Does President Barack Obama deserve the title "most Catholic president" bestowed on him by his chief of staff, even by the low bar of faulty social justice standards of so-called liberal Catholics?
White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough told former Obama advisor David Axelrod during an interview last week:
I think this is our most Catholic of presidents. ... It's not to say that he does everything entirely consistent with Catholic teaching. That's not the idea, but I think in fact his view of the person and our role and the view of us as adding to the common good is an undeniably Catholic set of premises.
It's understood that the title of "Catholic" is voided by Obama's policies involving contraception, abortion, homosexuality and transgender ideology. Also the fact that he directly fights Catholic institutions who resist his immoral agenda cancels such distinction. But even when employing social justice criteria of modern-day bishops, the appellation of "Catholic" doesn't fit Obama, who continually places ideology over the common good.
Of course, by authentic Catholic standards, Obama's radical pro-abortion, pro-same-sex and pro-transgender agenda would negate McDonough's Catholic appellation. Directly fighting Catholic institutions over their refusal to provide insurance for contraceptives, sterilization and abortifacients would invalidate such a title as well. But the Catholic label wouldn't apply to Obama even judged in the dim light of social justice heralds as Cdl. Blase Cupich of Chicago, who put joblessness on the same level as crushing babies' skulls, or Bp. Daniel Flores of Brownsville, Texas who placed immigration on par with abortion.
Under such leadership the perception of Catholicism has morphed from accepting Catholic teaching on faith and morals to the sketchy practice of so-called social justice. Looking squarely at Obama's policies through the blurred eyes of such bishops, we see a repeating pattern of ideology taking precedence over the urgent needs of people.
In 2012, Obama pulled government funding from Catholic groups aiding victims of human trafficking because they wouldn't provide abortion, contraception and sterilization. The president would rather keep such groups from helping these vulnerable people merely because his ideology was rejected.
In 2014, Obama refused to help Nigeria fight the terrorist group Boko Haram because Nigerians wouldn't allow homosexuality and contraception. This was confirmed by Nigeria's bishop Emmanuel Badejo. In the same year, Obama withheld humanitarian aid from poor African countries that refused to legally approve so-called gay marriage. He would let millions die unless they approved of his social engineering.
In 2016, the president told homeless shelters in the United States to accept so-called transgender ideology by housing males with females or risk shutting down owing to lack of federal funding. In the same year, he threatened Catholic hospitals with the crippling loss of federal funding if they didn't perform abortions or sex changes. And in May, Obama issued his transgender bathroom mandate, threatening to hamstring public schools with the loss of billions of dollars in title IX funding if they didn't allow males in female school bathrooms and locker rooms. All of the homeless, patients and school children would lose out if these institutions serving these groups didn't allow his ideology to be imposed on them.
Obama has consistently imposed his ideology on the public at home and abroad without regard for the common good. Setting aside the fact that his ideology is grossly immoral, the public has seen him willing to let them suffer rather than refuse his terms. Yet McDonough says it's precisely Obama's "view of the person and our role and the view of us as adding to the common good" which is "undeniably Catholic."
Watch the panel discuss how the electoral college protected the country from Obama's ideological agenda on "The Download—Electoral College Vote."