By Rabbi Dr. Michael Leo Samuel in Chula Vista, California
A young priest assigned to a rural parish once asked a veteran Monsignor for advice on his first sermon regarding social justice. The Monsignor replied, “Just remember: when you talk about the poor, you’re a saint; talk about the causes of poverty, and you’re a communist; but if you mention the Middle East, you’re just a guy looking for an early retirement!”
It appears the current Papacy has taken this cynical wit to heart, opting for a brand of moral “early retirement” that abandons the rigorous intellectual tradition once defining the Western conscience. The current Vatican rhetoric regarding the 2026 conflict with Iran—a war defined by nuclear brinkmanship and proxy aggression—represents a catastrophic departure from these foundations. When Pope Leo XIV claims that “God does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war,” he attempts to erase the legacy of Thomas Aquinas and Moses Maimonides. By retreating into “sentimental pacifism,” the Pope ignores the realistic moral frameworks that have protected civilization for centuries, presenting a worldview that leaves the innocent to be devoured by global terror for the sake of a hollow posture of moral purity.
One could say that mixing politics and religion in this way is akin to mixing meat and milk. In Jewish law, meat and milk are both permitted and life-sustaining on their own, but when combined, they take on a forbidden character. Politics and religion operate similarly. Politics deals with the “meat” of the world—the hard reality of statecraft, defense, and physical survival. Religion provides the “milk”—the nurturing forces of compassion and spiritual guidance.
When a religious leader pours the “milk” of unconditional pacifism into the “meat” of a life-and-death military struggle, the result is a curdled moral confusion. This mixture makes it impossible to digest the hard reality of defense, leading to a “forbidden” policy that benefits neither the state nor the soul.
Moses Maimonides, the Rambam, understood that we inhabit a fractured world rather than an ideal one. In his legal code, the Mishneh Torah, Maimonides prioritized the survival of a community over the abstract optics of peace. He established the category of Milchemet Mitzvah, or the Obligatory War, which is not a discretionary pursuit of national ego but the mandatory defense of a population against an imminent threat. When an enemy comes upon a nation, the response is a legal and moral fulfillment. In the 2026 conflict, where the Iranian regime has spent decades funding proxies to launch rockets at civilian centers, Maimonides would not suggest submission through dialogue. By condemning the US-Israeli defense, the Vatican suggests that survival is less important than the purity of the bystander, violating the fundamental ethical principle not to stand idly by the blood of one’s neighbor.
On the Christian side of this shared tradition, Thomas Aquinas provides a parallel critique. While the Vatican frequently cites Aquinas, it has conveniently overlooked Question 40 of the Summa Theologica. Aquinas was no pacifist; he situated Just War theory under the virtue of Charity. To Aquinas, war is not an alternative to love but an act of love for the common good when waged correctly to protect the vulnerable. He taught that a sovereign ruler has a mandate to protect the community, and refusing to rescue the needy from the hands of the sinner is an act of uncharity. Aquinas established three indispensable conditions for a just war: Sovereign Authority, Just Cause, and Right Intention. In the 2026 conflict, the aggressor’s fault is manifest in the blood of civilians and a stated intent to wipe nations off the map. To deny the right of defense here is to turn Aquinas on his head, replacing the tranquility of order with the tranquility of the graveyard.
Instead of providing this necessary moral clarity, the Vatican has opted for selective amnesia. George Santayana famously warned that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In the shadow of 2026, this is a spiritual indictment of the Pope’s demand for an unconditional ceasefire. History proves that appeasing radical ideologies leads only to a more violent shattering later. This was evident in the 1930s with the failure to recognize the Nazi threat and in the early 2000s with the rise of global jihadism. To forget how the foundations of civilization were broken by unchecked aggression ensures they will be broken again. When the Church treats the defense of the West as a mere “cycle of violence” rather than a defense of human value, it signs a lease on future catastrophes.
The Iranian regime’s behavior has brought misery across the Middle East, exporting death from the ruins of Syria and Lebanon to the starvation in Yemen and instability in Iraq. Now, armed with nuclear ambitions and ICBMs, Iran is an existential threat. If allowed to cross the nuclear threshold, an inevitable wave of nuclear proliferation will sweep the most volatile part of the world.
Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia will not sit idly by while a radical theocracy holds a nuclear sword to their throats. The Pope’s “peace at any cost” strategy ignores the reality that a nuclear-armed Iran makes nuclear war a statistical certainty. Enriching uranium to 60-90% cannot be used for domestic electricity; it is the fingerprint of a bomb. By prioritizing a ceasefire over the dismantling of this threat, the Papacy bets the future of humanity on the good faith of a regime that regards its opponents as primary theological targets. As history has shown, when someone threatens to kill you, you had better take those words seriously.
Perhaps the most glaring moral contradiction in the Pope’s stance is the disparity in his priorities. It is a bitter irony that the Vatican focuses intense energy on criticizing Western democracies while remaining silent on the ongoing genocide of its own flock. The Pope’s time would be better spent championing defenseless Christians murdered in Nigeria, where thousands are slaughtered annually by extremist groups like Boko Haram. In Muslim-majority countries across the Sahel and the Middle East, Christians face systemic persecution, kidnapping, and execution.
Yet, while the Vatican rebukes Israel and the US, it offers little more than thoughts and prayers to those actually being martyred for the faith. A Church that will not advocate for the physical protection of its own people has lost the moral authority to lecture those doing the difficult work of protecting civilization.
Ultimately, the sentimentalism of the current Vatican stance lacks the intellectual courage championed by Maimonides and Aquinas. They understood that true leadership requires the willingness to undertake the difficult work of justice, because it is a higher duty than the natural revulsion from conflict. Pope Leo XIV’s stance may provide temporary psychological comfort, but it provides no roadmap for the survival of civilization.
Real ethics require the courage to identify evil, the authority to act against it, and the wisdom to know that sometimes the most charitable act is to refuse to let the darkness win. If we forget the past and ignore the radioactive future Iran is building, we are not being holy; we are simply being foolish. In 2026, the price of that foolishness is measured in the potential end of the world.
Ultimately, the sentimentalism of the current Vatican stance lacks the fear of God that Maimonides and Aquinas championed. They understood that true faith often requires the intellectual courage and willingness to do the difficult, heart-wrenching work of justice, because it is a higher duty than our own natural revulsion from conflict.
Pope Leo XIV’s stance might provide a temporary psychological comfort to those safely removed from the reach of Iranian missiles, but it provides no roadmap for the survival of civilization. Real healing for a broken cosmos requires the courage to identify evil, the authority to act against it, and the wisdom to know that sometimes the most charitable thing a person can do is refuse to let the darkness win.
*
Rabbi Dr. Michael Leo Samuel is spiritual leader of Temple Beth Shalom in Chula Vista, California.