So on Saturday I came home from work and saw a story on the side bar of the blaze that made me laugh, then shake my head: Catholics Divided on Libertarianism as ‘Heresy’. Ok so there is utter maddness about with the travels about of Cardinal Kasper, the generation from 18-23 year old actual Catholics being non existent, continued irreverence at least passively if not actively endorsed by Archbishop Gomez (at LA's education conference) or Pope Francis with Jesus Christ in plastic cups at world youth day. There are so many things that are so much more important to this than trying to define libertarianism, which libertarians disagree with each other about to begin with, as heresy.
First if it is heresy then you have heretics not just identifying as progressives or consevatives, but actually quite a few traditionalists who are not prone to think only of post conciliar decrees as important would identify politically as libertarians. People like Tom Woods (of How the catholic church built western civilization" book fame) and Judge Andrew Napolitano (who appears as a legal expert on many shows and makes it clear he is a pre-vatican II Catholic, which is confusing but he is not SSPX but probably more along the lines of FSSP).
If you read the Blaze article it brings up three articles written very recently by Michael Winters of NCReporter (aka fishwrap, aka that paper that John Allen wrote for knowing that the paper was heretical yet people treat him to this day like he is a good source, when he really knew he was feeding error, oh he even was endorsed by my Bishop to give a speech, oh Milwaukee you are useless). The other is by Mark Shea (the ubber reactionary of neo-cons, Mark lets be real you are reading this) which is the article that outright condemns libertarianism as a heresy. The final article I will post on this is one by Joe Hargrave entitled Mark Shea's Economic inquisiton (Which Mark Shea has been whining about ever since because hes being picked on... put on your big boy pants Mark. Consider asking Jimmy Akin to write a piece entitled "9 things to know and share about how writing posts that counter Mark Shea posts is dastardly")
I take no position on the matter of libertarianism probably because I'm a distributist and of the monarchial view on government. By the way does anyone else find it odd that Mark Shea who writes for Heresy central (AKA Patheos, think about it, its pure indifferentism) is calling others out for being heretics.
Also I have put two videos below with differing view points on the matter for those interested in seeing the two views.
The first is by a seminarian in Canada who always puts about great YouTube videos. His view is that libertarianism is not enough.
The second is by Tom Woods from his recent show where he tries to show how it is compatible with Christianity
I do think that we can agree that atheistic libertarianism espoused by the likes of Ayn Rand is devoid of compatibility. There was an interesting article on how the satanist Anton LaVey was greatly encouraged by Rand's works and recommends her stuff for what its worth on the Acton blog.
Meanwhile we whistle dixie