Michael Novak is worried "whether [Pope Francis] has a very good theory for how you get the poor out of poverty."

I mean, [says Novak,] I don’t think the aim should be to keep the poor poor and feel sorry for them and give them alms; I think the hope for the poor is to help them to break the chains of poverty and become independent people of initiative and energy on their own, and I don’t see the Pope there yet.

My goodness, where to start? (That's not a rhetorical device, either.)

Let me take a step back and mention that the Forbes article in question is the epitome of what many around here take to be the unbearable myopia of neo-conservative Catholicism. Quite frankly, I'm not even sure what those words mean. But I can point to examples when I see them—like the intimation that "a great love for America and [admiration for] many things" covers a multitude of old-world-style sins. According to Novak, John Paul II evolved tremendously in his appreciation for capitalism and the "virtues of the free market system." This was a corrective to his somewhat stunted anthropology, which didn't immediately see that to benefit from modern capitalism all one really needs are "diligence and intelligence."

Fortunately for us, JPII ended up on the right side of history. For Francis, however, there's little hope. (An ironic thing, really, for a man who's already been named TIME's Person of the Year.) Francis, as Novak rightly points out, doesn't have a "very good theory for how you get the poor out of poverty." He does come with his own charming traits, though: for example, "insisting that things like doctrine...while very important and not to be denied by him, [are] nonetheless not at the heart of the matter." This is especially useful when working, say, to ensure that a new magisterium will face minimal opposition. To be sure, Francis is lightyears beyond the "finger-wagging disciplinarians that religious people have sometimes seemed to be." Pope Benedict, Novak says, "probably had the best mind of our lifetime, an immense amount of erudition and learning...just the brilliance of the man, and the kindness... But that's not Francis." Francis's forte is "so much mercy, and so much love," but not so much sophistication. He escapes the peril of being too smart for his own good; but his naïveté will be an almost insurmountable hurdle.

Let's be honest, there's exactly one thing that would force the prevailing fates to judge Pope Francis with favor. And it sure as heck wouldn't require something so original as coming up with "a very good theory" of anything. (Incidentally, he's already done that a few places here.) In this regard, Francis and Benedict are more kindred than ever. And I'd venture to guess that, were Saint John Paul II here to weigh in on his behalf, he'd much prefer present company to those who would immortalize his legacy as one of a recovering statist.

Andrew M. Haines is the editor and founder of Ethika Politika, and co-founder and chief operating officer at Fiat Insight.