Halden already, and awhile back, said a bit about Novak’s response to Caritas in veritate but I have my own two-cents.
This is not outside of Novak’s normal self. This article is in continuity with his other work: capitalism is awesome. So what is he doing here? Being an ideological pundit, again. I believe we call this person a tool. Is this an ad hominem? Perhaps, however, I’d still say it may be a correct description even then. As for Novak, while he didn’t call the pope names, he showed a gross misunderstanding at best, but it seems more and more a misreading and a fumbling analysis instead, and presumably to discredit the encyclical as formative for Christian life. So whats the best thing to come out of this? Well, Novak has at last in his own words admitted to placing himself outside of the Catholic tradition. Perhaps he finally took that flying leap.