Corporate Social Responsibility in the Twenty-First Century Bryan Horrigan Northampton, Massachusetts: Edward Elgar, 2010 (427 pages)

Despite the fact that Junius insists in his letter to the nobles of Holland that he will stay within the bounds of a theologian who knows his place, one wonders if there was a judicial complement who had studied theology, languages, and classics as closely and with as much distinction as Junius had studied law. This work as well as Junius scholarly caliber forms also a counterpoint and rebuke to overcome the frequent stereotype that humanism and scholasticism are necessarily antithetical. In Junius, we have one theologian who was trained as a humanist upon legal and classical sources, formally cultivated the study of biblical languages and hermeneutics, contributed to the development of theological systems, thoroughly engaged in pastoral praxis and confessional development, and managed to maintain a modest sobriety about his role as a theologian. Yet, how many opportunities did Junius have to address matters of state and civil polity whether as diplomat, pastor, or theologian? Furthermore, Junius and his work stand as a beacon and call for the interconnectivity, engagement, and distinctness of philosophy, culture, society, civil polity, and theology.

The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine Michael Lewis New York: W. W. Norton, 2010 (266 pages)

Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition Anthony C. Percy Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, 2010 (191 pages)

The Battle: How the Fight Between Free Enterprise and Big Government Will Shape Americas Future Arthur C. Brooks New York: Basic Books, 2010 (192 pages)

List of contributors for Volume 14, Number 1.

Faith in Politics: Religion and Liberal Democracy Bryan T. McGraw Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2010 (320 pages)

For the last four decades, a number of neoconservative Christian scholars have worked to great benefit in articulating the moral foundations of capitalism and its positive moral effects in socializing market participants. This has been much-needed work, as the Christian churches still have not grappled adequately with the systematic moral defense of self-interest in market relationships that has been employed in secular thought for three hundred years. At the same time, however, many involved in this affirmation of capitalism have too easily found common cause with others on the political right, in particular libertarians, whose fundamental view of the human person and morality is at odds with a Christian and, in particular, a Catholic view of life.

During the second half of the nineteenth century, the Netherlands was confronted with the social and political integration of the working and middle classes. The contribution of Protestantism to the solution has been heavily debated. An ongoing question has been how the over-weaned, conservative, Christian social thought that always rejected a large government role in society had, after World War II, so quickly moved to support expanding the welfare state. New investigation shows that the answer is found by supplementing the existing portrait at two points. First, alongside the Kuyperian movement there already existed a social tradition far less identifiable that was rooted in the Dutch Reformed Church. Although much less visible in the social debate, it nonetheless exerted significant influence on the settlement of the social question. Second, before World War II, a decisive reversal had occurred in the acceptance of a welfare state by younger people from both traditions so that the tipping point came before 1940.Rolf van der Woude, "Taming the Beast: The Long and Hard Road to the Christian Social Conference of 1952," Journal of Markets & Morality 14, no. 2 (Fall 2011): 419-444

Finn says that my arguments fail to erect a position that is both Catholic and libertarian. I disagree and will expound on them here further, showing how justice for all is possible within such an order. In addition, I will show that Finns belief in the redistribution of income is contrary to Catholic social thought. It is he who fails to erect a position that is both Catholic and liberal.