the second
L.
4. Hon. applies to judges, senators, representatives, heads of government
departments, mayors, and others of similar rank; as, Hon. Thomas M. Cooley.
5. His Excellency applies to the President of the United States, an Ambassador
of the United States, or the Governor of a State. This title should be written on a
line by itself; as,—
His Excellency,
Gov. C. M. Croswell,
Adrian,
Mich.
6. In addressing a married lady, the professional title of her husband is
sometimes used; as, Mrs. Dr. Haven.
7. Two professional titles meaning the same thing should never be used; as, Dr.
A. D. Smith, M. D.

Large Cities.—When the person to whom the letter is addressed,

lives in a large city where letters are delivered at places of business
or private residences, the title and name, number of house and
street, the city, and state should be given; as,—
A. S. Barnes & Co.,
34 and 36 Madison St.,
 Chicago.
Ill.

remarks.
1. The title and name should be written first, the number and street to the right
and a little below, the city below the name of the street, and the state under the
city.
2. The name of the state might be omitted in the address above given. It is not
really necessary to give the state, when the city is so widely known that no mistake
can arise, if the name of the state is omitted; as, New York, Philadelphia, Boston.

Small Towns and Villages.—The name of the county in which a

small town or village is located, should always be given in the
address. If the person to whom the letter is written, lives in the
country, the nearest post-office must be given, together with the
county and state. The name of the place in which a person lives, and
his post-office address, may be two very different things.
Mr. George Harvey,
Palmyra,
Lenawee Co.,
Mich.

remarks.
1. The title and name should be written first; the town, village, or post-office,
second; the county, third; the state last.
2. Sometimes letters are detained at post-offices, by reason of the directions not
being sufficiently complete.

Addressed Envelopes.—It is the custom with business firms, when

an answer to a letter is asked as a favor, to send, within the letter, a
stamped envelope properly addressed. The address is usually
printed, so that no mistake can be made. In all cases, even when an
addressed envelope is not required, when a favor is asked from an
acquaintance or a friend, and an answer is desired, a postage stamp
should always be inclosed. It is certainly an unpardonable
presumption to ask even a friend to write a letter for a particular
purpose, and expect him to pay for its proper delivery.

Letters with Special Request.—Sometimes directions are written

or printed on envelopes as to the disposal of letters, if not called for
within a certain time. This should always be done when addressing
business letters. These directions are written or printed on the left of
the envelope, near the top. See form on p. 81.

The Stamp.—The stamp should be placed in the right-hand corner

of the envelope, near the top. It seems hardly necessary to say that
every letter should be properly stamped, and yet between three and
four hundred thousand letters are annually sent to the Dead Letter
Office, because the writers had forgotten to properly stamp them.

FORMS OF ADDRESS.
A letter of Introduction should be left unsealed.
 When a letter is intrusted to an acquaintance or to a friend for
delivery, it should not be sealed.

LETTER-FORMS.
I. Adrian, Mich., Nov. 6, 1877.
II. Mr. William K. Bixby,
Houston, Texas.
III. Dear Sir,—
IV. Your favor * * * * * *
* * * *
V. Very truly,
Joseph M. Blain.
In the letter-form above given, there are five parts to be
considered:—

I. The Heading.
II. The Address.
III. Introductory Words.
IV. The Body of the Letter.
 V. The Conclusion.

I. THE HEADING.

Definition.—The heading consists of the name of the city in which

the writer lives, the state, the month, the day of the month, and the
year; as,—
Adrian, Mich., Nov. 6, 1877.

remarks.
1. Great care should always be taken to give in the heading, not only the city,
but also the state. If the letter should be sent to the Dead Letter Office, the heading
will properly indicate the place to which the letter is to be returned.
2. The heading indicates to the person who receives the letter where an answer
is to be sent.
3. Sometimes the day of the week is given; as, Adrian, Monday, Nov. 5, 1877.

Punctuation.—A comma should be placed after the city, state, and

date. A period should be placed at the end. If a word is abbreviated,
a period should be used to indicate the abbreviation, and a comma
should also be used, if the word written out in full would require a
comma; as,—

Adrian, Michigan, November 6, 1877.

Adrian, Mich., Nov. 6, 1877.

remarks.
1. Some writers thoughtlessly place a comma between the name of the month
and the day of the month; as, November, 6, or Nov., 6. The 6 forms an essential
part of the month, and should not be separated from it by a punctuation mark.
2. It is better to omit st, th, or d after the number indicating the day of the month.
It certainly looks neater to write the date without the marks and dots that
sometimes disfigure the heading of letters.
3. Some prefer to place the number before the name of the month; as, Adrian,
Mich., 6 Nov., 1877. This, however, is not the usual practice.
 Large Cities.—In large cities where letters are delivered by letter-
carriers, it is necessary to give, in the heading of a letter, the number
of the house and the name of the street. The order should be
number, street, city, state, month, day of the month, year; as,—
215 Prospect St., Cleveland, Ohio,
March 5, 1877.

remarks.
1. Sometimes the size of the paper necessitates the use of three lines for the
heading. If this should be necessary, the number of the house and the name of the
street should be on the first line; the city and state, on the second; the month, the
day of the month, and year, on the third. Each line should commence farther to the
right than the preceding; as,—
215 Prospect St.,
Cleveland, Ohio,
March 5, 1877.
2. As few lines as possible should be used in the heading. In sending letters
from well known cities like New York, Philadelphia, &c., it is not necessary to give
the state. When the name of the state is omitted, the heading can usually be
written on two lines.
3. A period should be placed after St., because it is an abbreviation. A comma
should also follow the period, because the word written in full would require a
comma. 215 Prospect St., is one item; Cleveland, a second; Ohio, a third; March
5, a fourth; 1877, a fifth.

A Small Town or Village.—If the place in which the writer lives, is a

small town or village, the name of the place, county, and state should
be given; as,—
Palmyra, Lenawee Co., Mich.,
Sept. 13, 1877.

remarks.
1. The county should be given so that an answer to the letter may be properly
directed.
2. If the writer lives in the country, the post-office where his letters are received,
should be given, and not the place where he lives.
 Hotels.—When a letter is written at some prominent hotel, it is
customary to give the name of the hotel in the heading; as,—
Grand Central Hotel, New York,
Jan. 10, 1877.

Seminaries and Colleges.—In writing from a seminary, college, or

university, the name of the institution is sometimes given; as,—
Female Seminary, Cleveland, Ohio,
April 11, 1877.

Position.—The heading should be written on the first line, on the

right hand, commencing about the middle of the line. If more than
one line is required, the second line should commence farther to the
right than the first, and the third than the second.

remarks.
1. When a letter does not fill a full page, the heading should not be written on the
first line. The space at the head of the letter should be about the same as at the
bottom. In business letters, this is not necessary.
2. Some write the city, state, month, &c., at the close of a letter. This is not
however, the usual form.

II. THE ADDRESS.

Definition.—The address in the inside of a letter should be the

same as the address on the envelope. It consists of the title and
name of the person to whom the letter is written, and the place of his
residence; as,—
Mr. William K. Bixby,
Houston, Texas.

remarks.
There are several reasons why the address should be written within the letter:—
 1. Business men usually take an impression or make a copy of all letters written
by themselves or their agents. It is a great convenience to have the address within
the letter, so that it can be referred to, if necessary, at any time.
2. If the envelope is accidentally torn off, or is lost by not being properly sealed,
the letter can still be forwarded to its destination, if the address is written within.
3. It is frequently the habit, on receiving a letter, to destroy the envelope.
Sometimes, after the envelope is destroyed, the letter is lost. If there is an inside
address, the letter, if found, can be returned.

Punctuation.—A comma should be placed after the name of the

person and of the city. A period should be placed at the end.

remarks.
1. By placing to before the address, it will be seen that a period is required at its
close, just as a period is required at the end of the address on the envelope; as, To
William K. Bixby, Houston, Texas.
2. Some writers place a colon after the name of the state, but the practice is not
a correct one. A semicolon should never be used.

Large Cities. When the person to whom the letter is written, lives
in a large city, the number and name of the street should be given,
as on the outside address; as,—
A. S. Barnes & Co.,
34 and 36 Madison St., Chicago.

remark.
If three lines are necessary, the title and name should be on the first line, the
number and street on the second, the city and state on the third.

Small Towns and Villages.—When the letter is addressed to a

small town or village, the county in which the town or village is
situated, should be given; as,—
Mr. George Harvey,
Palmyra, Lenawee Co., Mich.
 remark.
The title and name should be on one line; the town or village, county, and state
should be on the second.

Letters to Intimate Friends or Relatives.—In writing letters to

intimate friends or relatives, the address should be written at the
close of the letter, at the left, commencing on the line immediately
following the signature. It would be too formal to write the address at
the head of the letter, and it would not be in keeping with the
introductory words which immediately follow; as,—
Milburn Wagon Works, Toledo, Ohio,
Nov. 2, 1877.
Dear Mother,—
Your letter * * * * * *
* * * * * *
Very affectionately,
Edgar W. Curtis.
Mrs. James E. Curtis,
Adrian, Mich.

remark.
When the heading occupies only one line, it is better to leave a blank line
between the heading and the address.

Position.—The address should commence on the left, and should

be written on, at least, two lines. The title and name should be on
one line; the city and state, on the second, and farther to the right.
The address, if possible, should be written on two lines. If the
heading consists of two or three lines, the address should
commence on the line immediately following the heading. If the
heading consists of one line only, a blank line should be left between
the heading and the address.
 III. INTRODUCTORY WORDS.

Definition.—The introductory words consist of the greeting or

salutation; as,—
Dear Sir,—

remarks.
1. Sometimes only one word is used in the greeting; as, Sir, Gentlemen.
2. When Sir, Gentlemen, Friend, Father, &c., are used as introductory words,
they should always commence with a capital, as a mark of respect. In greeting
friends or relatives, do not belittle them with small letters.
3. When dear, respected, honored, and words of a like character, are not the first
words of the salutation, they should commence with a small letter; as, My dear Sir,
My respected Friend. If they commence the salutation, capitals should be used;
as, Dear Father, Respected Friend.

Punctuation.—A comma should be placed after the salutation, and

a dash may also be used. The use of the dash, however, is simply a
matter of taste.

remarks.
1. A colon should not be placed after the greeting, except in official or very
formal salutations. See p. 100.
2. A semicolon should never be used.

Position.—The introductory words may be written in three different

positions:—
1. When the address occupies two lines, the salutation should be
written on the line immediately following, commencing a little to the
right of the second line of the address; as,
Mr. Harry B. Hutchins,
Mt. Clemens, Mich.
Dear Sir,—
 2. If the address consists of three lines, the first word of the
salutation commences on a line with the number of the street; as,—
A. S. Barnes & Co.,
34 and 36 Madison St.,
Chicago.
Gentlemen,—
3. If the address is written at the close of the letter, the introductory
words should commence on a line with the body of the letter, that is,
with the marginal line; as,—
Dear Manning,—
Rest you merry in your own opinion. Opinion is a
species of property; and though I am always desirous to share with
my friend to a certain extent, I shall ever like to keep some tenets,
and some property, properly my own. * * * * *
Your well-wisher and friend,
C. Lamb.

Forms of Salutation.—Custom authorizes the use of several forms

of salutation. These may be arranged under four heads:—
1. To Strangers.
Sir, Madame, Miss ⸺.
2. To Acquaintances.
Dear Sir, Dear Madame, Dear Miss ⸺.
My dear Sir, My dear Madame, My dear Miss ⸺, imply a
better acquaintance than Dear Sir, &c.
3. To Friends or Relatives.
Dear Friend, My dear Father, Dear Henry, &c.
4. To Business Firms or Corporate Bodies.
Sirs, Gentlemen, Ladies.
 Salutations to Young Ladies.—Owing to the fact that we have no
word corresponding to Sir that can be used in addressing young
ladies, there is sometimes an uncertainty as to the proper salutation
to be used. Although Madame may refer to a married or an
unmarried lady, it is not an appropriate word with which to address a
young lady. There are three forms that may be used:—

1. To a Stranger.
Decatur, Ill., May 6, 1877.
Miss Delia L. Corbus,—
* * * * *
Respectfully,
William C. Johns.
Miss Delia L. Corbus,
Adrian, Mich.
The name is given as the salutation, and the full address is given
at the close of the letter.

2. To an Acquaintance.
Adrian, Mich., Sept. 3, 1877.
Dear Miss Dewey,—
* * * * * *
Very truly,
Thomas M. Hunter.
Miss Ella Dewey,
Hotel Madison, Toledo, Ohio.

3. To an Intimate Friend.—In writing to intimate friends, the

character of the letter, and the intimacy of the writers, will suggest
the proper forms.