(LifeSiteNews) — Pope Leo XIV has publicly contradicted the teaching of the Catholic Church that engaging in warfare is morally legitimate under certain conditions.

In his sermon for Palm Sunday, Leo XIV said:

Brothers and sisters, this is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war. He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them, saying: “Even though you make many prayers, I will not listen: your hands are full of blood” (Is 1:15).

On April 10, comments posted on his official X account reiterated this position:

God does not bless any conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, is never on the side of those who once wielded the sword and today drop bombs. Military action will not create space for freedom or times of #Peace, which comes only from the patient…

— Pope Leo XIV (@Pontifex) April 10, 2026

The comments have been made in the context of the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran, which many Catholics – including the author of this article – regard as unjust.

Many will agree with Leo’s comment that President Donald Trump’s threat that a “whole civilization will die” was “truly unacceptable.”

However, Leo XIV has not challenged the Iran war from the perspective of Catholic just war theory, but by rejecting the legitimacy of all wars, not just in the present but in the past also.

Without nuance or caveat, Leo has stated that (i) Our Lord “rejects war,” (ii) that no one can “justify war” with reference to Him, and (iii) that “He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.”

These positions are all false, and contrary to the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church, as this article will show.

War in Sacred Scripture

The Sacred Scriptures, which are divinely revealed and free from all error, make it clear that (i) God commands war, (ii) war can be justified by reference to God’s commands and revelation, and (iii) He listens to the prayers of those who wage war.

Indeed, the waging of war at God’s command, and with His blessing, is one of the major themes of the Old Testament. Throughout the history of Israel and Judah, from the time of Moses down to the Maccabean revolt of the second century BC, God blessed those who fought in His name and He answered their prayers.

The book of Exodus provides an early and striking example of God directly intervening in the armed combat of the people of Israel:

Moses said to Josue: Choose out men: and go out and fight against Amalec: tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill having the rod of God in my hand. Josue did as Moses had spoken, and he fought against Amalec; but Moses, and Aaron, and Hur went up upon the top of the hill.

And when Moses lifted up his hands, Israel overcame: but if he let them down a little, Amalec overcame. And Moses’ hands were heavy: so they took a stone, and put under him, and he sat on it: and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands on both sides. And it came to pass that his hands were not weary until sunset. And Josue put Amalec and his people to flight, by the edge of the sword (Ex 17: 8-13).

The book of Joshua tells how God commanded the armies of Israel to invade the lands of the Canaanites, wage war against them, and take their lands for their own. In this campaign, as in later wars, God even gave specific military instructions, for example at the siege of Jericho (Joshua 6). In the book of Judges, we read that God commanded Gideon to reduce the size of his army, so that everyone might know it was God who fought for Israel (Judges 7).

King David directly sought, and received, God’s guidance before his campaigns. For example, in 1 Kings 23:2 we read:

Therefore David consulted the Lord, saying: Shall I go and smite these Philistines? And the Lord said to David: Go, and thou shalt smite the Philistines, and shalt save Ceila.

And again in 2 Kings 5:19-20:

And David consulted the Lord, saying: Shall I go up to the Philistines? and wilt thou deliver them into my hand? And the Lord said to David: Go up, for I will surely deliver the Philistines into thy hand. And David came to Baal Pharisim: and defeated them there, and he said: The Lord hath divided my enemies before me, as waters are divided.

In Psalm 143, King David sings:

Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. My mercy, and my refuge: my support, and my deliverer. (Ps 143: 1-2)

And in Psalm 18, David praised:

God who hath girt me with strength; and made my way blameless. Who hath made my feet like the feet of harts: and who setteth me upon high places. Who teacheth my hands to war: and thou hast made my arms like a brazen bow. (Ps 18:33-34)

Examples from Scripture could be multiplied, but these are enough to show that throughout the history of Israel, God has commanded war, answered the prayers of His warriors who prayed to Him, and blessed those who fought in His name.

The position expressed by Leo XIV is directly contrary to Divine Revelation and thus may not be held by any Catholic.

War under the New Covenant

God has continued to bless Catholic armies who have fought in His name. The history of the Church is replete with examples of  Roman Pontiffs, the Vicars of Christ on Earth, blessing those who go to war in a just cause.

A well-known example is the launching of the First Crusade by Pope Urban VI in 1095. During his famous sermon at the Council of Clermont, he urged Christians to go to war “for your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them … They have killed and captured many and have destroyed the churches and devastated the [Eastern Roman] empire.”

Acting as Christ’s vicar, he called western Christians to arms:

On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians … Christ commands it.

And He granted a plenary indulgence to all who participated:

All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested.

Papal support for the military defense of Christendom remained steadfast throughout the centuries to come. Another well-known example is Pope St. Pius V’s support for the Christian naval forces defending western Europe against the Turks at Lepanto in 1571. This great victory was widely attributed to the prayer of the rosary, which the Holy Father asked to be said, and the Church celebrates the Feast of the Holy Rosary on the anniversary of the battle.

The Church has also shown that God approves of fighting and leading just wars by repeatedly canonizing soldiers and military commanders.

For example, St. Ferdinand III of Castile (c.1199–1252) spent most of his reign at war with the Islamic rulers occupying southern Spain and is a major figure of the Spanish reconquista. St. Louis IX of France (1214-1270) led two crusading armies, the Seventh Crusade, which invaded Egypt, and the Eighth Crusade, in which he died. St. Joan of Arc (c.1412–1431) played a leading role in the concluding stages of the “Hundred Years War” between France and England, being given command of the armies of France.

The Church has declared that all three of these war leaders – among many others who practiced heroic virtue, are worthy of imitation, and now enjoy the beatific vision of God in heaven.

Catholic just war theory

God has commanded war, blessed His armies, and answered their prayers. But this does not mean that war is something to be sought. The existence of war is a consequence of man’s sin. If all men were perfectly virtuous, there would be no war. Yet, because of human injustice it is sometimes necessary for individuals and societies to take up arms in self-defense.

The Catholic Church teaches that war can be justified, but only in certain limited circumstances.

The classic formulation of Catholic just war theory is that of St. Thomas Aquinas who, drawing on the writings of St. Augustine of Hippo, taught that “in order for a war to be just, three things are necessary.” ^[1]

Condition 1 – Legitimate authority

The first condition is that the war must be conducted by legitimate authority e.g. by the state, not by private individuals.

It is to the state that the common good of the whole people has been entrusted and, thus, St. Thomas writes, “just as it is lawful for them to have recourse to the sword in defending that common weal against internal disturbances, when they punish evil-doers, according to the words of the Apostle (Romans 13:4): ‘He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil’; so too, it is their business to have recourse to the sword of war in defending the common weal against external enemies.”

Condition 2 – Just cause

The second condition is that there must be a just cause.

A war can only be legitimately waged against those “who deserve it on account of some fault.” St. Thomas expands on this by quoting St. Augustine, who wrote:

A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished, for refusing to make amends for the wrongs inflicted by its subjects, or to restore what it has seized unjustly.

All just wars are therefore wars against a nation which has already done the wrong to the defender. There can be no moral justification for attacking a country which has not first inflicted a wrong.

Condition 3 – Right intention

The third condition is that there must be a right intention on the part of those who fight.

St. Thomas explains:

[I]t is necessary that the belligerents should have a rightful intention, so that they intend the advancement of good, or the avoidance of evil.

Furthermore:

True religion looks upon as peaceful those wars that are waged not for motives of aggrandizement, or cruelty, but with the object of securing peace, of punishing evil-doers, and of uplifting the good.

St. Thomas draws attention to the fact that wars of self-defense can be unjust if they are fought with a bad intention:

[I]t may happen that the war is declared by the legitimate authority, and for a just cause, and yet be rendered unlawful through a wicked intention.

In the centuries that followed Catholic theologians and philosophers have explored and refined these three conditions of St. Thomas. For example, given the destructive potential of modern warfare, it has been emphasised that the response of the defending power must be proportionate to the injury inflicted. On this point, Pope Pius XII taught:

The fact that one has to defend oneself against injustice of some sort is not enough to justify using the violent methods of war. When the harm caused by the latter are out of proportion to the harm caused by the injustice, one may have a duty to submit to that injustice. ^[2]

The Church has also always insisted that intrinsically evil acts can never be justified on the grounds that a war is just, so, for example, it is never permissible to deliberately kill innocent people or use sexual violence like rape for political or military ends.

The Catholic Church abhors the evils that accompany war, yet the Church can never rule out the possibility of a just war. After discussing the difficulties posed by modern wars, the philosopher Romano Amerio notes:

The absolute condemnation of war is, however, alien to Catholic tradition; the profession of arms is not forbidden in the Gospel, is held to be an honest occupation by the Fathers, and has been followed by Christians, many of the martyr saints being soldiers. War was only regarded as illicit by movements of a Manichean or otherwise heretical stamp. Even the rule of the Franciscan tertiaries allows for carrying arms in defense of one’s country. ^[3]

For St. Augustine, total opposition to war was associated with cowardice. It is not war itself that is intrinsically unjustifiable but rather the evils which all too often accompany it:

What is wrong with war? Is it that some men, who are bound to die eventually, die now so that those who are defeated can be governed in peace? To object to that is a sign of men who are cowardly rather than religious. What is wrong in war is an eagerness to cause harm, a cruel vengeance, a remorseless and uncontrollable spirit, a rebellious wildness, a desire to dominate, and other things of that sort. ^[4]

This is the true Catholic position. The existence of war is an evil, and often brings about further evils, but those who are attacked by the unjust nonetheless have the right to defend themselves. Indeed, taking part in such a defense is often morally obligatory.

Capital punishment

As we have seen above, St. Thomas Aquinas refers to Romans 13:4 in the context of defending the right of the state to defend its people from external enemies, as well as internal threats. This text is also frequently used as a scriptural basis for the legitimacy of capital punishment.

There is a close relationship between the Church’s teaching on the right of the state to use violence against external enemies (a just war), against internal sedition (maintaining public order), and against those commit serious crimes (capital punishment).

In each of these cases the state exercises its right to use violence to protect the community from those who do evil. This is encapsulated in those words of St. Paul: “He beareth not the sword in vain: for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil” (Rm 13:4).

Leo XIV, on the other hand, has publicly rejected two aspects of this doctrine. In his comments which are the subject of this article he rejects the right of the state to wage war and before his apparent election to the papacy he publicly rejected Catholic teaching on capital punishment.

In 2022, then-Bishop Robert Prevost said, “In the Church, we teach that the death penalty is inadmissible.” Prevost is here expressing the heretical doctrine which was introduced into the Catechism of the Catholic Church by Pope Francis in 2018. This statement is contrary to the divinely revealed truth that the state may have recourse to capital punishment under certain conditions, as explained here.

Leo’s rejection of just war theory, and of capital punishment, are closely interrelated, because they both involve a rejection of the right of the state to use coercive means to defend the common good.

In order to hold these positions Leo XIV has to:

• reject the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, which teaches the legitimacy of capital punishment and of warfare under certain conditions;
• reject the doctrine of the Roman Pontiffs through the centuries, who in their teaching, laws, and acts, have manifested the legitimacy of war and capital punishment;
• reject the consistent teaching of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and the witness of her theologians, regarding the legitimacy of war and capital punishment;
• reject as worthy of imitation many canonized saints, who were soldiers, or lead armies in war, or sentenced men to death.

Yet, to behave in this way is to completely untether oneself from a Catholic way of acting and thinking. Such a man manifestly fails to take the doctrine proposed by the Sacred Magisterium of the Catholic Church as his rule of faith, as every Catholic – including the pope – is bound to do. The manner in which the Roman Pontiff receives the faith is explained in detail here.

Conclusion

Leo XIV rejects the teaching of the Catholic Church on the legitimacy of waging war, and of using capital punishment against those guilty of grave wrongs.

In doing so he rejects doctrines which have been revealed by God in the divinely inspired Scriptures, and which have been proposed for our belief by the universal and ordinary magisterium of the Church.

Leo departed from the public profession of the Catholic faith before his apparent election and has continued to reject Catholic doctrine after it.

Public heretics cannot be elected to the papacy, nor can public heretics exercise any jurisdiction in Christ’s Church.

The same is also true of public apostates, and publicly participating in the worship of idols has always been regarded by the Church as an act of apostasy.

In the light of his public heresy and public idolatry, the status of Leo XIV’s claim to the papacy ought to be a matter of the greatest urgency for all Catholics.

Despite the gravity of this crisis, conservative cardinals and bishops who spoke out against Francis have remained silent in the face of the very same errors and public acts on the part of Leo.