A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics

Scalia kept kids Catholic by attending reverent Mass May 20, 2014

The lede to this post is just one of many revelations made by Catholic Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.  I did not know he had 9 kids.  That is fantastic.  God bless him, and his wife.

Scalia gave a long interview to The Remnant.  That says quite a bit right there. But as the interview shows, Scalia is no trad.  He’s a product of his generation.  (I add emphasis my own comments):

As a young boy, Scalia’s mother was the devout Catholic parent in the family; his father did not attend Mass, not an uncommon trait amongst Sicilian men of that era, but as he aged, Gene Scalia became increasingly devout and conservative, a rarity amongst the professoriate at Brooklyn College to be sure. [Most kids tend to follow the father’s religious behavior.  If dad is devout, the kids will be too. There are exceptions, of course]

It was at Xavier, a Jesuit high school in New York City, that the young Antonin Scalia became “a serious Catholic,” very much influenced by the “thoroughly religious atmosphere of the school” and the many young Jesuit priests who taught him.[Boy that’s a rarity nowadays.  In fact, Catholic schools are where faith goes to die]  Attendance at the school’s retreat held at the end of the school year deepened his Catholic convictions to the point that Scalia, who was to graduate as class valedictorian, thought seriously about entering the priesthood. However, the recognition that he was an only child with no cousins on his father’s side meant the disappearance of the family name, something that the future Justice recognized would deeply upset his parents, and which led him to consider another profession.

That decision would be made at Georgetown University: the law. “Georgetown University is not Catholic anymore,” the Justice said,[nice to hear such clarity]  but in the 1950s, “they rolled you out of bed to attend Mass. Not anymore.” ……

……At his final oral exam prior to receiving his degree (History), Scalia was breezing along when Dr. Wilkinson, the chairman of the department who presided over the three professor panel, asked this question: What was the most important event in the history of the world?

The confident candidate thought, “I have done very well up to here and there is no wrong answer to this one,” but as he responded Prof. Wilkinson continued to shake his head signaling that the student had it all wrong. Was it the Battle of Waterloo, or the Greek valor at Thermopylae? The panel member remained unimpressed with the candidate’s answers.

Finally, Dr. Wilkinson replied: “Mr. Scalia it was the Incarnation, when Christ became a man that is the correct answer.”[Once again, the contrast with the Georgetown – or virtually any “Catholic” univeristy – of today is shocking]  One seriously doubts that Dr. Wilkinson’s question is ever asked at Georgetown examinations today, and if it were, clearly his response would no longer be considered correct. Despite his answer, Antonin Scalia graduated from Georgetown U. summa cum laude, no mean feat in those days in which grades were not “curved,” and no one had ever heard of “grade inflation.”…….

……..The Justice was, however, unequivocal in stating his belief that a major reason his nine children are devout today is that he and his wife made a conscious effort to travel long distances to attend “a reverent Mass, not a guitar Mass.” The vernacular Mass in many churches has no sense of reverence, and was similar to “going to a club.”  [No argument there.]

It’s not all beer and skittles, though:

Regarding the current state of the Church and, to quote Roberto de Mattei, “the profound crisis that engulfs it,” Scalia, whose son is an ordained priest in the Diocese of Arlington, Virginia, believes the Church in the US is not in a similar condition to that of Europe, which is, he claims, “post-Christian.” Further, although no fan of Vatican II, the Justice appeared to be unconvinced that a great many of the problems facing the Church are a direct result of the Council’s impact, an oft-repeated theme of de Mattei, as well as other observers of the Church today.

————–End Quote————–

So I’ve stolen enough, but in another portion of the interview, Scalia maintains that it would be unconscionable to allow his political or religious beliefs to guide his decisions as a jurist.  Too bad his left wing confreres don’t hold such “high” principles.  If the 5 Catholic justices really adhered to a traditional understanding of the Faith, how different, how much better, could this country be?!?

The article also discusses how rigidly Scalia believes he must adhere to the original intent of the Constitution.  While that has made Scalia a darling of conservatives, both his Originalism, and his refusal to use Catholic belief to guide his judicial rulings, seems highly problematic to me.  He even goes so far as to say that if it is the will of the people that abortion should be legal, then abortion shall be legal.  This is a gross perversion of a proper Catholic understanding of the role of government and government’s duty to provide for the true common good (as guided by the Church) and protect the most vulnerable  of its polity, even if they cannot yet vote.

It’s yet another sign of how very far from the Catholic ideal the current governmental system of the US and most other countries really is.  If a majority decides that a minority can or should die, well, then, that’s just the democratic will working itself out, and the poor minority be damned. That is the entire rationale behind abortion, euthanasia, and other moral travesties.  It’s not just that the cult of Liberty is far from ideal, it is in so many ways violently opposed to the right understanding of authority and the Sovereign Reign of Jesus Christ the King.  That is to say, Scalia’s juridical viewpoint seems deeply in conflict with Quas Primas.

I wonder if he has ever been told that?  That maybe, his rigid adherence to the Constitution might be a very grave impediment to the right practice of the Catholic Faith and his performance of an amazingly exalted and influential office?

What if he did allow his Catholic Faith to inform his rulings?  How many natural and supernatural benefits could have flowed from that?  Does his preference for Originalism over Catholicism constitute the creation of a monstrous idol?

But what do I know?  I’m just a boring blogger.