Vatican City – This morning, in the Apostolic Palace, Pope Leo XIV received the President of the State of Israel, Isaac Herzog, in official audience. Following the papal meeting, Herzog also held talks with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State, and Archbishop Paul R. Gallagher, Secretary for Relations with States and International Organizations.
The encounter, described as “cordial,” was nonetheless preceded by an unusual communications mishap. In recent days Herzog had told the press that the Holy Father had “summoned” him to Rome—an assertion the Holy See quickly dismissed, clarifying that the Pope receives only those who formally request an audience.
Shortly after today’s meeting, Herzog published a post on X expressing his “profound gratitude to Pope Leo XIV for the warm welcome” and outlining the conversation from his own perspective. He highlighted Israel’s commitment to securing the release of hostages held by Hamas, his vision of cooperation among the “Children of Abraham,” the protection of Christian communities in the Holy Land, and his appreciation for “the Pope’s inspiration and leadership in the fight against hatred and violence.”
Yet Herzog’s version omitted several key points that the Vatican Press Office later emphasized in its official statement. Beyond the issue of the hostages, the Holy See noted that there had been an open discussion on the tragic situation in Gaza, the urgent need for a permanent ceasefire, the safeguarding of international humanitarian law, and the legitimate aspirations of both peoples. Pope Leo XIV and his collaborators reaffirmed the Vatican’s long-standing position: the two-state solution remains the only realistic path out of the current spiral of war.
The talks also touched on the West Bank, the sensitive status of Jerusalem, and the historic role of Christian communities in the Middle East in fostering social cohesion, education, and regional stability. The contrast between the Israeli and Vatican communications could hardly be sharper. Herzog’s narrative leaned toward reassurance, sidestepping the more uncomfortable points, while the Holy See insisted on restating its position with clarity and consistency, refusing to bend to propaganda. In the end, the Israeli president’s move comes across as a miscalculation—an attempt to instrumentalize the Pope’s image for political purposes. A risky game, but one that once again confirms how the voice of the Holy See remains, even in the harshest crises, an inconvenient yet unavoidable point of reference.
d.P.A.
Silere non possum