search
top

Great Ironies of Constitutional Interpretation

Dave Hardy points out Sanford Levinson’s “Protestant” and “Catholic” views of the Constitution. The irony being it’s the Catholics on the Court who seem to take the more “Protestant” view of the Constitution. It would be even more ironic of the Protestants on the Court took a more Catholic view as well, but at this point there are no Protestants on the court. It’s basically six Catholics and three Jews. I’m surprised this isn’t driving the tin foil hat crowd completely nuts. It’s a papist conspiracy!

One Response to “Great Ironies of Constitutional Interpretation”

  1. Hank Archer says:

    Of course, the Constitution is a human document. The Faith is not of human origin, so the analogy is not quite exact.

    “The Faith” began on Pentecost. Its “Constitution” (the Bible) was written and compiled over the course of the next decades or more. Our current government and its “Bible” (the Constitution) both came into effect on the same day.

    The “Catholic” view of “The Faith” is: interpreting and explaining the Faith is a duty assigned by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to His apostles. This Authority has been passed down in turn to holy men in each subsequent generation. These guardians, protected by the power of the Holy Spirit given to them by Christ are entrusted with a unique responsibility to interpret and explain the Faith. The Catholic Church teaches that the Holy Spirit prevents the successors of the Apostles from error when interpreting and explaining the Faith.

    The Constitution can only work if its interpreters spring from a good society, a corrupt society will subvert the document. Our Constitution, good as it is, is not protected by the Holy Spirit!

    Fortunately, the Catholics on the SC seem to understand this crucial difference.

top