While various prominent American bishops have taken the stance that the US war with Iran fails to meet the church’s classic just war criteria, opinion on the matter is not unanimous.
In recent days, Bishop Robert Barron of Winona-Rochester, Minnesota, one of the nation’s most prominent bishops in the public sphere, argued that it is not even the role of church leaders to make the final decision about whether a particular war is justified.
“The role of the Church,” Baron wrote in a x post on April 20, “to call for peace and urge that any conflict be strictly limited by the moral constraints of just war norms,” which are outlined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (number 2309).
However, he added, “It is not the role of the Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust.” To buttress his argument, Barron cites the Catechism’s explicit “just war” doctrine teaching (number 2309) that “the evaluation of these situations for moral validity belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.”
“So, is war really a last resort?” the Baron asked, referring only to war norms. “Is there really a balance between the good to be achieved and the destruction caused by war? Are combatants and non-combatants being appropriately distinguished in waging conflict? Do the belligerents have the right intentions? Is there any reasonable expectation of success? It is the Church’s right to raise those questions – indeed to emphasize their moral relevance – but it is the civil authorities’ right to answer them,” he concluded.
Meanwhile, other clergy with significant public influence, such as Father Gerald Murray, pastor of the Archdiocese of New York, a former U.S. Navy chaplain, clearly believe that U.S. military action against Iran qualifies as a just war.
Murray, making a comprehensive assessment of the situation in the light of proper war education, wrote The Free Press That “the justice of the United States attack on Iran is confirmed by the Iranian regime’s confession.”
Murray cited American negotiator Steve Witkoff, who revealed In the days just before the war began “both Iranian negotiators told us (Witkoff and fellow US negotiator Jared Kushner) straight up, you know, there’s no shame in it, that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60% (enriched uranium) and they knew it could make 11 nuclear bombs, and that was the beginning of their negotiating position.” Iranian negotiators told their American counterparts that “they have the inalienable right to enrich all of their nuclear fuel,” Witkoff added.
“A nuclear-armed Iran with ballistic missiles is an imminent threat to the United States, Israel, and many other countries,” Murray said.
“The advanced state of uranium enrichment means that the United States and Israel faced an imminent threat. The Iranian regime’s clear intention to build nuclear weapons has not changed. Given this, it was just for the United States and Israel to attack Iran to eliminate the nuclear threat,” Murray said, calling the joint military action “an act of security rather than aggression under the just war doctrine.”
Murray also pointed out that the conversations that preceded the attack on Iran showed how far the United States was willing to go to avoid war – evidence that the attack was a last resort.
Furthermore, he said that when Witkoff and Kushner told Iranian negotiators that the United States would provide Iran with non-weapons-grade uranium for 10 years if it stopped making nuclear weapons, the Iranians rebuked them.
“He rejected it,” said Witkoff, who told us at that very moment that he had no idea of doing anything other than maintaining the enrichment for weapons purposes.
“I believe this is a just war because a nuclear-armed Iran threatens the United States, Israel, and its allies,” Murray said in a separate statement. Interview. “In my opinion, just war norms do not require that we receive a nuclear attack first before we can actually try to destroy their nuclear weapons.”
The US and Israel attacked Iran in late February, but have been in a ceasefire since April 8, which President Donald Trump extended indefinitely amid negotiations. Neither side has agreed to a long-term peace.
Pope Leo XIV criticized the war and urged peace, while Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin said the attack “does not appear to meet the conditions of war”.
On April 23, Leo doubled down on his opposition to the war, saying he encouraged “the continuation of negotiations for peace” amid armistice talks.
The Holy Father said, “As a priest, I cannot be in favor of war, and I want to encourage everyone to make every effort to seek responses that come from a culture of peace, not of hatred.”
Tyler Arnold contributed to this report.
