That's better.
But why does he say it was maintained in Catholic theology?
Who maintained it, and why were they permitted to maintain it?
For those who were not involved with the Conciliar Church and the
Novus Ordo as I was, situational ethics was all the rage in adult catechisms, retreats, etc. beginning sometime in the 1970s and lasting well into the 1990s. The fad began to wane in the early 1990s but was still holding on when I escaped the
Novus Ordo.
I don't know its current status.
He says it was "maintained in Catholic theology" because he can't differentiate between Catholic theology and heresy. If Conciliar theologians are discussing it, he thinks its Catholic. And remember that Benedict believes that theology can evolve and that what was true at one time may not be true today and vice-versa.
On the other hand...
The article seems to be another false condemnation of a false pope. Benedict is clearly not defending as "normal" the evils being discussed. He is trying to explain what he sees are the historical circuмstances that led to the crisis that he is having to deal with. He is not defending them.
By making the false charge, those who accept the papal claims of Benedict attribute perfectly valid condemnations as unfounded as well and merely more persecutions that the Church has had to deal with since her founding. Anytime one sees or reads something that seems, at first glance, to show Benedict in an evil light, one should pause for a day, slowly re-read the docuмent from the point of view of a Conciliar Catholic believing that the Vicar of Christ is speaking, and see if the evidence is truly damning or simply one more bit of crazy talk that doesn't actually prove anything.