The Pledge of
Allegiance (4am)
“…with liberty and justice for all.” What does this mean? Presumably, since the
phrase is a part of the pledge of allegiance to the Republic of the United
States of America, and since only Americans make this pledge, it means “with
liberty and justice for all Americans.”
There is nothing wrong with this. This is a country. Countries have agendas,
borders, interests to protect and to foster. America does what countries do,
and does it well in many instances. It may be argued that it does what
countries do more perfectly than any in the history of the world, but that’s
another question. My questions today came about because it seems that some
Americans somehow see their Republic as more than a country; maybe like God’s favorite country or as a promised land
of some sort, as if their God favors
this soil above any other. (“Their God” being an often redundant phrase since
theirs is, or should be to them, everyone’s.) Leaving that for a moment, let’s
take a look at another phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance, one that speaks of
God.
“…one nation under God…” This part of the Pledge is often
stated with a comma-like pause between the words “nation” and “under”, as if we
were stating that there is a nation, and there is a state of being called
“under God”, but they have nothing to do with one another in this statement. I
don’t think this is the intent of the author or many that state the Pledge- and
it makes a difference. Are we really saying that there is “ONE nation under
God”? Aren’t all nations under God?
If the answer is no, then what makes this one particularly favored? Is it the
actions it, or its people, take now? Or
was it God-like when it was founded and has since slipped, fallen from grace? I
wonder how the spiritual views of the current citizens of the United States color
our feelings about the Republic and its status as the “one nation under God”?
In the bulk of popular Christianity (taking out the substantial and popular doctrines
of Catholicism and various smaller denominations, cults, etc.), it is
impossible to fall from God’s grace once “saved” because salvation is not tied
to one’s general works or actions. Once saved, they say, always saved. Are some
of us applying the same standard to our nation? Did our Founding Parents save
us forever from evil, or does our auspicious start on their backs and in their
blood give us even more responsibility to carry their principles forward? What
were their principles, really? Are we meeting that challenge as a nation? Do
our current national leaders look like the ones that started this nation? Is
our national agenda the same now as it was then? Maybe it’s not reasonable to
think it should be. But if it has gone too far astray and should not have, what
is our responsibility? What would God do with a Republic like ours is now,
under Him? If you are a Catholic or belong to a smaller Christian denomination
or cult and do not see your spiritual status as guaranteed because of a
one-time proclamation the same questions apply, but from a different
assumption; that people and nations are accountable for their works. Many people
of all types of spiritual and religious viewpoints would agree with this
statement, but when it comes to this nation, some seem to have different
standards.
If the answer to the question above about all nations being
under God is yes, all nations are indeed under God, then why do we pledge
allegiance to one flag and covenant to defend liberty and justice for us alone?
Should we not be concerned, with deep and agape-like love, for all people and
all nations, especially the ones that are affected by America’s far-reaching
actions? Does the nation to which we pledge allegiance have the same concern?
Can it? Is it a nation’s responsibility to care in this way for all people the
world over? I don’t think it is, but it wasn’t long ago that one of our
presidents committed to people the world over that we as a Nation would behave
as a “benevolent giant.” Have we lived up to that promise? And for many, here
is the crux: what if the actions of “the Republic” offend our basic morality?
What if one sees the defense of her “interests” as tyranny? How much power does
one that sees such things have within the system to change the actions of it?
Don’t all systems set up systems to defend themselves so they can survive? When
I look at legislation like Citizens United, I see that substantial power has
been taken away from the actual citizens. When I see laws like the Patriot Act,
I see that freedom of speech may be well on its way to being limited, something
that the original patriots fought against. Unless the nation that wields such
incredible power as that Act provides is truly a benevolent and wise giant
towards her own people, it’s a slippery slope towards fascism and that nation
is one step closer to one of the characteristics of Hitler’s Germany: where the
safest place to be politically was goose-stepping in line with the rest of the
minions.
No comments:
Post a Comment