World
White House vs the pope: What is behind the Catholic just war doctrine
When US Vice President JD Vance converted to Catholicism in 2019, he chose Saint Augustine as his patron.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
On Tuesday, speaking at a Turning Point USA event, Vance invoked the tradition of the fifth-century theologian and one of the most important Church fathers to push back against Pope Leo XIV’s criticism of the war in Iran.
The White House number two warned the pontiff to “be careful when he talks about matters of theology,” citing “more than a 1,000-year tradition of just war theory” in his defence.
Meanwhile, the supreme pontiff of the Catholic Church was in the Algerian port city of Annaba, paying homage at the basilica not far from where St Augustine died and was initially interred.
Hippo Regius, as it was known in the bishop’s time, is where St Augustine wrote most of what became the intellectual basis of the just war principles Vance was claiming to defend. Pope Leo XIV is the first pontiff to hail from the Augustinian order.
Whether Vance knew what the Holy Father’s itinerary was that day, his office did not say.
Vance was not the first member of the administration to weigh in.
Days earlier, US President Donald Trump had posted on Truth Social and later reiterated to the press that Pope Leo XIV was “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy,” suggesting the pontiff believed Tehran should be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
The pope never made any comments regarding the Islamic Republic’s right to nukes.
The post came after the pope had called Trump’s threat to destroy Iran’s “whole civilisation” “truly unacceptable”.
Pope Leo XIV responded the following morning on board the papal plane to Algiers. “I’m not afraid of the Trump administration or of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel,” he said.
“I will continue to speak out loudly against war, looking to promote peace, promoting dialogue and multilateral relationships among the states to look for just solutions to problems.”
What the doctrine says
Just war theory, rooted in St Augustine and further elaborated on by Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologiae, sets out strict conditions for the moral use of military force.
The threat must be lasting, grave and certain, and success must be realistically achievable. Most importantly, all other means of resolution must be genuinely exhausted, and the harm caused must not exceed the harm it seeks to prevent.
Put simply, the purpose of this set of rules is to prevent those engaged in war from being the final judges of their own righteousness.
“The just war doctrine doesn’t merely ask whether your cause feels just,” Joseph Capizzi, Dean of the School of Theology and Religious Studies at the Catholic University of America, told Euronews. “As we all know, everybody thinks their situation is just.”
“It understands that most people think of their causes as just. But it is a means by which you can distinguish legitimately just causes of war from illegitimate causes of war.”
The doctrine has also shifted in how it is applied. For most of its history, it was used by priests to authorise their rulers’ wars. Spurred on by world wars and the discovery of nuclear weapons, the modern papacy has used it in the other direction.
“Before, just war doctrine was used often by national clergy to give permission to their emperor or their king to go to war,” Massimo Faggioli, professor of ecclesiology at Trinity College Dublin told Euronews.
“Right now, it is used mostly — I would say almost always — to say ‘well, no, this military intervention doesn’t meet those criteria.’”
Writing as the Roman Empire crumbled, St Augustine had already posed the question of what is righteous in one of the most well-known open checks on power in Catholic moral thought.
“Justice removed,” he asked in The City of God, “what are kingdoms but great bands of robbers?”
Vance has cited The City of God as “the best criticism of our modern age” he has ever read, deeply affecting his religious outlook and thoughts on domestic and foreign policy.
Vatican’s track record
The administration’s framing of Pope Leo XIV as a pacifist who simply does not understand that force is sometimes necessary contradicts the pontiff’s and the Church’s track record, experts say.
Before his election just last year, the pontiff was a registered Republican voter. While he has criticised the Iran war, the Holy Father has shown support for Ukraine’s right to self-defence.
In recent decades, past popes also carefully deliberated the context before commenting on any given conflict.
The Holy See quietly regarded the post-September 11 intervention in Afghanistan as meeting just war criteria, as the US went after Taliban extremists and Al-Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden.
Yet Pope John Paul II opposed both the 1991 Gulf War and 2003 invasion of Iraq not as a pacifist, but on the grounds that last resort had not been demonstrated. Pope Leo XIV’s position on Iran is in line with his predecessors, according to theologians.
“To accuse the pope of being a pacifist is really absurd,” Faggioli said. “Vance and Trump are accusing the pope of thinking about war like a European Catholic. But that’s not true.”
“He is using just war doctrine — and the American cardinals who have spoken against the war in Iran, they have used just war doctrine in ways that Europeans would not. So this is, in some sense, an intra-American debate.”
There is also the matter of what Vance actually said — not just about just war, but about the pope’s remit, after he suggested Pope Leo XIV should confine himself to morality and stay out of foreign policy, Faggioli explained.
“Vance is one of those typical Catholics who thinks that morality is only sexual morality,” Faggioli said. “When he said the pope should stick only to morality, he meant sexual morality — as if war were not a matter of morality. Of course it is.”
Thousand-year tradition and its tenets
The US bishops and other Catholic Church clergy indeed did not stay quiet. On Wednesday, Chairman of the USCCB Committee on Doctrine Bishop James Massa issued a statement in support of the Holy Father’s position, but also the Catholic Church as a whole.
“A constant tenet of that thousand-year tradition is a nation can only legitimately take up the sword ‘in self-defence, once all peace efforts have failed,’” Massa, auxiliary bishop of Brooklyn, wrote.
“When Pope Leo XIV speaks as supreme pastor of the universal Church, he is not merely offering opinions on theology. He is preaching the Gospel and exercising his ministry as the Vicar of Christ.”
Unlike in other public exchanges in recent times with those opposing Washington’s view, the Trump administration has struggled to find the usual levers, experts say. “It’s very hard for them to use the usual tactics to delegitimise the pope, because he is American,” Faggioli said.
“They can’t call him a communist, they can’t call him a radical leftist — his record as a theologian doesn’t support that.”
Euronews contacted several Catholic institutions and theologians for perspectives to further outline the Trump administration’s application of just war doctrine, but none agreed to speak on the record.
‘A consistent lesson of our faith’
On Thursday, from a peace meeting in Cameroon — a country not without its own existing tensions — the pope said, “Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic, and political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth.”
The post on X from his official Pontifex account drew nearly 10 million views in English alone by Friday evening.
Capizzi urged against reading every papal statement as aimed at Washington, however. “You’re in Cameroon, on a continent marked by severe religious conflict; that comment has a much broader application.”
Still, according to Capizzi, the Holy Father’s words are meant for all of the faithful.
“Any believer who appeals to God — as though God is on their side — ought to do so with great fear and trembling,” he said. “That is a consistent lesson of our faith: that a believer is the person who has a healthy fear of God and of God’s judgment of his or her actions. And that includes the way he or she speaks about God.”
The same day at the Pentagon, US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth led a worship service and read what he described as a prayer recited by Combat Search and Rescue crews during the Iran operation.
He introduced it as “CSAR 25:17,” meant to reflect Ezekiel 25:17. What followed was nearly verbatim the monologue delivered by Samuel L Jackson’s hitman in Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction, in the scene immediately before his character Jules Winnfield commits a murder.
The actual Ezekiel 25:17 is considerably shorter and less specific. Tarantino’s version was itself adapted from a 1973 Japanese martial arts film.
‘Nothing against the pope’
Trump won around 55% of US Catholic votes in 2024. A poll conducted in late March, jointly by Republican pollster Shaw & Co Research and Democratic pollster Beacon Research, found his approval among Catholics had fallen to 48%, with 52% disapproving.
A Fox News poll found US Catholics opposed to military action in Iran by 10 points and against Trump’s conduct toward Iran by 20. A separate NBC survey found US registered voters now view the pope more favourably than the president by a net margin of 46 points.
On Thursday, Trump told reporters he has “nothing against the pope” and is “all about the Gospel,” while continuing to state Pope Leo XIV was in favour of Tehran having nuclear weapons.
Trump also said his preference remained with the pope’s brother Louis, who lives in Florida. “Louis is all MAGA. He gets it, and Leo (XIV) doesn’t,” Trump said.
“If I wasn’t in the White House, Leo wouldn’t be in the Vatican,” he reiterated.
The night before, police had surrounded the New Lenox home of a different brother of the pope, John Prevost, following a bomb threat. K9 explosive-detection units found nothing. The investigation remains ongoing.
The greater picture
For Faggioli, the dispute is a symptom of something that has been building for years: not a domestic row about one war, but a contest over what Christianity means and who speaks for it.
“America always had a religious understanding of itself as a nation, but presidents were very cautious about not looking like messianic figures — at least in life,” Faggioli said.
“Trump has exploited the creation of a vacuum of secularisation in America, and he has filled that vacuum with a certain degree of messianism — and some American Christians are happy about that.”
“Trumpism is a form of political messianism. He sees himself — and many people see in him — someone with a divine mission: a political Messiah who will deliver salvation to America, to Americans, to Christianity. And he is serious when he posts those things.”
Capizzi, for his part, was more of the belief that the US president would eventually mend bridges with the Holy See. “I actually consider this a hopeful sign — that it’s touching and impacting President Trump, despite what he’s saying and what he’s posted.”
“This conversation has shown that the Church retains her moral authority,” he said.
“This is a teaching moment. Catholics and others are getting to see that these doctrines are over a thousand years old, that we have thought about these questions for a very long time, and there is a moral gravity behind these claims.”
As for the pope, John Prevost said something crucial about his brother before any of this began. “I don’t think he’ll stay quiet for too long if he has something to say,” he told the New York Times last year. “He won’t just sit back.”
A 3-D rendering of an Iranian Shahed-136 drone, a device with two triangle-shaped wings attached to a central fuselage. It has an engine the size of a small motorcycle’s and carries 110 pounds of explosives.
Engine the size of a small motorcycle’s
Carries 110 pounds of explosives
One of the biggest takeaways of the war with Iran is that it has proven itself to be a surprisingly capable adversary against the United States. In addition to its willingness to go on the offensive, Iran has forced the U.S. and its regional allies to confront the rise of cheap drones on the battlefield.
Iranian drones, made with commercial-grade technology, cost roughly $35,000 to produce. That is a fraction of the cost of the high-tech military interceptors sometimes used to shoot them down.
Cheap drones changed the war in Ukraine, and they have enabled Iranians to exploit a gap in American defense investments, which have historically prioritized accurate but expensive solutions.
Countering drones has been a major priority for the Pentagon for years, according to Michael C. Horowitz, who was a Pentagon official in the Biden administration. “But there has not been the impetus to scale a solution,” he said.
In just the first six days, the U.S. spent $11.3 billion on the war with Iran. The White House and Pentagon have not provided updated estimates, but the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, estimated in early April that the U.S. had spent approximately between $25 and $35 billion on the war, with interceptors driving much of the cost. Many missile defense experts also fear interceptor stockpiles are now running dangerously low.
Here is a breakdown of some of the ways the U.S. and its allies have countered Iran’s drones, and why it can be so costly.
Air-based strikes
In an ideal scenario, an early warning aircraft spots a drone when it is still several hundred miles out from a target, and a fighter jet, like an F-16, is dispatched from a military base. The F-16 can then use Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) II rockets to shoot a drone from about six miles away.
A 3-D rendering of an F-16 fighter jet firing an APKWS II rocket from under one wing. Two to three rockets are fired per drone, as per air defense protocol. Two APKWS II rockets and an hour of F-16 flight cost approximately $65,000, a little less than twice that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Two to three interceptors fired per drone
These types of defensive air patrols are cost-efficient, but haven’t always been available because of the vast scope of the conflict. Iran has also targeted early warning aircraft that the U.S. needs to detect a drone from that distance, according to NBC News.
The other option for detecting and shooting down drones is a variety of different ground-based detection systems, but these systems are all at a disadvantage, as their ability to spot low-flying drones is limited by the curvature of the earth.
Anti-drone defense systems
One ground-based defense system the U.S. and its allies have built specifically to counter drones at a shorter range is the Coyote. It can intercept drones up to around nine miles away.
A 3-D rendering of a Coyote Block 2 interceptor, which looks like a three-foot tube with small rockets at one end. Two Coyotes cost approximately $253,000 or about seven times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
The Coyote is significantly cheaper than many of the other ground-based defense systems available to the U.S. and its allies and historically effective at defending important assets. But despite being both effective and cost-efficient, relatively few Coyotes have been procured by the U.S. military in recent years.
When Iran-backed militias launched attacks on U.S. ground troops in the region in 2023 and 2024, there were so few Coyotes available that troops had to shuffle the systems between eight different bases in the region almost daily, according to a report from the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank.
Ship-based anti-missile defenses
Many of the longer-range ground-based defense systems the U.S. and its allies can use to combat drones are more expensive, as they are designed to shoot down aircraft and ballistic missiles, not drones. A Navy destroyer’s built-in radar system, for instance, can detect drones from 30 miles away and shoot it down with Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) interceptors. As in the air-based strikes, military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of the deck of a Navy destroyer firing an SM-2 missile from a built-in launcher, which looks like a 15-foot missile launching from a grid of openings on the ship’s surface. Two SM-2 missiles cost approximately $4.2 million, about 120 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
This misalignment between America’s defense systems and current warfighting tactics started after the Cold War, when the anticipated threats were fewer, faster, higher-end projectiles, not mass drone raids.
Iran often launches multiple Shahed-136 drones at a time, given their low price tag. The drones are also programmed with a destination before launch and can travel roughly 1,500 miles, putting targets all across the Middle East within reach.
“This category of lower-cost precision strike just didn’t exist at the time that most American air defenses were developed,” said Mr. Horowitz.
Ground-based anti-missile defenses
The Army’s standard air-defense system is the Patriot. Typically stationed at a military base, it can shoot down a drone from up to around 27 miles away with PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement interceptors. Military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of a Patriot launcher loaded with 17-foot PAC-3 MSE missiles, which looks like a tilted shipping container with scaffolding. Two PAC-3 MSE missiles cost approximately $8 million, about 220 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Patriot missile defense system
Air defense training teaches service members to prioritize using longer-range defense systems first to “get as many bites at the apple as you can,” but those are the most expensive, said Stacie Pettyjohn, a senior fellow and director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security.
But a costly defense can still make economic sense to protect a valuable target, especially those that are difficult to repair or replace, such as the nearly $1.1 billion radar at a military base in Qatar and the $500 million air defense sensor at a base in Jordan that were damaged early in the conflict.
Ground-based guns
Finally, there is what one might call a last resort: a ground-based gun. When a drone is about a mile away or less than a minute from hitting its target, something like the Centurion C-RAM can begin rapidly firing to take down the drone.
A 3-D rendering of a Centurion C-RAM, which looks like a gun mounted to a rotating, cylindrical stand. The gun fires 75 rounds of ammunition per second. Five seconds of firing the gun costs $30,000, slightly less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Centurion Counter-Rocket, Artillery and Mortar
Fires 375 rounds of ammunition in 5 seconds
Even though it is fairly cost-effective, the Centurion C-RAM is not the best option because it has such a short range.
Interceptor drones
There’s also what one might call the future of fighting drones: A.I.-powered interceptor drones. Interceptor drones like the Merops Surveyor can theoretically hunt and take down enemy projectiles from a short range.
A 3-D rendering of a Surveyor drone, which looks like a three-foot tube with wings and a tail. The Merops drone costs approximately $30,000, a little less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Merops system: Surveyor drone
Eric Schmidt, the former Google chief executive, founded a company to develop the Merops counter-drone system in conjunction with Ukrainian fighters, who have already been combatting Iranian drones in the war with Russia for years.
The U.S. sent thousands of Merops units to the Middle East after the conflict began, but it is unclear whether they have been deployed. The military set up training on the system in the middle of the war, as reported by Business Insider.
Other attempts to lower the cost-per-shot ratio of taking out a drone have failed.
The Pentagon invested over a billion dollars in fiscal year 2024 researching directed energy weapons, or lasers, that would cost only $3 per shot and have a range of 12 miles. Those systems have yet to be used in the field.
Despite the cost imbalance, the real fear for many in the defense community is the depleted stockpile of munitions.
“What scares me is that we will run out of these things,” said Tom Karako, the director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Not that we can’t afford them, but that we’ll run out before we can replace them.”
World
Moscow-born gunman dead after Kyiv shooting rampage leaves at least 6 dead, 14 wounded: Zelenskyy
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A Russian gunman was killed by special forces Saturday in Ukraine after opening fire at a supermarket in Kyiv, killing six people and wounding 14 others — including a 12‑year‑old boy.
The 58-year-old shooter long resided in the Donetsk region and was born in Moscow, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko.
He took at least four hostages, killed one of them, and fatally shot four others on the street, Zelenskyy said. Another woman died at a hospital from her injuries.
Graphic video captured by witnesses showed the gunman shooting at a victim within close range on the street. Other bodies were seen lying on the pavement and in courtyards.
The gunman was seen walking with a weapon on the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
MANHUNT UNDERWAY AFTER GUNMEN STORM CHICK-FIL-A LEAVING 1 DEAD
Ukranian special forces stormed the convenience store after 40 minutes of failed negotiations, according to Klymenko.
At least fourteen people were wounded in the attack, though officials cautioned the number may rise as people continue to seek medical assistance.
Among the injured is a 12‑year‑old boy and a supermarket security guard, according to Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko.
The gunman was pictured dead in the convenience store. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
NINE DEAD, 13 WOUNDED IN SECOND TURKISH MASS SHOOTING IN TWO DAYS
Zelenskyy said the shooter also set fire to an apartment prior to the attack, though it is unclear if any injuries resulted from the arson.
“My condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims,” Zelenskyy wrote in an X post. “…We wish all the wounded a swift recovery.”
The gunman had previously been prosecuted for criminal offenses, but held a valid weapons permit, according to authorities. Investigators from the National Police and the Security Service of Ukraine are investigating.
The gunman was seen holding and shooting a weapon in the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
GUNMAN OPENS FIRE AT HIGH SCHOOL IN TURKEY, WOUNDING AT LEAST 16
Ukraine’s security service labeled the attack an act of terrorism.
“All available information about him and the motives behind his actions is being thoroughly investigated,” Zelenskyy said. “Every detail must be verified.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
One of the shooter’s neighbors, Hanna Kulyk, 75, described him as an “educated, refined man,” who lived alone and did not socialize often.
“You’d never guess he was some kind of criminal,” Kulyk told The Associated Press.
Top negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf says US naval blockade of Iran’s ports is ‘a clumsy and ignorant decision’.
Published On 18 Apr 2026
Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGC) says the Strait of Hormuz is closed and that any ship that attempts to pass through the waterway will be targeted, a dramatic reversal less than 24 hours after the critical shipping lane was reopened.
In a statement carried by Iran’s Student News Agency, the IRGC navy said on Saturday the strait will be closed until the United States lifts its naval blockade on Iranian vessels and ports. It said the blockade was a violation of the ongoing ceasefire agreement in the US-Israel war on Iran.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
“We warn that no vessel of any kind should move from its anchorage in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman, and approaching the Strait of Hormuz will be considered cooperation with the enemy, and the offending vessel will be targeted,” it said.
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker and a senior negotiator in talks between Washington and Tehran on ending the war, said in a television interview that “the Strait of Hormuz is under the control of the Islamic Republic”.
“The Americans have been declaring a blockade for several days now. This is a clumsy and ignorant decision,” he added.
The reassertion of control came just hours after Iran had briefly reopened the strait, in line with a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. Oil prices dropped on global markets after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that the waterway was “completely open for all commercial vessels.”
More than a dozen commercial ships passed through the waterway before the IRGC reversed course.
Iranian gunboats reportedly fired on two commercial ships on Saturday, according to United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO). India’s Ministry of External Affairs also said that two Indian-flagged ships were involved in a “shooting incident” in the strait.
Some merchant vessels in the region received radio messages from the IRGC Navy, warning that no ships were being allowed through the strait.
US President Donald Trump said Tehran could not blackmail Washington by closing the waterway and warned that he would put an end to the ceasefire if a deal before its expiry on Wednesday is not reached. Trump added that the naval blockade would “remain in full force”.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, meanwhile, said the navy was ready to inflict “new bitter defeats” on its enemies.
‘Two competing blockades’
Al Jazeera correspondent Zein Basravi said that Iran and the US are back where they were the previous day.
“Less than 24 hours ago, world leaders were praising what they thought was a breakthrough in this conflict, hoping Iran was signalling a confidence-building measure by opening the Strait of Hormuz, potentially leading to a ceasefire deal and a permanent end to the war,” he said.
“As disappointed as people may be, this isn’t entirely surprising. What we’re seeing now is a return to square one,” he added, saying there are now “two competing blockades in place”.
Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem, reporting from Tehran, said Iran was using the strait to send a message.
“It’s clear that Iran is dealing with a situation in which they are not sure what’s on the table. So the Strait of Hormuz is once again the only space for engagement, even if it’s a negative engagement. And it’s the space where they are sending and conveying messages to the Americans, showing their leverage,” he said.
-
Nevada3 minutes agoIN RESPONSE: Cortez Masto lands bill would keep the proceeds in Nevada
-
New Hampshire9 minutes agoNew Hampshire grapples with nuclear waste storage – Valley News
-
New Jersey15 minutes agoNearby shooting interrupts 13-year-old’s birthday party in Paterson; 1 killed, 3 injured
-
New Mexico21 minutes agoCalm and warmer conditions move into New Mexico
-
North Carolina27 minutes agoMemorial service held for former Miss North Carolina Carrie Everett
-
North Dakota33 minutes ago
Richard D. Langowski Obituary April 16, 2026 – Tollefson Funeral Home
-
Ohio39 minutes agoThree Buckeyes Who Proved They Belong at Ohio State Spring Game
-
Oklahoma45 minutes agoOklahoma’s Jahsiear Rogers ‘Knew It Was Time to Showcase’ His Talents In Spring Game
