I don't agree with either the content of Weinandy's letter or the public nature in which he issued it. But I'd like a honest show of hands of those who similarly objected to Hans Kung's letter in 2010 to the world's bishops in which he strenuously criticized various aspects of Pope Benedict's exercise of papal ministry.  I sure can't find any objection to that letter & its criticism of Benedict from Winters or anyone at NCR. Fr. Jim Martin wrote at the time Kung's letter was released that it was "worth while reading" (although he indicated vague disagreement with some of its contents). Or does "dialogue" just mean that one is ok with public criticism of a pope if such criticism fits into one's own views?

This entire episode seems to me like a playing out of the tiresome & childish game of "You hit me first, no You hit ME first." A response to the response to an ill-conceived stunt.  Sheesh. Maybe the best response to someone's criticism of a pope is just to ignore it.