I typically wait at least a week to post on a current event, it gives me a good feel for what others have been saying, and not to just regurgitate things I could just post a link for someone else to explain. After looking over posts from Catholic, Baptist, and Mainline Protestant authors, one things I did not notice was the simple question:
Why is the President invited to the prayer breakfast anyway?
Is the President an exemplary Christian? The historical comparison which came to mind for me was different than all the Crusades/Muslim conquest references, but rather this one, Constantine at the Council of Nicea:
As soon then as the imperial injunction was generally made known, all with the utmost willingness hastened there, as though they would outstrip one another in a race; for they were impelled by the anticipation of a happy result to the conference, by the hope of enjoying present peace, and the desire of beholding something new and strange in the person of so admirable an emperor…And a single house of prayer, as though divinely enlarged, sufficed to contain at once Syrians and Cilicians, Phœnicians and Arabians, delegates from Palestine, and others from Egypt (et. al.)…
…And now, all rising at the signal which indicated the emperor’s entrance, at last he himself proceeded through the midst of the assembly, like someheavenly messenger of God…
…silence ensued, and all regarded the emperor with fixed attention; on which he looked serenely round on the assembly with a cheerful aspect, and, having collected his thoughts, in a calm and gentle tone gave utterance to the following words….
While I definitely have thoughts on the content of the President’s speech, where did we get the idea that a secular ruler has an automatic right to speak at a breakfast centered around Christ? Maybe the President is a Christian, but, if anything, Christ’s words should lead us to not automatically give those with outward power the best seat in the house.