Pope Francis has always warned about the risk of the Church turning into a merciful NGO. However, the lack of an intellectual push within the pontificate leads everything to be reduced to charitable actions or Pope Francis’ gestures.
He doesn’t have the wherewithal for this “intellectual push.” So he simply urges people to do good things, and prelates to “set an example.” That’s about it.
All of this is important and necessary. The pontificate lacks, however, an intellectual push. Since nobody leads the debate, the debate is biased by a series of forces that have always tried to bend the discussion, and hence the Catholic Church, to their will.
His “world view is above all that of an Argentinian, then a Latin American, and then a Jesuit.” Which is not enough, the analyst implies.
Paradoxically, a pontificate born during the Year of Faith with the wish of being missionary leaves a political legacy instead of a spiritual one. Pope Francis thought is indeed political and pragmatic, while his spirituality is mostly popular piety.
Sounds about right.
The writer sees “a fossilization” of Francis’ pontificate.
What will Pope Francis’ legacy be? What will be its impact on the history of the Church? It has been often emphasized that Pope Francis is a “parish-priest Pope,” who celebrates daily mass in Santa Marta and makes great gestures. But what will Pope Francis be remembered for?
At the moment, his legacy cannot be assessed. He fought to break careerism, but he mostly raised the stakes on institutionality. He worked to reform the Curia, but this reform seems to be a never-ending discussion. He flirted with progressive intellectuals, but he then made traditional choices. He spoke about synodality, but he has always been a man alone at the helm.
Pretty fair comments:
The hermeneutic of incoherence, perhaps?
via MondayVatican where is the proprietor.