It has been ten years of movementist tactics: saying and not saying, affirming and retracting, going forward while saying that one was going backward, making others say what one would like to say oneself, opening and closing, accepting and condemning, declaring and contradicting. Just when you thought you had understood, Francis had already moved on. By the time, one of his interviews had just been read, he had already given another of a different tenor. In the interviews with Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari it was never clear who had said what. Quotations from the Bible and the Magisterium, often partial and inaccurate; footnotes used to provoke great changes without making them apparent; phrases with a thousand nuances; love for those far away and raps on the knuckles for those nearby; endless receiverships; political interventions; protection of questionable characters; the promotion of doubts of faith made without cultivating any doubts... these are some examples of a method that has caused bewilderment.
A very accurate analysis of Pope Fracis' pontificate and his nominalist philosophy (Nominalism -the philosophy of the Medieval Franciscan William of Ockham that rejects essences and universals). Here Problems With Nominalist-Materialist Philosophy, part one is an excellent refutation of nominalism. Ladies and gentlemen we indeed have a Nominalist Pope, and that is the key to understanding his theology, actions, statements and writings. Thanks for posting!
“He came with the king's mandate, bringing nothing worthy of the high priesthood, but having the fury of a cruel tyrant, and the rage of a savage beast.” (2 Macc. 4:25)