Vox Populi
A Letter to the Editor
 
 

Did George Washington really say "So help me God"?
Tuesday, October 23, 2007

by Ray Soller

In your Commentary entitled JUST WHOSE AMERICA IS THIS, ANYWAY?, among the many hyper-extended sentences, I happened to read the following:

". . . I also noted that "The Constitution of the United States never once mentions God, not even in its Preamble (though a number of State Constitutions, in their respective Preambles, cite gratitude to "Almighty God" or "the Supreme Being" for "blessings" such as "Liberty")." A fair number of my fellow Americans, I dare say, don't even realize that the four words "so help me God" it has become traditional, ever since George Washington himself first used them, to append to the Oath of Office for President of the United States are not at all actually part of that Oath as spelled out in Article II, Section 1, clause 8 of that document."

Even though many people may think "So help me God" is part of the presidential oath, and in spite of the widespread notion to the contrary, there is no contemporary historical evidence showing that George Washington added anything to his presidential oath of office. This American legend made its debut in 1854, sixty-five years after the event, in the book, "The Republican Court; or, American Society in the Days of Washington," by Rufus W. Griswold. Griswold may have picked up this bit about George Washington saying "so help me God" from Washington Irving. However, neither of them ever disclose just how they came by their version of Washington's oath.

As far as can be determined, the first President who is known to have added those words to his presidential oath is Chester Alan Arthur. He appended "so help me God" to his oath when he was sworn into office on Sept. 22, 1881 after the death of President Garfield. Later on, several other Presidents during the first third of the 20th Century adopted this practice. The last President, who did not use those words, was Herbert Hoover. One may say that a President can choose to add these words to the presidential oath, but it is a clear violation of the Constitution, and surely not a good idea for a judicial official to prompt the President to succumb to a religious test of office. This, unfortunately, has been the unbroken practice since FDR's Inaugural Ceremony in 1933, and there is absolutely no early record that this practice started with George Washington.

A customary place for a President to acknowledge God's role in our national affairs is in the Inaugural Address. Indeed all Presidents, with one exception, have done so. Washington's second Inaugural Ceremony, in contrast to his first (where Chancellor Livingston, a fellow Mason, most likely, requested a Bible; where Madison drafted Washington's Inaugural Address; and where Congress laid out the concluding church service), was one which Washington managed completely. There was no planned church service, or official prayer. Furthermore, there were no reports of a Bible being present, or Washington saying, "So help me God."

The practice of adding "So help me God" to federal oaths outside of the courtroom began in 1862 with the Iron-clad Test Oath during the Civil War. It was supposed to keep Confederate sympathizers from participating in the Federal Government. It may well have been a counter-measure designed to offset the psychological impact that followed when Jefferson Davis repeated "So help me God" as he took his oath of office as President of the Confederacy. It wasn't until President Arthur's administration that the federal oath was restored to a degree of normalcy, and stripped of its designed Civil War anti-Confederate hostilities. As you probably are well aware, Congress preferred to retain the "So help me God" anomaly.

The notion that George Washington, as the President of the Constitutional Convention, would, at any subsequent time, disregard the concerted effort of the convention delegates and unilaterally amend the presidential oath is an unsubstantiated Orwellian legend.

Two very contrasting videos about whether GW said SHMG can be seen on the internet. The first is a short musical ballad, "'So help me God' - he didn't say it," sung by Michael Newdow that can be accessed on his website http://www.restorethepledge.com/video/. The second video is sponsored by the Senate Historians Office under the direction of the Senate Rule Committee, and a video icon, "'So Help Me God"' A historical look at the Inaugural Ceremonies 1789-2005," for it can be found in the lower right hand corner on their website http://inaugural.senate.gov/history/factsandfirsts/index.htm. (You only have to view the first two or three minutes of either video to get their message.)

Ray Soller
Duluth, GA
rxs at alum dot mit dot edu


Mr. Berg-Andersson responds:

Well, Mr. Soller has certainly done a fair amount of research on this topic, which I am not here going to at all dispute.

I will here only note the following:

First of all, it is interesting that Mr. Soller happened to have brought up a three-year-old Commentary of mine (one which was principally intended as the "closing unit" of my series of Commentaries on- and written during and immediately after- the Republican National Convention back in 2004), for I happened to have, again, addressed the phrase "so help me God" and the Constitution in my most recent Commentary for this website, entitled WHAT KIND OF NATION, THIS? (hmmm-- a rather similar title, too!) and posted a month ago now, in which I wrote

I could have also gone on to note that, while many- if not most- Americans believe the words "so help me God" to be part and parcel of the Presidential Oath of Office, it is- in fact- not! (don't believe me? then please see Article II, Section 1, clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution: there are 35 words in the Oath of Office prescribed for the President of the United States; "so help me God" is not at all amongst them!)

and managed to avoid any mention of George Washington altogether!

Secondly, while I am well aware of the many historical controversies surrounding the notion of just who was the first President of the United States to append these words to the Presidential Oath (and the concomitant notion that George Washington's doing so is more in the realm of mythos rather than History), I was- in the earlier, September 2004, Commentary- merely referring to George Washington having used "so help me God" as part of his Oath of Office in an, admittedly, facetious- where not also flippant- manner. I was, in effect, saying "even if you who read this happen to believe George Washington himself used them, these words are not found in the Constitution". What I should have written, to make said intent most clear, would have been something along the lines of A fair number of my fellow Americans, I dare say, don't even realize that the four words "so help me God" it has become traditional, ever since- perhaps, as so many seem to believe- George Washington himself first used them, to append to the Oath of Office for President of the United States are not at all actually part of that Oath as spelled out in Article II, Section 1, clause 8, etc. Adding the phrase "perhaps, as so many seem to believe" would have, to be sure, made both my intent- as well as my sarcasm- the more apparent; yes, such was an oversight on my part!

I will take exception to at least one thing that Mr. Soller has written and that is his notion that a President voluntarily appending the words "so help me God" to his or her Oath of Office is, somehow, "a clear violation of the Constitution". Aside from the fact that I find it rather difficult to fathom just how someone might bring a case in Federal court arguing that said court should order someone not to at all use these words on grounds of their alleged unconstitutionality (for who would have standing, in the first place, to have such an issue heard by the court?; if such can even be adjudicated, wouldn't it have to have been brought before a court before a President-to-be has had a chance to even utter these "unconstitutional" words?: in which case, can a court even enjoin someone from saying something that has not yet been said [sounds like Prior Restraint to me!]), it seems to me that a newly-inaugurated President uttering "so help me God" is not inherently different than that same person placing his or her hand upon a Bible while reciting the Oath of Office (with or without saying "so help me God"). In addition, mightn't a potential future Muslim President of the United States be permitted to take his or her Oath with his or her hand(s) on the Qur'an instead of the Bible or, for that matter, no sacred scripture at all? (Indeed, I have already devoted at least half of a Commentary earlier this year on this very subject) and, with or without Qu'ran, might this hypothetical someday Muslim President be permitted to say something reflecting his or her belief in "Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful", in lieu of a "so help me God", at the end of his or her Oath of Office?

We don't yet know, of course, who will actually be taking the Presidential Oath of Office come Noon Eastern Time (1700 UTC) on Tuesday 20 January 2009 but, yes, it could very well be Republican former Governor Mitt Romney, by all accounts a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: I also have no way of knowing (and will not at all find out- as neither will anyone else- unless he is elected in the first place, of course) on what exactly he might place his left hand in just such a case-- but it could be a Bible-- or a copy of 'the Book of Mormon'-- or even a copy of Doctrines and Covenants and/or The Pearl of Great Price, for all *I* care! Just so long as Mr. Romney himself, should he- indeed- find himself in a position to do so come that January day a little over a year from now, takes the Presidential Oath of Office even more seriously as a result of his so tying said Oath to his own religious (and, by extension, moral and ethical) beliefs and values. For, if placing a hand on a page (or cover of a collection) of scripture sacred to the Oath-taker and/or saying "so help me God" after having stated the Oath itself does not do so, then it is all a useless- where not also pointless- exercise in any event: nevertheless, its efficacy in this regard can only be in the eye of the Oath-taker him-or-herself.

And I would say the same of all candidates currently seeking to win the Presidency come the Fall of 2008- whether Democrat, Republican, Third Party or Independent. Whoever should be elected, I would want the new President to feel ethically bound to most fully honor- and, thereby, fairly apply- the Oath of Office he or she would end up taking: if it happens to take a Bible (or equivalent) and/or a "so help me God" (or, again, equivalent) appended to the end of said Oath to accomplish this, then so be it! To reiterate what I wrote, back in February of this year (specifically in relation to Congressman Ellison of Minnesota, a Muslim, having so recently taken his Oath of Office [as part of a "photo-op", since all members of the U.S. House present at the opening of a given Congress are formally sworn in all at once] on a copy of the Qu'ran):

I merely see a newly elected Congressman swearing to defend the Constitution- again, against all enemies, foreign and domestic- on a book he himself believes to be the very words of his own God; and I would rather have that than have a Muslim office-holder swear to same on a collection of Sacred Scripture in which he or she does not at all believe (and which then- presumably, however theoretically or hypothetically- would allow him or her to more easily violate said oath on the grounds that it was, as a result, not at all morally, ethically or religiously binding)!

I would say the very same thing about a newly elected President of the United States of America.

Thus, I still most fully stand by the words which immediately follow those Mr. Soller himself quoted from my September 2004 post-GOP Convention Commentary, where I wrote:

There is, of course, nothing at all wrong with a religious man or woman elected, or otherwise succeeding, to our Nation's Highest Office adding the words "so help me God" to this Oath at the time of his or her swearing in...

And, so long as this is done without someone else holding the proverbial "gun to one's head" (that is: it is voluntary on the part of the Oath-taker), it is hardly "a clear violation of the Constitution"!

 


Vox Populi Home