Mr Robert Mickens is angry because PF has broken the rules.
The Vatican City Governorate had decreed that all persons should wear masks ... rather as the Doge might have required Venetians to do at Carni Vale (or even the Masters of Ceremonies at the Vauxhall Gardens). But at the General Audience, PF himself and his entourage were maskless. A furious Mickens quotes the Vatican Government edict which makes clear that the rule applies to everybody.
Pictures show a maskless pontiff, exposing himself to the mindless mobs of groupies and Selfie enthusiasts.
What on earth does poor Mickens expect?
PF has form.
On repeated Maundy Thursdays, PF ignored the rules. He wanted to wash female feet. He wanted to and so he did. Just like a wilful toddler.
Then the rules were changed to require only that the feet be Christian. Still he ignored the rules.
At the heart of the disorder I have often called Bergoglianism is the conviction that he, PF, is above the Law.
And I argue that this is closely connected with the modern, unhealthy, sickly, papal personality cult.
My anxieties about PF began immediately after his election when his "I am a Poverello" papal name was announced. Then he came out on to the balcony humbly dressed and humbly asked to be blessed. Those anxieties grew when it was soon announced that he would not live in the Apostolic Palace. And that he would wear more humble vestments than Pope Benedict had.
You see, this brought back for me unpleasant memories of the corrupt Anglican Bishop Peter Ball, whose career was based on a cult of phony humility. He would pepper his (very often self-regarding) sermons with allusions to himself as 'just a silly monk'. I have known him enter the Sacristy before Mass, lift up his habit to show a humble pair of elderly trousers, and tell the servers that he was 'just a poor old monk'. Nice-looking young men beguiled into thinking of joining his 'religious order' would be shown his humble bedroom, with just a humble mattress on the floor, and a broken crucifix.
I am most certainly not suggesting that, as Ball was, PF has ever been a sadistic abuser. The media would have publicised that if they had been able to find even a tiniest scrap of evidence. Clearly, there is none whatsoever.
I beg forgiveness simply for the fact that I cannot shake off this gut feeling: a parade of Phony Humility is likely to be an indication of something, whether great or small, which is not quite right.
Of course PF did not want the mob at the Audience to be deprived of looking upon his wonderful (and humble) Face!
Whatever the next pope is like, whatever his doctrinal biases, I hope that, at least, he will not stoke up a personality cult whch is already excessive and is a a menace to the mentality of the Catholic Church.
And that he will indulge no temptation to set himself above the rules. Even if he thinks he is.