SO:he was not naming Putin because it was "not necessary", that was "already known".

That's the complex excuse for not naming Jesus or Christ in any of his wretched documents.

2 Romans 1:1 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
I wish to remind you of God and regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed God, the Son of God in name and power. By his death and resurrection, Jesus Christ our Lord we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith for his name’s sake.
I am to tell you that the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
Dear Rome, even so you knew God, you neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but your thinking has become futile and in your foolish hearts you were darkened. Although you claimed to be wise, you have become fools. You exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles alike. For this reason God gave some of you over to the sinful desires of your hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of your bodies with one another. Because you exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

The paradox is the following.
--
The Holy Spirit chooses the cardinals through the pope.
The Holy Spirit chooses the pope through the cardinals.
You believe in the Holy Spirit's infallibility.
You believe in the church's infallibility through the Holy Spirit..
You believe in God's omnipotence.
You believe in the perfection of God.
So you must believe the process can't go wrong.
So obedience is a logic consequence because you must reason that even if things go not as expected, then you must obey and trust that the thoughts of God are higher than your thoughts and God's ways are higher than your ways.

Now the pope is a puppet and a clown. QED.
So what happened?
Something went wrong!
You must give up on something.
Omnipotence?
Infallibility?
Perfection of God?
Obedience?
Giving up on obedience, then you give up on God!
Reasoning that obedience is an absolute value only in sync with other values is not enough for a perfect church.
So is the Catholic Church not so perfect? (fallible)
And if the church is not perfect than you can reason that the Holy Spirit did fail!
And then also the perfect infallible God Failed.

It is a paradox.
Something we believe is WRONG.
We must find out what it is and accept it.

I vote for: God is omnipotent, but not instantaneously omnipotent.
That gives wings to the devil who always loses after a while.
The second world war lasted six or seven years.
The evil roman empire dissolved and even left Christianity fortified.
This so called crisis is Soteriologic.
God induced, God led and God resolved.
And after it Christianity comes out fortified.
If not, then you can give up on the God of Jesus.

Esto no es un buen ejemplo.
xque?
El cable conectado al pin tiene al final algo pesado, creo que es un micrófono. Como pueden ver, el astronauta hace algo y se resortea el micrófono para abajo. Luego el cable se comporta como un resorte con una pesa. Al extenderse el resorte acumula energía de acuerdo la ley de hooke. A la hora de soltarse el pin, el resorte todavía tiene energía almacenada y jala los dos extremos para su centro gravitacional. Es decir el microfono sube y el pin baja.

Francis. You love politics!
But the focus on politics is not your job.

Please I beg you: Give to God what belongs to God, and peace will follow. There is nothing you can do about world peace, only God can do something about world peace. Even if that does not sound logic in your ears.
Instead you follow the logic of this world and therefore you are poised to fail miserably. You can talk the green off a leaf about morality and solutions to people with hardened hearts. In the end only God can soften the hearts and only that will solve world peace.
You are still so not aware that you are dooming the whole world with this attitude of focussing on politics and not on God..
Why are you not praying a few rosaries with the people on that plane.
In secret so that God will reward you in public as is one of the promises of Christ who could also be your redeemer.
Mene mene tekel upharsin!
You are blind and everybody you choose is blind to the living God who IS and is not deaf and listens. But thou wouldst not speak because thou art so full of thyself with pet morality theories thinking you have the power of influencing and you contagiate others dragging them with you deep into the pit without exit.
Of this world you are!
With this world you will go down the hard way.

Sensus fidei in the life of the Church (2014)
I demand sensus fidei. It takes longer to get to conclusions, but it is solid.
This text was endorsed by Muller in 2014.
Consensus fidelium is a sure criterion for determining whether a particular doctrine or practice belongs to the apostolic faith.

This crooked branch of liberation theology that Francis is implementing. This Iscariottian interpretation of the gospels must be cut off and thrown into the fire so that it burns to the ages!!!

This resumes it all:
And Judas said: What a waste! We could have sold this perfume for a fortune and given the money to the poor!

---from the text----
A legalistic Roche insisted that if one rejects the "legislation" of a Council “you are putting yourself sideways towards the edges of the Church, you are becoming more Protestant than Catholic.

Most ignorant people that pretend to know much about theology and in reality they are not aware of theology or church law. They turned around the law.
They reasoned that Jesus said: And I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.
That Jesus saying is short for: I will give you much power.
But it cuts two ways because in the context of the gospel it means: Now you have much responsibility and be careful with what you do because we in the heavens follow suit.
The Vatican seems to reason: Whatever we do and decide is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and thus correct. Of course this is only true when they hear the Holy Spirit and do the will of God.

But the Vatican itself says that there could be a mistake and there is a way to recognize this mistake.

The international theological commision ITC says on the Vatican page:
As a result, the faithful have an instinct for the truth of the Gospel, which enables them to recognise and endorse authentic Christian doctrine and practice, and to reject what is false. That supernatural instinct, intrinsically linked to the gift of faith received in the communion of the Church, is called the sensus fidei, and it enables Christians to fulfil their prophetic calling.

This same ITC is the institution that warned against liberation theology that seems to become mainstream in a neo-jacket.

In this document the ITC distinguishes between faithful as in all catholics on the one hand, and faithful as in practising catholics.
It states:
Discussion of dispositions appropriate to the sensus fidei needs to be supplemented with consideration of some important practical and pastoral questions, regarding, in particular, the relationship between the sensus fidei and popular religiosity; the necessary distinction between the sensus fidei, on the one hand, and public or majority opinion, on the other; and how to consult the faithful in matters of faith and morals. These points will now be considered in turn.

etc

For this reason it is important to sense the faithful (fidei) and not the majority of catholics like if it were election day.
But unfortunately as it is also this document can be interpreted by anyone in his own advantage while deliberately choosing for oneself who is faithful.

Therefore in my opinion in the context of the gospel it boils down to Matthew 16:19:
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

It is therefore not protestant if something unexpected happens in a large group of catholics, like opposition to vatican II. It could well be the Holy Spirit trying to maintain a tradition or even trying to make a correction.

@lancs1 Unless you can hear and see the truth from the mouth of the Holy Spirit, my advice is to never dismiss a prophet because it doesn't sound logic to you. That is the mistake all naysayers make. It sounds unlogic and the messenger looks fringe and I can;t hear nothing so why should she hear, so they reason. Not that I endorse this, but if I say nay to this, then that is only because my Holy Spirit said nay to this, and in reality my Holy Spirit did not say nay. To me that means to me: Do not say nay to the words of this woman, but also do not say yes.

Hahahaha. What chord did I hit? I see so many stupidities here, and nobody is ever being criticized for that, unless it is a personal attack or if it is very immoral. Of course.. what I say above is impossible to do and will lead to the total destruction of the Catholic Church. Because even so I did see many Jesus sayings being very very true, I yet have to see the fruits of the other cheek. In this society if you turn the other cheek they will brace themselves to knock you out. I believe that is not because the other cheek philosophy is wrong persé, but because the people of this society are all corrupt, proud and selfish. Thank you for lifting me up from the stone age. But I fear there was more solidarity then, but alas there was no love your enemy feelings. But is there now? I fear we don't love our own, and we do not love our enemies. We are so full of ourselves. We love ourselves

Empty words without real actions yes a clown show.
How can we as the catholic church pretend to be in good standing with our moral conscience, saying to hold the correct morality and regarding ourselves as serious, if we do not pay back the damages we caused until the very last penny and pay also interest and also interest over interest and then also an indemnification. (Matthew 5:23-26) Not only in Canada but also Ireland and even in the Netherlands and Germany where the church recently in the fifties and sixties went on a raping spree, kill off tens of thousands heretics against the church in the 16th century. Further name all the countries that the church looted starting with Latin America. But before we indemnify we must ask the receiver of the indemnification. Listen and please say out loud if you agree with this and attain to the consequences.

repeat with me: Your church and your god has only taken from me. It has eradicated my identity and my dignity. This church has been of no use to me ever and I believe it can't and it will never be of use. Just give me the money and leave me alone.

While the world does not want to see that the catholic church also gives much to the world, and most people are simply said greedy. They will take every opportunity to get whatever they can get, to buy some cigarettes or go out for dinner. So they will nearly all say the above in blue and then we will have to pay them the indemnisations. After that, we have money nor churches left, there will be no monasteries nor any other property or artwork. But we gained dignity for ourselves because we can again regard ourselves as serious. Even so we will not have gained any credibility with the world, because their purpose is to destroy the church. We will be left with just the right people who agree with those actions and will restore the church in no time.

Unfortunately the reasoning of St. Thomas C. is pointless to today's standards. Acting and behaving like a pope is subject to today's relativism and boils down to: What is a pope supposed to behave as? And Peter is subject to the duties of the Office. I presume he means formal duties as described in certain documents. Or does he mean he is subject to the then ruling morality viewed as logical in that time, as a result of an interpretation from that time by St Thomas, of existing documents like the bible and the catechism. And you may notice the Pope changing interpretations in his binding motu proprios in such a way that the morality as seen from the Vatican changes in such a way that Francis objectively seen complies with the fallacy of St. Thomas C. So.. even according to today's standards, Francis behaves like a pope and is subject to the duties of the office. The rest is a question of taste. If it tastes bad, then its your problem. Legally it is watertight. They know what they do. By any standard they are relativists.