This is a paragraph from a post by Bishop Barron on X:
The role of the Church, therefore, is to call for peace and to urge that any conflict be strictly circumscribed by the moral constraints of the just war criteria. But it is not the role of the Church to evaluate whether a particular war is just or unjust. That appraisal belongs to the civil authorities, who, one presumes, have requisite knowledge of conditions on the ground. So, is the war in question truly the last resort? Is there really a balance between the good to be attained and the destruction caused by the war? Are combatants and non-combatants being properly distinguished in the waging of the conflict? Do the belligerents have right intention? Is there a reasonable hope of success? The posing of those questions—indeed the insistence upon their moral relevance—belongs rightly to the Church, but the answering of them belongs to the civil authorities.
Aren't the passages I have boldfaced just another way of saying the pope should stay out of politics? Even if the American and Israeli administrations have a plausible case to make that the war against Iran is a just war, is Bishop Barron saying there may never be a war that it is so obviously not just that the pope can't say so? Who among the civil authorities responsible for waging war are going declare that the war they are responsible for is unjust?