On Pope Leo and media attempts to misrepesent papal remarks about Venezuela

Pope Leo’s recent comments on the United States military operation in Venezuela were quickly labeled left‑leaning by some media outlets, including The Daily Beast, Yahoo News, and a growing list of syndicated sites.

But that framing misses the point. It forces a long tradition of papal diplomacy into the narrow world of American politics while ignoring the centuries of Catholic teachings on war, peace, and justice.

With the headline,” First American Pope Voices Grave Concern Over Trump’s Invasion” Laura Esposito of The Daily Beast framed Pope Leo’s response through a critical lens by bringing up a long list of the pontiff’s past criticisms of some of President Trump’s policies. Claiming that Pope Leo “has repeatedly condemned Trump’s hostile treatment of immigrants, his deportation tactics, and elements of the president’s approach to Russia-Ukraine peace negotiations,” The Daily Beast attempts to frame Pope Leo’s response to removing Venezuela’s despotic President as fitting into a larger anti‑Trump narrative.

The truth is that the pope’s focus on sovereignty, peace, and dialogue follows the same pattern set by Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis whenever military action was on the table. Treating his words as ideological and increasingly hostile to President Trump says much more about the media’s preferred storyline than about the Vatican’s actual position.

The Esposito essay in The Daily Beast frames Pope Leo’s cautionary remarks as “a sharp rebuke” of President Trump’s actions in Venezuela. This framing suggested Pope Leo was siding with the political left rather than applying long‑standing Catholic moral teachings and established principles of Vatican diplomacy. A few other general interest outlets echoed this tone by highlighting conflict and ideology instead of Pope Leo’s actual language about sovereignty and peace. These stories treated his caution about military action and concern for the Venezuelan people as a partisan signal, even though the pope never used political terms or singled out President Trump by name.

There’s a clear pattern in how previous popes have addressed military action that matches the pattern used by Pope Leo. Pope St. John Paul II called war a “defeat for humanity” and urged leaders to choose diplomacy before turning to force. Pope Benedict XVI said military action should be only defensive and always focused on protecting civilians. And Pope Francis echoed the same ideas, asking that “weapons fall silent” and warning against any nation using force to control another.

Pope Leo’s comments on Venezuela follow the same pattern as he talked about sovereignty, peace, and dialogue, not politics. Comparing the responses from each, it is evident that Pope Leo is not breaking from tradition at all. He is following the same path the modern papacy has walked for decades.

In fact, it was less than a year ago, on February 9, 2025, when a frail Pope Francis delivered a moving homily promoting peace at a Mass for the Jubilee of the Armed Services. Then‑Cardinal Robert F. Prevost, who was then prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops (and is now the current Pope Leo XIII), presided over the liturgy at that Jubilee Mass for the Armed Services. In his homily, Pope Francis thanked members of the military for their service, and urged them to resist seeing others as enemies, and asked them to devote their work to protecting life, peace, and justice: “Be vigilant lest you be poisoned by propaganda that instills hatred (and) divides the world into friends to be defended and foes to fight,”

In certain ways, some within the Catholic media itself are at fault for contributing to the confused media narrative and the primacy of politics that have led others to believe that Pope Leo is hostile to President Trump. Even the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops published an essay on January 5th with the headline that “Pope Leo Voices Deep Concern Over Venezuela After Capture of Maduro,” and quotes—without editorial comment or criticism—the newly installed acting Venezuelan leader, Delcy Rodríguez, as saying that “the U.S. violated international law and that Maduro remains president.”

At a moment when Pope Leo’s words are being filtered through a partisan lens, it is worth recalling the broader moral tradition that shapes Catholic thinking about the use of force. The Church’s just war framework has long emphasized legitimate authority, the protection of the innocent, and the careful, proportionate use of military power.

Bishop Robert Barron’s clear explanation of these principles—outlined in his teaching on Catholicism and just‑war theory—offers a helpful way to evaluate actions taken to remove an unjust ruler in a case like the vicious and tyrannical ex-President Maduro of Venezuela. In a short video at Annapolis Military Academy, presented four years ago, Bishop Barron draws from Aquinas to state clearly: “Sometimes the only way to oppose great wickedness is to use violence or to use force.” That is the essence of just war theory.

Seen through this lens, the question is not whether the pope is leaning left or right, but whether the moral criteria that guide Catholic teachings are being taken seriously by those charged with interpreting them. And if they are, Pope Leo’s words look far less like politics and far more like the steady moral witness the Church has offered for centuries.

Read original article