On the morning of February 2nd, both religious and civil leaders gathered in Washington, D.C., for the annual National Prayer Breakfast. As is customary, the President of the United States was invited to reflect on how his religious convictions have guided him throughout his time in office. President Obama’s remarks tapped into two profound realities at the intersection of civil government and religious faith.

1. Religious and moral commitments cannot be separated from one’s deliberation regarding a particular course of action he or she might take.
2. The religious practice of our elected officials is oftentimes suppressed and even discouraged

The National Prayer Breakfast provides an opportunity to experience this rare encounter of open engagement between faith and public life.

President Obama shared repeatedly that his faith and relationship to God is a constant support and benefit to his presidency. The president added, “the director of our Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnership’s office, Joshua DuBois… starts my morning off with meditations from Scripture.”

One might not know this was part of the president’s routine because it is rare for public officials to share such personal issues. Obama said that through this practice he is re-centered around his core convictions. The president pointed to the Prophets of the Hebrew Bible, who openly advocate a progressive call for social transformation, suggesting, “one day the world will be turned right side up and everything will return as it should be. But until that day, we’re called to work on behalf of a God that chose justice and mercy and compassion to the most vulnerable.”

Representatives from both religious and secular communities were upset, however, with his participation in the event. Ironically, both demographics found it to be another example of false piety. Robert Boston, senior policy analyst at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, suggested, “government officials will attend these events to appear to be pious and win votes.” He also promoted the idea that “a truly devout person doesn’t need to make a big show of it. People who wear religion on their sleeves can be accused of doing so for political reasons.”

The Reverend Grayland Hagler found the National Prayer Breakfast to lack “substantial engagement” with prayer. In other words, both religious and non-religious people alike are sometimes suspicious when an elected official begins to throw around religious language.

So, an impasse has been reached. The “Separation of Church (religion) and State” has cornered spiritual conviction to early morning prayer sessions, yearly breakfasts, and political districts where such language is appreciated. The notion that most elected officials are inauthentic when appealing to religious convictions is not only a slippery slope, but also a debilitating one.

Limiting outlets of communal reflection is dangerous. The separation is necessary, but there is a difference between establishing state-sponsored religion/impeding one’s practical freedom and hoping one would divest oneself from a main source of truth and empowerment.

President Obama suggested that through all of the political gridlock, these experiences have “deepened [his] faith.” If religious practice has helped him remain calm and productive all the turmoil, then that is wonderful. The Gospel of the Prayer Breakfast teaches that all people are journeying along their own path. When we gather around a warm breakfast to share of our trials and tribulations, we can collectively exhale to know, “Hey, I’m not struggling with this alone.”