Pledge of allegiance to the Vatican

[Saint_Sebastian]

I have to agree with gamewell. The pledge of allegiance is an American sign.
Our baptismal vows should suffice to remind us where our loyalties lie, and we repeat them several times throughout the year. There is no need to pledge allegiance to a foreign power, even though the Holy Father is our spiritual head.
This will only become a divisive force between Catholics, and we have enough division as it is.

Dear Viki, The Vatican and the Pope are not a foreign power for Catholic, they are in fact the only power on earth whom are approved by Christ. Of course the pledge would create a divisive force in the Church, it would separate those who practice fidelity to all that is Catholic from those who give scandal to the Church by misrepresenting Christ and the Doctrine of Faith. This is the reason the pledge was written so that the children of deception could be made painfully apparent. Pope Benedict XVI said he would rather see [more] entirely faithful Catholic as the body of the Church and [less] many unfaithful who misrepresent the Church. On his visit to the USA, Pope Benedict XVI specifically expressed his concern that American Catholic are turning more and more to secularism and away from fidelity. The Baptismal vow is not enough to prevent Catholic from secularism which is primarily no more than practising worldly behaviours. His call is to become more religious and faithful to Christ. No one so far has developed a means to obtain that increase in faithful dialogue and pledge of allegiance to all that is Catholic. It is important that Catholic begin to understand that no longer can one claim to be Catholic and refuse to produce the fruits of faith. The pledge proves that in one act for the faithful and makes all those unfaithful stand out as representing the force of “dissident”. I for one would like to have those dissident identified more clearly so they can either be corrected or avoided as any unfaithful person usually is.

Not only in America but also all over the world are there many Catholic who profess their Baptismal vows yet they preach dissidence of Catholic Doctrine. This is a terrible misrepresentation of Christ and the Church He founded and protects to this day.

 

[GratefulFred]

I know the author and supporters of the proposed pledge mean well, but it does seem redundant and therefore unnecessary.

While the Vatican takes its name from the ancient Roman name of the area where it is located, the Vatican did not become a city state until about the 1920’s. I doubt whether those who live in the Vatican City State have a pledge to the Vatican flag.

And there is a significant difference between the Holy See and the Vatican. As I understand it (I could be wrong), Christ’s authority, is through the Pope (The Holy See). The Vatican is the administrative organization that supports the Holy See. If I were to pledge, I would consider pledging to the Holy See and NOT the sub unit called the Vatican. I am much more interested in the meat and potatoes and not just the plate that supports my necessary food.

BUT, and this is huge in mind mind: I am already pledged to God through His Son, Jesus Christ to whom the Pope is responsible as we all are. I am good with my sincere heartfelt expression of the Nicene Creed at Mass, receiving the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, and living up to the Precepts of the Church and the Ten Commandments and the annual renewal of my Baptism vows at Easter.

IF I do not already believe and act according to my Faith, there is no pledge that will get me there. If I do believe and act as I should (and I do do the best I can, we are all sinners) any such pledge is redundant. Any such a pledge may very well by take my focus off my faith to refocus on the sub unit of my faith.

In any event, for such a pledge to have meaning, it would have to be established by the Pope who has to consider the appropriateness of it in ALL the countries of the world.

 

[TheresaLS]

Many will disagree but here goes…maybe it would not be such a bad idea. I do not like labels but I do see my self as a Catholic American. I am a good Catholic. I do my best to follow the ten commandments and abide by the precepts of the Church. I follow and believe in the Magisterium. I believe that Jesus instituted the faith and that was part of His mission. All this and much more makes me a good American. Without my faith I would be of little value to this nation because that is who I am.

This nation has lost its moral compass. Our country has become “me” not “us” or “we”.
We look to our leaders for guidance and give them power. They make decisions that have weakened not only our nation and culture but the individual.

I believe that God is looking down and will not crown us for being “good Americans” but “followers of His Church”.

 

[Lujack]

I’d be opposed to it for a few reasons. The first is that we don’t owe any allegiance to the Pope as the head of Vatican City, we owe allegiance to him as the head of the Catholic Church. If, for whatever reason, Vatican City left the control of the Pope, it would not change his status in anyway. Secondly, the Creed at Mass is an implicit pledge of allegiance to the Church and its teaching; this redundant second pledge is redundant. Thirdly, I think it would be more trouble than its worth. If you understand it, its inoffensive, but so many people who don’t would be offended and look negatively at the Church.

Now, if it is an effective ministry, it would be worth it, but a pledge like this won’t reinforce the faith in anyone who does not already possess it, and would drive more away from the Church than it brings in.

 

[Saint_Sebastian]

In any event, for such a pledge to have meaning, it would have to be established by the Pope who has to consider the appropriateness of it in ALL the countries of the world.

The pledge was already sent to the Vatican attn: Pope Benedict XVI and the US Catholic Conference of Bishops. I do not see the pledge as redundant as there is no other instrument of fidelity like it which applies to lay parishioners. The Priests take an oath of fidelity which is similar to the pledge although I have not seen any oath or pledge for lay persons anywhere so this is a first as far as I know.

 

[Saint_Sebastian]

Many will disagree but here goes…maybe it would not be such a bad idea. I do not like labels but I do see my self as a Catholic American. I am a good Catholic. I do my best to follow the ten commandments and abide by the precepts of the Church. I follow and believe in the Magisterium. I believe that Jesus instituted the faith and that was part of His mission. All this and much more makes me a good American. Without my faith I would be of little value to this nation because that is who I am.

This nation has lost its moral compass. Our country has become “me” not “us” or “we”.
We look to our leaders for guidance and give them power. They make decisions that have weakened not only our nation and culture but the individual.

I believe that God is looking down and will not crown us for being “good Americans” but “followers of His Church”.

Theresa, You are now explaining many of the same reasons I had when writing the pledge, although I did not intend to “replace” the American pledge, rather simply add a great deal of meaning to the US pledge by uniting all Catholic faithful as a sign of morality for all to see. Many Catholic preach false Doctrines and make the Church look like a scandal.

 

[Saint_Sebastian]

I’d be opposed to it for a few reasons. The first is that we don’t owe any allegiance to the Pope as the head of Vatican City, we owe allegiance to him as the head of the Catholic Church. If, for whatever reason, Vatican City left the control of the Pope, it would not change his status in anyway. Secondly, the Creed at Mass is an implicit pledge of allegiance to the Church and its teaching; this redundant second pledge is redundant. Thirdly, I think it would be more trouble than its worth. If you understand it, its inoffensive, but so many people who don’t would be offended and look negatively at the Church.

Now, if it is an effective ministry, it would be worth it, but a pledge like this won’t reinforce the faith in anyone who does not already possess it, and would drive more away from the Church than it brings in.

Lujack, The pledge is primarily intended for parochial school children and special events so it would not present any redundancy. How the pledge is used will drive people away from it like anything else will drive away people when it is repeatedly demanded or misunderstood. Any Priest who is able to speak well of it should be able to obtain the necessary cooperation and in fact may develop an entire group dedicated to prayer for the pledge.

 

[Saint_Sebastian]

I’d be opposed to it for a few reasons. The first is that we don’t owe any allegiance to the Pope as the head of Vatican City, we owe allegiance to him as the head of the Catholic Church.

Lujack, The flag contains the emblem of the keys to the Kingdom which are held by the Pope. Every Catholic Church throughout the world posts the flag of the Vatican on the altar as well as their national flag to indicate that the Church wherever it is…is an extension of the Church in Rome. The homes of all Catholic faithful are considered the Domestic Church and so the connection between the homes of the faithful and the Vatican is evident in what is known as Ambassadorship. All Catholic faithful are considered Ambassadors of the Vatican and Representatives of Christ to the world, so flying the flag or pledging allegiance to the flag is a sign of fidelity to the power of the keys and the Pope where authority is placed primarily on the Pope and from there that same authority grants all faithful witness to Christ in accord and in unity with the Vatican.

 

[Saint_Sebastian]

Many will disagree but here goes…maybe it would not be such a bad idea. I do not like labels but I do see my self as a Catholic American. I am a good Catholic. I do my best to follow the ten commandments and abide by the precepts of the Church. I follow and believe in the Magisterium. I believe that Jesus instituted the faith and that was part of His mission. All this and much more makes me a good American. Without my faith I would be of little value to this nation because that is who I am.

This nation has lost its moral compass. Our country has become “me” not “us” or “we”.
We look to our leaders for guidance and give them power. They make decisions that have weakened not only our nation and culture but the individual.

I believe that God is looking down and will not crown us for being “good Americans” but “followers of His Church”.

Theresa, Here is the history: Coat of Arms
of the Holy See and
of the State of Vatican City

Crossed keys
surmounted by the tiara over a red field
(gules, two keys in saltire or and argent,
interlaced in the rings or, beneath a tiara argent, crowned or)

[Cf. Fundamental law of the State of Vatican City dated 26.11.2000 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Supplement, 01.02.2001, Attachment B).]

The symbolism is drawn from the Gospel and is represented by the keys given to the Apostle Peter by Christ.

The insignia is red with the two keys crossed as the Cross of St. Andrew, one gold and one silver, with the cotter pointed upwards and towards the sides of the shield. Two cords hang from the grips of the keys, usually red or blue.

The shield is surmounted by the tiara or triregnum.

Two ribbons hang from the tiara, each with a patent cross.

Ordinarily the keys have the mechanical part placed up, facing to the right and the left and usually in the form of a cross, not for the mechanisms of a lock, but as a religious symbol. The grips vary according to artistic taste, from the Gothic to the Baroque.

Since the XIV Century, the two crossed keys have been the official insignia of the Holy See. The gold one, on the right, alludes to the power in the kingdom of the heavens, the silver one, on the left, indicates the spiritual authority of the papacy on earth. The mechanisms are turned up towards the heaven and the grips turned down, in other words into the hands of the Vicar of Christ. The cord with the bows that unites the grips alludes to the bond between the two powers.