By 
Pope Leo XIV voiced concern on Sunday about developments in the Middle East and Iran, urging the parties involved to stop what he called a “spiral of violence” before it becomes an “irreparable abyss.”
“Stability and peace are not built with mutual threats, nor with weapons, which sow destruction, pain, and death, but only through a reasonable, authentic, and responsible dialogue,” the pope said March 1. He appealed for diplomacy to “recover its role” and for the common good of peoples who long for peaceful coexistence “founded on justice.”
The pontiff added: “Let us continue to pray for peace.”
Leo also appealed for peace in the conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, calling for an urgent return to dialogue. He asked Catholics to pray that concord may prevail in conflicts around the world, saying: “Only peace, a gift of God, can heal the wounds between peoples.”
The pope also said he was close to the people of Brazil’s state of Minas Gerais following severe flooding, offering prayers for victims, families who have lost their homes, and those engaged in rescue operations.
Earlier, before reciting the Angelus, the pope reflected on Sunday’s Gospel account of the Transfiguration, describing Christ as the living wisdom who fulfills the Law and the Prophets. He said the Transfiguration anticipates the light of Easter—death and resurrection, darkness and new light—shining, he said, upon bodies “scourged by violence,” “crucified by suffering,” and “abandoned in misery.”
Pope Leo said that the Lord “transfigures the wounds of history,” illuminating minds and hearts with a surprising revelation of salvation. He added that grasping this mystery requires time: time of silence to listen to the Word, and time of conversion to savor the Lord’s companionship.
This story was first published by ACI Stampa, the Italian-language sister service of EWTN News, and has been translated and adapted by EWTN News English.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
POPE LEO XVI:
Attempts at diplomacy were tried endlessly. The only option left was to rid Iran of leaders who were murdering their citizens by the tens of thousands. The situation in Iran is no different from that we faced with Hitler’s Germany.
Pope Leo, just stay out of it. This is not your area of expertise. Let me remind you that your expertise is ECCLESIOLOGY!
Pope John Paul II urged W Bush to not invade Iraq. He was right.
He might have been right (even a broken clock is right once every day) but it was none of his business to get involved in politics. The Pope, as with all clergy, operates within the authority of mission of the Church. Clergy should leave the arena of politics to the LAITY of the Church. Please dont try playing the JPII card; it won’t get you out of jail.
Pope John Paul II had no jurisdiction to impugn a determination by the nations and by the UN Security Council that Iraq had committed an act of aggression against Kuwait and that armed force was to be used to coerce the legal consequences of the wrongful act.
He would have been within the bounds of his office to confirm that Iraq was an unjust belligerent and to demand that Iraq surrender unconditionally and thereby to obviate the necessity of war.
Deacon,
You are absolutely right. I love Pope Leo, but so many Popes and clergy are extremely naive. They presume that humans are naturally good and will do the right thing. They seem to forget about the effects of original sin. How do you dialogue with tyrants? Think of PM Chamberlain who dialogued with Hitler and called him a lovely man. The next day, Hitler invaded Poland. Unfortunately, sometimes strength is the only way to get rid of tyrants. God grant us peace.
Two months after rejecting an appeal from exiled Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi to intercede on behalf of Iran’s persecuted Christians, Pope Leo XIV has issued a subtle rebuke censuring the U.S.-Israel strike on Tehran’s theocracy.
https://www.meforum.org/mef-observer/pope-leo-condemns-u-s-israel-operation-silent-on-irans-tyranny
Christianity in the Middle East is being eradicated and for a very specific reason. If there are no Christians where Christianity began, it’s another step to deny Incarnation.
The pontiff added: “Let us continue to pray for peace.”
,
Know Jesus, know peace. No Jesus, no peace.
.
Lo these many years, the Church has prayed for peace, but not the conversion of Muslims to Christianity.
It’s expected that a Roman pontiff would call for negotiation rather than war and continued war, as with Iran. Nevertheless, pontiffs should recall that Popes also call for Crusades to save Christian heritage from Islam.
Call it what you will, Shia Islam teaches in comparative likeness to Christianity the expectation of a Messiah. Muhammad al-Mahdi. The 12th and final Imam, who will bring peace to the world – which means the conversion of the world to Islam. Iranian Shia have expressed the belief that Iran should initiate a global war to anticipate the 12th Mahdi’s arrival.
President Trump may by the work of providence be preventing Iran from acquiring the nuclear capacity and delivery system to initiate a global catastrophe.
My husband came home from a men’s breakfast. The topic of conversation was the Good Samaritan; a story we’ve heard many times before. It is a good story with important lessons. But it is a very well-known story and has been so deeply imbedded in our culture we have “Good Samaritan” laws to try to keep “Good Samaritans” from being unjustly sued if things go wrong (as they are wont to do in emergency situations).
.
It occurred to me Christianity really doesn’t have much of a theology of when to throw a punch or when to stop being charitable. Yes, we have just war theory, but I am not sure that is applicable for every situation of aggression. When is one allowed to stop turning the other check and defend oneself. When is one permitted to stop giving alms when people time and again abuse the charity?
.
I have no answer for this, other then, never.
MrsHess it seems you meant to say one is always allowed, not that it is never allowed to defend oneself. If so, that right to defend oneself is a recognized right by our Church. Especially when your life is at stake.
Insofar as giving alms we should not refrain from giving even when there’s indication of abuse. We can research and check the surveys that validate the degree of donated funds actually spent on the poor, those in need.
Just war theory is theory and nothing more. A nation’s right to defend itself depends on the degree of danger posed as that nation’s intelligence apparatus determines.
Oh, no. I meant what I said. Sadly.
I’ve been Catholic for just over 30 years, and I’ve never heard that it is acceptable to throw a punch. Turn the other check, etc. Pray for the enemy to store up treasure in Heaven.
MrsHess – I enjoy reading many of your comments. With regard to the acceptability of throwing a punch I suggest reading the Catechism # 2308 And following.
Crusader:
Our priest on Sunday told us that the clergy and bishops go through many years of “formation” so as not to teach heresy. And they are pretty much universally opposed to enforcement of both our (US) attempts to enforce our border laws (pretty haphazard as they appear to be), and this recent attack on Iran.
And the Church appears opposed to Israeli goings on in Gaza and the West Bank. (I don’t think I’ve ever read an article about a Palestinian Christian who supports Israel.)
So no matter what the Catechism says, I’m not getting the impression throwing a punch is allowed. (Contraception, yes; self-defense, not so much.)
(Please note: I am saying how I see that things are, not how they are supposed to be. The US was invaded before Trump attempted to stop it; theft of tax payer monies are legion. Christians are being enslaved and slaughtered globally, and yet we are supposed to “dialogue”?)
“Turn the other check” doesn’t mean expose your center of mass to a kill shot and it’s not a mandate to suicide.
No reply below. I hope you realize that your priest telling you that priests can be “formed” against heresy, let alone are they actually taught to be at modern seminaries, is a fantasy.
If you want to understand the faith, you need to pursue sources well outside asking a parish priest. Many are faithful, but many are as willfully misinformed as most in the laity.
So attacking Iran is a good idea? They don’t have nukes. I thought Trump destroyed them a few months ago? More horse manure.
The iranian mullahs have been behind worldwide terrorism for 47 years. Now, if a member of your family was a beneficiary of their largesse, you might think differently. It was the same with Hitler. My family wasn’t Jewish, there were no known homosexuals in our family and other than a few stray liberals in my family there were no mental defectives. So why would I have been concerned about whom he put in ovens? And, if Obama were around in the early 40s he’d likely have given Hitler a few billion dollars of taxpayer money like he did with the Iranians. Why do the Leftists always leave it to the rest of us to do their thinking for them?
You make no sense. One disjointed thought after another in the same paragraph.
You illustrate his point of having others dod your thinking for you with your inability to understand an ironic analogy. Not being directly affected by crimes should not invite submissive attitudes to objective evil.
To MrsHess –
As of 2024, there are approximately 141,900 Palestinian Christians living in Israel, according to the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics.
They are Israeli citizens and I would guess many of them Support Israel.
Attacking Iranians isn’t a good idea but attacking the regime & its military assets is.
You don’t let a cancer grow until its capable of taking you out & you don’t allow the same for Iran’s nuclear weapon capability. It’s about being proactive.
Preemptive war is a slippery slope. Remember W Bush and his war with Iraq? A total debacle from a Nepo Baby who didn’t know a Sunni from a Shiite. Now, we have a President who makes W Bush look like an intellectual.
Iraq wasn’t close to becoming a nuclear power as in the case of Iran. It’s a different scenario today.
I would agree that foreign interventions come with risks & no guarantees.This one seems to make a lot of sense but there can be unforeseen consequences also.
Are you able to comprehend the difference between a nuclear weapon and ballistic missles as well as ballisitic missle bases that have already been utilized for wanton killing?
Are you able to comprehend the difference between partially destroyed facilities for building nuclear bombs and a renewed active rebuilding of those facilities in addition to their undestroyed stores of enriched uranium?
Have you ever worn the uniform and served? Are you an expert on weapons systems? I doubt it. Your military expertise is doubtful.
Wearing a uniform is not an indication of technical proficiency with nuclear weapons. My neighbor is a Vietnam era vet who loaded such weapons on B-52s, but will admit to to no special technical proficiency with such weapons, other than now obsolete loading protocols.
Our uniformed geniuses were extremely lucky with the Goldsboro NC “broken arrow” incident 65 years ago (we almost nuked ourselves with a bomb with a yield that would have made Hiroshima look like a firecracker). They also created the SL-1 disaster. The two incidents occurred three weeks apart. So pardon me if I don’t think they are demigods.
For at least thirty years, we have heard about Iran’s nuclear program and that they weeks or months from deployment, yet unlike North Korea, no tests. Further, despite the current attacks, they have not responded with nuclear weapons. When Trump launched the strikes last summer, he said that Iran’s nuclear capabilities were completely eliminated, so the question now is what the hell are we doing this for now?
Anybody with the slightest familiarity with nuclear weapons knows that there are two ways to make a fission weapon. The first is a “gun type” where one subcritical mass is propelled at high speed into another. It is the crudest sort of weapon and the most likely attainable.
You can’t use the design for plutonium because its reactivity will cause a “fizzle”, so you have to master the emplacement of high and low speed chemical charges in a pattern that causes a near perfectly spherical shockwave to compress the mass to achieve supercriticality.
Despite the fact that a relatively small core (a few kilograms) is at the heart of a fission weapon, the arming, detonation and safety apparatuses require a relatively large supporting structure (thousands of kilograms). The idea of a “suitcase” fission weapon is largely a work of science fiction. Even a “dirty bomb” light enough to be portable is likely to be suicidal to a courier, and if you want a really dirty bomb, U-235 is the wrong element and the wrong radionuclide.
Keep in mind that delivery of a payload is another matter. The B-29’s that were used in Japan had to be stripped to allow sufficient range and escape speed-despite being designed for high payload, long range missions. The only platform that could theoretically used by Iran is an aging fleet of F-4 Phantoms, but that’s a stretch.
I’m hearing echoes of “Read My Lips” and ” Saddam has WMD’s”. There may be some reason Iran poses a proximate threat to the U.S., but so far the only beneficiaries I see are Israel and Sunni Islamic States, because Iran is Shia.
There’s four confirmed U.S. deaths and I don’t see a good reason for them as of yet. I don’t care about the ME while we have so many existing problems here.
If I remember correctly (?) Mr. Baker has engineering experience, so yes he probably does have some expertise. I know for sure the Israelis do.And I expect our intelligence agencies do, also.
Pope JP2 was right.
Pope Leo is wrong. Be should focus his attention to his duty of governing our outlaw clerisy elites, and refrain from counseling negotiations with the homicidal, bloodthirsty Islamic Jihad of the Khamenei Regimists, and INSTEAD urge Catholics to pray that the people of Iran can overthrow the murderers who terrorize their own citizens.
“Pope Leo urges diplomacy amid Iran tensions.”
I can’t help but contrast this with Pope Pius V in 1571 who helped organize and finance the Holy League fleet to attack the invading Muslim fleet at Lepanto. Pope Pius did not urge diplomacy but rather prayed for victory and prayed in thanksgiving when victory was won.
Well, those days are over.
“Pope Leo XIV voiced concern on Sunday about developments in the Middle East and Iran, urging the parties involved to stop what he called a “spiral of violence” before it becomes an “irreparable abyss.”
The wars will become an “irreparable abyss” only for those who do not believe in the coming of the Kingdom of Christ who is coming to renew heaven and earth. Pope Leo’s call for “reasonable, authentic, and responsible dialogue” and “diplomacy” is as much nonsense as his call for “ecological conversion” to save the planet.
Read the Book of Revelation and the things that “must come” and call the Church to prepare for the coming of the Kingdom of Christ, pope Leo.
Good Lord! Is every single Church leader today utterly naive and feckless? It is easy to see why Europe has abandoned the Faith. The Church has abadonned Europe to Islam, fairy tales and pablum.
Seems so.
Wait, Tim, you’re a born-again NeoCon now?! I myself, when it comes to moral questions, am going to roll with the Pope over President Stormy Daniels.
Vince: The same Pope who is now completing the work of his predecessor of converting the Pontifical Academy for life into the Pontifical Academy for dealing death to the vulnerable?
And the “spirit of Vatican II.”
I was going to end my comment there but then I thougt of all the blatant relativist junk theology that was a part of that “spirit” and the cowardly refusal of bishops to confront peddlers of junk theology. How else did we wind up with a pope who believed and embraced junk theology as though junk theology doesn’t matter? As if the victims of sin from a conscience corrupted by junk theology don’t matter.
Our adventures in the Middle East typically do not go well. Iraq. Afghanistan. And now Iran. We don’t seem to learn.
Bombing will not accomplish regime change. Only invasion and occupation will do it. Are we ready for years of blood and agony? Note that Congress has not given approval. Why bother? Congress can’t run a 3 car funeral. It would be difficult to imagine a greater sycophant than Lindsey Graham. Checks and balances indeed.
Your man Obama bombed 7 times in his presidency without Congressional approval. That gets lost on those with terminal TDS.
What’s needed is an armed rebellion by Iranian patriots against the homicidal Islamic terror establishment suppressing Iran.
That is the only hope that Iranians have for freedom.
The armed rebellion is not going to happen,because the citizens are unarmed. To accomplish regime change you have to have invasion and occupation. Given Iran’s size and population, this may entail at least 200,000 US troops. We are talking years of agony to accomplish a complete and total regime change.
Bombing is overrated. We had air superiority in Vietnam and look how that ended. As a former Marine Corps officer who served with both infantry and air wing, I know that air strikes alone are not enough to achieve regime change and post war stability. Trump and Hegseth are TV guys. Everything is for show, not reality. Unless we have boots on the ground, the Shiite Mullahs will remain in charge. And the preening TV guy a Hegseth will strut around like Mussolini.
Perhaps you may know, somehow, that the citizens have access to weapons, or you may be speculating. My sense is you are speculating.
I have heard people, including those in the news business, pose the question, but I have not heard any answer, speculative or otherwise. I have heard 2 interviews of the former crown prince Reza Pahlavi, who when asked how the opposition would take over, says repeatedly “We have a plan.” My speculation is that when he says that, he means that the plan includes armed forces of the Iranian opposition.
Your apparent viewpoint, whether or not being anything other than your pure speculation, is that there is no (sufficient) armed opposition inside Iran, and because of that, nothing short of invading and occupation is the alternative, and of course, that won’t work, therefore nothing can be done whatsoever.
My own view, which does not require any speculation, is that the only thing that will bring freedom to the Iranian people is an armed rebellion by Iranians themselves. My hope and prayers for those Iranians who want a free Iran, is that for their sake, and the betterment of the world, they have the military force themselves to overthrow the Islamic Terror Regime of the Ayatollahs. That would be a real plan of action.
The Iranian armed forces are under the control of Shiite Mullahs. You make no sense.
William:
Having myself been in the military for 25 years, and having also read a great deal about recent wars, I would venture to say that no one could successfully invade and occupy a nation of 90 million people with a mere 200 thousand soldiers.
It is only armed rebellion that might succeed.
Regime change can happen with a revolt in the military.If the Iranian military turns on the regime, it’s over.
It should be noted that formal declarations of war ended with Britain and France declaring war on Germany 1939 and the U.S. declaration of war against Japan 1941 and Germany and Italy 1941.
Since then we’ve had multiple wars around the globe that were not formally declared, most simply beginning with growing deadly interaction or simply unannounced simply.
Pre-emptive, unannounced war became the model. As such it appears to diminish if not in instances dismiss the effectiveness of just war theory, although not the Justice issues attached to war.
The present conflict with Iran is a prime example. Its justification, based on long held suspicion of Iranian nuclear development and delivery systems, its aggressive pursuit of a policy of domination and support of proxy wars by ideological allies including terror organizations.
America’s partisan, divided Congress demands prior consultation with Congress and a virtual declaration returning to former practice. Whereas the present Administration appears to hold to the premise that consultation and declaration announced to the Congress weakens the ability to take action when conditions favor U.S. success. It’s clearly a moral issue that has interplay with just war theory and or versus the realities on the ground in our modern world.
So the Administration need never obtain approval from Congress, even retroactively? Ever hear of the Constitution? You seem to be an extreme MAGA apostle.
Article 1, Section 8 has been a dead letter at least since President Franklin Roosevelt directed the U.S. Navy to protect British shipping vessels during WW2 as well as ordering the occupation of Greenland and Iceland. And then there’s the little matter of how he practically invited the attack on Pearl Harbor buy concentrating the Pacific Fleet there and then concocting the the “Roberts Commission” to affix blame and it took years for Kimmel to be exonerated.
You want to worry about the Constitution worry about the People’s Republic of California’s gross arrogation of authority to regulate operating systems.
California is a bigger threat to America and World Peace than Iran, since it’s a foreign autocracy masquerading as a state.
Yes I have. You should read it. You’ll learn that the 1973 War Powers Act hasn’t been ratified by the Supreme Court. The U.S. Constitution splits war powers, granting Congress the authority to declare war Article I, Section 8 while designating the President as Commander-in-Chief Article II, Section 2, the inherent, disputed authority to deploy troops for urgent national interests without prior consent.
Should read: Section 2, the inherent, [un]disputed authority to deploy troops for urgent national interests without prior consent.
Catholic Integlarism which is tied to the Kingship of Christ suggests that the Pope has every right to “but in”.
Do Catholics believe that Christ is God and a King only during mass on Sunday morning and we can push Christ aside when it comes to politics or our daily lives?
I’m not suggesting that every word that comes out of the mouth of Pope leo is sacrosanct, but as the Vicar of Christ he has the authority and the right to speak.
Every knee shall bend and every tounge confess that Jesus is Lord is not just a line in a hym we sing at church.
Nick: your ultramontanism is off base. Popes, if they intervene at all, should do so quietly. I suspect that the Vatican is trembling that one-day Islam will drive Catholicism out of Rome, all of Italy and perhaps out of Europe altogether. Just where will the Papacy operate out of whem Islam completes its jihad against Europe. Where? Remember, you cannot reason with a terrorist.
I would add that anyone who thinks that Islam is not operating a jihad against Christianity whose explicit goal is to eradicate Christianity altogether then you’ve been asleep for the past 100 years (or perhaps since the 7th c. hegira). I happen to think that the Pope – well-intentioned that he is – is deluded about the intentions of Islam. I would encourage everyone who’s asleep to wake up before it’s too late. And remember, Islam doesn’t only want to destroy Christianity and Judaism but to forcibly impose Islam on everyone. Wake up, people!
Islam has always been martial and imperialist, and it’s anti-Christian program has been consistent throughout the centuries. And this is despite the fact that it regards Christ as a prophet, unique in creation, born of a virgin, and messenger from God. “Damning with faint praise” comes to mind.
As far as I know, Islam doesn’t have anything on par with the Talmudic blasphemies. Ben Shapiro described Jesus as a political revolutionary who was executed for his troubles.
If people who think Christ was a prophet contemn me for believing in His Divinity, why should I regard those that describe his as a political revolutionary or a religious heretic as deserving some special affinity and loyalty?
I don’t want to be considered as an Infidel or Goyim.
All right, but what makes you think the western establishment cares about Christianity? The establishment loves invading Muslim countries and when this people inevitably turn up as refugees / migrants without money to the frontiers of Europe and America they fail to close the border.
The conquests of Islam during the 21st century will not be through direct wars and the invasion of nations without Sharia. The real conquest of Islam during the 21st century is through immigration, which is often a sub product of this wars.
If the argument in favor of this wars is that they will stop the spread of Islam, then I want to actually see the results. And I am still waiting.
DiogenesRedux, you misunderstood my comment. I was not commenting on the war with Iran, which I hope ends with the end of their regime, or the rise of Islam in the West which is a threat to its future. I was simply responding to those who believe the Pope should keep quiet, or only speak on politics when it aligned with theirs.
The authority of the Papacy is both temporal and spiritual which is why the Pope has ever right to speak.
Nick: I am one who strongly believes that it is not within the purview of any pope, bishop or priest to inject himself into politics. To do so damages the Church and divides the Body of Christ. There is the temptation in the Church when clergy are distracted with expressing their political views to pay scant attention to the mission of the Church.
To Commenter William, who has written to me that “You make no sense,” and unfortunately to which no further reply is possible in that string:
It seems to me that I am making a lot of sense, and in contrast, you are pitching strawmen, and are unwilling and/or unable to reply to me on the basis of what I am saying.
Whether or not you yourself make any sense is actually also up for debate, but perhaps you are choosing to retreat, because that would require your departure from strawman projections, which may indicate you only argue with fictional opponents of your own imagination, rather than the harder work of engaging with actual people posing their own opinions, instead of those you assign to them.
Until such time you may choose to argue on real terms, I am always willing.
Your armed rebellion of Iranians might make sense if it includes members of the armed forces. So far, that has not happened and thousands of Iranian protestors have been killed by the government. When is that successful armed rebellion going to happen?
Is there a plan for a new government in Iran? There does not seem to be. I seriously doubt that Trump is willing to launch an invasion and occupation of long duration requiring hundreds of thousands of US troops, as well as thousands of US casualties. So what is the plan when we finish bombing? This whole enterprise looks to be a whimsical mess.
So if I don’t agree with a lot of illogical MAGA drek, I am “setting up straw men?” Try to think a little and not just agree with right wing propagandists.
The problem is you don’t have a point about Iran, you only have TDS buzz feed. So why bother entering a discussion that you have no position on? Sometimes, a scream is better than a thesis…but not most of the time.
William:
While I already replied to your comment, I see that I missed your very last “tut-tut.”
Just for your edification, glib dismissals aren’t substitutes for an argument, nor do they make you seem like much of a thinking man.
You ought to try harder or just hild your tongue if you find you can’t control your bad impulses.
Pray for peace – an admirable sentiment indeed, and WE all do.
But – be ready for war, because that’s what THEY do.
Good comments, Mr. Terence. Thank you.
Thanking God for the Angelus address of the Holy Father – esp. on March 1, month in honor of St. Joseph – whose life witnessed powerfully the Angelic guidance & protection .The Pope in addressing the world is also invoking the powerful Angelic choirs – for the good of all including those who are misguided by the lies of the enemy who can make persons have their wills set against God and His goodness. Thank God that as a Father figure,the Pope knows his role, to grieve with The Spirit to call forth the Army of Heaven to help undo evils world over that floods every nation to raise our minds & hearts to God in praise & adoration, united to the guardian angels of all who need liberation . FIAT !
I never, ever thought that in my lifetime I would see Iranian, Israeli, and US flags being waved together by crowds of jubilant, thankful people who are dancing. To YMCA.