system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I believe that Pope Francis is a PR tool and does not represent any real change in the direction of the Catholic church. CMV

Let me make clear that I believe that Francis himself is **NOT** a fraud.  He seems sincere in his desire to do good things in the world.  He seems like a truly kind and Christ-like man, and it's good to see that there's still a place in the high levels of church leadership for someone who is evidently not a hypocrite.  

But, Francis says all of the exact right things.  He does everything that his predecessor Benedict XVI was criticized for not doing.  He is charismatic, he is gaining the respect of even hardline atheists by practicing what he preaches and promoting progressive views and reform.  He embodies a rebuttal to every complaint that people have with organized religion in general and the RCC in particular.  A man like that as the pope is exactly what the Catholic church needed to rehabilitate its worldwide public image.

The thing that makes this clear to me is that his predecessor is still around. Benedict XVI was responsible during his time before becoming Pope for some of the most conservative doctrine of the modern church, along with his alleged involvement in the coverup of sexual abuse by priests.  He also had no charisma and did not engage with laymen, and had no visible sympathy for the suffering of the poor.  Here in the USA we tend to forget about the poverty and hunger of the third world, where the church's power base continues to grow.  Francis addresses those concerns.  Meanwhile, Benedict was an academic and a theologian who seemed to care more about writing papers and denouncing heretics than ministry and charity.  And he is *still in the Vatican* as the "Pope Emeritus", and organizational behavior being what it is, his views would continue to have serious weight.

The Catholic church throughout its history has shown itself to be primarily focused on power and subjugation, and has presided over some of the greatest atrocities in human history.  Francis might live an austere life and avoid the trappings of power, but I don't see him emptying the Vatican treasuries either.  You can't change an organization like that the RCC just by electing a new figurehead.  The rot infects the whole organization.  I want to believe, but I just can't.  So, CMV.
gpt
The Catholic Church is incredibly cautious in what it says about faith and doctrine because its words become the beliefs of its members.  This is especially true where their policy leans more liberal.  If they make a mistake in being too conservative with their doctrine, then they can always lighten up, but if they are too liberal then they damn souls.

This is exactly why what many non-Catholics (especially atheists) would consider as progress will either happen slowly or not at all.  Before they say something they have got to be certain that it will not lead to a crisis of faith for most people, will not damage the authority of the Church, is supported by scripture (of course), and will not create problems political or economic later.  A big change simply can not happen because that implies something happening all at once; rather, many small changes occur over a very long period of time.

The Roman Catholic Church does not reform.  It evolves.

Having a pope simply retire rather than serve to the deathbed is rare, but it has happened before.  In this case, to an extent, you are correct OP.  But there's a cynical and an insightful way of saying it.

At a time when inequality is a pressing concern, the world was lunged into recession, and misconduct by elites and bankers alike has triggered civil unrest the world over, a grand Catholic Church led by one in gold robes is a bad match for what the world needs.  That is not always the case.  If the world prospered and the Church portrayed too foppish an image then too would they lose esteem.

In addition to all of this, consider that the Vatican is a sovereign city state.  Their policy therefore is not only church doctrine but also diplomacy and foreign policy, and a special case of such.  Catholics the world over are beholden to the rule of a foreign nation as well as their home government.  This is why we have the Anglican Church; the British sought independence.

So, the changes in rhetoric and tone are also meant to convey a message necessary today as the world recovers from the recession, the Internet has become a battleground between theism and atheism, science is under attack by Protestants (you'd be surprised how much Catholics respect science), and the people need hope and unity in an era where borders are being gradually erased.

There is much more to consider than simple reformation to align with modern values.  The Catholic Church considers modern sensibilities last of all.  In a century, by the time sensibilities that are new today have only just begun to truly effect the Church, the contemporary values of that time will have changed as much as they have since a century ago -- on a global scale (think beyond the culture of your home nation).

What may seem today to be little more than words is actually a sign of much greater things to come -- very, very slowly.

edit: There's one more clarifying thing to say: mass, in the sense of physics.  Suppose you're on a BMX bicycle.  You can shift your body weight and move your vehicle, intuitively.  Suppose that you use a drump truck to tow a jumbo jet.  Now you have to plan changes to your velocity much more carefully.  There are many Catholics in the world, and staggering resources managed by the Church -- a very high mass still feeling ancient changes to its velocity.