Pope Leo XIV responds to letter from victims of Minab girls’ school strike in Iran
Pope Leo XIV responded to a letter from parents whose children were killed in a February 28 attack on a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran. He expressed grief over the deaths of more than 150 people, including children, and called for dialogue and peace between the United States and Iran. The pope emphasized that the focus should be on promoting shared values without further innocent casualties, rather than on regime change. He noted the situation in Iran as complex amid a ceasefire, warning that shifting positions between Iran and the U.S. could lead to uncertainty.
1 day ago
Pope Leo XIV addressed the tragic Minab school strike after receiving a heartfelt letter from grieving parents, urging dialogue, peace and the protection of civilians while emphasizing that the debate over regime change must not eclipse the loss of innocent lives 1 2.
The pontiff spoke aboard the papal plane returning from an African trip, saying the core issue is “how to promote the values we believe in without the death of so many innocent people.” 1 2
He described the situation in Iran as “complex” and warned that the future of negotiations between Iran and the United States remains uncertain. 1 2
Leo called for continued dialogue, the removal of war threats, and respect for international law, stressing that innocent people must be protected. 1 2
On 28 February 2026 a military strike hit a girls’ elementary school in Minab, Iran, killing more than 150 people, including many children. 1 2
The U.S. Defense Department confirmed the incident is under investigation but has not claimed responsibility. 1 2
Press TV published the full Farsi letter, with an English translation noting that the Pope’s advocacy “offered a healing touch to our broken hearts.” 1 2
The parents described holding “charred bags and bloody journals” and pleaded for the Pope’s call to “lay down the weapons” to be heard amid what they see as U.S. and Israeli aggression. 1 2
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reiterated that the military follows presidential orders and operates under legal authority, expressing confidence in its actions. 1 2
A Pentagon official reiterated that the strike is still being investigated and promised further details when available. 1 2
The strike occurred amid a fragile ceasefire and heightened tensions that have impacted the global economy. 1 2
Pope Leo XIV’s remarks aim to shift focus from geopolitical maneuvering toward humanitarian concerns and the protection of civilians. 1 2
Assess Catholic doctrine on non‑violence in inter‑state conflict
Catholic doctrine takes a strong moral presumption against war and against violence, while also maintaining that—under sharply limited conditions—states may exercise lawful self-defense when all reasonable peaceful avenues have failed. The “non-violence” ideal is therefore not an absolute denial of all force in every case, but a demand that force never be chosen as a convenient tool, and that peace be pursued as far as possible through just and effective means.
The Church’s social teaching (as summarized in the provided sources) treats “violence” as morally disordered when it means an illicit use of force—not merely any physical resistance. In that sense, “violence is never a proper response,” and it is described as evil and “unacceptable as a solution to problems.”
The Catechism explicitly links non-violence with evangelical charity. It teaches that those who renounce violence and bloodshed—and, to safeguard human rights, make use of defense means “available to the weakest”—bear witness to charity, provided they do so without harming the rights and obligations of other people and societies.
This matters for “inter-state conflict”: the Church is not primarily advocating cruelty, revenge, or intimidation. Rather, it is insisting that if defense is used, it must be morally constrained by the rights of others, not by vengeance or power-politics.
The Catechism states that “because of the evils and injustices that all war brings with it,” one must do “everything reasonably possible to avoid it.”
Likewise, it teaches that “the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer and to action” so that humanity is freed from “the ancient bondage of war.”
Catholic doctrine is not only spiritual; it assigns duties to political actors. The Catechism teaches that “all citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war.”
This obligation is not merely rhetorical: it frames war as something to be prevented by institutional and diplomatic work, not treated as a default policy option.
Catholic teaching includes an important exception to the presumption against war:
“as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.”
So, inter-state conflict is assessed through a sequence:
The provided sources also contain a direct magisterial warning attributed to John Paul II in addressing the Diplomatic Corps (13 January 2003), emphasizing that:
“War is never just another means that one can choose to employ for settling differences between nations… [W]ar cannot be decided upon… except as the very last option and in accordance with very strict conditions…”
This is central for your question on non-violence: Catholic doctrine treats war not as a negotiable instrument on par with diplomacy, but as something that morally requires extreme necessity and strict conditions.
Catholic teaching in the provided materials emphasizes building peace through international legal and mediating mechanisms. John Paul II’s address supporting the International Court of Justice is explicit that conflicts should be resolved peacefully and that international administration of justice and arbitration is a way of peace and part of the evolution of a world legal system.
The Catechism’s “avoid war” duties for governments fit naturally with this: if the Church urges avoidance of war and speaks of the lack of international authority as relevant to self-defense permissions, then strengthening international justice structures is not incidental—it is aligned with doctrine.
From the provided sources, the Church’s practical moral logic can be summarized as:
Catholic doctrine on non-violence in inter-state conflict is best read as a moral presumption for peace, insisting that violence is never a “proper response” and that war must be avoided as far as reasonably possible. Yet it simultaneously allows governments a conditional right of lawful self-defense when the danger persists, international authority is inadequate, and peace efforts have failed—always under the principle that war is the very last option and under very strict conditions.