Church of England backs Palestinian Christian report

The future of interfaith relations between the Jewish community and the Church of England has been cast into doubt, after the Church’s General Synod overwhelmingly voted in favour of a controversial resolution in support of the so-called Kairos II document, “A Moment of Truth: Faith in a Time of Genocide.” The Synod was meeting in York.

Speaker after speaker, led by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dame Sarah Mullally, rose to support the motion, tabled by Archdeacon Stewart Fyfe. Dame Sarah, who referred both to her recent visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories, and to her rejection of antisemitism — particularly in the UK — said that “put simply, Palestine, which the British government recognised last year, is disappearing.”

But no matter how senior clergy, such as the Bishop of Manchester, David Walker, despite his concern for Palestinian Christians, warned that supporting the motion would send a worrying message to the Jewish community, the resolution was backed in all three “houses” of the Church represented at the Synod. Bishop Walker, a friend of Heaton Park Synagogue’s Rabbi Daniel Walker, believed there should be “a less inflammatory way” to support the Palestinians.

In the House of Bishops, 25 voted for the motion, none against, while five abstained; in the House of Clergy, 115 voted in favour, 20 against, and 30 abstained; and in the House of Laity, 113 voted for the motion, 27 against, with 35 abstentions.

Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis, commenting before the debate, said Kairos II and any Synod resolution in its favour, “would be “little more than political activism dressed up as theology.” In the wake of the Synod vote, Chief Rabbi Mirvis condemned the resolution as “shameful”, referring to Kairos II as a document full of falsehood, which openly rejects dialogue, uses extreme rhetoric to challenge the very existence of Israel and objects to existing peace agreements in the region. Though it poses as a route to understanding, Kairos II in fact functions as an egregious barrier to it, reducing one of the world’s most complex conflicts to a single, warped narrative, which can only harm the cause of peace.”

He went on to describe it as “a sad day for Jewish-Christian relations.

The Board of Deputies issued a briefing document for the Synod in advance of the debate, warning the “negative impact of the Church engaging with the Kairos II document for British Jews and Jewish-Christian relations”. It argued that the Kairos documents, especially Kairos II, “spread a toxic narrative about Jews, and that their dissemination will do more to perpetuate conflict than make peace”.

Right from the beginning of the debate on Sunday evening, the resolution ran into controversy as Stephen Hofmeyr KC, who once acted on behalf of the Rev Stephen Sizer and defended him against charges of antisemitism, sought to defer the debate altogether, telling the Synod it was more likely to promote “disunity” and that “the time is not right” to embrace Kairos II.

But Archdeacon Fyfe, to applause, told the Synod that “silence does not promote unity” and, calling for solidarity with the Palestinian church, urged a stand “against the eradication of an indigenous church in the land of our Saviour.”

So many people wanted to speak on Sunday night that the discussion had to be adjourned until Monday morning, when, after various amendments to the substantive text, there was further debate and the vote was taken.

Among the passionate contributions was that of Amanda Robbie, a vicar’s wife and prominent member of the Lichfield laity, who said that her community included an Israeli woman who had converted to Christianity, and who questioned how the language of Kairos would affect her.

Or there was the Rev Canon Jane Richards, from Chelmsford, who spoke as “the daughter of a Jewish woman” whose parents had escaped the Holocaust, and whose own daughter had chosen Judaism and who attended a Progressive Jewish synagogue. But Rev Richards said she “utterly deplored” the actions of the Israeli government”.

Kairos II, written by a group of Palestinian Christians, appears to defend Hamas, saying that its attacks on southern Israel on October 7 2023 were “born out of decades of injustice, oppression and displacement since the Nakba of 1948”.

Numerous speakers referred to the language of Kairos II which includes references to “genocide”, “apartheid” and “racism”, the latter in particular said by some in the debate to be the underlying foundation of “settler violence” in the West Bank.

But the majority of speakers went out of their way to deplore antisemitism — and also to deny that the language of Kairos II breached the terms of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which was formally adopted by the Church’s College of Bishops in 2018.

In rueful remarks, the Bishop of Southwark, Christopher Chessun, said: “We reject antisemitism in all its forms but we must have the courage to name the imbalance of power and the violations being inflicted upon law-abiding Palestinian families under occupation — that is our solemn duty.” He added: “I am a friend of Israel. I do not want Israel to become her own worst enemy.”

However, the Bishop of Blackburn, Philip North,  argued that supporting the motion put “bridge builders” like himself, in “an invidious position.

Much of the linguistic wrangling focused on the original wording of Archdeacon Fyfe’s resolution which spoke of the Synod “receiving” the motion and Kairos II, which a number of people suggested could mean that the Church of England “endorsed” the controversial document.

Eventually an amendment was accepted, which now means that the General Synod has agreed to “hear” Kairos II. But this is a nuance unlikely to find much favour in the mainstream Jewish community in the UK.

The president of the Board of Deputies, Phil Rosenberg described the decision as “highly problematic”.

He said: “Kairos Palestine may come from a place of genuine pain, but the falsehoods and distortions of Kairos II, including its erasure of Jewish identity and experience, is a prescription for more division and not the answer to conflict in the Middle East. There is also a clear tension between the incendiary wording of the document and the Church’s expressed aim of tackling antisemitism.

“We thank our allies across the Church of England who worked to share our concerns and mitigate the harms associated with the Synod motions relating to Kairos Palestine, including by calling for dialogue with the Jewish community.

“We remain committed to working with Christians, Jews, Muslims and others in this country to tackle hatred and extremism and build a better future for all at home and abroad. We must not import conflict, but export peace instead. We will be stepping up that work over the coming days.”

The motion, including amendments, as passed was:

“That this Synod respond to the call of Palestinian Christians to stand in solidarity with them and their fellow Palestinians in non-violent resistance to the ongoing occupation. We lament the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives and the violations of human dignity and rights on both sides, as well as the displacement of population. We commit to a better understanding of the situation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory, seeking peace and security for all the peoples of those lands and pursuing that which leads to the establishment of a just and lasting peace.

In particular, we:

reject antisemitism, anti-Muslim hostility and all forms of prejudice based on religious affiliation and ethnicity;
acknowledge with repentance the Church’s historic contribution to antisemitism and to the situation now affecting the Palestinian people, reaffirm our commitment to inter-faith dialogue, including Christian-Jewish dialogue and encourage a deeper understanding of Judaism and other faiths;

pray for all victims of the current conflicts in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory and for a lasting peace;
hear the Kairos Palestine Declaration (2009), the Cry for Hope (2020), the Call for Repentance (2023) and Kairos Palestine II (2025) as heartfelt expressions of the lived experience of Palestinian Christians and:
encourage the Church of England at all levels to engage with those documents as part of a quest for greater understanding of the situation;

ask the Faith and Public Life Division to commend resources that enable Dioceses and local churches to promote a full understanding of the situation and to respond through prayer, theological study, advocacy and practical support for the work undertaken by the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem and other Churches in the service of the people of Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory;

encourage the Church of England at all levels to engage with those documents as part of a quest for greater understanding of the situation, alongside continued dialogue with Jewish and Muslim voices in the pursuit of justice, equality, peace and reconciliation;
call on Church investors to implement and demonstrate a leading approach to responsible investment relating to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and:

to review their investment policies in the light of the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion of 19 July 2024 on the illegality of the occupation of Palestinian territory;

to request the Church Commissioners and Church of England Pensions Board to report back, on a triennium basis, on the progress and success of their approaches;

the bodies named above to support the EIAG to develop guidance for wider Church of England investors on how to manage human rights risks relating to occupied territories and conflict.

ask His Majesty’s Government to work urgently for a lasting peace in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory, that will ensure safety and security for all parties and the upholding of the rights and inherent dignity of all people.’