Chief Rabbi warns ‘genocide’ document due to be discussed by Church of England Synod will ‘harm peace’

It brands Israel a “colonial, settler, and exclusionary entity”, describes Palestinians as the “indigenous people of this land”, criticises the Abraham Accords – Israel’s agreements with a number of Arab countries – and calls on churches to “distinguish between dialogue with Jews and dialogue with Zionism”.

While it condemns the killing of civilians by Hamas on October 7, it says the attack was “born out of decades of injustice, oppression and displacement since the Nakba of 1948” and, alluding to Israel’s actions in Gaza, says: “The claim of ‘self-defence’ cannot stand. How can a coloniser defend itself against those it has colonised and expelled from their land?”

Last month, the conference of the Methodist Church formally “received” the text also known as “Kairos II” and called for the preparation of study materials to be based on it.

In a statement following the Methodist Conference, Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis roundly condemned what he called a “shocking” document.

Rabbi Mirvis said: “The decision by the Methodist Church to receive Kairos II is deeply concerning. While it is important to recognise the suffering of Palestinian Christians, this document does so in a way which can only harm the cause of peace.

“It presents a one-sided account of a complex conflict, downplays the historical experiences and legitimate concerns of Jewish people, and offers little more than political activism dressed up as theology.

“It is truly shocking that a document which purports to speak in the name of truth, contains so much falsehood – using extreme rhetoric to challenge the very concept of a Jewish state, and to oppose existing peace agreements in the region.

“At a time when Christian-Jewish relations require nuance, trust and a willingness to engage with complexity, Kairos II risks undermining decades of careful relationship-building.

“Meaningful progress begins when the dignity, aspirations and suffering of all peoples are acknowledged. Kairos II takes us further away from that goal, not closer to it.”

Responding to the document’s publication, the Council of Christian and Jews (CCJ) warned in guidance to churches that “the unqualified use of the terms ‘colonial’ and ‘settler-colonial’ can be heard as denying the historic and spiritual connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel and denying the legitimate establishment of the State of Israel by the United Nations in 1948”.

It called on churches to “affirm Jewish indigeneity and historical connection to the land” and to “avoid adopting unhelpful language, including that which appears to erase one people’s story in order to affirm another’s”.

The CCJ also warned that statements about Zionism in the document could be “heard as a rejection of Jewish identity or belonging or right to self-determination” and prove “extremely damaging” in the UK when Jews were facing rising antisemitism.

In a statement this week, the CCJ said it had been working to raise Jewish concerns with the Methodist and other churches, urging UK Christians to listen to a broad range of Jewish views.

There was language in the Kairos Palestine document that was “deeply harmful to these aims, including statements which deny the historic and spiritual connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel,” it said.

Rabbi Charley Baginsky, co-lead of the Movement for Progressive Judaism (MPJ) and a president of the CCJ, commented: "The voices of Palestinian Christians should be heard with compassion and respect.”

But while Kairos Palestine was an expression of that lived experience, “it should not become the only lens through which churches understand this conflict,” she warned.

“Parts of the document use language about Zionism and Jewish self-determination that many Jews experience not simply as criticism of Israeli governments, but as questioning a core part of contemporary Jewish identity.”

Engagement with the document “must be accompanied by sustained dialogue with the breadth of Jewish voices. The challenge is not whether the Church should speak, but how it speaks in ways that enlarge understanding rather than reduce it.”

MPJ chairman Dr Ed Kessler, founder of the Woolf Institute and an expert on Jewish-Christian relations, said it was right for the Church to respond “to the urgent witness of Palestinian Christians but building on a long history of positive dialogue with Judaism, should do so in a way that strengthens rather than weakens the relationships it has spent decades building with Britain's Jewish community.

“My hope is that the General Synod will take into account the need for the Jewish community, as well as other communities, to feel they have a trusted place in the Church's reflections and decision-making process.”

Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, Senior Rabbi of the Masorti movement, observed that “the deep pain and uncertainty of the Christian communities in Israel/Palestine” was “very understandable”.

But he added: “However, the document places all forms of Zionism in the same bracket as that of the most extreme. It defines Israel as a colonialist enterprise and the Zionist project as bent on dispossession of all non-Jews. It denies any legitimate historical Jewish connection to the land and allows no space for Jewish sovereignty.

“It includes no acknowledgement of the persistent attacks on the state, of Israel, the constant rhetoric of hatred directed against it, the repeated attempts by Hamas, Hezbollah and their state backers to wipe Israel off the map, and the impact this has had on the psyche and some of the reactions of the country.

“It refers to Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, but fails to reference the murderous attacks against Israel, aimed at destroying the country.”

In suggesting that Christian groups distinguish between dialogue with Jews and dialogue with those with “Zionist voices”, the document “risks having a devastating impact on Jewish–Christian dialogue. It may force Jews, some of whom may share a deep concern for the Christian minority in Israel/Palestine, and, to some degree, some of the criticisms of Israel’s actions, to avoid dialogue for fear of being taken as ‘good Jews’ who don’t believe in Israel’s right to exist.”

A Methodist spokesperson said: “The Methodist Church is committed to interfaith relationships and dialogue. We are grateful to be engaged in ongoing conversation with Jewish communities, and we do not conflate the actions of Israel’s current government with those who make up Jewish communities, whose friendship we value.

“Members of the British Board of Deputies were advised that the Kairos document would be presented to the Methodist Conference.

The Methodist Conference is the governing body of the Methodist Church and has directed the President regarding this matter. No letter has yet been sent.  Such letters are not uncommon and are part of our ongoing dialogue with the UK Government on many issues.”

The spokesperson added: “The language of genocide used in the Kairos II document that was presented at the Methodist Conference is the language used by the United Nations to describe Israel’s actions in Gaza. It is not language we share lightly and nor without careful and reflective consideration.”