It seems that nothing is ever quite the right fit for Francis. Those who knew him in Buenos Aires affirm that, even as Archbishop, he never resigned himself to merely tending to the flock confided to his care. Convinced of being the privileged vessel of a kind of irresistible charism, capable of resolving any and every problem, he not only strove for firm control of the Argentinean Church according to his own ideology, but also involved himself in problems belonging to the most varied ambits. Between efforts to attract other confessions to his mysterious pan-ecumenical polyhedron project, – without proselytism, of course! – and his forays into the intricate meanders of national politics, his activity assumed an altogether novel scope.
Having reached the topmost peak of the Catholic Church he is by no means satisfied. He finds the Catholic flock so very dull, perhaps for having ‘closed in on itself,’ influenced by the ‘retrocession’ marking the previous pontificate.
Consequently, he has made it clear, from the very start, that he is not happy with the situation and wants to change things. Only within the Church? Absolutely not. Apparently convinced he has a saving mission, Francis wishes to be the man who establishes a unique epoch of peace for all of humanity. Are we perhaps dealing with a new prophet? Is Francis something much greater than the mere head of the Catholics? Let us remain attentive, for such a mission would surely not be unaccompanied by great signs and wonders…
Really, perhaps the worst part of all of this is witnessing how this ‘project’, that looms behind certain initiatives, is far, very far from the Father’s original plan of salvation with the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Who is it that benefits from this mysterious ‘project’? Who does the coming of this new ‘messiah’ favor? To what degree is Francis conscious of this? These are some of the many questions – whose response is not easily conjectured – arising not only in the minds of illustrious Catholics, but also among the fragile flock that should be being lead toward celestial pastures.
While each one seeks his own answers, we do well to recall a previous study of the Denzinger-Bergoglio regarding the complex topic of ecology that has been brought to the fore by the recently released ‘pope’s video’:
I – Suspicion of the Church regarding ‘integral ecology’; a new doctrine involving an ideology which in many points opposes the teachings of the Church
A) Legitimate concerns of the Church for the environment
B) Grave misgivings of the Magisterium in relation to an ‘ecological mentality’ contrary to the teachings of the Church
C) Humans are put at the apex of material and visible creation: they are image and likeness of God, with a body and immortal soul, and with a final end that is not in this world
II – The ecological problems of the planet are due to the neglect of the practice of the Commandments – immutable moral principles – by the greater part of humanity. The crisis of our world is a moral crisis, therefore, only a moral conversion will resolve ecological problems
A) The Christian should see the world as a setting where life evolves in accordance with moral principles, with his sights placed on eternity
B) The root of the environmental crisis is moral
C) The solution for the world crisis is found in a society based on the religious principles of Christian morals
III – An ecology of a spiritual and irenic character opens the doors toward a distortion of the humanity and dialoguing with everybody, Catholics and non-Catholics – adapt to ways of thinking which constitute doctrines truly contrary to unchanging teachings
A) Dialogue and drawing closer, without transgressing the truth and the faith
B) Authentic respect for nature and human beings will only exist within an
C) The Christian vision of the Triune God cannot be reconciled with the spiritualist mask of an ecology that appears to be open toward interreligious dialogue, but is interwoven with religious syncretism and pantheism