Is Pope Francis mentally competent to do his job?

I feel uneasy over Pope Francis statements and actions: not just because what the catechism defines as sin he seems to brush aside: but saying lonely old men and unemployed youths are the Greatest evils... Is Pope Francis competent in his position? As a bishop he was not so unpredictable. Can anyone explain his unplanned imprecise words, is there some explanation which justifies his behaviour? Is he saying nuclear war, rape, and countless evils are not as bad as lonely old men? Is he lonely? Is that it?

His statements of an obsession with abortion, gay marriage, etcetera: that is not what I experience in parishes: if anything moral issues are not covered at all. He speaks of nuns needing to not be too spiritual: point me to a spiritual nun, because I don't know any. Nuns are deeply secular in behaviour and outlook. The type of nun who prays all day, as the saints desired nuns to be, is near non-existent, and as a result nunneries are dying. Pope Francis has seen no need to have clarifications made of his statements. He signs off on very bad translations of speeches. He doesn't read what he signs off on according to Vatican officials. And his very public 'humility' seems to be the opposite of humility and aimed at attention getting. Perhaps the Pope is lonely? Is that it? But he seems somewhat unpredictable.

For instance he says the Church must stop obsessing about things, and the next day he strongly condemns the things he said the Church obsessed about in that the Church condemned these things.

At first one reasons the pope like a leader in the Arab World: as speaking in hyperbole, but he is not speaking an embellishing language when he makes multiple strange unvetted statements,

As you know I am not one to respect personages, I treat everyone with the same respect, and I do follow procedures of respect where requisite such as respecting someone with power over me, or court etiquette: I believe the faith and what it says of papacy, but I will be honest if I am concerned. I am deeply concerned about Pope Francis. If he were a political leader I would call for resignation due to the loss of competence to fulfil a job satisfactorily. But he is the pope, and only he can determine his fitness for office. Whatever the reasons, I would like to hear explanations, thoughts to explain this.

The pope need not be impeccable, and is only infallible in certain circumstances, but a pope who has so little concern for the deep spiritual damage to the flock is something I am concerned by if that inference is fair and true.

The responses I have been subject to so far, range from acknowledgement of my concerns, to requests we pray for the pope, to people attacking my article as diabolic, to people believing the pope is a humanist who will destroy the faith. The Catholic Church has survived deeply evil popes, and the gate of hell will not overcome it. Jesus saying that suggests that there will be times when we think the gates of hell will submerge us in the devil. I do not believe this pope is evil. He was amongst the most faithful and orthodox and outspoken moral focussed archbishops. I respect what he has said. At the same time I think he may have lost touch with his surroundings. I am concerned he may not be functioning in fine form, and if so, then why is he not allowing others to vet his words to make sure they fit the position of a widely followed world leader? I have also been told that the Holy Spirit chooses the pope, though I do not see that in the dogma of the church: The Holy Spirit guides ex Cathedra (From the Chair) statements of the popes: of which only a few have been made: such as on the assumption of Mary, and possibly on women not being able to (notice: this is about impossibility not what ought to be, the church teaches that the process of anointment there does not work) be priests: both of which I believe were ex cathedra and followed the processes, and thus join Vatican II as dogma. On women priests, it relates to priests needing to be like Jesus in as many ways as is possible: this is also why priests tend to be celibate, and straight if the Canon Law has its way: to as closely channel Jesus Christ as possible. If Jesus had been a woman there would likely be the same dogma but against male priests.

The pope in general is speaking from a personal perspective not infallibility. And the pope's actions are personal acts of a human being. The man who becomes pope is still physically there. The pope is not God, and bad popes have been elected in the past. There is no great promise that the electors will choose the perfect candidate, only that God will protect certain statements and certain aspects of the Church.

The ageing population problem is certainly a great evil: our societies are undergoing under-population: not enough youths to replace the elderly retiring. Immigrants therefore come in to fill the vacuums as nature hates a vacuum, but immigrants are often not well adapted, and locals feel threatened and thus become xenophobic and violent. Lack of education and experience does leave unemployed youths, a result of ageing population. And in China and India bare branches: unemployed youths caused all the major revolutions, and unemployed and unmarried youths to be precise are dangerous. Bare branches is one example, gangsterism is another coincidental. Elderly if they opt for suicide, undermine the fabric of society, and make it seem that those without economic value are worthless. Perhaps the Pope's words could be stretched here and there, to be in line with reasoning. What I say of ageing population is me, not the pope. Also, if that were the case he would need to have said that it were the source of many an evil, not the greatest evil itself. Surely death and torments are the greatest evils, not unemployed youth and sad elderly populations. Maybe he doesn't want lazy nuns. Maybe he wants media to be kinder to the church and is reaching out to make headlines better... But is this how he acted as a bishop? Is this what a younger version of the man did? If he meant the things I would like him to mean, or if he is playing media or whatever else as some might want him to being, so be it. However, he doe not issue clarifications like other popes did. He seems almost obsessed with his own image and closeted off away from the de facto world. It seems as though he might have lost his inhibitions, and his firm grounding upon good faculties. This is not an unorthodox leader, but the man who was exiled from the Jesuits for standing up for the dogma of the Church. My worry is if he has lost his faculties, in a world where the faithful have learnt to rely heavily of a Vatican lead.