Let me explain my presupposition in handling Pope Francis' statements.
First, in theology, I advert to Benedict XVI's method, the Hermeneutic of Continuity, which proposes that whenever statements are ambiguous, they should be interpreted in the light of settled Catholic doctrine and the mind of the Church.
This gives us plenty to work on, since, regrettably, Pope Francis' statements are often ambiguous.
Second, in terms of administration and policy, I generally go by Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." (Tagline). The more complete form of this, I'm told, is:
In general, I agree with livius' opinion that Pope Francis is not quite adequate as far as intellectual power is concerned. He doesn't have the systematic reasoning faculties of Benedict XVI, and tends to speak and make decisions impulsively --- off the cuff, all the time --- without grasping larger implications. I may be all wrong about this --- God forgive me --- but it's what I think I'm observing.
Third, in politics, I find him injecting his personal policy preferences into documents which are supposed to be Magisterial (e.g. Laudato Si). This is an abuse of the papal office, because very few people other than hyper Mrs. Don-o types are going to comb through his statements and color-code them as to what is de-fide authentic doctrine ans what is fervent dingbat opinion. His political slant being (broadly) Peronist, is not morally depraved so much as empirically stupid. He should not be talking about stuff that's outside of his competence. Stop. Please. Full stop.
As far as the doctrines of the Faith go, I think he's orthodox, if interpreted prudently according to that first principle, Continuity.
Finally, I always strive (fighting my own habitual sinful tendencies) to avoid Three Mortal Sins of the Internet, which are Rash Judgment, Detraction and Calumny. We owe this to everybody, but especially to the Holy Father, toward whom our attitude should always be filial.
Pope Francis has made some serious mistakes already, which We need to pray, fast, and make sacrifices for him. Maybe we should talk more about that.
And I take these words to heart:
"In a world which all too often is merciless to the sinner and lenient to the sin, we need to cultivate a strong sense of justice, to discern and to do God's will." - Pope Francis
The "Hermeneutic of Continuity" was devised by Benedict XVI as a method of identifying "the correct key" to the VII Council's "interpretation and application" -- not as an Input/Output machine through which transparently unorthodox statements and actions by churchmen may be miraculously rendered the opposite.
In general, I agree with livius' opinion that Pope Francis is not quite adequate as far as intellectual power is concerned.
Is he a man lacking in intelligence, or is he a Modernist who is assiduously applying his intellectual powers toward subversive goals? Isn't there sufficient direct and circumstantial evidence at this point to seriously consider the possibility of the latter being the case?
"...4. But since the Modernists (as they are commonly and rightly called) employ a very clever artifice, namely, to present their doctrines without order and systematic arrangement into one whole, scattered and disjointed one from another, so as to appear to be in doubt and uncertainty, while they are in reality firm and steadfast, it will be of advantage, Venerable Brethren, to bring their teachings together here into one group, and to point out the connexion between them, and thus to pass to an examination of the sources of the errors, and to prescribe remedies for averting the evil..." (Pascendi Dominici Gregis -- Pope Pius X On The Doctrines Of the Modernists)
As far as the doctrines of the Faith go, I think he's orthodox, if interpreted prudently according to that first principle, Continuity.
Only if one considers such things as that ghastly light show on the facade of St. Peter's on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception or his personal interpretations of Scripture that fly in the face of traditional Catholic interpretations, or his benign acceptance of a mockery of a crucifix hammer and sickle "orthodox". And furthermore, his answer to the atheist that was dissected in earlier posts is markedly discontinuous even with the VII document "Gaudium Et Spes" in regard to atheism.:
"...21. In her loyal devotion to God and men, the Church has already repudiated and cannot cease repudiating, sorrowfully but as firmly as possible, those poisonous doctrines and actions which contradict reason and the common experience of humanity, and dethrone man from his native excellence..."
We owe this to everybody, but especially to the Holy Father, toward whom our attitude should always be filial.
"Filial" respect does not demand the imposition of an artificial paradigm (i.e. a misapplication of a "hermeneutic of continuity" dependent upon an arbitrary characterization of "ambiguity" where ambiguity does not exist) in order to whitewash destructive papal statements and actions that are public and scandalous. Such attempts at legerdemain merely compound the damage and confirm false perceptions among many non-Catholics. To defend the indefensible is poor Catholic witness and exceeds the limits of "filial" loyalty.
Pope Francis has made some serious mistakes already, which We need to pray, fast, and make sacrifices for him.
Indeed.