The chief rabbi has criticised the Church of England Synod’s decision to encourage its members to engage with a Palestinian Christian document that accuses Israel of genocide.
Sir Ephraim Mirvis said the Synod’s vote was “shameful” and marked “a sad day for Jewish-Christian relations”.
“This is 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,” he said.
“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.”
Likewise, Masorti Judaism’s Senior Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, a co-president of the Council of Christians and Jews, called the Synod’s response to Jewish concerns over the document as Kairos Palestine II as “inadequate”.
Anglican bishops, clergy, and lay leaders overwhelmingly voted to “hear” the document, released last year by a Palestinian Christian group called Kairos Palestine, and recommend that all levels of the Church engage with it. The motion had initially been worded to “receive” - rather than “hear” - it.
During the Synod debate, the archbishop of Canterbury, Dame Sarah Mullally, spoke favourably of the motion, saying: “To hear the heartfelt expressions of the lived experiences of the Palestinian Christians does not mean we agree with everything in these documents – but it does mean that we listen with compassion, and stand in solidarity with them amidst the many injustices they face.”
But the amended motion failed to assuage Jewish consternation, with Board of Deputies President Phil Rosenberg describing it as “highly problematic”.
"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,” he said.
There was, he added, “also a clear tension between the incendiary wording of the document and the Church’s expressed aim of tackling antisemitism”.
He offered thanks to allies across the Church 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”.
Reaffirming the Board’s commitment to working with Christians, Jews, Muslims and others in this country to tackle hatred and extremism, he went on: “We will be stepping up that work over the coming days.”
In his response, Wittenberg noted that Kairos had rightly been criticised by the Chief Rabbi prior to the debate “as a barrier to peace and understanding” and condemned by the Board of Deputies for calling Israel “a colonialist and racist state”.
It was important for both Jews and Christians to acknowledge that Kairos II emerged from “sustained suffering and ongoing injustices” but there was “all the difference in the world between sharp and justified criticism of specific policies of its government, with which many Jews, and Israelis, might largely agree, and the condemnation of the very right of the state of Israel to exist,” he added.
Although the Synod’s response was “more nuanced,” he suggested that the nuance risked being “broadly undermined by what it fails to say”.
The Synod, he continued, “acknowledges Israeli as well as Palestinian suffering and commits to the search for an enduring peace to end the tragic conflict in a just solution for both peoples. It does not define Israel as a colonialist entity”.
“It acknowledges the Church’s contribution to antisemitism and Jewish suffering. It strongly reaffirms the Church of England’s commitment to Jewish-Christian dialogue and does not differentiate between Jews according to their views about Israel.”
However, he said, “these commitments risk being contradicted by stating that the Church ‘hears’ and recommends ‘engagement with’ Kairos, vague terms which are hostage to interpretation and leave the door open to communities and clergy who choose to adopt Kairos uncritically”.
“In particular, the Church of England’s response does not explicitly condemn the definition by Kairos II of Israel as a colonialist entity, or Kairos II’s failure to acknowledge the unbroken historical connection between the Jewish People and the Land of Israel. Nor does it condemn Kairos II’s failure to acknowledge the necessity for a Jewish homeland in the wake of millennia of – often Christian – persecution, and in particular the Nazi Holocaust.
“As a result, many Jews committed to dialogue and interfaith work will find the Synod’s statement inadequate and insufficiently reassuring.”
The Movement for Progressive Judaism said it appreciated that “our concerns were… taken seriously”. The distinction between “hearing” as opposed to “endorsing” Kairos II was important, its leaders said, creating space for continuing the “difficult work” of dialogue.
But they added: “We continue to believe that Kairos Palestine II contains deeply problematic language and theological framing about Jews, Jewish history and Israel.
"Left unchallenged, these risk entrenching the very divisions that dialogue should seek to overcome.”
In her contribution to the Synod, the archbishop said the situation in Israel and Palestine was “gravely serious”, recalling that in her visit to the region last month she had seen “how settlements are expanding at unprecedented rates”.
“Palestine, which the British government recognised last month, is disappearing.”
In particular, Palestinian Christians, whose numbers were becoming “ever smaller”, faced an “existential threat,” she claimed.
Against this desperate backdrop, she said, “we are called to a new and active solidarity. We must not ignore the urgency of this moment.”
Both Jewish and Palestinian peoples had a “profoundly deep connection to the Holy Land” and both had the right to self-determination.
The Synod motion “rightly notes that we lament – equally, without qualification – the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives. We affirm our rejection of antisemitism and anti-Muslim hostility.
“Especially with the abhorrent rise in antisemitism in this country, we must be vigilant about the long and terrible history of Christian anti-Jewish hatred. We must not add to this history: we must continue our journey of repentance and ongoing dialogue.”
The Kairos II document, she suggested, reflected “the pain and trauma of the Palestinian people. As a pastor, I hear the cry of our Palestinian Christian sisters and brothers – a cry that rises from the ruins of Gaza, and from the violence and oppression of the West Bank”.
“The urgency of the situation in the Holy Land demands that we have difficult conversations. We must listen to those things that are hard to hear, and take the risk of engaging across divides.
She said she also heard the concerns of the Chief Rabbi, Progressive Jewish leaders, and the Board: “During my recent visit to the Nova Exhibition in London, I was reminded once again that the pain and trauma of the appalling events of the October 7 attacks have not receded: they remain a daily reminder for the Jewish people in this country, Israel, and around the world.
“More than ever, we need a critical, respectful dialogue – that includes the voices of Palestinian Christians, as well as our Jewish and Muslim friends.
“We may feel the pressure to take sides, but we are called instead to human solidarity. Our duty is to defend freedom and human dignity. Our calling is to build bridges – believing that all people are made in the image of God.”
To get more news, click here to sign up for our free daily newsletter.