My NBC Evening News has devoted its opening story two nights in a row to Pope Leo, who just gave an interview in the Apostolic Palace of Castel Gandolfo, the gorgeous Papal summer residence of whose existence I was unaware. Among other things, the Pope revealed that he loves America and realizes he’s the first American Pope, but says that he also recognizes that his mission is to lead a worldwide church. He also revealed that, after someone looked up his ancestry, he had ancestors who were slaveowners as well as slaves (he didn’t elaborate on the latter). Finally, NBC reported that the Pope held a Concert for Peace and made an eloquent plea for peace as a prelude.
That was all well and good, but it didn’t seem to me that this should be a story that led the news—or even should be on the news. Of course the Pope pleaded for peace—that’s an important part of the job description, though there’s a lot of other stuff. To me it’s as earth-shaking as saying that a plumber unclogged a drain.
Leo seems like a good guy, and “progressive” in the good sense, but I found myself yawning at this paean to the Infallible Man, and wanted to hear real news—new news. I also remembered that the Papacy wasn’t always so peaceful. So I asked Grok a two-part question:
Did the Papacy ever engage in war? Is there any modern pope who has not pleaded for peace?
Yes, the Papacy historically engaged in wars as a temporal (political/territorial) power, particularly while ruling the Papal States; modern popes, by contrast, have consistently pleaded for peace and have not engaged in war as state actors.
From roughly the mid-8th century (after the Donation of Pepin) until the capture of Rome in 1870, the popes were sovereign rulers of the Papal States in central Italy. They maintained military forces (volunteers, mercenaries, and later specialized units such as the Papal Zouaves), participated in regional conflicts, and sometimes allied with or fought against other European powers. These included conflicts with the Holy Roman Empire, involvement in the Italian Wars of the late 15th and 16th centuries, the Wars of the League of Cambrai and Cognac, actions during the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic periods, and resistance during the Italian unification (Risorgimento). The Papal army was generally modest and often relied on foreign troops or diplomacy; by the late 18th–19th centuries it was weak and largely defensive or internal-security oriented. Temporal power ended with Italian annexation in 1870; the Swiss Guard today is ceremonial/protective rather than a force for external war.
Popes also initiated or strongly supported the Crusades, beginning with Pope Urban II’s call at the Council of Clermont in 1095 for the First Crusade to recover the Holy Land, with later popes proclaiming additional crusading efforts.
A prominent example of direct military leadership is Pope Julius II (1503–1513), nicknamed the “Warrior Pope” (or Battle/Fearsome Pope). He actively campaigned to restore and expand Papal States territories during the Italian Wars: he subjugated Perugia and Bologna, joined the League of Cambrai against Venice, formed the Holy League against French forces in Italy, and personally led troops (including at the successful Siege of Mirandola). He framed some efforts as freeing Italy from foreign domination.
After 1870 the papacy lost its territorial state (beyond the later-recognized Vatican City) and shifted emphasis to spiritual and moral leadership. Modern popes (commonly understood as those from the late 19th/20th century onward, especially post-World War I) have not commanded armies or waged war. Instead, they have repeatedly and publicly pleaded for peace, often in the face of major conflicts.
- Benedict XV (1914–1922) worked intensively for an end to World War I, issuing encyclicals and a detailed 1917 peace note proposing arms reduction, arbitration, restoration of occupied territories, and related measures; he also organized humanitarian relief while maintaining neutrality.
- Pius XII (1939–1958) made radio and other appeals for peace on the eve of and during World War II (including a notable August 1939 broadcast) and continued to preach peace amid the conflict.
- John XXIII issued the encyclical Pacem in Terris (1963) and advanced teachings on peace in the nuclear age.
- Paul VI famously declared “No more war” (including at the UN).
- Subsequent popes—John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis, and the current Pope Leo XIV (as of 2026)—have issued frequent appeals, encyclicals, messages, and prayers against war, for dialogue, disarmament, and reconciliation, continuing a clear pattern.
No prominent modern pope stands out as having refrained from pleading for peace; the record shows a consistent emphasis on it as part of the papal moral role once temporal power ended. Historical engagement in war reflected the dual spiritual-and-political character of the medieval and early-mo
Perhaps I seem churlish at the MSM regarding the Pope’s please for peace as Big News, but so be it. My question is whether the Pope’s pleas have any real effect in bringing peace. And about that I do not know,
Don’t popes pray for peace pretty much every day? Their gods must be laughing at them!
I started out watching that NBC broadcast last night, but as soon as I saw that the pope would be the main story, I switched channels. I am a non-believer, but basically like Pope Leo as a calming influence in the world. That doesn’t mean, however, that he or his surroundings should be the main story of a national news broadcast that is only about 23 minutes long, adjusting for commercials. ABC reported stories that were much more representative of national and world news.
Unlike the fearmongering that accompanied JFK’s candidacy, the Pope does not command action for congregants. There is a long tradition of considered conscience in which Roman Catholics are to listen, understand, and act accordingly. In any worldwide religious organization, conditions “on the ground” are going to vary. Thus, JD Vance can argue that Pope Leo’s invocation of “just war” doctrine to oppose the attacks on Iran and Venezuela (and Cuba) doesn’t fit the circumstances (though JD went as far as claiming that Leo didn’t understand the doctrine itself, which qualifies as chutzpah to the nth degree). It is true that this doctrine is evolving (and not all RCs are happy about it), but Leo is arguing that modern warfare requires a rethinking of the doctrine (https://www.usccb.org/news/2026/encyclical-what-pope-leo-thinks-about-just-war-theory-historic-church-apology-slavery). What JD doesn’t know (or appreciate) as a recent convert, perhaps, is that this rethinking has been going on for decades. Still, as reactions to Church doctrine on divorce and birth control have shown, RCs have a way of making up their own minds on matters of faith.
At the top of the page is the link for the J&Mo&Irony followed directly by the Big News title.
I first read that as one title through. It made sense.
Who?
Perhaps 🙂 We can ask a plumber to unclog a drain. And the job gets done. Popes pray for peace. But whether it works is at least debatable.
My favourite Crusade is the fourth.
A general appeal by the Pope for peace is understandable, but largely meaningless. When the Pope calls for immediate peace during a specific conflict, however, he is often wrong.
Israel responds militarily to Hamas after the October 7 attack. The Pope says: peace now.
If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, there is a serious risk that Israel could be destroyed. Israel and the United States therefore try to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. Again, the Pope says: peace now.
Peace is desirable, but merely calling for peace does not address the causes of war or the consequences of allowing a dangerous aggressor to prevail.
Leo, like all recent Popes, is all talk and no action. I have an idea: Pope Leo should fly to Ukraine and walk to the front lines to the Russian soldiers and tell them to put down their arms and go home. JD Vance, devout Catholic that he says he is, could join him.
Comment by Greg Mayer
It wasn’t a major story in other venues, just NBC. (Like Jerry, NBC News is a major news source for me.) The reason for this is that NBC got a one-on-one interview by Tom Llamas with the Pope. News media always tout and highlight these “exclusives”, especially if it involves their anchor; the underlying stories may or may not get attention in the broader media.
@Anj Petto– Two days ago, I was speaking with a fluent but non-native English speaker, and was trying to explain the meaning of “chutzpah”. The example I used was JD Vance trying to correct the Pope on Catholic theology! 🙂
GCM
LOL, Greg, and you aren’t even Jewish!
Good example!
Comment by Greg Mayer
All New Yorkers know a bisl of Yiddish!
GCM
If you can get an interview with the Pope, it’s news. All the interviewer needs to do is chose the angle. World Peace is always a popular option.
Just as with other beauty pagents.
Well-researched, well-summarized, balanced and concise: this work deserves an A+.
For someone who is so concerned about peace he is awfully quiet on the massacre of Christians in Nigeria by the Islamists.
https://x.com/lizarosen0000/status/2082775229118480658?s=46
Will he one day speak up about other worldwide atrocities committed by another religion? Seems to be very uninterested in standing up for any victims but more for endorsing a white guilt narrative.
https://x.com/ajatheempress/status/1899443111954088111?s=46
Love the image of the pope as a plumber, wearing a vending machine rain poncho and long rubber gloves, and waving a wrench as he tries to stop wars using impassioned pleas and reminders of his shared heritage. Pope as plumber, I think you’re onto something.
Pope Leo also calls for all Western countries to open their borders to millions of third world and mostly Muslim migrants. What has he been smoking?
The loss of temporal power has obviously been good for the Pope’s moral authority. One may observe that Jesus, Judaism and Christianity could only develop their peaceful teachings thanks to the Roman military that they did not necessarily appreciate. With Quakerism and Anabaptists the story is similar.
Given a long history of dubious moral behaviour by Popes I am amazed that Catholics can hold to the belief that Popes are part of a long continuous line if divinely appointed representatives of god on earth.