Ambassador Lewy (front row, second from left). Photograph: Gary Wayne Gilbert

Theodor Herzl, the father of modern Zionism, and a journalist by trade, wrote in his diary about his meeting with Pope Pius X in 1904. Herzl had proffered his case for an Israeli homeland, and he recorded that the pope had responded, in part, “The religion of Israel was the root of our religion, but she was superseded by the teaching of Jesus, and we cannot recognize it as having any status.” For good measure, Pius X reportedly added that if Herzl and his fellow Zionists were to resettle in Palestine, “we will prepare churches and priests in order to baptize you.”

Those austere words were referenced by Mordechay Lewy, Israel’s ambassador to the Holy See, in a public lecture on June 17 sponsored by Boston College’s Center for Christian-Jewish Learning. Lewy came to Chestnut Hill, though, not to touch exposed nerves in the historical relationship between Catholics and Jews, but to offer two cheers to the evolution of Vatican policy toward the Jewish state since diplomatic accords were signed in 1993. He noted that on the occasion of his accreditation as ambassador in May 2008, Pope Benedict declared that the Holy See joined him in “giving thanks to the Lord that the aspirations of the Jewish people for a home in the land of their fathers have been fulfilled.”

Even more solacing, to Lewy, was Benedict’s visit to Israel this past May, which the ambassador rated as a soaring diplomatic success. (Others, particularly in the Israeli press, were a good deal less enthusiastic, with some commentators saying Benedict offered few conciliatory words, compared to his predecessor, John Paul II, who apologized emphatically for past sins of the Catholic Church during a millennial pilgrimage to Israel in 2000.) Speaking to nearly 150 scholars, religious leaders, and others in Gasson Hall, Lewy cited in particular Benedict’s revivifying words at Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial museum, in which the pope declared that the millions who perished in the Nazi genocide “lost their lives, but they will never lose their names.” Referring in part to this homily on the power of name and memory, the ambassador said, “Pope Benedict’s statements during the visit will nourish our [Vatican-Israeli] future relations for a long time.”

Sparing the details, Lewy also alluded to efforts behind the scenes to ensure a successful papal trip—including attempts by both Israeli and Vatican diplomats to defuse the controversy over Benedict’s rehabilitation, earlier this year, of the Holocaust-denying English bishop, Richard Williamson.

There’s no question that Lewy’s message, compressed in the lecture title, “From Denial to Acceptance: Holy See–Israeli Relations,” was diplomatically attuned to Israeli politics and relations with Rome. It might also have had, as Henry Kissinger once quipped in another geopolitical context, the added advantage of being true. But a couple of scholars in attendance that evening took issue with portions of the narrative, arguing, for example, during the question-and-answer segment that the Vatican’s non-recognition of Israel before 1993 had more to do with the Holy See’s erstwhile position in favor of international authority over sacred sites in Jerusalem than with animus against the Jewish state.

There were also some glimpses into the tender spots of this still-fledgling diplomatic relationship, including Israel’s policy of not granting visas to Catholic clergy from countries that refuse to formally recognize the Jewish state, a policy that inhibits clergy from Arab countries, notably. “On this delicate matter not all the hopes of the Vatican can be fulfilled,” Lewy said, carefully.

The lecture opened a two-day conference on relations between the Vatican and Israel that brought together 21 scholars who are, as characterized by Raymond Cohen, a visiting scholar at the Christian-Jewish center, “veterans of Catholic-Jewish reconciliation.” Unlike public diplomacy, reconciliation requires the honest setting out of antagonistic positions, and these discussions were, prudently, closed to the press.

Read more by William Bole