The Church must hear the voices of Palestinian Christians like me

I have lost count of how many times people have explained Palestinian Christianity to me. They tell me what Palestinian Christians believe. They tell me how we live, what we should feel, what we should say, even what our own churches stand for.

Many of those who speak with the greatest confidence have never met a Palestinian Christian. They have never worshipped in our churches. They have never sat at our tables or listened to the stories that have shaped our faith for generations.

Yet they are often the quickest to say that our own testimony cannot be trusted. This is why the decision of the Church of England’s General Synod to acknowledge and engage with Kairos Palestine II meant so much to many of us.

Not because a Synod motion can end a conflict that has scarred our land for 78 years. It cannot. It mattered because a major Christian body finally did something that should never have been controversial in the first place. It listened to fellow Christians.

For Palestinian Christians, being heard is not a political victory. It is a matter of dignity. We are not a footnote in someone else’s story. We are not characters in a debate run by other people. We are followers of Jesus Christ. We belong to churches whose roots go back to the earliest centuries of Christianity. We worship in the land where Jesus lived, died and rose again. And yet our voices are questioned before they are even heard.

Broken by the backlash

The reaction to Synod’s decision has been painful to watch. A small but very loud group has done far more than disagree with the motion. Some have questioned the integrity of the CofE and attacked members of the Synod for daring to listen. They treated the act of listening to Palestinian Christians as something shameful.

Others went further. They called Palestinian Christians antisemites, Islamists, even terrorists. These accusations are not just false. They show how easily some people will dismiss an entire Christian community rather than sit with what it is actually saying. This should concern every Christian and every church.

I am so grateful Synod chose to listen, but listening on its own is not enough

Disagreement has always been part of the life of the Church. Kairos Palestine II can be read critically and debated honestly. But there is a real difference between challenging a document and discrediting the people who wrote it.

Too often, when Palestinian Christians speak about our own experience, suspicion comes before listening. We are asked to defend our identity before anyone lets us tell our story. Are we less Christian because we are Palestinian? Is our testimony worth less because we speak Arabic? Would people hear us differently if our passports were different?

Opposing antisemitism

Some have claimed that supporting Kairos Palestine II is itself a form of antisemitism. This is a serious accusation, and it should never be made lightly. Christians have a particular duty to reject antisemitism, because our own history holds painful examples of where hatred toward Jews has led.

But opposing antisemitism also requires honesty. Hatred of Jewish people is always sinful. Criticism of political actions and policies is something else. It belongs to ordinary moral and political debate; the kind Christians are free to have.

So, the first question should always be a simple one: Have you actually read the document? Kairos Palestine II was written by Palestinian Christian theologians, patriarchs, bishops, priests, pastors and laypeople from across our churches. It is a theological reflection born out of lived experience.

There is a difference between challenging a document and discrediting the people who wrote it

People may disagree with parts of it. They may question its language or its conclusions. That is a fair discussion to have. What is not fair is condemning a document without reading it or dismissing the people who wrote it because they happen to be Palestinian. For many of us, the deepest wound is not the criticism. It is the expectation that we should stay quiet.

We are told that speaking about our suffering creates division. We are told that asking for justice sounds hostile. We are told to manage our own pain so no one else feels uncomfortable.

But the gospel does not ask this of us. Jesus never told suffering people to be silent. He listened to those others ignored. He gave dignity back to those whose voices had been dismissed. He confronted religious leaders when they cared more about their own comfort than the truth. The Church is called to do the same.

Words into action

So, I am grateful Synod chose to listen. But listening on its own is not enough. 17 years after Kairos Palestine was first written, simply agreeing to hear Palestinian Christians is a beginning, not an achievement. Listening has to lead to real relationships, honest theological engagement and the courage to keep speaking the truth even when it draws criticism.

A Church that listens but never acts risks turning compassion into ceremony. The Church of England should not let peer pressure or smear campaigns decide whose voice gets heard. The Church has never fulfilled its calling by following the loudest voice in the room. It fulfills its calling by following Christ.

What Palestinian Christians ask of our brothers and sisters is not blind agreement or political loyalty. It is something that is both simpler and harder: Read what we have written. Meet us before you judge us.

We long for a day when Palestinians and Israelis alike can live with security, dignity, freedom and peace. We reject hatred, racism, antisemitism and every attack on civilians. We also reject the idea that peace can be built by asking one people to accept permanent injustice, or by asking one Christian community to quietly disappear from the conversation.

The Church of England did not make a mistake by listening to Palestinian Christians. It did what the Church should have done a long time ago. The question now is whether the Church is willing not only to listen, but to walk with us.

See here for an alternative perspective on this story