Scalia
Yeah, I agree. Pope John Paul II was a great man and a couragous historical figure, but things like "female altar boys" and distorting the church's two century old teaching on the death penalty, will prevent him from ever being St. JP the Great.
distorting the church's two century old teaching on the death penalty
Two centuries isn't that long ;) But, did he distort the teaching?
56. This is the context in which to place the problem of the death penalty. On this matter there is a growing tendency, both in the Church and in civil society, to demand that it be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished completely. The problem must be viewed in the context of a system of penal justice ever more in line with human dignity and thus, in the end, with God's plan for man and society. The primary purpose of the punishment which society inflicts is "to redress the disorder caused by the offence".46 Public authority must redress the violation of personal and social rights by imposing on the offender an adequate punishment for the crime, as a condition for the offender to regain the exercise of his or her freedom. In this way authority also fulfils the purpose of defending public order and ensuring people's safety, while at the same time offering the offender an incentive and help to change his or her behaviour and be rehabilitated. 47It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent.
This seems to be, in substance, the same as what St. Thomas says:
An individual man may be considered in two ways: first, in himself; secondly, in relation to something else. If we consider a man in himself, it is unlawful to kill any man, since in every man though he be sinful, we ought to love the nature which God has made, and which is destroyed by slaying him. Nevertheless, as stated above the slaying of a sinner becomes lawful in relation to the common good, which is corrupted by sin. (St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae, II-II q. 64 a. 6)
Since it is unlawful to kill a man considered per se, it would seem that bloodless means are, in fact, more consistent with human dignity when they can achieve the objective of "redress[ing] the disorder caused by the offence" and thereby protecting society. Now, JP II's prudential judgment about the ability of current prison systems to achieve this objective makes no pretension at being doctrine...
Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. (CCC 2267)
Whenever legitimate authority has once given a clear command, let no one transgress that command, because it does not happen to commend itself to him; but let each one subject his own opinion to the authority of him who is his superior, and obey him as a matter of conscience. Again, let no private individual, whether in books or in the press, or in public speeches, take upon himself the position of an authoritative teacher in the Church. All know to whom the teaching authority of the Church has been given by God: he, then, possesses a perfect right to speak as he wishes and when he thinks it opportune. The duty of others is to hearken to him reverently when he speaks and to carry out what he says. [Pope Benedict XV: Encyclical Letter Ad Beatissimi (c. 1914)]
Scalia is a knucklehead when it comes to the DP issue. As Dulles noted, the Magisterium has not changed doctrine.
"The Catholic magisterium does not, and never has, advocated unqualified abolition of the death penalty. I know of no official statement from popes or bishops, whether in the past or in the present, that denies the right of the State to execute offenders at least in certain extreme cases."
Scalia is at war against an error he is responsible for. Her is at war against a non-existent "teaching." Maybe next time, he will actually read the Encyclical he publicly opposed and he won't make such an ass of himself.
For an "originalist," Scalia didn't attend to the origins of his complaint as expressed in the Catechism and Evangelium Vitae.