You are mistaken. There is nothing I have said here that could reasonably be construed as my acting as an apologist for Fr Z. I mentioned him only in response to what another commenter said, and only in the context of the issue under discussion, the experience of conservatives in seminaries. 

I also made a plea for a charity towards him. That's an attitude I try to maintain in any debate. I doubt you'll find that I have failed in that goal in my many comments here yesterday and today, despite the fact that I disagree strongly with many of the other commenters.

I also dislike ad hominems, unlike many other commenters here. Perhaps it was their lack in my comments which led you to believe I was acting as Fr Z's  apologist?