100 Days: Obama Begins Day With Prayer At National Cathedral

Obama started the day with a prayer service at the National Cathedral. Watch highlights via MSNBC below.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Comments

[whatevahs]

GREAT! first day in office and he's already talking to some fantasy make believe character and trying to turn the country into a theocracy!

Shouldn't the liberals be up in arms about this?

[meko]

After the endless parade of ministers the past several days, it'd be nice to see the focus of government return to governing and get away from conducting religious services.

[TruthMatters09]

The phrase "Separation of Church and State" has been around for so long that many Americans believe that it is actually in the Constitution. In fact, those three words appear nowhere in the Constitution. Oblivious to the irrelevance of their arguments, and at the same time refusing to acknowledge that no document of state, let alone the Constitution, has ever proposed such a concept, those on the left have tried to convince the American people that our founding documents warned of the dangers of mixing politics and religion.

It was never the purpose of the Constitution to give religious content to the nation, rather, the Constitution was an instrument whereby already existing religious values of the nation could be protected and perpetuated.

Anti-Bible socialist liberals want to achieve a new, godless America where our children will be protected from Biblical ideas and will enjoy freedom "from" religion --- not freedom "of" religion.

[greatlardini]

Lord give me strength to stay civil. And thank you Lord for ensuring November 4, 2008, that the likes of Robert.son, Hag.ee, and Pars.ley will not be allowed near the White House. Amen.

[TruthMatters09]

Which Lord are you referring to?

[aintnogod]

Of course the Constitution does not say we need freedom from religion, just freedom from any religion which is not my religion.

For a sample of failed religious government in American, read about the Puritan governments. Now those dudes could never have written the Constitution we have today. Nor could any of today's fundamentalist Christians write the Constitution we have today. Note how fundamentalists have injected a religious prohibition into the discussion about the civil rights of gay Americans to marry. I don't see any prohibition in the Constitution about gay marriage. Marriage is a civil matter and not a religious matter. A ban against gay marriage is a perfect example of why Bible literalists can't be trusted with our government.

Probably the Americans who could most be trusted to protect and defend the Constitution would be atheists because their only protection against religious persecution is the Constitution. It's a matter of grave importance to them. Most all Christianity's charitable deeds are performed in order to make converts. If they corrupt Christ's teachings, how much less can they respect oour man made Constitution?

To modest and moderate Christians, I apologize for these comments, but of course, your modesty decrees that you pray in the closet and serve others, thus we don't hear much from you in the political arena. A-political and honorable to a fault, you are solid Americans I can still trust. It's only the fundamentalists, of all religions, who scare me.

[MathIsTruth]

I love your last sentence because it challenges the reader to decide which bit of wrongness to spend time refuting.

So let me just a few comments, and you can read it or you can go on wallowing in your ignorance.

Liberals want separation of religion and government, and fully believe that that is implied by the First Amendment. Government employees must be capable, by and large, of separating their religion from their government duties.

If it is someday decided (say by the Supreme Court) that the First Amendment does not imply separation of church and state, the Constitution should immediately be amended to make this separation explicit. No one who has ever been a member of a religious minority would have trouble explaining why this would be necessary. Neither would members of a religious majority, unless they were self-serving people by nature.

America is a homogeneous group of people, so it is utterly meaningless to characterize it as "godless" or "godly". Each individual is entitled to his/her own view point about the existence and nature of deities. Everyone is entitled to freedom of religion and freedom from others' religions. No one may impose his/her religious belief on others, in particular those which relate to the supernatural beliefs and prophetic beliefs and the rituals of others' religions.

[TruthMatters09]

"I love your last sentence because it challenges the reader to decide which bit of wrongness to spend time refuting."

Refute if you must, the Truth will prevail.

[Binea]

I'm not impressed with pastors or church goers eigther,but,I do know this...
the True Church is made up of all the elect throughout all time, from Able on. '
If Obama's intention is for show ,well,that's what he will get,and all the emptiness it reaps,But if he has a true desire to know God ,all he has to do is humbly ask him.That being said,Obama would be better served if he did not go any churches ,Making time for daily bible study is far better.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.


Isa 57:15 For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.
Acts 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

..This may help "The First Principals of Bible study"by Harold Camping. was helpful to me since I had no clue on how to study for myself, and Quick Verse for windows,or a free bible at freeonline bible.org ( KJV version is best. :)

[sasson]

Obama's religious stuff always bothered me. People of faith don't bother me--for the most part, i'm looking at you televangelists. People of no faith don't bother me. But people who use religion for political purposes--I'm looking at you Republican Paty--bother me.

Obama always stated how important religion was in his faith, but when the Rev. Wright "scandal" broke, Obama tried to present himself as very detached from the church. He was either lying about his religion or Rev. wright and i think that it was the former. I understand why he would do something like that, especially in a majority black state senate district, but it still annoys me. maybe i'm wrong. I'm not blaming him, but it always felt like pandering to me.

While i consider myself a some what religious person, i can't wait for our first atheist president.

[KarenT]

When did Obama present himself as very detached from the church?

[sasson]

When hesaid he had no idea that Rev. Wright was like that. He definitely distanced his involvement in that church.

[MathIsTruth]

Over 200 years ago, we started talking about all men being created equal. We had slaves then, but today we have an African American president. We're not there yet, but at least we achieved a milestone.

Over 200 years ago, we started talking about separation of church and state. Sadly, we're making much slower progress on that front.

But I'll have the audacity to hope that perhaps with a future president we may achieve that.

This president will have to succeed at other things, and I think he will. He's just isn't good at the Sep of C&S thing.

[Vige]

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments. For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".

[DanniD]

For the whining blowhards...

"After stepping into the Oval Office for the initial time as the nation's chief executive, President Barack Obama took part in a prayer service Wednesday on his first full day in office, continuing a tradition that dates to the presidency of George Washington."

Instead of sitting around all day looking for trivial things to whine about. How about picking up a history book and learning something!

[jillsond]

Thank you! People are maybe thinking Obama is too good to be true? I don't get it.

[prog]

I think George Washington should have slept in as well.

However, thanks for the historical perspective.

[ilrslr3]

Good point DanniD

[alsm9]

So what? It's a tradition that needs to be put to rest. It's suppose to be seperation of church and state. In the last 24hrs all it's been is prayers, prayers and more prayers. Prayers do NOTHING. He should just get to work. I expected Obama to be a little more progressive than this.

[KarenT]

Attending a church service in no way means he will not abide by the division of church and state. Obama will not allow religion to make his political decisions.

[Vige]

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments. For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".

[joebftsplk]

Obama's religious tendencies are part of what got him elected,. They earned him big credit among African-Americans and helped defuse the enmity of Christian fundamentalists. His religious leanings may seem wooden-headed to a lot of us, but he does seem sincere. I think we need to accept the whole Obama package, religion and all, and be grateful that at last we have a great leader, brilliant thinker, inspiring statesman. If he needs religion, let us forgive him that vulnerability; he's only human.

[netzwerg]

Please seperate state and religion Mr. President! Thanks!

[Vige]

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments. For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".

[prog]

He should have slept in instead. It would have been his last chance for at least 4 years.

[vigilantwarrior]

The American people don't need prayer. They need the courage to face the cold, hard truth of what has been done to their Republic, and the courage to demand justice.

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/new-yorks-bravest/

[JackNasty]

Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori speaks clearly in plain language. Her message is made powerful by its simplicity. It was a pleasure to hear her.

[KarenT]

Agree

[DrZee]

I am not normally a "religious" person, but I must say I rather enjoyed the sermon. I was sorry that the streamed feed I watched did not give the names of anyone speaking or performing.

I googled the program and found that Sharon E. Watkins, General Minister and President of the Christian Church gave the sermon.

She rocks! Bravo Rev. Watkins.

[JackNasty]

Bishop Schori spoke briefly near the end of the service. She did not deliver the sermon.

The National Cathedral where the service was held is an Episcopal Church. Bishop Schori is the elected Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church USA.

[jazzdad51]

I suppose you would prefer seeing McCain and Palin standing there while some witch hunter cast out demons??? Give him a break, he never tried to hide or distort his religious convictions.

[kid5rivers2]

That was Whitley Phipps, son of my native land: Trinidad and Tobago, who sang Amazing Grace for the POTUS 44!! :-)

[MomfromTexas]

It was amazing!

[Vige]

And he sang it so beautifully and with such emotion.

[obamagal]

It was amazing - what a voice and what emotion. It moved me to tears.

[zapper501]

this is a painful experience for anyone. how can they stay awake

[Annieke]

Being European and, although baptised in the Dutch Reformed Church, I feel slightly uneasy with all the religious focus.
I thought that, like The Netherlands, the US is a country where there is a division of Church and State.
With all the traditional, mandatory, reverends, priests, chruch services etc etc that division is getting lost a bit.

But I am glad that at least the president acknowledged the non-believers in the US in his inauguration speech.

[Vige]

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. Originally, the First Amendment only applied to the federal government. Subsequently, under the incorporation doctrine, certain selected provisions were applied to states. It was not, however, until the middle and later years of the twentieth century that the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by state governments. For example, in the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion".