Does the fact the General fought for the Confederacy keep us from learning any positive lessons from him? And if it does, what have we lost? And whose fault is it that we have lost it?
It is history that teaches us to hope.
—Robert E. Lee—
Key point: All great men are imperfect, and we are wise to realize this; but if we fail to realize as well that imperfect men also can be great, we are utter fools.
You can access all the articles in this series from this page.
True or false?
Slavery is sanctioned in the Old Testament, although it is regulated. In the New Testament, the institution of slavery never is explicitly condemned. The apostle Paul actually sent one runaway slave, Onesimus, back to his master, Philemon; despite the fact Philemon would have every legal right to punish Onesimus harshly.
The answer is: True. Yet much more needs to be said. Here and here are pages that present numerous points that need to be made.
Yet because
-
-
- the Bible isn’t explicit in its condemnation of slavery but instead implicitly confronts and attacks its ideological underpinnings, and because
- slavery existed for centuries in a large number of places and many who became believers were born into societies that practiced it,
-
some believers through the centuries were convinced that God ordained slavery for a purpose, so they did not see it as an inherently sinful or evil institution. Actually, “slavery” as God authorized it and regulated it in the Old Testament wasn’t inherently sinful, at least not at that time. Significantly, though, there were genuine differences between the practices authorized in the Old Testament and the slavery practiced in America prior to the War Between the States.
Even so, it was entirely possible for American slave owners to treat their slaves well, and some did just that. Podcaster Jon Harris explores this historical reality in this excellent Conversations That Matter podcast. Especially in light of the demands of many social justice warriors today for reparations for blacks, serious questions must be answered.
You see, authentic history presents certain truths with which social justice crusaders are quite uncomfortable. Some slave owners were black. While the actual percentage of white Southerners who owned slaves is debated, it was clearly a minority, and probably a small one (see item 2 in this article). Historical revisionism is a weapon social justice crusaders use to oversimplify the events of the past in order to push their Marxist agendas. This is inherently unjust. We must be wary of these efforts and counter them with the truth. Hopefully, this article will help you, dear reader, push back.
Revisionist history is an unjust and manipulative tool used by social justice warriors to push their Marxist agendas.
Some Slave Owners Were Devout Christians Who Treated Slaves with Dignity and Respect
All of that is to say this: In America up until the end of slavery after the War Between the States, numerous Christians, some of whom were devout, either did not see slavery a sinful or evil, or they accepted it as something God allowed and did not oppose it. Some of them owned slaves, but many did not. Moreover, of those who did own slaves, not all abused them. Some treated them well. Some Southerners, General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson among them, can be noted for their intentional kindness to slaves in their spheres of influence. Jackson established a Sunday school for blacks in his area, taught them the Scriptures, and taught them how to read — even though doing so was illegal.
It is significant that black leader Booker T. Washington (1856-1915) praised Confederate Generals Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee with regard to their posture toward black slaves. In 1910 Washington wrote, “The first white people in America, certainly the first in the South to exhibit their interest in the reaching of the Negro and saving his soul through the medium of the Sunday-school were Robert E. Lee and ‘Stonewall’ Jackson….Where Robert E. Lee and ‘Stonewall’ Jackson have led in the redemption of the Negro through the Sunday-school, the rest of us can afford to follow.”
Expressions of praise for Lee from Booker T. Washington and other notable leaders are showcased on this page.
Robert Edward Lee: A Man of Exemplary Character
Last time we gave consideration to the matter of historical revisionism and its dangers. We also talked about the subtle influences of the contemporary culture (including its prevailing narrative) on our perspectives as we learn about and interpret history.
Furthermore, although we did not use the term, we alluded to the “slash-and-burn” efforts of social justice crusaders who insist on applying a microscope to the imperfections of good men and contend their flaws overshadow absolutely everything that was good or potentially good about them. As we will see next time, the microscope is selectively applied.
Specifically, we highlighted these patterns because they are strongly influencing the public narrative about some of American history’s finest heroes, including Confederate General Robert E. Lee. Let’s get to know this Southern gentleman before hastily writing him off for leading the military forces of the South. Our journey will be fascinating. To the surprise of some, we will find that Lee had a host of admirable qualities worth emulating. Here is a three-and-a-half minute video biography of the general.
Lee Considered Slavery an Evil
Right off the bat, let’s echo the video’s affirmation that Lee “viewed slavery as an evil.” We noted this at the end of our most recent post. We linked to this particular quote but did not reproduce it; we reproduce it here. Lee said, “There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil.”
There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil.
—Robert E. Lee—
At the beginning of the post, we emphasized that being a Union soldier or supporter didn’t necessarily mean that one opposed slavery. Lincoln’s primary goal, at least at first, was to preserve the Union, not free the slaves. These kinds of historical realities are all too often are ignored or forgotten. They’re frustrating to elites because they don’t fit the modern narrative. They are true nonetheless.
A Man Devoted to Duty
The mini-biography of General Lee does not highlight the early struggles of the boy who would grow up to take command of the Confederate forces during the War Between the States. Lee’s father, who was known as “Light Horse Harry” Lee, had financial difficulties that devastated his reputation and hurt his family.1 Robert was eleven when his father died. The family was forced to sell their home, and the young Robert had to shoulder the responsibility of caring for his mother, who was in ill health. He was “[k]ind, sensitive, and dutiful from the beginning, [and] he began to work to make something of himself and restore the honor of the Lee family name.”2
In 1820, Robert became a student at Alexandria Academy, where he excelled. In 1825, at 18 years of age, he “received an appointment to the United States Military Academy at West Point,” where, again, he succeeded and commanded the respect of his instructors and his fellow cadets. By the time he had completed his first year at West Point, Robert Lee had earned the rank of sergeant. It was a noteworthy accomplishment; no one else had achieved this rank in so short a period of time.
As the video indicates, “Once the Mexican War begins he was assigned to Winfield Scott’s staff and served with great distinction there.…As a result of his exploits during the Mexican War, Lee was considered one of the most courageous, intelligent, and daring officers in the army, at the time.”
Part of the reason Robert excelled was his attitude toward the responsibilities before him. He considered performance of duty a sacred task and strove for excellence in all he undertook. He said, “Duty, then is the sublimest word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more; you should never wish to do less.”
He also said, “There is a true glory and a true honor: the glory of duty done — the honor of the integrity of principle.”
A Man Devoted to Family, Heritage, and Home
When Lee was asked to command the Union Forces in the early days of the North / South conflict, Lee could not bring himself to take up his sword against his home state of Virginia. He had been loyal to the United States during his career, but ultimately he saw himself as a Virginian. Home, family, and heritage were paramount.
On April 20, 1861, Lee resigned from his position in the United States Army. He wrote his official letter of resignation (PDF file here) to Secretary of War Simon Cameron. Here is a draft of his letter informing Lieutenant General Winfield Scott, with whom he had served, of his decision.
To General Winfield Scott Commander-in-Chief, United States Army
Arlington,Washington City P.O.
20 Apr 1861
Lt. Genl Winfield Scott
Commd U.S. Army
General:
Since my interview with you on the 18th instant I have felt that I ought not retain my commission in the Army. I Therefore tender my resignation, which I request you will recommend for acceptance.
It would have been presented at once, but for the struggle it has cost me to separate myself from a service to which I have devoted all the best years of my life & all the ability I possessed.
During the whole of that time, more than 30 years, I have experienced nothing but kindness & consideration, & it has always been my ardent desire to merit your approbation.
I shall carry with me to the grave the most grateful recollections of your kind consideration, & your name & fame will always be dear to me. Save in the defense of my native State, I never desire again to draw my sword.
Be pleased to accept my most earnest wishes for the continuance of your happiness & prosperity & believe me
most truly yours.
R.E. LEE
On the same day, Lee wrote to his cousin Roger Jones. Here is page 1 of the letter; here is page 2. The decision Lee had made weighed heavily upon him, but he did not wonder if he had made the right choice. Lee wrote,
Arlington 20 April, 1861
My Dear Cousin Roger _
I only rec’d today your letter of the 17th _ Sympathizing with you in the troubles that are pressing so heavily upon our beloved country, & entirely agreeing with you in your notions of allegiance, I have been unable to make up my mind to raise my hand against my native state, my relatives, my children & my home. I have therefore resigned my commission in the Army & never desire again to draw my sword save in defence of my state. I consider it useless to go into the reasons that influenced me. I can give you no advice. I merely tell you what I have done that you may do better.
Wishing you every happiness and prosperity.
I remain faithfully your kinsman,
R. E. Lee
St. R. Jones
U.S. Army
Sympathizing with you in the troubles that are pressing so heavily upon our beloved country, & entirely agreeing with you in your notions of allegiance, I have been unable to make up my mind to raise my hand against my native state, my relatives, my children & my home.
—Robert E. Lee, to his cousin Roger Jones, on the same day he resigned from the US Army—
Writing to his sister, Anne Marshall, Lee expressed his convictions in much the same way. He understood that accepting the offer to lead the Union forces would mean leading an attack on his homeland. Understandably, it was to him about a great deal more than soil and land. It was about people — his fellow Southerners, yes — but it also was about his family. Does a man not instinctively defend his home when it is under attack, even when, and perhaps especially when, the attack comes from those with whom he has had an allegiance? Whether one agrees with Lee’s decision, and whether he believes he would have made the same choice or a different one, an individual ought to at least be able to understand Lee’s perspective.
Following the war, Robert E. Lee would look back without regret, despite his failure to lead the Southern forces to victory. He declared, “I did only what my duty demanded; I could have taken no other course without dishonor & if all was to be done over again, I should act precisely in the same manner.”
I did only what my duty demanded; I could have taken no other course without dishonor & if all was to be done over again, I should act precisely in the same manner.
—Robert E. Lee—
An Effective Leader
In the devotional guide, Battlefields & Blessings: Stories of Faith and Courage from the Civil War (Chattanooga: Living Ink Books, 2006), Terry Tuley writes about Robert E. Lee as a leader of men:
Lee firmly believed that leading by example was the best way to influence others. His example motivated men to follow his command in battle. Even after the surrender at Appomattox, his men were ready to continue the fight if he gave the command. Why did Lee’s armies have such a passion to follow his leadership? Because they knew he loved them and had their best interests at heart.3
Accordingly, Tully showcases this quote from the general:
As a general principle, you should not force young men to do their duty, but let them do it voluntarily and thereby develop their characters…Young men must not expect to escape contact with evil but must learn not to be contaminated by it.4
“You must be careful how you walk, and where you go,” said Lee, “for there are those following you who will set their feet where yours are set.”
A Man of Principle
On the battlefield and in other arenas of life, Lee challenged his men to fight for the ideals they held dear, to remain faithful to convictions rooted in virtue and truth. He told them in 1861,
Keep steady in the view of the great principles for which you contend. The safety of your homes and the lives of all you hold dear depend upon your courage and exertions. Let each man resolve to be victorious, and that the right of self government, liberty and peace shall find him a defender.
Lee believed in making a right choice over an expedient one. He said, “I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.”
He also said, “Never do a wrong thing to make a friend or keep one.”
Here is Lee’s advice on being forthright: “You must study to be frank with the world: frankness is the child of honesty and courage. Say just what you mean to do on every occasion, and take it for granted that you mean to do right.”
“Let us go home,” Lee said, “and cultivate our virtues.”
A Man Who Was Intensely Realistic and Practical, yet Upbeat
Lee gave this advice: “Shake off those gloomy feelings. Drive them away. Fix your mind and pleasures upon what is before you. All is bright if you will think it so. All is happy if you will make it so. Do not dream. It is too ideal, too imaginary. Dreaming by day, I mean. Live in the world you inhabit. Look upon things as they are. Take them as you find them. Make the best of them. Turn them to your advantage.”
Significantly, Lee wrote this advice to his son Custis, who was at the time a West Point Cadet.5 Lee’s Christian convictions regarding the nature of humanity, including the doctrine of original sin, informed the general about the best ways to approach both relationships and the affairs of one’s own personal life. In his book Robert E. Lee on Leadership: Executive Lessons in Character, Courage, and Vision, H. W. Crocker, 3rd writes,
Lee was a firm believer in the basic Christian tenets, in particular the Christian doctrine of Original Sin. It was a—even the—salient point of his character. If he was resolute and confident, if he was never crushed by setbacks or interested in assigning blame for failure, it was because of this. He expected men to fail, because, by nature, men usually did. He knew the challenge of leadership was to understand the fallen nature of man and succeed in spite of it.
So far did he believe this—and so far did he feel it was important to understand this reality—that he discouraged his children from reading fiction. In a letter to his wife, he wrote: “Let him [his son Rooney] never touch a novel. They print beauty more charming than nature, and describe happiness that never exists. They will teach him to sigh after that which has no reality, to despise the little good that is granted us in this world and to expect more than is given.”
While this view might sound narrow, Lee was no killjoy. On the contrary, he took great pleasure in nature, in his young children, and in the company of charming young women. He felt, rather, that a realistic understanding of life and its limitations—an understanding grounded in an appreciation of Original Sin—provided one with the means to understand and appreciate what was truly good, to enjoy this life we are given of simple pleasures, to keep oneself on a steady keel, and not to allow oneself to wallow amidst unattainable fantasies.6
It truly is remarkable how holding a biblical view of original sin can sharpen one’s perspective on the rest of life and enable him or her to effectively approach life’s challenges. We desperately need to recover a belief in original sin in our own day.
Lee was realistic about failure but always looking to learn from it in order to improve. He said, “We must expect reverses, even defeats. They are sent to teach us wisdom and prudence, to call forth greater energies, and to prevent our falling into greater disasters.”
Of course, it was more than just the biblical teaching on original sin that equipped Lee to make the best of the situations he faced (although certainly this teaching was involved). It was what the Bible teaches about God! Historian Terry Tuley notes that Lee, being both “a man of great faith” as well as a “realist,” “viewed life through the lens of the Bible and learned to be content within the parameters of reality. He could accept both victory and defeat with patience because he had learned to trust in the providence of almighty God.”7
Tuley highlights this quote from Lee to demonstrate the general’s approach to meeting the challenges he faced: “Get correct views of life, and learn to see the world in its true light. It will enable you to live pleasantly, to do good, and, when summoned away, to leave without regret.”8
Get correct views of life, and learn to see the world in its true light. It will enable you to live pleasantly, to do good, and, when summoned away, to leave without regret.
—Robert E. Lee—
We see both Lee’s practical approach to life and his faith in God in this, a conviction Lee expressed in a letter to Lt. Col. Charles Marshall in September of 1870, shortly before he died.
My experience of men has neither disposed me to think worse of them nor be indisposed to serve them: nor, in spite of failures which I lament, of errors which I now see and acknowledge, or the present aspect of affairs, do I despair of the future. The truth is this: The march of Providence is so slow and our desires so impatient; the work of progress so immense and our means of aiding it so feeble; the life of humanity is so long, that of the individual so brief, that we often see only the ebb of the advancing wave and are thus discouraged. It is history that teaches us to hope.
We can readily imagine Lee’s encouraging his disheartened fellow Southerners with similar words after the war. I’ll have more on Lee’s positive post-war influence in just a moment.
Concerning one’s personal desires and resources and the conflicts that often arise between the two, Lee declared, “It is easier to make our wishes conform to our means than to make our means conform to our wishes.”
A Reconciler and Peacemaker
After the war ended, the South was in shambles. The people of the North wanted to see the culture of the South utterly destroyed. A rising tide of anger and resentment among former Confederates was casting a dark shadow over what might otherwise had been a wave of relief that the conflict had ceased and that peace now was at hand. Significantly, Southern manhood had taken a beating and needed to be restored honorably, but intense emotions were obscuring possible ways for this to happen. Robert E. Lee’s guidance and leadership very well may have kept the spirit of the South from being utterly obliterated during the years immediately following the war.9 Historian John J. Dwyer writes that
wisdom seasoned his thought and actions. He rebuked younger officers who advocated continuing the war with guerrilla tactics; he refused to countenance or support large scale emigration of Confederates to foreign lands; he urged Southerners to work lawfully and cheerfully within the existing laws of the United States to rebuild their fortunes and their land; and most of all, he beseeched them to forgive and forget wrongs committed against them by Federals past and present.10
The former leader of the Confederate forces declared, “I have fought against the people of the North because I believed they were seeking to wrest from the South dearest rights. But I have never cherished toward them bitter or vindictive feelings. And have never seen the day when I did not pray for them.”
Lee said this about the poison of bitterness and its antidote, authentic forgiveness: “The gentleman does not needlessly or unnecessarily remind an offender of a wrong he may have committed against him. He can not only forgive, he can forget; and he strives for that nobleness of self and mildness of character which impart sufficient strength to let the past be the past.”
Lee’s nudging his fellow Southerners in the right direction often involved rebuking them, sometimes gently, and sometimes forcefully.
He counseled one of his many lovely, but bitter young female admirers in this way: “I want you to take a message to your friends. Tell them from me that it is unworthy of them as women, and especially as Christian women, to cherish feelings of resentment against the North. Tell them that it grieves me inexpressibly to know that such a state of things exists, and that I implore them to do their part to heal our country’s wounds.”11
He also said,
I have thought from the time of the cessation of the hostilities, that silence and patience on the part of the South was the true course; and I think so still. Controversy of all kinds will, in my opinion, only serve to continue excitement and passion, and will prevent the public mind from the acknowledgement and acceptance of the truth.
Robert E. Lee was a noble and effective leader in war and in peace. He sought to build bridges and demonstrate good will, not just to his former battlefield enemies and their neighbors in the North, but also to the former slaves.
On June 4, 1865, during a worship service Lee attended in Richmond, Virginia, a black man made his way to the front of the church to take communion. The tension in the air was strong and palpable. Lee performed a gesture that shocked the parishioners yet challenged them to take steps toward resolution and healing. Colonel T. L. Broun, who also was in attendance, reported that Lee “arose in his usual dignified and self-possessed manner…and reverently knelt down to partake of the communion, not far from the Negro.”12 The breakthrough event is portrayed in this brief video.
A Loyal Follower of Christ
Lee declared, “I can only say that I am nothing but a poor sinner, trusting in Christ alone for salvation,” and, “My chief concern is to try to be a humble, earnest Christian….”
He also said, “My trust is in the mercy and wisdom of a kind Providence, who ordered all things for our good.”
After taking the helm of Washington College in Lexington, Virginia in August of 1865 (the school later was renamed Washington and Lee University), Lee told a pastor, “I dread the thought of any student going away from the college without becoming a sincere Christian.”
Lee called the Bible “a book in comparison with which all others in my eyes are of minor importance, and which in all my perplexities and distresses has never failed to give me light and strength.”
In 1869, shortly before his death, the former leader of the South’s military forces and the president at Washington College extended an invitation to John William Jones, his friend and former chaplain, to deliver an address at the school. After Jones’s presentation, Lee thanked his friend for coming. He said,
Oh, Doctor: if I could only know that all the young men in this college were good Christians I should have nothing more to desire.
I wish, sir, to thank you for your address. It was just what we needed. Our great want is a revival which shall bring these young men to Christ.
I should be disappointed, sir, and shall fail in the leading object that bought me here, unless these young men all become Christians; and I wish you and other of your sacred profession to do all you can to accomplish it.
We poor sinners need to come back from our wanderings to seek pardon through the all-sufficient merits of our Redeemer. And we need to pray earnestly for the power of the Holy Spirit to give us a precious revival in our hearts and among the unconverted.13
Oh, Doctor: if I could only know that all the young men in this college were good Christians I should have nothing more to desire.
—Robert E. Lee to clergyman John William Jones—
Such was the character — and the passion — of Robert E. Lee.
More to Come
“It is history that teaches us to hope,” said Lee. But history can’t offer us any hope if what actually happened is distorted, misrepresented, and erased! Contemporary crusaders who appear to shun the memories of Lee and other Confederate leaders merely because they fought for the Confederacy are operating from a prejudice that rivals the racism they claim to deplore. These elites are not nearly as anti-Confederate as they are anti-American.
Mark my words: General Lee hasn’t been the elites’ primary target. They’re going after George Washington, Thomas Jefferson (also go here), Benjamin Franklin, other Founding Fathers, and historical personalities from before the founding of America. It isn’t just the vandalism, although that is bad enough. It’s also that leftists never object to the vandalism. Moreover, they publicly call for the removal of monuments of great Americans. Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is a prime example. They’re going after the founding documents as well.
Contemporary crusaders who appear to shun the memories of Lee and other Confederate leaders merely because they fought for the Confederacy are operating from a prejudice that rivals the racism they claim to deplore.
Thus, depriving Americans of the wisdom of great men from their nation’s past is only the beginning of the damage the social justice elites wish to inflict on this country.
They are trying to manipulate and shape the trajectory of American life toward socialism. Sadly, they are succeeding — but they don’t have to win.
The elites are trying to manipulate and shape the trajectory of American life toward socialism. Currently they are succeeding, but they don’t have to win.
What, someone may ask, are they so upset about? Great question. Next time (against the backdrop of the information provided here and in part 1) we’ll expose what really irks leftists about Robert E. Lee. Once we know that, we’ll understand why the elites hate America so much…
…and we’ll be far better equipped to thwart their efforts to inflict damage on this country.
Keep a sharp eye out for part 3. It will appear soon.
Copyright © 2021 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All rights reserved.
top image credit: General Lee’s Last Visit to Stonewall Jackson’s Grave, painting by Louis Eckhardt, 1872
Notes:
1John J. Dwyer, “An Epistle, Written of God” in Faith in God and Generals: An Anthology of Faith, Hope, and Love in the American Civil War, Ted Baehr and Susan Wales, compilers, (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 80.
2Ibid.
3Terry Tuley, Battlefields & Blessings: Stories of Faith and Courage from the Civil War (Chattanooga: Living Ink Books, 2006), 50.
4Ibid.
5H. W. Crocker, 3rd, Robert E. Lee on Leadership (p. 15). Crown. Kindle Edition.
6Crocker, (pp. 15-16).
7Tuley, 163.
8Ibid.
9Dwyer, 85.
10Ibid.
11Ibid.
12William J. Federer, America’s God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, (Coppell, TX: Fame Publishing, 1994), 366-367.
12Federer, 367-368.
Be First to Comment