CHURCH \u0026 THE MARKET (Studies in Ethics and Economics) by Thomas E. Woods Jr.

CHURCH \u0026 THE MARKET (Studies in Ethics and Economics) Reviews

• 
  Owen

  Distributists who attack Tom as a "dissenter" or a "liberal heretic" either have not read this book, or do not wish to give his case a fair trial. Not only does Tom display an incredible amount of economic knowledge that far surpasses his critics, but he is also able to defend his position on philosophical, moral, and theological grounds. I don't agree with everything he has written here, but nearly so. There are certainly short-run circumstances that allow for the exploitation that is warned about in the social encyclicals, and I would have liked Tom to acknowledge those cases. His treatment on usury was a little weak as well in that he spent most of his time parrying alternative views on usury instead of proposing his own interpretation of it; his very short treatment of Vix Pervenit was a bit disappointing in this regard. My main criticism is that he relies too much on mutual consent as a sufficient condition for a just contract, instead of taking into consideration duress, fraud, and other factors that significantly reduce the voluntariness of an agreement. On the whole Tom shows that the critics of the free market do not properly understand the logic of the market that cannot be superseded by fiat, but must be taken into account when formulating policy.
• 
  Charlie Donahue

  This book was recommended to me, and I'm glad it was. Thomas Woods does not disappoint, making logical and rational arguments throughout the book for the free market and Austrian Economics. He then shows that not only do these viewpoints not contradict the Catholic Church's dogma, they rather agree with it. Mr. Woods is not afraid to evaluate statements made by previous popes on economics, where they do not have infallibility. This book goes beyond merely presenting ideas and why they work, it goes over commonly held views that are often claimed to be better than the free market. Mr. Woods dissects the ideas, showing why they eventually fail in the long run and how the free market and Austrian Economics actually accomplish the goal they are seeking more efficiently. He then shows how the free market, in that circumstance, agrees with Catholic dogma. Mr. Woods uses reliable sources, his writing is clear and concise, and his arguments rational to the utmost. The Church and the Market, all in all, is an extremely well-written and worthwhile book.
• 
  Daren Tobert

  Excellent case for the free market
  
  As a Christian, I have struggled to find ways of explaining the glorious order God has placed in the universe in the laws of economics. Tom outlines well how many so-called libertarian positions are really just facts of nature, not really subject to debate. Wonderful book.
• 
  George McCombe

  In his introduction, Thomas Woods makes the point this book is not aimed at refuting socialists, but is intended to persuade Catholics who, whilst rejecting socialism, are uncomfortable with the concept of laissez faire free markets as proposed by Austrian school economists. His purpose is not only to convince Catholics that Austrian economics is fully compatible with Catholic teaching, but that it is also the most effective way to bring about the ideals of Catholic social thought as taught by a succession of Popes. In all fairness to Woods, he has written a book that is readable, well-presented and, like much that comes out of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, superficially plausible. Consider the implications, however, and one is left with a rather horrifying vision of the society that Woods wishes to create. Whilst very much being the 'target audience' for this book, I arrived at the conclusion that not only does Woods fail to make his case of the compatibility between Austrian economics and Catholic teaching, but that the ruthlessly individualistic society he proposes has the potential to be as horrendous as any socialist dystopia.
  
  From the start Woods acknowledges that a number of Papal documents present a dim view of uncontrolled free markets, warning that such a system as leads to exploitation, insecurity and hinders the flourishing of a just society. Woods’ response, and from which the rest of his book flows, is to claim that he agrees with the Papal ideals of Catholic social teaching but that the Popes have nevertheless misunderstood basic economics. Economics, according to Woods, is a cold, hard science that is governed by unchangeable laws. Only Austrian economists acknowledge this and thus only Austrian economics can ‘work’ if society is to prosper and thereby bring Catholic social teaching to fruition. As the Popes’ basic assumptions on economics have been wrong, their teaching on how best to bring about a just society is also mistaken.
  
  When you work for an institute that considers Somalia to be doing just fine, I’m not convinced you’ve properly understood what the Popes were aiming for.
  
  Woods is wrong to claim that economics is a ‘value-free’ science. Even if we do consider economics to be a science, Woods adopts a tactic of blurring theory and implementation, claiming that we do not judge the validity of scientific theories based on ethics. No, but the Church manifestly does judge the ethical implementation of scientific theories on a great variety of issues ranging from embryonic stem cell research to nuclear weapons, and thus Woods desire to see policies enacted is firmly within the realm of ethics. Woods attempt to claim that Austrian economics, while being value-free, is based on the ethical principle of liberty of the individual also falls flat. That Woods uses a quote from the odious Walter Bloch, defender of every low-life scum imaginable in the name of ‘liberty’, rather proves this point.
  
  Woods devotes several chapters to fleshing out basic Austrian principles. Some of this, such as his lengthy criticism of fractional-reserve banking and call to return to the gold standard, is not unique to Austrian thought and has little to do with Catholic teaching. His robust defence of usury (in which he noticeably fails to denounce the predatory practice of payday lending that has ruined so many on the breadline) and his attack on the minimum wage are topics that Catholic social teaching has much to say on, and it is the precisely the exploitation that results from such practices that is condemned in a number of Papal encyclicals.
  
  Despite stressing the importance of the individual, it is ironic that Woods entire defence of the compatibility of free-market economics with Catholic teaching is based on a utilitarian argument that it benefits a sizeable group of people. No consideration is given to the individual poor who are left behind. For example, while making some valid criticisms of the welfare state, his solution to the poor is merely that they should rely on their family to look after them. Ignoring the fact that many individuals must move great distances from their family to find work, what if their family is also poor? All Woods can do is denounce them as being lazy and not especially poor. His advocacy of the removal of any safety-net, combined with some almost sociopathic views on child labour, is in line with the principles of Social Darwinism rather than Catholicism.
  
  Woods repeatedly claims that critics of Austrian economics misunderstand it. The opposite is true; they understand it very well and criticize it for the right reasons. Woods, on the other hand, seems at times to deliberately misrepresent his critics. He sarcastically dismisses those who want decent conditions for workers claiming that the complaints will not end (‘who would not want five hour lunch breaks, the services of a masseuse, and an office with a view of Niagara Falls?’) and absurdly claims that those defending workers’ rights want everyone to live a life of millionaire luxury. He repeatedly falls into the slippery slope fallacy, arguing those who favour legislation to protect workers and the poor differ only in minor degree to socialists, and that the authoritarian State is ready to seize control if given a legislative inch.
  
  In many ways Woods' encapsulates the problem of libertarianism in that, while it may find itself on the right side on some issues, the workings of society cannot fit neatly into an absolutist, one-size-fits-all dogma. The evidence, both historical and contemporary, both in the USA and abroad, firmly demonstrates that unregulated markets lead to an exploitative and detrimental environment for workers and consumers. Woods cannot rebut this and instead falls into advocating utilitarianism at the expense of individuals or simply dismissing the problem. Pope Leo XIII and his successors denounced the Dickensian society Woods wants to create. After reading this book my sympathy and agreement remains with Rome.
• 
  Jairo Fraga

  Tom woods writes in this good book a well made defense of Christian principles applied to solid economics (austrian economics).
  
  Explains briefly what austrian school is about, reminding that eg. Rothbard says that what matters is ethics, not "market efficiency". Also, economics has nothing to say about Catholic faith, as it doesn't concern moral decisions.
  
  On the next chapter the theme is wages and price control. Reviewing scholastics economists it's possible to see that the just price could well be right away interpreted as the market driven price, with no government interference. After it the Catholic Popes stance on the inviolability of the private property is shown, associating socialism with robbery, which it really is, and also how socialism shuns away the desire to do something better with his property as the incentives are missing there. Unfortunately much of the Catholic social doctrine enters in contradiction, many of the supposed good actions the employer should do to in order to guarantee a good life for the employee worsens the situation for both. Interesting topic on some facts about trade unions, which indicate poverty increases on areas more union-driven. Tom Woods concludes here that the Popes professed the need for "just wages" and such with very good intentions, but due to lack of economic understanding the way they want things to be applied simply won't work and will bring the opposite consequences.
  
  Woods gives a short and easy to understand explanation about modern banking, its nuances (fractional banking, fiat money, etc) and how central banking can get around the massive redemption of money people could do from banks. Also, big moral problems arise from the state driven usual inflation and from the business cycle as explained by Mises and Hayek.
  
  Usury is treated here, as a thing early catholics condemned, but late scholastics sorted it out, and Austrians defined interest in a simple time preference context, meaning it would he morally injust not to pay interest, forcing the other part of transaction to treat the same good in the future as with the same value as now, a condition which is unconceivable.
  
  On foreign aid, Tom Woods asserts praxeologically why it's not only moral wrong due to the coercitive nature of the taxation that origins the money for the aid, but also it's widely used to mantain/increase support between chosen people for dictatorial governments. It's also explained why food aid usually doesn't gets directed to those who really need it. Well made critics against economic protectionism are done, as austrians know, they can only lead to poverty for the "protected" people.
  
  Woods points to the sick society of Sweden. Afflicted by the welfare state, demographics were screwed and got to a very low level, and now with massive immigration, there is not much hope for them.
  
  On distributism and self-sufficiency, Woods say that there is not only economic problems but also a moral issue when doing your own worker like a farmer for your own subsistence, as it's egoistic not having to work with and please your fellows, providing them with goods. Besides that, it may be possible to starve to death with a bad harvest. There is a mention to the maximum relative firm size that Mises and Rothbard talks about, that happens when a firm grows vertically (precisely what would happen if socialism was possible), on higher-order goods, and starts to have losses when trying to produce everything, instead of buying cheaper on market.
  
  Shows guild-like restrictions like the need for a degree to perform certain jobs, which leads to higher prices and worsening of the quality of the services.
  
  Explains that being forced via taxes to support leftist agenda, can be very uncatholic, like state-financed abortion. Also, the state defended by catholics on the medieval era was much more decentralized and less powerful than the modern state, and the laws were usually derived from the experience, not nowadays positive law.
  
  Woods remembers that profit, often touted as a bad, egoistic evil, just means that the one who seeks profit must plan his activities conforming to the society needs, not wasting scarce resources that could be used on other more desired needs, which would mean a loss. Catholics should support the market and profits as a way to even have minimal comfort and time to study and serve God better, instead of needing to worry about just surviving.
  
  It's a good overall basic free-market economics teaching book, but I expected to be a bit more focused on Catholic matters, but it points out some good things, and also we are remembered that Catholics are able to prudentially and respectfully disagree with the Pope on specific policies or scientific assertions, as the Popes aren't infallible on those topics.
  
  
• 
  The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha

  A must-read for anyone who is interested in Catholic social teaching and its relationship to economic liberty. Woods reminds us that although the Church is compelled to address issues of morality, including those that intersect with economics, such as the right to private property, it has no more authority over the science of economics than it would over the science of another kind, say mechanical engineering. The Church recommends the "preferential option for the poor," but it takes economic analysis to find that option; and it would not be a stretch to say that free-market capitalism has done more to eliminate poverty than any other economic system throughout history, despite any claims by communists of being the champions of the poor — on the contrary!
• 
  Barbara

  The work demands praise because its thesis is somewhat counter-intuitive: Woods is NOT calling for a middle ground between the free market and Catholic Social Teaching, which is what a lot of orthodox Catholics have taken as their stance. I give four stars because he could serve to reiterate his thesis. Found myself revisiting the introduction a lot.
  
• 
  Ned

  A book not just for Catholics. It is a shame that the market for this book is narrowed by it's focus on Catholocism. As a Baptist, I thoroughly enjoyed it. It is an antidote for anyone taken in by the so-called "social gospel."
• 
  TRE

  Great all-around book, and while it may be a bit tedious at times for those that aren't natural fans of economics, the learning curve really isn't too high and it stays interesting for an intermediate reader.
  
  Content-wise, Woods does a good job charitably dismantling distributist arguments, which really aren't well-founded at all.
  
  The book could use an update as this variant of right-wing socialism has found a lot of adherents online since 2005 (because it seems "trad" while also being different from more typical American right-wing movements/ideas), so Woods would have more recent material to work with.
• 
  Russell George

  Not only for Catholics
  
  I'm not Catholic, but I found this book to be insightful into any egalitarian dogma. It can be applied to most 'moral' arguments for interventionism. The writer has a good voice. This book draws many valuable logical conclutions, without sounding dry or wordy. I would recommend it.