The dustup continues from Donald Trump’s eruption against Pope Leo on his Truth Social two weeks ago. President Trump seems to have cooled off and pulled back from his recent diatribes against the Holy Father, and in the meantime, we’re learning what really set him seething.
What triggered Trump’s post was something that I suspected. It was less Leo than the three most liberal cardinals in the American Church—three Pope Francis picks: Cardinals Blase Cupich, Joseph Tobin, and particularly Robert McElroy. The culprit was their 60 Minutes appearance two days prior to the president’s historic blowup at the Vicar of Christ.
The interview was done by journalist Norah O’Donnell, who has since spoken to Trump twice, including about the Truth Social post. In her words, “The president also told me that he decided to make that lengthy post on Truth Social, where he lashed out against the pope, after watching our interview on 60 Minutes on Sunday night.”
I’m not surprised. I saw it coming, simmering, and hitting the boiling point.
As a biographer of Pope Leo, I’ve carefully watched every statement he has made regarding the Iran war, including those that may or may not be a reference to President Trump and his administration. Such is often difficult to determine, given that Robert Francis Prevost is a measured, prudent man who is both nuanced and very careful with his words.
Donald Trump is the opposite; he’s a bull in a china shop swinging a baseball bat, and the man has no filter. He lacks discipline, and his impetuousness often makes him his own worst enemy. Trump’s statements are obvious—painfully, explosively obvious. I’ve likewise carefully chronicled Trump’s statements against Pope Leo.
Prior to Trump’s Truth Social outburst, the closest that Pope Leo had gotten to a direct condemnation of a specific Trump statement came in response to the president’s threat against the entire people of Iran two days after Easter Sunday. Trump had threatened: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” The president of the United States cautioned, “I don’t want that to happen,” before assuring, “but it probably will.”
As head of the Roman Catholic Church and the world’s largest group of Christians, Pope Leo had no choice but to respond to such an astonishing statement. If he had not, he would have failed as a moral leader. But even then, Leo didn’t name Trump by name.
The Holy Father condemned “this threat against the entire people of Iran,” which he called “truly unacceptable.” A condition of Just War doctrine is that you don’t target civilians. The leader of the world’s mightiest military power threatening to produce the death of “a whole civilization” of over 90 million people “never to be brought back again” is morally unacceptable.
But to repeat, even then the pope didn’t name Trump by name. It’s telling that the Vatican News article on Leo’s remarks didn’t even include Trump’s name.
Still, Donald Trump no doubt wasn’t happy about the criticism, nor the pope’s other anti-war statements. And yet, even that Leo rebuke didn’t launch Trump into orbit. What burst him into the stratosphere were the 60 Minutes comments from the three cardinals, none of whom are as careful with their words as their pope is.
Here’s what happened.
McElroy Declares an “Unjust War”
Right on cue in the 60 Minutes interview, Cardinal Cupich went after President Trump, using words like “sickening” to describe his various posts. But Cardinal McElroy was the betting favorite to go further. It was very revealing that when Norah O’Donnell asked the three cardinals if the Iran war is just, only McElroy pounced. Here’s the exchange:
Norah O’Donnell: Is this a just war?
Cardinal Robert McElroy: No, in the Catholic teaching this is not a just war. The Catholic faith teaches us there are certain prerequisites for a just war. You can’t go for a variety of different aims. You have to have a focused aim, which is to restore justice and restore peace. That’s it.
Norah O’Donnell: Iran has been the chief exporter of terror. Is there no scenario in which preventing that can be a just war?
Cardinal Robert McElroy: It’s an abominable regime, and it should be removed. But this is a war of choice that we went to, and I think it’s embedded in a wider moment in the United States that’s worrying, which is this: We’re seeing before us the possibility of war after war after war.
There it was. “This is not a just war,” declared McElroy categorically on 60 Minutes. And it wasn’t the first time. For weeks, he made such statements. He said in early March that the U.S. war with Iran is “not morally legitimate,” claiming it fails several tenets of Catholic Just War principles.
Unfortunately, this was typical of McElroy and very much an illustration of why many questioned if he was a prudent choice to be appointed archbishop in the volatile political environment of Washington, D.C.
Pope Francis made that appointment in January 2025, just before Donald Trump’s inauguration. Typically, a pope would appoint a more neutral, calming voice to the position of Washington, D.C., archbishop, especially with Donald Trump returning to the Oval Office. But Francis did just the opposite.
It was reported that this highly ill-advised McElroy appointment was opposed by the two previous occupants—Cardinals Wilton Gregory and Donald Wuerl—as well as by the papal nuncio to the United States and several figures in Rome. But Francis did it anyway.
Francis was notorious for saying from the opening months of his papacy to the very end that he wanted to “make a mess of things.” Well, his McElroy appointment was bound to make a mess. He’s a lightning rod. He and Trump were bound to clash.
As for McElroy’s assertion that “in the Catholic teaching this is not a just war,” well, certainly not everyone in “Catholic teaching” agrees. Some would argue whether McElroy can make such a judgment. Bishop Robert Barron states that “it is not the role of the Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust.” Fr. Gerald Murray flatly disagrees with McElroy, stating, “I do believe this is a just war precisely because of the nature of the threat that a nuclear-armed Iran poses to the United States, Israel, and its allies.”
It’s certainly a subject for debate—and one on which McElroy doesn’t possess an authoritative final judgment.
Francis was notorious for saying from the opening months of his papacy to the very end that he wanted to “make a mess of things.” Well, his McElroy appointment was bound to make a mess.Tweet ThisWhat the Pope Has Said—and Hasn’t Said
And despite what some are saying, including AI search engines, Pope Leo has not declared this war unjust. I’ve had multiple interviewers tell me that he has. They’re being misled.
When Google’s AI function is asked, “Has Pope Leo declared the Iran war unjust?” the answer comes back with a firm “yes.” Specifically, AI says:
Based on April 2026 reports, Pope Leo XIV has repeatedly denounced the US-Israeli military action in Iran as an “unjust war.” Direct Denunciation: The Pope has explicitly called the conflict “unjust,” as noted on this Facebook post and this YouTube video.
But if you click those videos, you see that AI is incorrect. The pope refers to other individuals calling Iran an unjust war, and he makes no mention of President Trump. Both AI links go to a single video from three weeks ago in which Leo, speaking to the press (click here, here, and here) actually refers to “a war that many people are calling an unjust war.” Leo is referring to others, not himself.
Interestingly, when Leo did use the word “unjust,” he applied it in a very different way that Trump supporters might applaud. Here’s an exchange he had on April 23 on the Vatican airplane flying back to Rome from Africa. The questioner is from Newsmax, with both speaking in English (here’s the video):
Anneliese Taggart: Holy Father, thank you very much. You have spoken on this trip about how people hunger and thirst for justice. It was just reported this morning that Iran has executed yet another one of the members of the opposition, and this comes as it has been said that the regime has also publicly hanged multiple other people, as well as murdered thousands of its own people. Do you condemn these actions, and do you have any message to the Iranian regime?
Pope Leo XIV: I condemn all actions that are unjust. I condemn the taking of people’s lives. I condemn capital punishment. I believe that human life is to be respected and that all people—from conception to natural [death]—their lives should be respected and protected.
So when a regime, when a country takes decisions which takes away the lives of other people unjustly, then obviously that is something that should be condemned.
Look closely at that statement. In this one occasion where Leo used the word “unjust,” he applied it to the Iranian regime, not the war and not President Trump. The statement is further significant because many conservatives contend that Pope Leo has not condemned the Iranian mullahs. Would they like more from Leo than this? Certainly. But the reality is that the only case of him applying the word “unjust” to the Iran situation was this occasion against the Iranian regime.
In this one occasion where Leo used the word “unjust,” he applied it to the Iranian regime, not the war and not President Trump. Tweet ThisOf course, Leo has said many things about the conflict, including statements that many find controversial. “This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war,” said Leo at Palm Sunday Mass. “[Jesus] does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.”
This statement upset many people who have served in combat or had relatives—fathers—who fought in wars. But Leo here was not rejecting the idea of a Just War or defensive war. Our actions in World War II were not a matter of waging war. The Nazis and Japanese waged that war. America responded defensively. They were responding to the aggression of those who waged it.
Pope Leo’s own father fought at Normandy. He was at Omaha Beach. He was not waging war. (I recommend this especially good analysis at the National Catholic Register.)
St. Augustine gave us Just War doctrine. Pope Leo calls himself a “son of Augustine.” He headed the Augustinian order. He has quoted the author of Just War doctrine more than any other figure other than Christ Himself.
He did his doctoral work in Canon Law in Rome at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, also known as the Angelicum. This pope is no dope. He’s a careful man, refraining from making edicts about this war being unjust.
Cardinal McElroy is not as cautious.
In the concluding section of my biography on Leo, I warned that the new pope faces many minefields put there by his predecessor, from Traditionis Custodes, to the same-sex blessings fiasco, to an American cardinalate that Pope Francis ideologized with left-of-center bishops, some of them not especially measured with their words. These mines remain, poised to detonate at any time. We saw one such explosion when the American president was triggered by the 60 Minutes interview with the cardinals. We can expect more messes to come.
After reading this and the linked NCRegister article, what comes to mind is the oft-used line in politics: “If you’re explaining, you’re losing.” Popes in the 21st century should realize they need to take extra special care how they express themselves. An extra adjective or two, an extra sentence or two, can do much to alleviate problems. There’s an “inside baseball” aspect here that most of the world, and even most Catholics, will miss.
I am sorry, but Pope Leo and these three Cardinals are “joined at the hip”. If I am not mistaken, Cardinal Prevost was the head of the Dicastry of Bishops for the last half of the Francis pontificate. This means that he selected and/or approved most if not all of the bishop appointees during this time, which certainly includes McElroy, despite being equally if not more scandal-ridden than his two predecessors and being a blatant left-wing political hack, now assigned to the Archdiocese of Washington.
Even if the appointment of McElroy was more Francis than Prevost (very unlikely) Leo is certainly now in a position to do something about it, like reassign him to a much less important position. He could easily accept Cupich’s age-driven resignation. He hasn’t done either, and won’t in the near future, because they are his buddies and the ones who elected him pope.
And while Francis was the most political pope in modern history, Leo has already topped him, first and foremost by holding audience with David Axelrod, the top Demonrat political operative in the history of this country if not the history of democracies of the world – the one person who is most responsible for the Obama and this Biden presidencies (and not to mention a very secular Jew). Even if the meeting was not political (harder to believe than to believe that Epstein committed suicide) the optics of a pope meeting with someone like that is horrendous. And it was right before the “kerfuffle” between Leo and Trump. He meets with David Axelrod and a fraudulent “bishop” of a heretical, very secular, dying museum church but won’t meet with the SSPX to prevent a schism in the Catholic Church (and to that point, he could have replaced Tucho for his quasi-Nestorian document on the Blessed Mother, but hasn’t).
Despite all of his loud mouth blustering that offends so many delicate ears, President Trump is trying to protect this country and the world from nuclear aggression by crazed religious fanatics who rule their country as tyrannical despots, murder their dissenting citizens, and who make no secret of their intentions to inflict “death to America the Great Satan.”
Trump has also done more for pro-life and the Catholic Church than any other president of recent memory. He fought against great odds to put pro-life judges on the Supreme Court and throughout the federal Court system.
He ended the “soft” religious persecution of Catholic entities and suppression of religious freedom that was and is championed by the party of his “Catholic” predecessor. One of the very first acts of his second term was to pardon pro-lifers imprisoned on ridiculous charges by the previous administration.
But in a not very well veiled slap in the face to Trump, all Pope Francis would do is harp on the fact that “people who build walls are not very Christian.” (This despite the fact that the Vatican also has its own harsh penalties for those guilty of unauthorized entry into Vatican City including fines and imprisonment.)
I believe that beginning with Pope Francis, and now Leo (with his own not so veiled words) and the 3 stooges in miters who botch Church teaching on just war theory, that President Trump has just about had his fill of Catholic prelates. And I sure as heck don’t blame him!
“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” The president of the United States cautioned, “I don’t want that to happen,” before assuring, “but it probably will.”
By “whole civilization “, it appears that Donald Trump recognized that attacking Iranian “bridges, power plants, and other civilian targets might be necessary to put an end to the uncivilized regime of Iran while recognizing that by doing so, it would be extremely difficult, and possibly even impossible to restore the civilization of Iran to what it had been prior to the take over of the totally uncivilized regime.
It is the role of Christ’s Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust, just as it is the role of Christ’s Church to speak out against every form of injustice due to a deficit of Love, and this would include asking for clarification of a President’s unclear statement while reminding him of the importance of protecting innocent life from harm.
The evidence does not support either accusation that Trump is a nominal Christian or that he is America first.
In fact, the opposite seems more evident.
You are likely correct that the Pope’s words in conjunction with the three cardinals “piling on” was too much for a nominal Christian like DJT, and also likely the two events were not coincidental.
The Vicar of Christ is not a spokesman for anyone else, so for one who “chooses his words carefully” it would be an inappropriate comment to make. He speaks for the church and what others think is not helpful. It’s irrelevant what others think about controversial matters and theories. The pope knows this. Civil authorities are the ones charged with the prudential responsibility and judgment required. It seems more likely he was elevating this view to his own view, albeit carefully.
I don’t begrudge the author’s efforts to “pope-splain” what the pope actually said. He makes several good points but it’s a futile attempt to compare the pope who is God First with a bombastic president prone to exaggeration who is America First. No one believes DJT intends to use our military to kill ninety million people. He explicitly said he would not use a nuclear weapon in the conflict. Both have some work to do. Both leave much to be desired. God has a plan for them both.
DJT is decisive and convicted (no pun intended) , like him or not. The pope is an enigma, like his predecessor.
For people who make money with words it is sad that the definition of “civilization “ escapes. It is on purpose to define Trump as is favored by the ruling class. Trump is a flipper of tables.
Pope Leo is a master double speaker both denying same sex blessings and approving them in one paragraph. That is skill!
Trump was hired for action not word. Clarity not confusion or obfuscation. The unctuous Obama is matched with Prevost. “Martyrs” never in harms way.
Finally “Death to America” and 47 years of delivery, are answered.
For you smooth writer and all the lying lawyers and craven complicit clergy:
“It is not fit that you should sit here any longer. You have sat here too long for any good you have been doing lately … In the name of God go.“
I fully appreciate the author’s careful parsing of Pope Leo’s words. It brings to mind the careful parsing of words by another world leader over the meaning of “is”.
Nevertheless, no one, even an ardent supporter of Trump like me, would ever claim that he is not imprudent too often in his words. That being said, it still behooves this Pope to avoid any ambiguity in his statements particularly as the author has said he has to tread carefully through the minefield created by his disastrous predecessor, Pope Francis the Worst.
Unfortunately, Pope Leo is not immune to imprudent statements such as “[Jesus] does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war.” Many veterans, myself included, would take great exception to that.
I think Pope Leo could do much to restore the comity between Washington and Rome by removing or reassigning Cardinal McElroy. As a Catholic, I hate being placed in a position of having to choose between my President and my Pope.
You don’t have to choose. You can have an historic president and an incompetent cardinal.
Church history is replete with incompetent cardinals.
Our job is to call them out (see Bishop Sheen).
No serious analysis of the circumstances leads to the conclusion that Iranian civilians have been, are, or ever will be targeted by Trump or the American military generally.
No serious analysis leads to the conclusion that inaction toward the Islamic regime would lead to peace.
It would be refreshing to see Catholic prelates, including the Bishop of Rome, and pundits engage in serious analysis.