Every now and then, I’ll read something from someone on the right picking up on the fact that the Obama family has not officially picked a church in Washington, D.C., well, the President explained that to Matt Lauer earlier this week:
One blogger seems to think this is an important issue:
If Obama truly wants to participate in Christian life, being visible in this specific, chosen, sacred place is part of that commitment, as he knows. He and his wife and two daughters may arrive by limousine surrounded and protected by the Secret Service, but the unyielding hardness of a wooden pew, the Bible and the sermons based on it he would hear there each week, usefully remind us all that’s not how he — or any of us, regardless of our temporal wealth and power — will be leaving.
A good church (or mosque, temple, synagogue or any public place of worship) — and there are many that are not nourishing — is a plot of deep, rich, fertile soil, a place to put down some roots and see what blossoms. When you publicly and collectively meditate and pray for others, it reminds us of our larger humanity and our connection to those, as our service says every week, who are ill, dying, sick or in need.
This person obviously has no idea what it really means to put a venue, like a church, under the Presidential security umbrella. It would be a massive inconvenience for everyone.
But beyond that, though, remains the question who cares if Obama is a regular churchgoer or not ?
Neither Ronald Reagan nor George H.W. Bush were regular churchgoers. George W. Bush did not attended church in Washington, DC on a regular basis over eight years of his Presidency. In fact, the only recent President who was regularly photographed attending church in DC was Bill Clinton. And something tells me he was doing it more for the photo-op than for spiritual reasons.
So, you know, there’s really nothing new going on here.