This language about "defending...against all enemies" connects directly with another core part of the history of the oath that illuminates the meaning of the promise being taken: the oath of fealty taken by the person of lower rank (whether it be a knight to the king, or a serf to the noble).
In exchange for the protection provided by the lord, the "obliged" person swears an oath of fealty --from the Latin word fidelitas, or faithfulness-- to commit himself fully to fight to protect the lord from enemies.
In that medieval world --a world beset by anarchy and the constant "war of all against all" that anarchy entails-- these reciprocal commitments were a way of introducing a degree of order and coherence and faithfulness to limit the general chaos and the brutal rule of raw power. And the oath is brought in to harness the power of the sacred order --and the power of people's allegiance to it-- to bolster this effort to displace the chaos of mere gangsterism with the better order of promises made in good faith.
In the oath of fealty, the vassal commits himself to defend the lord whenever needed --no matter what, and to the utmost of his powers.
In the American system of government, the place of the "lord" (the higher party, who is the overarching protector to those below him) is taken by the Constitution of the United States. And quite fittingly, too: for the Constitution is indeed the most vital protector of the people of these United States.
And so each member of Congress is swearing a kind of fealty to that great protective document, the Constitution of the United States.
AN OATH LEAVES NO ROOM FOR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
What is it, then, that they are promising to do? In particular, what are they obligated to do under circumstances like the present, when the Constitution of the United States is under unprecedented and concerted assault from a lawless presidency? (Or even if there is a reasonable suspicion --and who can honestly deny this much-- that the Constitution is in need of defense?)
They have obligated themselves to defend the Constitution-- and the promise they make is complete and without any room for exceptions, without any room for allowing any other consideration to overrule it.
A politician --looking at the play of political forces currently in the United States-- might judge that it would be political suicide to defend the Constitution against the present assault upon it, and he/she might be right.
But the oath says, that doesn't matter, Other considerations are completely irrelevant. An oath has been taken --not qualified in any way-- to defend the Constitution, and so the oathtaker is obliged to defend the Constitution even at the cost of his/her political career, if that's what it takes.
Just as the honorable knight is prepared to die in the defense of the king, the honorable Member of Congress must be prepared to commit political suicide in defense of the Constitution.
The word "utmost" appears in various forms of such oaths. And accordingly, defending the Constitution in a partial or half-hearted manner --defending it just "up to a point"-- is a failure to honor the oath. If the Member of Congress sees the Constitution under threat, the Member is not only obliged to support measures to defend it, not only obliged to take all possible measures to defend it, he/she is obliged to strive to the utmost of his/her powers to defend it.
To do anything less is to break the oath. And to break the oath, as we have seen, is to betray the sacred order that is invoked in the oath, it is to commit a kind of treason against the political order, and it is to invite punishment from the highest sources (political and/or religious) of moral order.
IT IS UP TO US, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
Just as the Members of Congress cannot allow the president to get away with his assault on the Constitution, so also we the citizens of the United States cannot let the Members of Congress get away with their failure to honor their oath of office.
In exchange for the protection provided by the lord, the "obliged" person swears an oath of fealty --from the Latin word fidelitas, or faithfulness-- to commit himself fully to fight to protect the lord from enemies.
In that medieval world --a world beset by anarchy and the constant "war of all against all" that anarchy entails-- these reciprocal commitments were a way of introducing a degree of order and coherence and faithfulness to limit the general chaos and the brutal rule of raw power. And the oath is brought in to harness the power of the sacred order --and the power of people's allegiance to it-- to bolster this effort to displace the chaos of mere gangsterism with the better order of promises made in good faith.
In the oath of fealty, the vassal commits himself to defend the lord whenever needed --no matter what, and to the utmost of his powers.
And so each member of Congress is swearing a kind of fealty to that great protective document, the Constitution of the United States.
AN OATH LEAVES NO ROOM FOR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
What is it, then, that they are promising to do? In particular, what are they obligated to do under circumstances like the present, when the Constitution of the United States is under unprecedented and concerted assault from a lawless presidency? (Or even if there is a reasonable suspicion --and who can honestly deny this much-- that the Constitution is in need of defense?)
They have obligated themselves to defend the Constitution-- and the promise they make is complete and without any room for exceptions, without any room for allowing any other consideration to overrule it.
A politician --looking at the play of political forces currently in the United States-- might judge that it would be political suicide to defend the Constitution against the present assault upon it, and he/she might be right.
But the oath says, that doesn't matter, Other considerations are completely irrelevant. An oath has been taken --not qualified in any way-- to defend the Constitution, and so the oathtaker is obliged to defend the Constitution even at the cost of his/her political career, if that's what it takes.
Just as the honorable knight is prepared to die in the defense of the king, the honorable Member of Congress must be prepared to commit political suicide in defense of the Constitution.
The word "utmost" appears in various forms of such oaths. And accordingly, defending the Constitution in a partial or half-hearted manner --defending it just "up to a point"-- is a failure to honor the oath. If the Member of Congress sees the Constitution under threat, the Member is not only obliged to support measures to defend it, not only obliged to take all possible measures to defend it, he/she is obliged to strive to the utmost of his/her powers to defend it.
To do anything less is to break the oath. And to break the oath, as we have seen, is to betray the sacred order that is invoked in the oath, it is to commit a kind of treason against the political order, and it is to invite punishment from the highest sources (political and/or religious) of moral order.
IT IS UP TO US, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
Just as the Members of Congress cannot allow the president to get away with his assault on the Constitution, so also we the citizens of the United States cannot let the Members of Congress get away with their failure to honor their oath of office.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
