Don’t Blame a Pope for Praying for Peace
By the end of October 1914, things weren’t looking all that promising. “I’ll be home for Christmas,” soldiers promised their wives, and yet Russia had just declared war on the Ottoman Empire in the latest of the rapid-fire declarations of war. Things were spiraling faster than anyone could have predicted, and it looked like the whole world was about to engage in the bloodshed. And so the pope, from his prison in the Vatican, begged for peace.
“We implore those in whose hands are placed the fortunes of nations to hearken to Our voice. Surely there are other ways and means whereby violated rights can be rectified,” Benedict XV wrote. “Let them be tried honestly and with good will, and let arms meanwhile be laid aside.”
World leaders grumbled. In France, the pro-war press complained that the pope was nothing but a German puppet — “le pape boche.” Meanwhile, General Eric Ludendorff dismissed him as a French pawn, more interested in backing a historically Catholic nation than the more Protestant Germany. His call for peace, as far as they were concerned, was evidence of betrayal.
And so the war went on and cost some 35 million lives.
Benedict XV wasn’t the last pope to plead for peace on the world stage either. Pius XII famously did so during World War II, and (as internet commentators have reminded us plenty of times this week) John Paul II opposed the U.S.’s involvement in Iraq. It should, therefore, surprise no one that the current vicar of the Prince of Peace, whose first word as pope — as Paul Kengor has repeatedly pointed out — was “peace,” might advocate for peace on the world stage.
But apparently, that position bothered the leader of the free world.
So much so that on Sunday, Donald Trump fired off an angry tweet directed at the pope. At this point, that inopportune message has been overanalyzed. It’s been parsed: every sentence measured; every verb considered; every capitalized letter analyzed. (READ MORE: Why We Should Give to God What Is God’s, and to Caesar What Is Caesar’s)
It’s a tale centuries old. The pope says “peace,” and world leaders complain that he is siding with their enemies or, in the words of our president, that he is “WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy.” Sure, it was probably a bit of a political show of the kind that our president is known for (it’s certainly been entertaining), but it was undoubtedly problematic.
The administration hasn’t come anywhere near expressing remorse. JD Vance, himself a convert to the Catholic Church, spoke at a Turning Point USA event in Georgia earlier this week and commented, “I think it’s very very important for the pope to be careful when he talks about matters of theology … if you are going to opine on matters of theology, you’ve gotta be careful, you’ve gotta make sure it’s anchored in the truth.” This to a man who, in addition to his papal office, has both a masters in Theology and a doctorate in Canon Law. (To be fair to Vance, he was being yelled at mid-response by a heckler in the crowd, maybe he wasn’t totally on his game.)
Look, you can respectfully disagree with the pope. You can argue that the war you are waging is a just war according to the principles set forth by St. Augustine (as Fr. George Murray recently did). You can ask the pope to further elaborate on his Palm Sunday statement that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them.” You could even ignore the pope entirely. But to complain that the pope isn’t wholeheartedly embracing your vision of a global world order and to petulantly demand that he “get his act together” and stay in his popish lane far away from politics — well, that’s a bit disrespectful. (READ MORE: Sword and Spirit to Save the World)
There are, as always, pragmatic reasons for being respectful toward the man in the Vatican. One in five Americans professes the Catholic faith, and, back in 2024, some 55 percent of them voted for the current president, making up 22 percent of those who voted for him. From an electoral standpoint, it seems worth it not to force Catholics to question their support (which is what Democrats are hoping we’re doing in the wake of Trump’s tweet). Furthermore, like it or not, the papacy heads the institution that built Western civilization from the ashes of the Roman Empire — a civilization that, it should be noted, this administration has laudably defended.
Less pragmatically, dealing with the pope is dealing with a man who has a more important job than the president. “To put my message on the same plane [as his] is what the president has attempted to do here,” Leo XIV told journalists on an airplane en route to Algeria earlier this week. Trump is merely running a country; the pope is trying to save souls.
Does this mean that you can’t respectfully argue that Iranian possession of a nuclear weapon is not in the interest of world peace? Of course not. You can even suggest that maybe the pope’s Palm Sunday declaration that God “does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them” might need a bit more elaboration. But you need to do so respectfully.
This has been the mistake made by the administration in recent days, and Leo XIV deserves an apology. It doesn’t have to be a statement any more public than the original tweet and it doesn’t have to cede argumentative ground. No one is asking Trump to stand barefoot in a blizzard outside a castle in northern Italy for three days. But it does have to showcase a smidge of humility and the admission that the pontiff is much more than a politician.
READ MORE by Aubrey Harris: