Pope Francis’s death, of course, was not a surprise, and so people had time to reflect and write about his legacy before today.

First Things has a piece up today by Archbishop Charles J. Chaput that they likely commissioned in advance for when the time of his death came.

It begins warmly:

I have personal memories of Pope Francis that I greatly value: a friendly and generous working relationship at the 1997 Synod on America when we were both newly appointed archbishops; his personal welcome and warmth at Rome’s 2014 Humanum conference; and the extraordinary success of his 2015 visit to Philadelphia for the Eighth World Meeting of Families. He devoted himself to serving the Church and her people in ways that he felt the times demanded. As a brother in the faith, and a successor of Peter, he deserves our ongoing prayers for his eternal life in the presence of the God he loved.

And then it moves into the more clinical:

Having said that, an interregnum between papacies is a time for candor. The lack of it, given today’s challenges, is too expensive. In many ways, whatever its strengths, the Francis pontificate was inadequate to the real issues facing the Church. He had no direct involvement in the Second Vatican Council and seemed to resent the legacy of his immediate predecessors who did; men who worked and suffered to incarnate the council’s teachings faithfully into Catholic life. His personality tended toward the temperamental and autocratic. He resisted even loyal criticism. He had a pattern of ambiguity and loose words that sowed confusion and conflict. In the face of deep cultural fractures on matters of sexual behavior and identity, he condemned gender ideology but seemed to downplay a compelling Christian “theology of the body.” He was impatient with canon law and proper procedure. His signature project, synodality, was heavy on process and deficient in clarity.

Chaput adds:

Despite an inspiring outreach to society’s margins, his papacy lacked a confident, dynamic evangelical zeal. The intellectual excellence to sustain a salvific (and not merely ethical) Christian witness in a skeptical modern world was likewise absent.

For those of us — like Archbishop Chaput — who have some fond memories of the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia, among others, that might feel a little jarring to read this already this morning. It does come with the territory of analysis, however!

And as the commentary flows, the first part are not just soft feelings but the reality of life in the Church. It’s Christ’s Church, and He works through men, living in the world and flawed as we are.

Chaput is a wise and holy pastor, whose assessment ranks among those most authoritative in the Church today. I’d just offer my two cents of my years of watching Pope Francis and all the varied reactions to him: I’ve often wondered if he trusted the Holy Spirit more than many of us do. I don’t mean Chaput. I do mean me, though. If I had a dollar for every time I thought some perfect solution was necessary in the church or other matters. . . . I’m often certain it only would make sense to have a package with a bow. Francis, on the other hand, at times, seemed to simply shine a light on what was already going on. And while content might not be the word, he saw that as sufficient for now.

He didn’t start the fire of divisions. His synodal approach could be perceived as hashing things out in the open, guided, we pray, by prayer.

Of course, because we’re humans, that’s all neater said than done. And the synod process was both vague and heavy-handed, somehow at the same time.

Peggy Noonan did me a wonderful favor in her book on John Paul the Great by not disclosing to the world that I was the friend she was instant messaging (blast from the AOL past) during Pope John Paul II’s funeral Mass who declared Joseph Ratzinger would never be pope because it was too good to be true. She, on the other hand, prophetically predicted the next pope was giving the homily that day.

B16 was a treasure of truth and clarity. And I’m not sure we appreciated what we had.

So the Holy Spirit tried another approach with us? And will continue to until we get our hearts right with God?