This article examines the use of sources in an essay by Daniel Finn. Booth claims that Finns citations of Booths own work (as well as that of others) fail to responsibly and properly account for the original context of those references as well as their clear implications. After outlining the differences between libertarianism and neoconservatism, as well as between Catholic social thought and Catholic social teaching, Booth proceeds to examine three specific citations attributed to him by Finn. Booth concludes by looking at Finns characterization of positions attributed to Robert Sirico and Rodger Charles, as well as with a statement about the possible contributions to Catholic social thought to be gained from public choice and Austrian economics.
Philip Booth, "Catholic Social Teaching and the Market Economy: A Reply to Daniel K. Finn," Journal of Markets & Morality 15, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 11-20