Back in 1924, Rockefeller had a dream that the era of the Revolution would be honored with the establishment of a national park at Williamsburg. For years, the era was glorified in the same way the history books had written the narrative.

Problem was that the narrative was found to be wanting as historians found the courage to challenge it. So in the 1970’s, the truth about slavery began to be interspersed with the traditional narrative. With much public resistance, as you might expect.

At one point, even a mock auction was carried out. One time only. Not again because the players themselves, both black and white, were so overcome with powerful emotions that it was evident that it would be too difficult for the actors. Perhaps too difficult to even find actors.

So, if we cannot revisit a scene, even knowing full well that it is just a re-enactment, how can we possibly convey unspeakable horrors. I’m not sure we can. And this brings up another question: If we can’t convey the horrors fully, is there a possibility of ever changing our understanding of the past?  Or re-write the narrative so that it reflects the truth, in both spirit and fact.

So we have glorified George Washington while declaring the Africans who worship their ancestors to be “heathen.”  I find that interesting.

How does this compare to the way we have arranged our religious beliefs into rigid black and white thinking, leaving no room for ambiguity? Would this be part of the reason that so many in the church cannot tolerate the thought of questioning traditions or upholding high moral standards for leaders? Is this why evil is so often suppressed in our institutions today?

Only denial would allow people to fight for universal freedom while raffling off human “property” that held no hope for liberty and no hope for the pursuit of happiness. People who rejoiced and mourned in the same breath each time they brought a new child into the world. For the child was born with sorrowful future. Most surely facing human rights violations that would make anybody, with even a halfway pure heart, cringe.

Not only were slave masters like Washington living in denial, so were their biographers. Yes, even our teachers who never seemed to think it important to teach us the origins of slavery. Nor to point out that it existed long before the Revolutionary War.

Not that they necessarily knew themselves that people were debating the slavery issue back then, even as some suggested that the abolishment of slavery be clearly written into the Constitution. Truth is, I seriously doubt any of my history teachers knew this fact. Somehow history managed to teach us that nobody questioned slavery until the 1800’s.

Certainly nobody told us that people in England were clucking their tongues and some even laughing at the blatant hypocrisy that was exhibited by the idealists who were insisting on “freedom for all.”

Washington’s story is filled with paradoxes. In a way, this gives us hope that things may be different in the future in regard to many issues of oppression and power abuse. Or, depending upon how we see the “glass,” we may despair.

I choose to be hopeful. It’s the only perspective that keeps me moving on in faith, acting in small ways on the things that I can change. Impacting others’ lives. Speaking out about bigotry and challenging the status quo that chooses to ignore reality.

Maybe that’s why someone recently suggested that I should change my web address to www.takehope.org I still prefer courage. It feels much more proactive. But that’s just my opinion.

The rules have changed, some people say. When it comes to what constitutes abuse, that is. The rules have changed. Just as the rules about slavery have changed.

The principles have NOT changed. As Malcolm X reminds us. “Wrong is wrong no matter who does it or says it.”

Slavery was wrong, no matter what the manmade rules were regarding slavery. Even in New Testament days when the writers made it appear to not be wrong. It was. Check it out. Does Jesus give us any teachings that would condone slavery? Correct me if I’m wrong. I don’t believe he did.

You may recall that people very quickly began twisting and reorganizing Jesus’ teachings to fit them into something acceptable for the culture. Rules change. Principles do not. 

If we stop at the law, Jesus taught, we do not measure up to Kingdom standards.  We have to use standards that are higher.  It's not about "what we can get by with."  It's about what is right because it comes from a very pure heart, something none of us ever can claim, try as we might.

George Washington was a slave master. He was also a gambler who was deeply in debt because of his gambling. Most likely a mental health professional, after an in-depth interview, would probably declare him to be a compulsive gambler, based on documents now uncovered by historians.

In spite of this he managed to do some remarkable things. He showed courage as a general. He sacrificed greatly. Most of all, he spoke out against the institution of slavery at times while holding those back who wanted to take action to abolish it. And just speaking, in that day, was an act of courage that could have cost him his life!!

Just as we grapple with ourselves and others when our behavior does not reflect our belief system or when we pledge our allegiance or align ourselves with organizations that exhibit inconsistencies, isn’t it a wee bit liberating to realize that we have not come upon something new in ourselves. Or in our world.

It is a part of the human condition. While we have ideals…. Ideologies. Aspirations. Hopes. Dreams. Fantasies. All of these! When history is written--our own history, even--it will be written. Not based on what we wanted or dreamed for. Nor on what we believed. The facts of history will be only what we actually did. About how we translated out our beliefs into action. Our courage will be measured by those who follow us, using standards and values that may be very different from what we hold today. Scary as that may seem.

While recently standing in line next to me, a lady expressed alarm at the book I was reading. It didn’t surprise me, after we began a congenial conversation because of the book cover, to discover that she was from a very fundamentalist church.

The title of the book was An Imperfect God by Henry Wiencek. If my new acquaintance had not been so focused on the title, she would have immediately noticed the picture and subtitle that clearly indicate the book to be about George Washington. Wiencek wasn’t writing about theology at all, but about the way Americans have been led to make the first President into something of a perfect god.

Truth is, Washington was plagued with a nagging internal conflict. Like all internal conflicts, it grew when he didn’t find a way to fully resolve it. It was played out, in fact, even after his death. By his heirs who conspired to go against their grandfather’s clearly written will that would set his slaves free.  Diminishing the estate, of course.

The conflict was between his role as a slave holder and the fact that he espoused “liberty for all.” Even as he held a position of influence in his church, so devoted to keeping the status quo that protected the institution of slavery!

Ironically, these paradoxical forces interfered greatly with this founding father’s pursuit of happiness.