I'm looking for a good opportunity to dispense with all of those hackeyed accusations that McGovern was at the least a communist sympathizer, that Willie Sutton robbed banks, that Johnny Appleseed was a boon to the creation of apple orchards, that the sun rises in the East and that disrespect and insolence are to be discouraged among actual Catholics. Valid opportunities in all cases are few and far between.
I also note the repulsively presumptuous abuse of the prefix "neo" yet again. We have in politics isolationist Simon Legrees who imagine themselves the real conservatives and attack the real thing as "neo-conservatives" and now we have schismatics imagining themselves Catholic who abuse that overused prefix by dismissing actual Catholics in communion with the Holy See as something called "neo-Catholics." It is in such cocoons of abused vocabulary, in each case, that politically or spiritually carcinogenic fantasies must be protected lest they be blown away by cold cruel reality and/or common sense as the case may be.
If words like "schismatic" and "heretic" have some meaning, then they must apply to someone like Luther. But when you use them to attack every person with whom you disagree, then they lose their meaning.
The point was "Would you use the same old hackneyed accusations to attack Fr. Somerville?" It looks like the answer is "Yes." But when you don't have any other arguments, then I guess you have to keep using the only one that you have.