Ric wrote:Pope John the XXIII had his controversial moments.. had he been alive today, he probably wouldn't achieve sainthood. His Unity pleas were similar to the current Pope, but the world was different, too.His vision of restoring unity throu ecumenism was starlingly frank for the mid 60's, yet, he wasn't labeled a radical communist. He speaks of 'seperated flock' in his controversial decree.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_coun ... io_en.html But wasn't labeled by those who werent familiar a communist.. nor a radical. and this was the 60's, where that term was skewered about liberally.
Pope Paul the VI wrote the Huamane Vitae. This encyclical was particularly politically controversial, but he was still never labeled as anything more than the Spiritual leader of the Church, which I suppose carried much more weight. Many of the Popes detractors today might have supported this controversial Papal decree.. and today, he would be embraced by those that call this Pope a Radical Communist, mainly because his decree about married love still is Cannon Law within the Church.
Benedict the XVI was controversial for any number of things, yet....
the point is.. if you study the Papacy, you can find much to be critical of, and much to revere. But ALL of them preached Unity. All of them. And that's all this Pope is doing when talking about mercy for refugees, regardless of from whence they came. Because that is what every one of them believed Jesus himself would do.
Calling the Pope a Radical is one thing. Calling the Pope a radical Communist without considering his motivations for anything.. or assuming that his motivations are cynical is to tread over many peoples sacred beliefs. And if you don't care about one's sacred beliefs, you lose a lot of credibility. With me, anyway.