At Public Discourse, Nathan Shlueter takes an unusual approach in his review of Acton’s Director of Research Sam Gregg’s Tea Party Catholic — it’s a memo to the faculty of Georgetown University as written by Sen. Paul Ryan:

As Gregg’s book makes clear, defending market economies does not make one a libertarian. And, in fact, no libertarian or Randian egoist would approve of my budget plan, which—whether you agree with it or not—is a sincere attempt to preserve and improve a financially endangered social safety net, not destroy it. Nor should defense of the market be confused with crony capitalism, which is profoundly unjust, and which I have spoken outagainststrongly and repeatedly. Finally, the market is not a panacea for all our ills, and is even a source of a few of them. There mon goods that can only be secured by good government. And, like government, the market will only be as good as the human beings who act within it.

The fact that we disagree on some matters of policy does not necessarily mean that either of us isoutsideCatholic social teaching. As Gregg points out, in most cases, Catholic social teaching only provides the correctprinciplesfor plex social and economic questions, rather than specificpolicyrequirements. This means that in most cases there is room for legitimate disagreement on the correct application of those principles.

Read more . . .