Pope tells Muslim reps not to 'instrumentalize God' for military or economic aims

Pope Leo XIV’s message here was about religion and power — and about who gets to claim God when politics turns ugly. Meeting Muslim representatives from Senegal at the Vatican on May 9, he said Christians and Muslims share a duty to reject using God’s name for military, economic, or political gain. That sounds broad, but it lands in a very specific moment. Leo has spent his first year pushing a steadier, less theatrical style of papacy built around peace, coexistence, and lowering the temperature. ### Who was in the room? This was not a generic interfaith audience. The delegation came from Muslim communities and brotherhoods in Senegal, alongside representatives of the Catholic Church there. Leo leaned hard on Senegal’s reputation for “teranga” — basically hospitality, solidarity, and peaceful coexistence among people of different faiths. He framed the meeting as a real-world example of how Christians and Muslims can live together without turning religious difference into a political weapon. (vaticannews.va) ### What did he actually say? The key line was blunt. Leo said believers must “reject any exploitation of God’s name for military, economic or political ends.” He paired that with two other duties — condemning discrimination based on race, religion, or origin, and speaking up for suffering minorities. In other words, he was not just calling for polite dialogue. He was defining a shared moral job for religious communities when states, movements, or armed groups try to wrap themselves in sacred language. (vaticannews.va) ### Why mention military and economic aims together? Because Leo is talking about more than holy war. The phrase sweeps in the whole habit of using religion as cover — for violence, for power, for exclusion, and even for material advantage. That makes the warning wider than a standard anti-extremism line. It says the abuse starts anytime leaders turn faith into a tool, whether the goal is territorial control, political legitimacy, or economic leverage. (vaticannews.va) That’s an inference from his wording, but it fits the way the Vatican published the speech and highlighted the phrase. ### Why did Africa come up so prominently? Leo tied the appeal directly to conditions on the continent. He pointed to armed conflicts, humanitarian crises, deep inequality, violent extremism, migration, refugee flows, hate speech, and the weakening of family and moral reference points, especially for young people. His argument was basically that interreligious dialogue is not a feel-good side project. It is one of the few tools that can help cool tensions before they harden into radicalization or wider conflict. (vaticannews.va) ### Is this a new line from Leo? Not really — it’s becoming a pattern. In April, during a stop in Cameroon, he used even sharper language, warning against those who manipulate religion and God’s name for their own gain. So the May 9 remarks were not an isolated flourish. They look more like a repeated theme of his papacy: religion should act as a brake on violence and domination, not as branding for them. (vaticannews.va) ### So where does the LGBTQ piece fit? It matters because it shows the same governing style. The Vatican is signaling a more pastoral tone toward LGBTQ Catholics under Leo, but with clear limits and no obvious appetite for near-term doctrinal change. That mirrors this interfaith message in a different register — openness in language, emphasis on dignity, but caution when the question turns to formal teaching or institutional change. (americamagazine.org) ### Why does this matter beyond one audience? Because popes do not just speak to the people in front of them. Leo is sketching the kind of Church he wants to lead — dialoguing, peace-focused, wary of culture-war escalation, but still institutionally careful. The catch is that this style can look expansive and restrained at the same time. Supporters hear moral seriousness. Critics hear caution dressed up as warmth. (apnews.com) ### Bottom line? Leo’s point was simple: faith should not be used as fuel for power. But the bigger story is how he keeps making that point — with inclusive language, diplomatic tone, and very controlled boundaries. (vatican.va) (vaticannews.va)