@USNavy vet, BA History, MA Curric, Instr, & Asses. APHuG, AVID, & coach Swim @ElRanchoHS. Opinions are mine. Stoic in training. In solidarity... he/him/él.
I think JD Vance’s response, unfortunately, misses the point.
When the Pope says, “God is not on the side of those who wield the sword” (Matthew 26:52), he is not denying the Church’s Just War tradition. He is calling us back to the heart of Christ.
In Matthew 26:52, Jesus says, “all who take the sword will perish by the sword.” He also teaches us to love not only our friends but our enemies (Matthew 5:44), to refuse retaliation (Matthew 5:39), and in the end, He submits to the Cross without violence. This shows a clear direction: the Kingdom of God is not built through force. As He says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God” (Matthew 5:9).
Christ does not present violence as something that reflects God’s nature. He allows Himself to be killed rather than defend Himself with force. That is central to the Church’s message.
What is Just War Theory? Just War Theory was developed mainly by St. Augustine and later refined by St. Thomas Aquinas. It is not a justification for violence, but a strict moral framework meant to limit it. It accepts that, in a fallen world, the use of force may sometimes be tolerated, but only under serious conditions. There must be a just cause, such as defending innocent life or resisting grave injustice. It must be declared by a legitimate authority. The intention must be right, not driven by revenge, hatred, or conquest, but by the desire to restore justice and peace. War must truly be a last resort, after every serious peaceful option has been exhausted. There must be a real probability of success, so that lives are not wasted in a hopeless conflict. The response must be proportionate, meaning the harm caused must not be greater than the evil being resisted. And even in war, civilians and non-combatants must never be deliberately targeted.
Even with all these conditions, the Church never says that God supports war. At most, it says that moral responsibility may, in very limited circumstances, tolerate the use of force to prevent a greater evil. Peace remains the goal. Violence is never the ideal.
What I find difficult in Vance’s response is the tone toward the Pope. It comes across as though he is trying to correct theological language, as if the Pope is offering just another opinion. But the Pope’s role is precisely to speak into moral and theological questions, especially when they touch on real issues like war and power.
At a deeper level, this seems like a clash between political reasoning and the logic of the Gospel. Christ is the standard, not political strategy, not historical precedent. Everything has to be measured against Him.
So yes, the Church has wrestled with the reality of war. But that does not weaken the Pope’s point. If anything, it makes it more necessary. In a world that keeps finding ways to justify violence, the Church must keep pointing back to Christ, who did not conquer by the sword, but by the Cross.
This photo deserves a Pulitzer because it shows Federal agents shooting the Pastor of the First Presbyterian church in Chicago with rubber bullets in the head and spraying him with tear gas in the face when he was just there to pray with everyone!
Nicki Minaj sold her soul for a trump gold card because she, ironically enough, was an immigrant, she’s just overpaid princess who lost her humanity because after becoming a celebrity, she’s let the money corrupt her. She sold out black fans, queer fans, immigrant fans. She sold out all of us for a gold card so she could stay in the country and be in the maga maralago pedophile protector club, but hey, given the fact her husband is a convicted rapist, it all makes sense why she fits so well in trumps greedy cabal.
"There are no Amish with autism"
There are
"Vaccines aren't tested against placebo"
They are
"MMR has never been studied as a possible cause of autism"
It has. It's not the cause.
I apparently need to say this stuff over and over and over and over again.
And again.
🚨NEW: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has rejected the Trump Administration’s offer of federal funding in exchange for aligning with Trump’s agenda. This is the first university to do so.
RETWEET to thank MIT President Sally Kornbluth for standing up to Trump!
@JusticeToAll@ltgrusselhonore I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice of all.
@JusticeToAll@ltgrusselhonore The pledge of allegiance should be revamped also. “I pledge allegiance to the flag” should be replaced by I pledge allegiance to the constitution” and the 1950s “under god” should be dropped as well. They send a mixed message. Keep it simple.
The United Nations has just voted 153-1 on a resolution ensuring the safety and security of humanitarian workers and UN personnel across the globe.
The only country voting against? The United States 🇺🇸.