Not Pledging as Liturgy: Lessons from Karl Barth and American Mennonites on Refusing National Oaths

Controversy over whether Christians may offer national oaths—
such as Barth's refusal of Hitler's loyalty oath and the Mennonite debate
about the Pledge of Allegiance—can help the church better understand its
relation to the state. The way Barth and Mennonites reason about church-state issues is sophisticated, but also has areas of weakness. One weakness
is too great a reliance on the principle, "Obey the state unless it conflicts
with obeying God"—a principle that provides neither criteria for
determining when a conflict exists nor ethical practices to shape
Christians into people able to make that determination. A superior
understanding of the church's relation to the state would take into account
the way national oaths shape the character of those who say them. This
could be accomplished by drawing on the concept of church practices,
specifically by seeing national oaths as a kind of liturgy. Doing so
provides compelling reasons for sometimes not pledging.