[Author's note:] This article was written before illness led the Supreme Pontiff to hospitalization. Like all the faithful, I too offer my prayers for the physical and spiritual health of Francis. What I write below is valid for the orientation of his pontificate, which is still true today, as can be seen in the recent suppression of the Miles Christi Religious Institute, announced on Thursday, the 6th of this month.
***
The current Pontificate is distinguished by a true contradiction: the Pope is an enemy of Tradition, persecutor of those who follow it and identify with it. This persecution is accomplished in many ways: he displaces good bishops, appointing coadjutors for them; he elevates to the episcopate progressive characters; he takes care to elevate to the cardinalate those who second his projects of reforming the Church; he promotes progressive religious institutes and undermines or eliminates those attached to Tradition. It is significant that he has chosen the unusual name of Francis - alien to papal history - probably thinking of the saint of Assisi, considering him an ecclesial reformer.
All these attitudes cause in many people the need for dissimulation, to avoid being the object of the Pontiff's interest, or else they incite attachment to him, becoming officialists. The Jesuit condition of Francis explains in good measure the situation, if we take into account the historical ups and downs of the Society.
It is in the theological and doctrinal sphere where the novelty of the current Pontificate is especially noticeable. If there is one thing that characterizes the Roman See, it is the care it has taken to keep to the boundaries of Tradition. Great Popes have always distinguished themselves by this note. Close to us are the collection of encyclicals of Leo XIII, and the work of St. Pius X against Modernism (the encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis). His successor Benedict XV kept on going from his first encyclical (Ad beattisimi apostolorum). Pius XI promoted the worship of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and instituted its liturgical feast and that of Christ the King. His study on communism (encyclical Divini Redemptoris) marked the attitude of the Church during the 20th century. Then we must point out the work of Pius XII, warning about the dangers of the nouvelle théologie (encyclical Humani generis, 1950). Paul VI suffered painful reactions by defining the immorality of artificial contraception (encyclical Humanae vitae, 1968). John Paul II and Benedict XVI were true teachers of the Faith.
On the other hand, Francis' errors and vacillations have multiplied. His interviews with Eugenio Scalfari (founder of “La Repubblica”) gave much to talk about: “The souls that repent are forgiven, those that obstinately persist in sin, disappear.” There is no hell, but the disappearance of the damned. On this matter, he also taught that “hell is to say to God, I don't need you, I can manage on my own. As did the devil, the only one we are sure is in hell.” His Mariology is deficient: she rejects the title of Co-Redemptrix, because -he says- “she is not divine.” He does not preach on the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ, but promotes a horizontal humanism, in accordance with the globalist agenda. He is lavish in exhorting peace, against the proliferation of atomic weapons. This attitude is prudent, but it must be recognized that war is not an absolute evil: there are just wars. From this point of view, too, it departs from the Tradition of the Church.
This synthesis I have presented is quite eloquent.
