The Pope is the head of the Catholic Church. Starting last year, Pope Leo XIV took the seat in the Vatican, the first American-born Pope, whom the United States Department of Defense (DoD) may have just threatened. It’s very important to note that this alleged threat to the Pope did not come from DoD, as it was just from a higher level official within the DoD. However, even though it didn’t come directly from the DoD, this person is a representative of the DoD in and out of the office.
Starting the threat off was an official, who made the comment that the Vatican needs to “pick a side” because “the [American] military has the power to do what it wants.” This is a reference to the ongoing war that is happening with Iran. This statement is threatening, but it is also a very generic threat, so what’s to worry? Is there actually a threat to the Papacy? Unfortunately, that is not what the threat is; it was a later comment where he “invoked the Avignon papacy” that became the threat.
At first glance, many may not even know what the Avignon papacy means, but for someone who knows the church history, they would know how threatening this is. This period of history, church historians refer to as the “Babylonian Captivity” because the Catholic Church was held captive by the French in 1309–1377. The way the French took over the church was by sending in their military to Vatican City and killing the Pope (Pope Boniface) and making their own Pope (Pope Clement V), then moving the head of the Church from Vatican City to Avignon, France. There was conflict and confusion between France and within the Catholic Church herself that began what is referred to as “The Great Schism” and then later became the Protestant Reformation.
That’s what makes this whole situation so strange. This wasn’t just some random historical reference, but it was a callback to one of the only times in history when political power controlled the Papacy through military force. One doesn’t just causally bring that up as a modern military official without it meaning something. Whether it was intended as a warning, a comparison, or just a poorly chosen example, it immediately shifts the tone from political disagreement to something much larger.
To reiterate, it was not the official stance of the Department of Defense. They have actually denied it being a threat against the Papacy. The Vatican has taken the United States off the list of places Pope Leo XIV will be visiting in 2026 after this interaction, even though they have commented, saying they view it as “intimidation.” Still, it’s hard to ignore how out of place this sounds. A modern U.S. defense official referencing a 14th century “captivity” of the Pope in a political conversation? That’s not normal diplomatic language, whether it was a misunderstanding or something more intentional.
