Contact Us

Use the form on the right to contact us.

You can edit the text in this area, and change where the contact form on the right submits to, by entering edit mode using the modes on the bottom right. 

         

123 Street Avenue, City Town, 99999

(123) 555-6789

email@address.com

 

You can set your address, phone number, email and site description in the settings tab.
Link to read me page with more information.

Feed

Filtering by Tag: Traditionalist

#HimToo: Brian McCall & Brett Kavanaugh - Baseless Accusations Destroy Lives

Vox Catholica

Over the past year, we have seen an increase in the practice of Doxxing, De-Platforming, Social Media suspensions, firings and forced resignations, at the behest of violent Marxists, Leftists, Feminists, and all other stripes of anti-Christian zombies with little more than an allegation, in an effort to advance an agenda of social degeneration, progressivism, un-fettered immigration and homosexualism.

Controversial Radio Host Alex Jones

Controversial Radio Host Alex Jones

It wasn’t until the Alex Jones case, wherein the inflammatory radio host was de-platformed overnight by Apple, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Periscope etc., that people started to take notice of the looming danger of politicized censorship.

Jones, of course, was not the first to be de-platformed. The first serious de-platforming took place when a prominent neo-Nazi website called the Daily Stormer, ran by the infamous Andrew Anglin, was taken down after violence erupted in Charlottesville, Virginia, due to the neglect of the Charlottesville Police Department. Shortly thereafter, there was a purge of “right-wing,” “nazi,” “white supremacists” (aka. mostly run of the mill conservatives) from the internet, and a serious pursuit to identify and persecute participants with taxpayer dollars by PBS and the liberal website Pro-Publica. These efforts have led to firings, students being kicked out of schools, de-platforming and recently 4 men being arrested for their involvement in the Virginia rally-turned-riot.

All these cases of censorship, doxxing, and de-platforming came about at the mere accusation of those ever present buzzwords in our current society of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, nazism, fascism, white supremacism, bigotry or whatever else is in style that particular week. Some of the accusations may have been true, some may have been false, but either way, this set the precedent for two notable cases that we are seeing un-fold before our eyes this week.

Those would be the cases of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and the former Associate Dean at the Oklahoma University Law Department, Brian McCall.

Dr. Brian McCall

Dr. Brian McCall

While these two cases of McCall and Kavanaugh are at face value seemingly un-related, there is a deep vein of misandry and hatred of Truth and Justice lurking just below the surface that will become apparent.

The big story here is the case of Dr. Brian McCall. A noted scholar, lawyer, professor, associate dean, and acclaimed Catholic journalist and speaker, Dr. McCall is the last person anyone in the Traditionalist world would have expected to be attacked, ridiculed, slandered and ultimately forced to resign from his job, but those who hate truth will stop at nothing to remove anything and anyone which lays bare their own nakedness and degeneracy.

The First Story

On September 9th, a Oklahoma University Journalism School student named Drew Hutchinson published an article titled “Endowed OU law professor found connected to anti-Semitic publication.” The article went on to defame Dr. McCall’s good name and ultimately take away his livelihood by conjecture, insinuation and defamation by implication.

One claim by Drew Hutchinson in the article stated:

McCall contributed to TradCatKnight Radio, a traditionalist Catholic podcast, on July 15. David Duke, a former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, was a guest on the same episode and made derogatory remarks about Jews.


This claim is demonstrably false. While it is true that both Brian McCall and David Duke were both invited as guests on TradCatKnight radio, they were featured on totally different podcast episodes.

TCKRadio

While I’m absolutely NOT a David Duke apologist, the idea that Brian McCall is some sort of a KKK bigot because he was invited to speak on a podcast that also featured Duke, is absurd. (Pro-Tip: David Duke is absolute kryptonite and effectively ruins anything he becomes associated with. Period. The man could donate money to an orphanage for poor African-American children, and within a week that orphanage would be shut down. Believe me.)

McCall and Duke spoke about completely different topics, and it is frankly a mystery to me why a protestant like Duke would be invited on a purportedly Catholic podcast that deals primarily with visions, prophecy and end-times predictions.

The article admits:

McCall made no anti-Semitic remarks but instead spoke about aspects of traditionalist Catholic beliefs.

But due to this guilt by association, implication and accusation, McCall is never-the-less branded an Anti-Semite by the young journalist wannabee as well as the thoroughly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center.

In another instance of guilt by association, Drew Hutchinson tries to make the claim that the brilliant Catholic Apologist, John Vennari (RIP), was some sort of a raging Anti-Semite who peddled in “really crazy conspiracies about Jews.” The only evidence for the claim was a passing mention of a book published by John Vennari, most likely the recently re-published “Permanant Instruction of the Alta Vendita,” an outline of how an Italian Lodge of Freemasons planned on infiltrating and subverting the Church, and a reference to how Mr. Vennari had said Judaism is a "part of the Kingdom of Satan."

Both of these accusations came with absolutely no footnotes, links, supporting documentation or anything substantiating the claim that John Vennari or Dr. Brian McCall were actually prejudiced towards Jews because they were born Jewish. Furthermore, Judaism, as traditionally spoken about by the Catholic Church, references a theological system of behavior and/or a religion that rejects Jesus Christ as the Son of God, something which as a belief system, or a behavior is willfully chosen and adhered to by the group in question, unlike something like race. At the rate we are going, the Bible will soon be condemned as Anti-Semitic hate speech.

In the article, McCall protested numerous times his innocence of these unsubstantiated claims of bigotry and prejudice, much like Brett Kavanaugh, and absolutely nobody gave McCall a fair hearing.

Liberals Take A Second Pass

In a follow up article on September 30th, titled “OU law professor, associate dean expresses homophobic, sexist views in 2014 book,” Hutchinson groundlessly blasted Dr. McCall for his totally valid and deeply-held religious beliefs, which are supposedly protected by the 1st Amendment, and accused him of sexism and homophobia.

Frankly the article speaks for it’s self, and Dr. McCall’s book (which you should go buy right now) “To Build the City of God: Living as Catholics in a Secular Age” outlines incredibly poignant issues for the Catholic living in the “current year.”

The issues addressed were women’s modesty, a Man’s authority over his home, union of Church and State, arguments for Traditional marriage based on the Natural Law, as well as many other topics that are frankly benign to Traditional Catholics. What I find interesting is that the vitriol and hatred for Traditional life is so intense in modern academia, Hutchinson only needed to basically state the basic teaching of the Church (not McCall’s) to whip up a frenzy over the fact that this kind of a “backwards thinking, white privileged, misogynistic, homophobic man” was an Associate Dean of the Oklahoma University School of Law.

Troubled Fake News Wannabee

Drew Hutchinson - Journalism Student @OU

So who exactly is this Drew Hutchinson girl, that effectively forced Dr. McCall to remove himself from his highly lauded career as Associate Dean of the School of Law at OU?

According to her website, Miss. Hutchinson has a history of “mental health” issues, “emotional instability,” anxiety problems, suffers from feelings of loneliness (no doubt due to her recent “terrible breakup”), lives with “turbulence and restlessness,” seeks “power,” and “loves to be in charge.” She even stated that her own mother had concerns over her mental health, and would have enrolled her in “Clown College” to make her happy. (Just in case she tries to delete this article, it is archived here.)

While, I’ve seen first hand how devastating a mental illness can be, and wish no ill towards those suffering from such diseases, young Miss. Hutchinson seems to be suffering from pathologies that come from the adherence to modern Feminism, Leftist Ideology and possibly even Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Miss. Hutchinson is clearly using Dr. McCall as her scapegoat and whipping post for her own rebellion and personal problems. For a social justice warrior, who seems to frequently lament the in-justice of the “gender-gap” in STEM fields, she has committed one of the gravest of all injustices: the bearing of false witness against one’s neighbor. And to add insult to injury, without thinking about the women and girls dependent on Dr. McCalls income from the University, she recklessly put their well being in danger. Clearly an act of oppression of women.

The Kavanaugh Connection

As we have seen, Dr. McCall has been groundlessly accused of the modern litany of sins against Social Justice, with absolutely no proof, which has now cost this courageous man his job as Associate Dean at the University of Oklahoma. This mirrors, in a way, the national drama we have seen playing out with the un-just and unfounded accusations of sexual impropriety directed at Brett Kavanaugh.

Nominee to the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh

Nominee to the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh, an honorable (albeit liberal) man with a long history of upstanding service towards his country, a man who with the grace of God could put an end to the daily Holocaust of innocent babies murdered at the hands of abortionists, reflects a certain amount of God’s Justice towards the hordes of disgusting, disgruntled, pink-hat wearing, perpetually outraged, Marxist-Feminazi-God-Hating-Liberals. This group of filth absolutely cannot risk anyone standing up for anything good and holy in our nations supreme court, and have concocted an ever-changing, un-corroborated, thoroughly discredited story about how Judge Kavanaugh drugged and gang-raped women in High-School and College and has some how gone un-detected at the highest levels of government for the past 35 years.

These accusations are losing steam, as Liberals and Democrats scramble to block this man’s appointment, but at Oaklahoma University, in an effort to rally support for the leftist’s agenda to perpetuate abortion and sex without consequences, our young “journalist” Drew Hutchinson breathlessly live-Tweeted The Gender + Equality Center’s “Take Back the Night event to take a stand against sexual violence,” an event clearly geared at discrediting the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh.

Clearly for “journalists” like Drew Hutchinson, feelings matter more than evidence and the truth.

Please say a prayer for young Miss. Hutchinson, as well as the un-justly attacked Dr. Brian McCall, and don’t forget that any one of us could be next!

abortion rights

Update 10/4/18 10:38 PM:

Since Publication of this article Drew Huchinson has revised her April 21st article “Benefits of Switching Majors” sourced above. In the original blog entry, Drew includes indecent photos of herself, reproduced in this blog, as well as several paragraphs referencing relationship problems and “mental health” issues. It is not my intent to poke fun at or persecute individuals suffering from such problems at all. That being said, Miss. Huchinson quietly revised her article, deleting several paragraphs quoted in this article, most likely in an effort to frame me as someone intent on smearing young college students with a political ideology I disagree with. This is far from the truth.

Luckily, I archived her old un-edited post before I published this article. You can view her original blog entry by clicking here. You can view her newly “revised” blog entry by clicking here. By comparing these articles one can see clearly that Miss. Huchinson is trying to hide the truth and maybe regrets her honesty. I do feel sorry for her, and seriously urge you to pray for her, and all souls in need of conversion.

What Miss. Huchinson did with her “journalistic endeavor” was more akin to radical activism, not journalism. Had she interviewed Dr. McCall, his students, his co-workers et. al. I’m sure she would have found that his personal religious beliefs did not prejudice or affect the behavior of Dr. McCall in the workplace, as the statement on the situation from Dean Harroz clearly stated.


SSPX Ordinations 2018 - Bishop Tissier Sermon & Photo Gallery

Vox Catholica

On Friday, June 22nd, 2018, the Catholic Church welcomed 7 new priests, ordained by Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais of the Society of Saint Pius at their new Seminary in Dillwyn, Virginia.

Those seven new priests are:

  • Fr. Thomas Buschmann
  • Fr. Samuel Fabula
  • Fr. John Graziano
  • Fr. Michael Sheahan
  • Fr. Thomas Tamm
  • Fr. Nicolas McManus
  • Fr. Thomas O’Hart

Below are photographs of their ordination, as well as photos from the first masses of Fr. Sheahan, Fr. Fabula and Father O'Hart. 

Fr. John O'Connor: The Marxist Destruction of Western Civilization

Vox Catholica

In this talk, Fr. John O'Connor O.P. lays out the destruction, subversion and infiltration of Western Governments by revolutionary Marxists and communists.

Father O'Connor discusses the foundation of the Federal Reserve, the destructive power of usury, and the takeover of our government by Radical Leftists.

Father John O’Conner was a Dominican priest, born in Chicago in 1929. He studied at Notre Dame University and joined the Order of Preachers in 1949. He obtained degrees in philosophy and theology, and was ordained to the Catholic priesthood in San Francisco in 1955. He taught in Catholic colleges in Madison, Wisconsin and Austin, Texas from 1955 to 1966. He was associate pastor in New Orleans from 1966-1969, and since then, as a Dominican preacher, he has travelled over 300,000 miles over the United States and Canada giving missions and retreats to the laity.

Michael Davies: The Traditionalist Movement - Yesterday And Today

Vox Catholica

At the Roman Forum in 1988, renowned Catholic author, and advocate for Traditionalism, Michael Davies discusses the state of the Catholic Church, and outlines the destruction caused by Vatican II.

Bishop Tissier: On Marriage and The Family - 1992

Vox Catholica

This is an INCREDIBLE and previously un-published talk of Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais given in Ridgefield Connecticut on July 10, 1992 about the Christian Family and Education.

Since the family is the basic building block of society, without strong families, we will not have strong societies. 

The good Bishop speaks of the great Islamic Replacement happening in Western Countries (and many years before this became a main-stream talking point) and warns that if Christians do not have big families, we will lose our societies. 

Here are some notable quotations:

2:30 And so what the Conciliar Church no longer wants, and what the Conciliar Church has excommunicated, is not only the true bishops and the true priests, it is not only the Mass of Tradition, but it is all the bastions of the Catholic Faith.  I quote only the words of Cardinal Ratzinger… Several years ago Cardinal Ratzinger said with Hans Urs Von Balthazar, a heretical theologian, “we must say the must urgent thing today is the demolition of the bastions” he said. A cardinal. “The dismantling of the bastions”. And what are these bastions, the bastions of the catholic faith? The bastions of Catholicism? They are the Catholic Family, Catholic Schools, Catholic Churches, Catholic Mass, Catholic Catechisms, Catholic Civil Laws, Catholic Governments, and finally Catholic States. On the contrary, we are for these bastions. It is a mission of the priestly society of Saint Pius the X, to rebuild these bastions of the Catholic Faith. To rebuild these destroyed bastions of the Catholic Faith. And we have begun with the Catholic Mass and the Priesthood 22, 23 years ago in Switzerland with Archbishop LeFebvre. We have continued with our chapels, seminaries naturally, with our priories, because the priests must live a life of community… But this work would be totally useless if it is not continued with catholic families and catholic schools.

11:45 The Catholic Family is normally, if god allows it, permits it, the large family. A family with many children. Christian England, Christian France, Christian America, must not die for want of children. Must not die Islamized, oh yes. This is a great danger in France especially, and also in your country (America) to die Islamized. Because the only families with many children are Traditionalist families, and Islamic families. It is so in France. And so the Conciliar race is an endangered species. Deo Gratias, I would say. But it is dangerous, the Islamic people are very many, naturally. So only Tradition, only strong convictions are fruitful.

It is a fact that demonstrate it. Liberalism, Conciliarism, lead to sterility. They are sterile. The fruits of Vatican II, it is childless families, dead families. And especially the root of the problem is the new conception of marriage given by Vatican II. It is in Vatican II!

35:34 It is very sad to see the new type of christian family. Husband, wife, a boy and a girl. It is the typical family. A typical modern family. Television everywhere, with the advertising. A husband a wife, and a boy and a girl. It is false! Once I was driving my car and before me was another car. On the front seat was Mr. DuPont and Mrs. DuPont, you know, and on the back seat, was the dog. The model of the new Christian family. Of the Conciliar family. Mr., Mrs., and the dog. What an awful idea of marriage.

39:14 People marry, and especially in the Conciliar families, and also in the non-Catholic families, people marry and say “we will have two children, and only two children!” And if they say this, with a real will of doing so, this marriage is invalid. Invalid. They have no right to limit the number of their children. To limit so rigorously without any grave reason, makes this invalid.

40:05 …Even if we must be criticized, be mocked, be laughed at in the streets… “What is this family with 7, 10, 15 children? How ridiculous! What a scandal!” Even if we must be pointed out and called insane and mad by these grave diggers of marriage and family.

41:20 Homosexuality and Civil Unions…

48:00 With Vatican II and the [doctrine of] religious liberty; “with all false religions” said Archbishop LeFebvre, “bring with themselves immorality”. In the Islamic religion, it is well known that one husband can have up to 5 wives. It is allowed. And also, protestant denominations do not recognize the indissolubility of marriage. Many people who are our “separated brethren” say “we get married, but if it does not work, we have the possibility of divorce.” It is this saying that makes of this marriage, and invalid marriage also. Invalid. To marry with the idea of divorcing if it doesn’t work. It is invalid. So dear friends, let’s have the true idea of marriage. And let us react against these awful dangers that threaten the Christian marriage. Let us fight against these grave diggers of marriage. 

50:28 Catholic People need Catholic laws, and Catholic government. And here in America, why could that not be the case? In some states in America, there is almost a majority of Catholics. Why could it not exist a catholic state? And Catholic laws, that is laws which encourage the religion, marriage, the family, schools. Yes? We must fight for this ideal of the Catholic State. The reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the political life. In the social life. You must understand, our lord must not reign only in the churches and in the sacristies, no. He must reign everywhere. In society, in the politics, through our laws which correspond to the gospel. This is normal. It is our fight. Our Catholic Fight.

Fr. Schmidberger: Archbishop Lefebvre and the Modern Popes

Vox Catholica

Father Franz Schmidberger, former Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, discusses the relationship between Archbishop Marcel LeFebvre, and the modern Popes. 

Ever since the Second Vatican council, tension with Rome has been very high, as Liberals and Marxists hijacked the Church, and broke with the 2,000 year Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church, and Archbishop LeFebvre stood up and defended the truth against those who were trying to destroy the church.

Father Schmidberger discusses the backstory of Vatican II and the changes implemented by John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II,  and Benedict.

Since this lecture was given on March 12, 2006, Pope Francis had not yet been elected Pope, and some of the new developments are obviously not discussed.

Father Schmidberger divides his talk into four parts: 

He starts by talking about the ministry of Saint Peter (The Pope). 

The second part discusses the attitude of Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX towards these modern (conciliar) popes. 

The Third part asks weather these popes are TRUE popes (looking into the ideas of Sedevacantism). 

The Fourth Part draws some conclusions, and takes a look towards the future. 

www.VoxCatholica.com

*Video* A Sign Of Hope 1986 - Saint Thomas Aquinas Seminary

Vox Catholica

 

In 1986 Father (now Bishop) Williamson who was rector of Saint Thomas Aquinas Seminary, was interviewed by Fr. Bourmaud along with various seminarians in attendance at the time.

This vintage documentary was filmed in Ridgefield, Connecticut, where Saint Thomas Aquinas Seminary was located until 1988.

The seminary has since moved to Dillwyn, Virginia, where a new seminary has been erected to accommodate the large number of vocations growing out of the Traditional Catholic Communities in North America. Details on the new seminary can be found at www.STAS.org.

The buildings you see on this video, in Ridgefield, Connecticut, are still in use by the SSPX, as Saint Ignatius Retreat House, and has a growing chapel there under the patronage of Christ the King.

At Saint Ignatius Retreat House, there are retreats for men and women held every month, and it is a great way to refocus your life, with the Traditional Catholic faith as your bedrock. To learn more about Saint Ignatius Retreat House, visit www.SSPXRidgefield.com.

In this video, Fr. Bourmaud Talks with several priests who were seminarians in 1986, including Fr. Johnson, Fr. Robinson, Fr. Albert (OP) Fr. Dean and Fr. Kimball. More information on the SSPX is available online at www.SSPX.org

Capitalism vs. Distributism

Steven Bachmann

Capitalism is not Catholic. It's not the default, simple system that many people assume it to be. It has its roots in Enlightenment thinkers, and necessarily requires classical liberalism to justify itself. It begins in the theories of those like John Locke, Adam Smith, and Turgot, and has no tested lineage beyond these innovators. I've never heard of the definition of capitalism outside of circles fundamentally opposed to the Church. And yet distributism, which is in-line with Catholic teaching and based in the market practices of Catholic medieval Europe, is excused as a second-rate economic theory by a grave many believers?

Distributism uses a subsidiary hierarchy of moral authority, of ecclesiastical, political, social, and economic parts respectively, to create an organic society by which its participative members are compelled to distribute the factors of production as widely as possible amongst themselves.Capitalism is the establishment of free enterprise, in the hopes that anarchistic properties of the market mechanism distribute capital in a circulating flow from two separated classes - producer and consumer - as efficiently as possible. The emancipated focus of each system is its human members and capital, respectively. 

Let's observe these two definitions. Each is an unbiased definition of what that ideology does, and what is favors. The distributist systems aims clearly at a cohesion that is beyond the act of making money, the goal is literally transcendent from profit. Profit is used as a means to build the social order that promotes its industry in all. Because people are born into a form of social fabric, they become more involved than a mere hireling, and the result transforms into a market that may be slow, but is sustainable for a thousand years. Capitalism is a functional opposite in every way: it favors the elimination of any social caste that would even remotely hinder the sacred goals of profit and turnover. It separates people into argumentative groups of producer and consumer by nature instead of unifying, fosters competition and successive elimination of businesses rather than cooperation, and creates a massive disparity of vision and wealth between industrial business owners and the employed consumer. A review of some of its further champions can vouch for its moral track record.

Capitalism has endorsed usury, which, as we know, is the charging of interest out on loans, as a standard practice. Condemned by great ecclesiastical minds like Thomas Aquinas (he explained that interest is like charging a man for a bottle of wine, and then charging him again to drink it), interest is a tool that has been used by scrupulous bankers throughout the ages to take advantage of those in desperate straits. While forbidden in medieval Christian Europe, our Modern world is built upon the necessity of debt so thoroughly that it's practically required for normal existence, but yet few question the morality of generously taking from - and trapping - individuals who have no other option.

Due of its solid beliefs in the most fluid and efficient flow of capital achievable, capitalism encouraged policies that enable the affluent, monied classes. Concessions for business like private property ownership and equality before the law are frequently toted as heralding symbols of our Modern economic system, but were nothing more than simple heirlooms, already assumed requisites and working parts of the markets in the Old World. Leo XIII iterates this forgotten fact perfectly in his encyclical Rerum Novarum, distinguishes the two by condemning capitalism and relentlessly defending property rights in the same instance. And His Holiness was completely consistent in arguing so; because to say that capitalism exclusively endorses private property rights is like trying to claim that Modern feminism exclusively endorses women. This sort of preferential claim is against all other forms of thought is an ignorant one. 

The fundamental understanding of capital as this live asset of investment within hyperactive markets is what distinguishes capitalism from the preceding guild systems of Europe. The invisible hand of free enterprise governs people, rather than people governing business. Money is in control. This set of ideas and its related venture use of capital were not feasible until the eve of the Renaissance, when an excess of prosperity brought the beginning of joint ventures of exploration and trade. New ventures like these birthed investment and some of the first corporations, agitating and ultimately changing the structure of the preceding economy into something wholly new. It's impossible that capitalism existed as some abstract-standard-with-a-different-name before the Enlightenment philosophes called it capitalism. To think that capitalism pioneered property rights or the ownership of the factors of production, for instance, or that these features were the showcase of its definition, is to be a little mistaken. It merely inherited both of these practices from its predecessor, from which commentators like Hillaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton created the economic theory of distributism. Economic systems were entirely different during the Middle Ages - but for some reason, I'm pretty sure the townsmen then still understood freedoms like private possession just as well.

Now while capitalism does have an overwhelmingly different character, it does confusingly share much in common with the distributist ideal. The difference, primarily - and what made capitalism boldly different, which it did invent itself - was an absence of a certain control. But this isn't control from a centrally controlling power, like a privately regulatory government in the socialist theory. The primary control missing comes from the moral authority created both within the echelons of society, and the Church. If you think hard enough about it, it's curious how the structures within society that businesses serve mean nothing to those businesses today. Only through best profit, through money, is any decision relevant. What makes our margins higher? In that way, capitalism has actually done well to erode social distinctions and the ethics that they create. For profits to be most efficient, industry of scale necessitates the concentration of resources into a centralized corporatism, which many distributists accurately criticize for inadvertently leading into socialism anyway. That's where we are today in the United States, isn't it? In this sense, capitalism is just as unsustainable, perhaps only as possible in theory as communism is. The state of capitalism is not a state of being, but a state of inevitably transforming into something else.

Conversely, distributism necessitates as widely distributed factors of production as possible among the people, and employs social methods to do so. It implies a preference of owning your own business, of working for yourself, which sets the most economic liberty possible before each and every person. Meanwhile systems like Churches, guilds, and an artisan system, rather than industrialized economy, exert the presence of ethical existence that capitalism rids itself of. Guilds act oppositely of unions, and unite tradesman of a craft together in practice, rather than dividing the worker and owner from within. Social structure is as much a study of distributism as the "purely" economic side. So just like Modern science doesn't understand the existence of God, because its horizons are definitely limited to the physical existence, so capitalism is blind to distributism, because its horizons are limited only see the monetary, the economic existence below who uses it. As one distributist said, "In contrast [to capitalism], distributism seeks to subordinate economic activity to human life as a whole, to our spiritual life, our intellectual life, our family life."

Subsidiarity is also a belief that should get some attention, in order to ward off the wrongful idea that we're just reinventing socialism. Now obviously, as Catholics, we believe in the necessity of hierarchy. Socialism has organized central hierarchy, while capitalism does not. Socialism's hierarchy is tyrannical, unfounded, and repressive, whereas capitalism is equally damnable for having no idea of centralism. The distributist offers a third way. We recognize the authority invested in the Church, the undisputed authority of our souls and consequent details of life, but yet realize the freedom of the secular crown to exist and operate within their potential as regulators for the temporal existence of nations. And we're all patriotic and know that our king has precedence (The US is a little different with republicanism, but it's the same idea), but yet we all nonetheless recognize the right of the tradesmen to regulate their own members for fear of government corruption and heavyhandedness. And we all recognize the vast necessity of quality wares and fair pay for which the guilds are responsible for enforcing, but yet we understand that the free nature of the human conscience, and that God desires this to be, must be fundamentally respected. See, these echelons of power - and freedoms - exist together in the concept of subsidiarity: "that no larger unit (whether social, economic, or political) should perform a function which can be performed by a smaller unit."

With each different author, distributism has been articulated as being realized by slightly different mechanisms. Unlike capitalism, unfortunately, distributism has never been a mainstream Modern goal, so its manifestation isn't nearly as tangible. It remains very theoretical. So if you ever had an interest into the further working details of distributism, the best information you can find are at its sources: both the Catholic medieval period, and the authors that ultimately wanted to recreate the more just parts of it. But at any rate, the primary differences between capitalism and distributism remain the same. It's the fundamentals that tell the difference, all authors have agreed on that. After all, the proof lies in the pudding. Examples like the banana republic, the steel titans, the railroad monopolies, the establishment of enormous national banks, and even the excessive existence of insurance companies were not possible feats of the pre-capitalist period most associated with distributism. While most people measure all forms of economy on a two-way scale between capitalism and socialism, these are not good standards at all, and in reality should be on the same side of any scale they occupy! 

But even with in their times of their intellectual procurators, many Catholics were nonetheless still skeptic about the precepts of distributism in the face of mainstream economic thought. “Freethinkers” of the Enlightenment wrote extensively on the benefits and freedoms afforded to man in what became capitalism, which is why it’s still associated with the notion of freedom today. They made intellectual assertions about property in the hopes of defining their desire of equality, which translated into the destruction of the nobilities and monarchies that presided socially over the emerging class of traders and craftsmen, whom they favored. These treatises on “liberty, equality, and property” still exist romantically in the minds of many Americans today. It seems like these philosophical writings of theirs have many faithful hung up on how to differentiate the fundamentals of the two systems apart. It helps when you remove the boogeyman that they give to tradition in classical liberalism, to remove their ambiguous statements of freedom in order to observe the real working differences between the two. And those real working differences have absolutely nothing to do with having small details.