Let me give an example. I'm sure you're aware of the Global Warming furor. For a long time I was quite skeptical of there being a general global warming underway because there was a discrepancy between satellite and ground measurements - one showed a slight cooling trend and the other a slight warming. One of the guys responsible for the satellite data and interpretation is John Christy. Well, one day I read an article of his defending Intelligent Design. It was full of the same nonsense we get here from the anti-Es. So, I said to myself, if that's the quality of scientific thinking that went into interpreting the satellite temp data, it's probably crap. And lo and behold, two significant errors were found and now the satellite and land measurements both show a slight warming trend.
The moral of course is that maybe you should re-examine your reasons for buying into his prior scriptural analysis.
The stuff I read of his was written well over 5-6 years ago and received Church sanction. Some people start out okay, but later go off of the deep end. I don't think EWTN would have employed him at all if he hadn't been not crazy at some point in time. I think that it is obvious that he was considered okay enough prior to 2002 when he started espousing this wacky stuff that mainstream Catholic theologians took him seriously.
His books "Not By Scripture Alone" and "Not By Faith Alone" were not any different than other similar works of previous Catholic apologists that I have read.
I doubt you know much about Sungenis prior to this article.
I would pay close attention to the field of linguistics after Chomsky dies. I think his manure might just help a hundred flowers blossom.