It is important to understand, however, that good will is not synonymous with sound thought; and I must say, not without reluctance, that West’s work seems to me to misrepresent in significant ways the thought of John Paul II.
click here to see full article.
BUT WAIT! There's more! Idiot lawyer Chris Ferrara, who has some precision but no accuracy, lucked into a grouping pretty close to the mark in his latest attempt to fire some rounds-- published in today's Remnant click here
Typical of his style, he front-loads his bias in conclusive transitions (and over uses the magical word "clearly") but this quote is worth mention:
I rather doubt that theological truths of momentous importance for the Church and the world were left unspoken for nearly 2,000 years, only to emerge suddenly in “John Paul’s thought” by way of little-known addresses so “dense” they need to be “translated” by “secondary literature.” Yet the lay “translators” of TOB preposterously “interpret” a series of opaque commentaries as nothing less than the hope of the world in our time, the implication being—and this is classic neo-Catholicism—that the Church’s teaching on marriage and procreation before Vatican II was all pretty much worthless.
Schindler's crtique is worth the read. Ferrara makes a good point in criticizing the "holy sex" exhuberance.
So let's see if the West fans and TOB Luddites can overcome their prediliction to write off crticism as warrantless because it comes from traditionalists (an inherent fallacy of ad hominem) and properly respond to Schindler (Smith's attempt was laughably flat) or Ferrara (who is a trad, but lucked into some ok points). I don't think they can do it. They rely on emoting, while what I'm asking for takes reason.