The objector says Weinandy should go out and do pastoral work rather than be a theologian.  Diocesan priest Charles Curran has done nothing for the Diocese of Rochester since the mid-1960s, has promoted theological positions that are not Catholic (yes, I have studied him, yes I picked the verb "promoted" because churning out a petition of dissent on a papal encyclical hours after its release in the mid-1960s is personal showmanship, not scholarship, and yes, the CDF was right in 1987 to declare him not to be a Catholic theologian).  The NCCB-USCC backed down into a fetal position when it refused to stand behind Cardinal O'Boyle's effort to discipline him, and now ... when Weinandy asks whether the ambiguities of Amoris Laetitia demand clarification, suddenly papal deference has made a comeback, the "academic theology" choir is crickets, and there is a pressing need for a theologian to go and do "street evangelization" ?  Sauce for the goose ....