Please, I didn’t say it was official Catholic apologetics. I said “gay apologetics.”
That was in the form of distorted teachings from Catholic sources. There actually was virtually no official teaching from the Church after Vatican II, because the imprimatur became unnecessary and every flake in the universe was free to publish his (or her, very often) flaky ruminations as authentic Catholic teaching. Look at the Dominican Matthew Fox and his teachings on “gaia” and homosexuality and a host of other things; look at all the loony nuns and their “teachings,” some of which appear in Catholic textbooks.
Why do you think the Vatican, under the more orthodox leadership of Benedict XVI, had to do all of the investigations and even condemnations that led to such hatred against BXVI that he had to resign?
I’m not saying JPII wasn’t orthodox personally; he simply was pretty neglectful of what was going on and being taught in the rest of the Church. And he picked up from the weak and overwhelmed Paul VI, whose one moment of heroism was Humanae Vitae but who simply couldn’t do anything more after that except weep.
Ask yourself daily whether you read and stay in touch enough and are knowledgeable enough to fight against threats to the Faith.
The reason I made my statement is a reaction to people blaming Vatican II for any number of ills in the world.
There will always be loony tunes out there who were ordained, or professed. However, while anybody can publish anything, it doesn’t mean there isn’t correction. The CDF regularly corrects those under its jurisdiction, and publishes the details.
I have no desire to be the Supreme Pontiff, with all of the global politics, as well as the religious politics. As such, I am very cautious to criticize. Additionally, the Vatican II fathers are a product of a pre-Vatican II world. So how is it possible for them to be less than orthodox?
Let us pray for the Pope and all religious, especially those whose interior motivations are anything other than serving the Lord.