"Catholic" judicial temperment?

A few weeks ago, I blogged about an essay in the Boston Globe that discussed, among other things, Professor Sandy Levinson's book, "Constitutional Faith."  The post, and the essay, considered whether there is really a "Protestant" or a "Catholic" way of reading the Constitution.  In a similar vein, here is an opinion piece by Dennis Coyle, in which he considers whether Judge John Roberts's Catholicism tells us anything about his judicial "temperment":

So where should we look, to get a glimpse of what a Justice Roberts would be like on the Court? I would suggest that part of answer lies in his Catholicism. Described as a "devout" Catholic, Roberts received a Catholic education before heading to the strongly secularist world of Harvard — in the 1960s, no less. When I see Roberts speak, ever so succinctly, or read his equally succinct writings, I see one of my students. In my 15 years at not only a Catholic university, but the Catholic University of America, many capable (and occasionally not so capable) students have come through my Constitutional Law classes. Many of my better students have been quiet, thoughtful, respectful, and very attentive to their obligations — but drawing them into critical argument can be another matter. Roberts's record seems to reflect a Catholic discipline and comfort with hierarchical roles and authority; he has learned how to tame — in an amiable manner — his intellect and emotions for a larger cause or obligation, be it a president, a client, or the law itself.

Rick