Catholics and the Pledge of Allegiance?

Status
Not open for further replies.
twf said:
Of course this will be a topic where I doubt an American will agree, but I personally think it is easier to swear allegiance to a living person as a symbol of the nation than it is to an inanimate object (the flag) as a symbol of the nation ;). Its not loyalty to an individual so much as it is to an institution which in turn represents the na
Click to expand...
That’s because you’re a citizen of a Nation based on that sort of Monarchic mentality.

We’re citizens of a Nation built on principle, not personality. We swear oaths to the Constitution and pledge allegiance to the Flag - we don’t swear oaths to the President or pledge allegiance to our Governor.

We value the Office and the Idea more than the person.

I would never swear an oath “to Donald Trump.”

However, part of the oath I swore was to obey the “Orders of the POTUS.”
 
Last edited:
The end result is essentially the same- at least in a constitutional monarchy.
The President of the USA is a political office. The individual who holds it has an agenda. The monarchy is apolitical. No one swears an oath to the sitting Prime Minister, whoever that happens to be- or any other politician.
 
This is actually one of the reasons I like the idea of a Monarchy. The Monarch would serve as a unified apolitical symbol of the country vs how it is here in the US where only roughly 50% of the population is happy with our head of state at any given time and it serves as an extremely divisive symbol.
 
JanSobieskiIII said:
how it is here in the US where only roughly 50% of the population is happy with our head of state at any given time and it serves as an extremely divisive symbol.
Click to expand...
We have mighty god-emperor Trump, he is far above a mere monarch.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
twf said:
The end result is essentially the same- at least in a constitutional monarchy.
The President of the USA is a political office. The individual who holds it has an agenda. The monarchy is apolitical. No one swears an oath to the sitting Prime Minister, whoever that happens to be- or any other politician.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you are saying here. In the UK, the Queen (or the future King) is the sovereign. In the United States, the President is NOT the sovereign. The sovereign in the United States is “We the People” – not individuals, but all citizens as a group.

There really isn’t a comparison between the President of the United States and the British sovereign. Yes, they are both heads of state, but that’s where it ends. The Queen is far more than the President of the United States.

The Office of the President of the United States really has much more in common with the Office of Prime Minister than it does with The Crown.

God bless.
 
Last edited:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(These pictures are not to imply Trump is an evil dictator. They are mocking his tendency to idolize authoritarian dictators publicly as well as the sycophantic fawning over him of some of his most vocal supporters)
 
Last edited:
JanSobieskiIII said:
This is actually one of the reasons I like the idea of a Monarchy. The Monarch would serve as a unified apolitical symbol of the country vs how it is here in the US where only roughly 50% of the population is happy with our head of state at any given time and it serves as an extremely divisive symbol.
Click to expand...
That’s because the President of the United States operates more like a Prime Minister than a typical head of state.
 
Somewhat ironic however that the Office of POTUS has come to be much more powerful than either the Queen or the PM in Britain.

POTUS is head of State & head of Government & Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, he has immense power in the US Govt.
 
Arguably completely against the wishes and intent of the founders. Congress abrogated a lot of power to the office that used to be held by legislature but proved to be slow moving and inefficient.
 
If not reciting the pledge is a political act, then reciting it is also. You may find it an agreeable political act, but that doesn’t make it not one.

The OP has not even said that she objects to the pledge nor to reciting it. She objects to children being compelled to recite it. Objecting to compulsory gestures of loyalty to the State is hardly unAmerican. It’s thoroughly American.
 
Spyridon said:
Somewhat ironic however that the Office of POTUS has come to be much more powerful than either the Queen or the PM in Britain.

POTUS is head of State & head of Government & Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, he has immense power in the US Govt.
Click to expand...
That’s because the President of the United States was never intended to be the head of government. He was only supposed to be Head of State and Head of the Executive Branch.

The “Head of Government” role was supposed to be equally divided between the President, the President of the Senate (aka the Vice President), the Speaker of the House, and the Chief Justice.

But over time, it really became the President, Speaker of the House, and the Senate Majority Leader, with the Speaker and Majority Leader deferring to the President if from the same party. That deference was never supposed to happen.
 
Teaching respect for one’s nation through such practices is good parenting. It’s not a matter of law. It’s a matter of values. Indeed, any Catholic School is about values, including love of God and country.
 
Last edited:
The context of the discussion was oath of allegiance. The poster I replied to was pointing out that Americans swear allegiance to the constitution / republic rather than to the president. My point was that when citizens of Commonwealth Realms swear allegiance to the Queen, it is effectively the same end result…they are swearing allegiance to the nation, not to the personal whims of the individual who happens to be monarch.

That being said, to your point, the President of the United States is Chief of State. The Prime Minister of the UK or the Prime Minister of Canada are not Chiefs of State of their respective countries. The President’s counterpart as Chief of State is the Queen. On the other hand, the President is also Head of Government, and in that role his counterpart would be the Prime Minister.
 
The authorities, namely the Supreme Court, have said you cannot be required to say the pledge, so there is nothing un-Catholic about refusing to say it.

Now, if it was a school rule (and as a private school, they could make it a rule), then respect for authority would reply as due to the school.
 
In the Westminster system, the Prime Minister has almost unlimited power IF, and this is important, he has the support of Parliament. That is to say, there are no specific limits on his or her power. The US President has a lot more power on the global scene, but I would argue that its much easier for a sitting Prime Minister to push through a domestic agenda than it is for a US President - even if the latter’s party holds Congress.
 
Again, it’s not about rules or law. It’s about tradition and practice and teaching values. But let’s clarify one point, if the children do not say the pledge, it’s the parents who are objecting.

I suppose by your reasoning, a child should also be able to conscientiously object to doing his homework. The parents would have to respect his constitutional right to remain uneducated even though he meets the requirement of law to be in school.

Interesting idea. Why didn’t I think of that? I hated homework!
 
Children can object to saying the pledge themselves though that’s more likely as they get older. I know I stopped saying it in high school, maybe middle, and it wasn’t because of my parents’ objections.

And no, that’s a very uncharitable effort on your part to make a caricature of my argument. The question is this: do Catholics have to say the pledge of allegiance? On it’s face, no, they do not have to (in public schools), though there are reasons to encourage it. At a private school, the school may have the authority to demand you say the pledge. In that case, deference to authority would require you to say the pledge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top