Received this message the other day from Andrew McNabb, whose great-granduncle, Fr. Vincent McNabb, was one of the key distributists of the 20th century:

"Fr. Vincent, as you well know, was a brilliant, pious and some may even say saintly man. His writings have had a tremendous influence on my life. I am not writing, however, to take issue with your 'taking down' Distributism in the book. The fact that the simple act of writing that word has produced a red squiggly underneath it (i.e. 'that word is not in our dictionary') pretty much says it all. I am writing to thank you for writing a darn good book.

"I recently bought The Church and the Market because, like most devout Catholics, I struggle with the inconsistencies inherent in 'modern' life, and while hardly an anti-capitalist -- I have an MBA from NYU and did decidedly 'Capitalistic' work both before and after achieving that degree -- the subtitle of your book caught my attention. I have always considered the Distributist ideal as just that, as the best of what could be achieved. However, for as long as I have been trying to find one, it is nearly impossible to obtain a cohesive explanation of Distributism, even from Distributists themselves. It is even more difficult finding practical examples of its employment. I have always been dubious about the practicality of 'The Third Way,' but because of my respect for Fr. Vincent (and Chesterton and Belloc), I have always considered my inability to better understand it and potentially even do something to practice it to be due to my own weakness of mind and character. I must say, your explanation of Distributism is the best I have read."You will probably find it amusing that I am a writer, and that Joseph Pearce has written a very flattering blurb (there is no other kind!) for the cover of my first book, a short story collection entitled The Body of This, due out next Spring. I can't speak for Joseph regarding his economic views, but his recent 'update' of Schumacher's Small is Beautiful would seem to put the two of you at odds about a great deal. While I am sure there is much about which you would agree, oh, to be a listener of a discussion between the two of you. Joseph, of course, is not an economist but has a brilliant mind. To that point, despite the obvious piety and facility of mind possessed by those holding the office of Pope, your argument that 'papal infallibility' does not apply to the realm of economics is a terrific one and one of the key take-aways from the book.

"Anyway, while I agree with most of what you wrote, I didn't write to address the few arguments you make that I find myself questioning. I am just happy that you wrote that terrific book. I learned a lot."