Defenders of the rule of law | WORLD
Logo
Sound journalism, grounded in facts and Biblical truth | Donate

Defenders of the rule of law

Armed Forces Day and the meaning of the enlistment oath


U.S. military personnel arrive for a transfer of authority ceremony from the 101st Airborne Division to the 10th Mountain Division in Bucharest, Romania, on April 5. Associated Press/Photo by Andreea Alexandru

Defenders of the rule of law
You have {{ remainingArticles }} free {{ counterWords }} remaining. You've read all of your free articles.

Full access isn’t far.

We can’t release more of our sound journalism without a subscription, but we can make it easy for you to come aboard.

Get started for as low as $3.99 per month.

Current WORLD subscribers can log in to access content. Just go to "SIGN IN" at the top right.

LET'S GO

Already a member? Sign in.

On the third Saturday of May we celebrate a holiday that slips by most of us: Armed Forces Day. The purpose of the day is to honor the men and women currently serving in uniform, and thus it is distinct from holidays honoring military personnel who have died (Memorial Day) and our veterans (Veterans Day). A careful look at the oath of enlistment should inspire us with gratitude, and also cause us to reflect on the depth and limits of patriotic commitment.

Military personnel swear an oath when enlisting or receiving commission as an officer. The content of a military’s oath tells us much about the moral nature and demands of its government. Take, for example, the notorious oath that Germany’s military and some government personnel were forced to take in the 1930s. The evil nature of this oath was captured onscreen by the Tom Cruise film, Valkyrie:

I swear to God this holy oath that I shall render unconditional obedience to the Leader of the German Reich and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath.

The Nazis demanded a sacred, binding oath of obedience to Adolf Hitler himself. It was unconditional and unlimited. It was a sacrilege to call this oath “holy.” It was idolatrous to render Hitler, or any man, god-like authority. The Nazi pledge points to the gross evil institutionalized across the Third Reich, including soldiers “just obeying orders” as they massacred six million Jews in the Holocaust.

In contrast, American military personnel swear (or affirm if they have a religious conviction to avoid swearing) a very different oath:

I (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

The oath calls for obedience to orders, but it does so with caveats. Those orders must proceed within the authority structure and derive from the principles of the Constitution itself.

The U.S. oath is a solemn vow to defend the fundamental fabric of America, the Constitution of the United States. What is actually being defended? The Constitution says that its purpose is “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” In other words, to “support and defend the Constitution” is to protect and serve the rule of law for the common good of all citizens.

Unlike the ritualized, chant-like quality of a legion saying the Nazi oath in unison, the American oath is personal in that the soldier publicly states his or her name, “I, Eric Patterson, do solemnly swear.” The individual is a citizen, not a subject, and is responsible for his commitments and actions.

The oath calls for obedience to orders, but it does so with caveats. Those orders must proceed within the authority structure and derive from the principles of the Constitution itself. Moreover, if authorities command something that is not in accord with “regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice,” then that command must be questioned and, in some cases, disobeyed.

The oath’s ending, “So help me God,” reminds us that every warrior is also under a higher authority, that of God himself. God, not government, is the ultimate foundation for right and wrong. Furthermore, Christian just war thinking illuminates this moral principle with three criteria for deploying force: those under rightful political authority must act on a just cause with right intentions.

Armed Forces Day provides us with an opportunity to reflect on rightful patriotism. Nazi ‘patriotism’ was evil, a form of Teutonic (ethnic) nationalism that made Hitler a sort of deity. Right and wrong were defined by a man and the government he controlled. In contrast, rightful patriotism begins with love of one’s neighbor and one’s community. Rightful patriotism recognizes the important role of government in providing law and order, and it respects those who step forward into public service roles on behalf of the common good.

Armed Forces Day also allows us a moment to express gratitude for the sacrificial service of men and women wearing the military uniform, and thus standing much closer to danger than you and I do. As President Eisenhower observed, “It is fitting and proper that we devote one day each year to paying special tribute to those whose constancy and courage constitute one of the bulwarks guarding the freedom of this nation and the peace of the free world.”


Eric Patterson

Eric Patterson is president and CEO of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation in Washington, D.C., and past dean of the School of Government at Regent University. He is the author or editor of more than 20 books, including Just American Wars, Politics in a Religious World, and Ending Wars Well.


Read the Latest from WORLD Opinions

Brad Littlejohn | Many people want to conserve the only status quo that they know

Anne Kennedy | The controversy at NPR reveals deep confusion about truth

Jerry Bowyer | Mixing PepsiCo and pedophilia is a branding disaster

R. Albert Mohler Jr. | This is what happens when the ideological left controls higher education

COMMENT BELOW

Please wait while we load the latest comments...

Comments