Pope Leo Warns Of A World Sliding Back Towards ‘Zeal For War’
(ANALYSIS) Pope Leo XIV’s address to the Vatican’s diplomatic corps functioned less as a New Year greeting and more like a an intervention in a rapidly destabilizing global moment.
Without naming any political leaders, the pontiff used this annual speech to deliver a sweeping critique of what he described as a resurgence of “a diplomacy based on force” and a growing “zeal for war” — placing the Holy See in opposition to a geopolitical climate increasingly defined by military assertiveness.
The timing of the speech sharpened its impact. Delivered as Russia announced the use of a nuclear-capable intermediate-range ballistic missile against Ukraine and amid heightened tensions involving the United States, Venezuela and Greenland, the pope’s remarks on Friday delivered at the Vatican read as a rebuke to the current geopolitical moment.
READ: The Viral Holy Water Moment Behind The Pittsburgh Steelers’ Big Win
“A diplomacy that promotes dialogue and seeks consensus among all parties is being replaced by a diplomacy based on force, by either individuals or groups of allies. War is back in vogue and a zeal for war is spreading,” the pope said. “Peace is no longer sought as a gift … Instead, peace is sought through weapons as a condition for asserting one’s own dominion. This gravely threatens the rule of law, which is the foundation of all peaceful civil coexistence.”
The pope’s insistence that countries “cannot depend on mere circumstances and military or strategic interests” underscored the Vatican’s long-standing role as an advocate for multilateralism and restraint — something evident both in the Israel-Gaza conflict and Russia-Ukraine war.
Although Leo avoided direct confrontation with any specific world leader, the critique left little ambiguity. By warning that peace is now being pursued “through weapons as a condition for asserting one’s own dominion,” he framed contemporary conflicts not as a series of isolated crises, but as a larger symptom regarding the erosion of the rule of law.
By framing the address around St. Augustine’s “City of God,” Pope Leo decried this crisis within a larger philosophical and theological tradition. Augustine’s warning against prideful leadership, for example, gave Leo the chance to critique modern politics without reducing his message to partisan commentary. The pope’s invocation of a “profound readjustment of geopolitical balances and cultural paradigms” suggested he sees today’s conflicts as part of a deeper civilizational shift.
“The ‘City of God’ does not propose a political program,” the pope added. “Instead, it offers valuable reflections on fundamental issues concerning social and political life, such as the search for a more just and peaceful coexistence among peoples. Augustine also warns of the grave dangers to political life arising from false representations of history, excessive nationalism and the distortion of the ideal of the political leader.”
Religious freedom also emerged as a key talking point. The pope highlighted the persecution of Christians as one of the most widespread human rights crises today — citing violence in regions ranging from Nigeria to Southeast Asia. At the same time, he drew attention to what he described as more subtle forms of discrimination in Europe and the Americas, where Christians, he argued, face social and legal pressure when defending traditional teachings on life and family.
“There, they are sometimes restricted in their ability to proclaim the truths of the Gospel for political or ideological reasons, especially when they defend the dignity of the weakest, the unborn, refugees and migrants, or promote the family,” he said.
The speech also revealed how Leo is shaping his papacy’s public voice. In contrast to the often confrontational style of his predecessor Pope Francis, Leo’s delivery was measured. Yet the substance suggested Leo has embarked on a papacy increasingly willing to speak forcefully, particularly on issues where he sees moral clarity such as war, immigration, human rights and religious freedom.
Finally, Pope Leo’s most-politically charged critiques came against what he called “Orwellian-style language” that, he said, claims inclusivity while excluding others within broader debates over free speech in the West.
By arguing that freedom of expression depends on words remaining anchored in objective truth, Pope Leo positioned the modern church as a defender of linguistic clarity against what he highlighted as ideological manipulation.
“Rediscovering the meaning of words is perhaps one of the primary challenges of our time. When words lose their connection to reality, and reality itself becomes debatable and ultimately incommunicable,” he said. “We should also note the paradox that this weakening of language is often invoked in the name of freedom of expression itself. However, on closer inspection, the opposite is true, for freedom of speech … is guaranteed precisely by the certainty of language and the fact that every term is anchored in truth.”
Clemente Lisi serves as executive editor at Religion Unplugged.