The Power of Invitation: The Moral Discourse of Kairos Palestine Kjetil Fretheim 135

The Power of Invitation:

The Moral Discourse of
Kairos Palestine
By Kjetil Fretheim
Abstract: In this article I analyze the moral discourse of the Palestinian kairos document A Moment
of Truth (2009) using the distinctions between prophetic, ethical, narrative, policy, and participatory
discourse offered by James M. Gustafson and Lisa S. Cahill. I conclude that the document articulates a
sixth variety: invitational discourse. This is a kind of moral discourse that invites a wide range of groups
and individuals into a normative discussion on a given issue.

Key Terms: moral discourse, invitational discourse, kairos theology, political theology, Kairos Palestine

James M. Gustafson outlines four varieties of what
he refers to as moral discourse: prophetic, ethi-
cal, narrative, and policy discourse;1 and Lisa S.
Cahill has complemented this list with a fifth vari-
ety: participatory discourse.2 All of these are ideal
types and can, of course, be applied in combina-
tion, allowing further varieties as moral discourse is
articulated in practice and is given concrete expres-
sion. In this article, however, I want to use these
five varieties of moral discourse as analytical tools
when reading A Moment of Truth: A Word of Faith,
Hope, and Love from the Heart of Palestinian Suffer-
ing,3 in the following simply referred to as Kairos
Palestine. This document was issued in December
2009 and is a contemporary expression of kairos
theology, a movement within Christian theology
that can be traced back to the Christian opposition
against the apartheid regime in South Africa in the
mid-1980s.
In the following I first present Kairos Palestine
and contextualize it as part of the kairos move-
ment. I then analyze the document using the dis-
tinctions offered by Gustafson and Cahill. Based on
this analysis, I conclude that it articulates a sixth
variety of moral discourse, what I choose to call
invitational discourse. This is a kind of moral dis-
course that identifies a given moral issue and takes
a position on it, but also invites a wide range of
groups and individuals into continued, critical dis-
cussion on the right and good thing to do with
regard to this issue.
Kairos Palestine
Kairos Palestine was written by Palestinian Chris-
tians, theologians, and church leaders of differ-
ent denominations. Accordingly, the document is
a Christian ecumenical statement, although it can-
not be considered an official church document. It
was not issued by any official church body, and
was, in fact, presented to the churches as a mes-
sage to them and with a challenge to respond
appropriately.
The document presents itself as a result of
prayer, reflection and an exchange of opinion,
and a cry out from within the suffering in our

Kjetil Fretheim is a theologian and Associate Professor of Social Science at MF Norwegian School of Theology in Oslo. He is the author of
Rights and Riches: Exploring the Moral Discourse of Norwegian Development Aid (Peter Lang, 2008), and has published articles on theological ethics,
intercultural communication, and development issues.


C 2012 Wiley Periodicals and Dialog, Inc.
136 Dialog: A Journal of Theology Volume 51, Number 2 Summer 2012 June
country, under the Israeli occupation.4 This high-
lights the carefully considered character of Kairos
Palestine, but also indicates the social, economic,
and political context out of which it emerges. It
is, of course, the situation in the Middle East and
more specifically, the conflict between Israel and
Palestine that constitutes the background for the
document. Accordingly, it is a response to a long-
lasting conflict, but also a conflict that the authors
find has escalated to a critical point. They claim
they have reached a dead end in the tragedy of
the Palestinian people.5 Against this backdrop the
authors conclude that the situation requires a radi-
cal and fundamental reaction.
The way in which the document is written in-
dicates, however, that it also emerges out of a con-
text beyond Palestine, Israel, or the Middle East.
Through the explicit reference to South Africa, the
use of the concept of kairos, and the combination
of Christian theology, social analysis, and moral dis-
course, Kairos Palestine places itself within the in-
ternational kairos movement. In 1985 church lead-
ers and lay Christians in South Africa issued what
came to be known as The Kairos Document: a clear
and strong denunciation of the apartheid system
and the theological legitimization of it.6 Several
other kairos documents have been published since
then, not least Kairos Central America,7 The Road to
Damascus,8 and others. All of these documents were
inspired and informed by the South African kairos
document that thus plays an important and consti-
tutive role in what can be termed kairos theology.
This is also the case with Kairos Palestine, which
compares the current situation in Israel and Pales-
tine with South Africa in the apartheid era, and
on that basis develops a revealing analysis of the
situation in occupied Palestine. The authors argue
that the Palestinian situation is unreasonable, un-
fair, and unjust, and express a deep criticism of
Israeli occupation policies.
Kairos Theology
Before analyzing Kairos Palestine in more detail, and
in order to understand the context for the moral
discourse articulated here, it is necessary to high-
light some characteristics of kairos theology. Al-
though the various kairos documents were written
at different times, in different contexts, and were
issued in response to specific challenges, they have
important similarities. First, kairos is a key word in
all of the kairos documents and often is explained
through a comparison with the word chronos. Both
are Greek words for time, and the latter refers
to linear timetime that passes through the past,
present, and future. Kairos, on the other hand, de-
notes the character of a given moment in time, or
a moment with special characteristics. In the field
of rhetoric, kairos thus refers to the right moment
to act or to speak. But the concept of kairos also
can be used as a theological concept linked to Je-
sus and the understanding of his coming, death,
and resurrection. The coming of Jesus Christ (Lk
19:44) implies a qualitative breakthrough and a
turning point in history. With Jesus resurrection,
this turning point receives lasting importance. Je-
sus brought the kingdom of God close (Mk 1:15),
and in the kairos documents this notion of the
kingdom of God is of key importance. Kairos is
seen as the moment of revelation, the time when
the will of God and the truth are made visible
and evident in a special way. This also implies that
a kairos moment comes with special claims and
challenges.
Accordingly, in kairos theology it is not only
necessary to understand what the coming and res-
urrection of Christ imply as kairos moments in
the past, but also to interpret what is the present
kairos (Lk 12:56). The use of kairos in Kairos Pales-
tine thus signals an interest in reflecting on current
challenges for the church and theology. Based on
what the authors see as a crisis in the socio-political
context, they conclude that they do not live in
ordinary times. They find themselves in extraordi-
nary times, a special time that offers both a chal-
lenge to act and an opportunity for change.
Second, the kairos documents are all attempts
at interpreting, understanding, and critiquing con-
temporary society and the social challenges of their
times. In this sense kairos theology is empirically
oriented, contextual theology, meaning a kind of
theology that reflects critically on the context, as
 The Power of Invitation: The Moral Discourse of Kairos Palestine Kjetil Fretheim 137

opposed to other kinds of theology that uncon- Moral Discourse

sciously and implicitly mirror their context. The
kairos documents combine theological reflection
and social analysis, and draw normative conclusions
James M. Gustafson presented his four varieties of
from their inquiries. The desire to change society
moral discourse in his Stob lectures, and distin-
provides the explicit starting point, and they do not
guished between ethical, prophetic, narrative, and
avoid conclusions that relate to current political is-
policy discourses.14 With regard to prophetic dis-
sues. The documents also tend to follow the same
course, he highlights its biblical roots and prece-
structure: they provide a social analysis, a theologi-
dents, and identifies two dimensions of it. First, it
cal interpretation of the social context, and point to
is characterized by moral or religious indictments;
the need to act in this particular situation. To some
and, second, it is utopian. The prophetic indict-
extent concrete actions also are prescribed, and of-
ment typically runs as follows: prophetic discourses
ten social analysis, theological reflection, and ethics
usually address what the prophet perceives to be
are combined in a three-step approach: see, judge,
the root of religious, moral, or social waywardness,
and act. The first task is to undertake social analysis
not specific instances in which certain policies are
(see). The second is to evaluate the findings of this
judged to be inadequate or wrong.15 The utopian
analysis (judge), and the third is to respond to these
aspect of prophetic discourse refers to how it is
realities through practical action (act). Thus the
a language used to proclaim and depict an ideal
dependence on liberation theology is evident. This
state of affairs which is radically in contrast with
three-step approach is a trademark of liberation the-
the actual state of affairs in which we live together
ology and is described programmatically by Gustavo
in society.16
Gutierrez in his renowned book A Theology of
Liberation.9
Third, these documents are collective and ecu- Narrative Discourse
menical statements, and have come about through
a long and inclusive process. As such they draw on When discussing narrative discourse, Gustafson
typical theological sourcesthe Bible and Chris- refers to the works of Stanley Hauerwas, and
tian traditionbut they also enter into a discus- highlights three interrelated functions of narratives.
sion with different forms of theological thinking. First, they sustain and confirm the religious and
A key concern is to reject the forms of theologi- moral identity of the Christian community, and
cal thinking that the authors find it necessary to evoke and sustain the faithfulness of its members
warn against, condemn, and/or explicitly denounce. to Jesus Christ.17 Second, they have a moving
At the same time the documents have a tentative prophetic function, appealing to empathy and emo-
character. Kairos theology is not a fixed theology. It tions. Third, narratives offer a moral pedagogy.
represents a processa kairos movementin which Regarding the latter, Gustafson writes, a narra-
Christians reflect and act on the basis of a dialectic tive evokes the imagination, stimulates our moral
between social analysis and theology. sensibilities and affections. Its conclusion is not as
As Albert Nolan points out: The essence of clearly decisive [as ethical casuistic arguments], but
Kairos theology is the act of interpreting a partic- it enlarges ones vision of what is going on; one acts
ular crisis as a kairos in the biblical sense of an in its light more than in conformity to it.18
encounter with God, who is speaking to us now
with warnings, promises and a call to action.10
Kairos theology accordingly can be described as so- Ethical Discourse
cially aware, concerned, and committed theology. It
is a variation on liberation theology, but also can be Ethical discourse is, in Gustafsons definition, char-
described as an example of contextual,11 political,12 acterized by basically philosophical modes of ar-
or public theology.13 gument and analysis;19 and though there are
138 Dialog: A Journal of Theology Volume 51, Number 2 Summer 2012 June
different attitudes to such argument and analysis
in the Christian tradition, Gustafson sums up that
every serious Christian group that makes moral
proposals for the wider public must at least ac-
knowledge and come to grips with this issue: the
relation of Christian particularity to the universal
in morality.20 Accordingly, Christian theology and
ethics cannot avoid ethical discourse. On the con-
trary, it should include ethical discourse and bene-
fit from its philosophical sophistication, Gustafson
argues. As he points out, Ethical discourse pro-
vides the concepts, the modes of appropriate argu-
mentation, and important distinctions which lead
to greater precision and stronger backing for what
Christians and other religious communities think is
the right thing to do, the good thing to do.21
Policy Discourse
By policy discourse Gustafson refers to the writ-
ings which seek to recommend or prescribe quite
particular courses of action about quite specific is-
sues,22 and he highlights two features of it. The
first feature of policy discourse is that in its most
important form it is conducted not by external ob-
servers, but by the persons who have responsibility
to make choices and to carry out the actions that
are required by the choices.23 The second feature
of this variety of moral discourse is the particu-
larity of conditions within which policy is devel-
oped. These conditions both limit the possibilities
of action and enable them.24 This implies that
[p]olicy discourse has distinctive demands in terms
of knowledge, concepts, and understanding.25
Participatory Discourse
Lisa Cahill identifies a fifth variety of moral dis-
course, participatory discourse. She defines it as a
mode of theological and ethical speech in which
its practical roots and outcomes are intentionally
acknowledged.26 This discourse has a power to
allude to or induce a shared sphere of behavior,
oriented by shared concerns and goals, and [. . .]
to constitute relations of empathy and interdepen-
dence.27 In contrast to Gustafsons four varieties
that are verbal, participatory discourse focuses on
activities that give rise to moral discourse, and in
this sense are praxis-oriented.
Shortcomings
Gustafson does not dismiss any of the varieties of
moral discourse he discusses, but is eager to point
out their shortcomings. With regard to prophetic
discourse he notes how [i]t involves a necessary
simplification of what are, from other perspectives,
very complex problems and issues. Prophetic in-
dictment has to locate a devil, a focal point of
radical evil. It does not concern itself with incre-
mental choices that have to be made by persons
and institutions in which good and evil are intri-
cately intermingled.28 Similarly, Gustafson points
to the limits of narrative ethics and discourse.
First, [p]erceptive intuitions informed by parables
need to be checked against more rational analysis;
and second, just as there is often a gap between
prophetic discourses and particular choices made in
the midst of medical, political, economic and other
situations, so narrative also leaves that gap.29
Turning to ethical discourse, in Gustafsons view
this particular discourse lacks the capacity to iden-
tify the roots of evil and does not move persons
with a sense of urgency.30 Both policy discourse
and policy makers need to have their institutions
challenged by the prophet; they need to have their
arguments and choices clarified, evaluated, and in-
formed by the ethician.31 Similarly, and finally,
participatory discourse needs to be supplemented
and informed by the more verbally oriented modes
of discourse the other four represent.
Moral Discourse in Kairos
Palestine
Turning back to Kairos Palestine, the subtitle, A
word of faith, hope and love from the heart of
Palestinian suffering, indicates the key features of
this document. The trinity of faith, hope, and love
provides a biblical reference (1 Cor 13) and pro-
claims the theological character of the document.
Faith, hope, and love also can be found in the
 The Power of Invitation: The Moral Discourse of Kairos Palestine
headings of chapters 2, 3, and 4, respectively, and
thus constitute Kairos Palestines basic structure. The
latter part of the subtitle, from the heart of Pales-
tinian suffering, similarly places the document in
its geographical, sociological, and political context.
The emphasis on suffering indicates the problem
the issue to be addressed in the documentand
thus also the social analysis and normative direc-
tion of the document: the plight and suffering of
the Palestinian people, the role of the churches in
the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and how Christians,
churches, and others should respond.
Social Analysis
Before the chapters on faith, hope, and love, how-
ever, the authors analyze the reality on the ground
in chapter 1. Elaborated here is the social analysis
that justifies and explains the release of the docu-
ment. The reality is described through reference to
a wide range of specific political issues and con-
troversies: the Israeli separation wall erected on
Palestinian territory, the cruel war Israel waged
in Gaza at the end of the years 2008 and 2009,
the inhuman conditions the residents of Gaza
experience,32 as well as Israeli settlements,33 mil-
itary checkpoints,34 refugees,35 political prisoners,36
Jerusalem,37 discriminatory policies,38 emigration,39
collective punishment,40 etc. In contrast to harmo-
nizing descriptions of peace and cooperation in the
region, the situation is portrayed in terms of con-
flict, suffering, and injustice.
The social analysis in kairos theology thus evi-
dently belongs to the branch of social theory that
is often labeled Marxist theory or the conflict ap-
proach.41 This is in line with much of kairos
theology that emerges out of contexts that are
conflict ridden, characterized by oppression, and
springing from the conflict between oppressed and
oppression. The social analysis is first and foremost
driven by a need to disclose the underlying and
pervasive conflict that permeates all parts of social
life. Rather than introducing shades of grey, the
concern is to make clear-cut distinctions.
Clearly, the social analysis that is such an in-
tegrated part of kairos theology is an empirically
Kjetil Fretheim 139
oriented and descriptive analysis. But it is also nar-
rative and normative. The analysis is framed as the
retelling of the story and tragedy of the Palestinian
people, reconstructing and interpreting the history
and identity of the Palestinian people. And the
analysis is normative in the sense that it is framed
and defined by its focus on conflict between op-
pressors and oppressed, and that this is regarded as
an unjust relationship that demands a proper and
normative response. In this sense, the social analysis
of kairos theology is critical theory put into prac-
tice. Consequently, the moral discourse of the doc-
ument has both narrative and prophetic elements. A
narrative of the Palestinian people is tolda story
that includes how Christians, churches, and others
have related to this story of suffering and oppres-
sion. The Israeli occupation is seen in this story
as the root cause of Palestinian suffering. This, to-
gether with a strongly articulated hope for a better
future, indicates the role of prophetic discourse in
the document.
Faith: Particular and Universal
Chapter 2, A Word of Faith, comes in response
to the description of a reality marked by suffer-
ing, repression, and conflict in chapter 1. The con-
trast between reality and idealism becomes evident
when the authors confess the faith of a good and
just God, who loves each and every one of his
creatures.42 This is a creed that unites Christians
of different denominations and indicates both a
universal (one God) and a normative (good and
just) orientation in the document. It is worth not-
ing how this universal outlook is kept in a tone
that is recognizable to and in line with Jewish and
Muslim beliefs, and implies an inclusive approach
to peoples of other faiths. There are undoubtedly
also more specifically Christian accentuations in
Kairos Palestine. For example, the first paragraphs
in chapter 2 deal with the three persons of the
Christian God: God the Creator, the Son Jesus
Christ, and the Holy Spirit.43 This particular Chris-
tian perspective is, however, consistently combined
with an emphasis on universality, humanity, and
inclusiveness.
140 Dialog: A Journal of Theology Volume 51, Number 2 Summer 2012 June
This second chapter also includes a reflection on
how the word of God should be understood and
the biblical texts read, as well as a more context-
specific discussion of the understanding of Israel
and the notion that God has promised the Holy
Land to the Jews and Israel.44 With regard to the
word of God, the universal perspective is again
emphasized. The key premise is that God has
spoken to humanity, though here too the uni-
versal perspective is combined with more specifi-
cally Christian teachings.45 This is done through
a reference to Hebrews 1:12 and the notion that
God has spoken to us by a Son,46 and that Je-
sus Christ came in order to fulfill the Law and the
Prophets.47
Further, the word of God is understood as a
living Word, casting a particular light on each pe-
riod of history, manifesting to Christian believers
what God is saying to us here and now. For this
reason, it is unacceptable to transform the Word of
God into letters of stone . . .48 This in turn leads
the authors to reject any use of the Bible to legit-
imize or support political options or positions that
are based upon injustice,49 and to declare that
the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is a sin
against God and humanity because it deprives the
Palestinians of their basic human rights, bestowed
by God.50 In other words, Kairos Palestine criticizes
groups and movements whom the authors believe
contribute to the suffering and oppression: funda-
mentalist Biblical interpretation,51 and theologi-
cal cover-up for the injustice we suffer.52 Theolo-
gians who use biblical texts to produce such human
rights violations are encouraged to rectify their
interpretations.53
Regarding the understanding of Israel and the
Holy Land, the authors emphasize that our land
has a universal mission. In this universality, the
meaning of the promises, of the land, of the elec-
tion, of the people of God open up to include all
of humanity, starting from all the peoples of this
land.54 It is explained further that [o]ur land is
Gods land, as is the case with all countries in the
world.55 Thus the unique and particular role of
Israel in world politics and history is downplayed,
if not rejected. Rather there is an accentuation of
inclusiveness and universality and an emphasis on
the connectedness between Christian and Muslim
Palestinians.56
In other words, in this chapter the Christian
and theological character of Kairos Palestine is evi-
dent and emphasized. In terms of moral discourse,
the narrative element already introduced reappears
here, though this time as a rewriting and reinter-
pretation of Palestinian and Israeli/Jewish history.
With the emphasis on natural (human) rights, uni-
versalism, and inclusiveness, ethical discourse also
makes itself known. It is worth noting, however,
that this is done through the expansion of the par-
ticular toward the universal. The particular promise
of our land is interpreted as a promise to all of
humanity.
Hope: Now and Future
While chapters 1 and 2 in different ways focus on
the contemporary suffering and injustice in Pales-
tine, chapter 3 brings the positive note of the doc-
ument to the fore. The opening sentence is instruc-
tive, as it sets the tone for the rest of the chapter:
Despite the lack of even a glimmer of positive ex-
pectation, our hope remains strong.57 The authors
insist that there are signs of hope in the midst of
despair. In other words, Kairos Palestine is an at-
tempt to handle two thoughts at the same time:
the on-going tragedy58 and lack of hope59 on the
one hand, and faith, hope, and love on the other.
Hope is explained as threefold. First, hope is
based on belief in God and the resurrection, and
is thus given a theological interpretation.60 Second,
hope carries with it a notion of time, and not least
the idea of a potentially better future.61 Strik-
ing in Kairos Palestine is, however, the emphasis on
hope in the present, as the need to resist [. . .]
and work hard in the contemporary circumstances
and to consider and find strength and comfort in
signs of hope.62 Such signs are found in parish
communities,63 in local centres of theology,64 and
meetings for inter-religious dialogue.65 This ori-
entation toward the present matches the third as-
pect of hope: a realistic approach to the realities at
hand, and the rejection of illusions.66 It is worth
noting how hope is linked to the here and now,
 The Power of Invitation: The Moral Discourse of Kairos Palestine
not to a future utopia. The document is in many
ways prophetic, but it is realism, not naivete, utopi-
anism, or idealism that characterizes it. The authors
refer to the current situation and specific political
and religious issues. There is an emphasis on con-
structive dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis,
and not least people of faith, but this dialogue is
described as a long process and not as a means
of compromise between different theological posi-
tions.67
An important section in this chapter on hope is
the reflection on the mission of the Church.68
This mission is defined as prayer and service
[which] is prophetic, bearing the voice of God in
the present and the future.69 The prophetic aspect
of this mission is explained as a calling to speak
the Word of God courageously, honestly and lov-
ingly in the local context and in the midst of daily
events, confirming the particular and dynamic un-
derstanding of the world of God noted above.70
Being prophetic seems also to be related to a po-
litical positioning by the church, although this is
not strongly asserted. Rather, the authors explain
in more cautious terms that [i]f she [the church]
takes sides, it is with the oppressed following Je-
sus example in standing by the side of each poor
person and each sinner, calling them to repentance,
life, and the restoration of the dignity bestowed on
them by God.71 In fact, the concept of hope in
Kairos Palestine is closely related to the Kingdom
of God, a kingdom of justice, peace and dignity.72
This is not an earthly kingdom, and cannot as such
be confined to a particular period in time and far
less to a particular political system.73 Reference
is rather made to a new land and a new hu-
man being,74 evoking the eschatological hope of
a new heaven and a new earth and rejecting an
overly close identification with a particular policy
discourse.
Love: Resisting Evil
Just as hope is closely linked to the belief in a
good and just God, the treatment of love has an
explicitly theological starting point. Chapter 4, on
love, begins with four different biblical quotes, each
Kjetil Fretheim 141
of which underscores the call to love and not to
resist evil with evil.75 The noteworthy element
in the use and interpretation of these quotes lies,
however, in their interpretation of and application
to the present situation. With reference to the com-
mandment to love both friends and enemies, the
authors confirm that this must be clear when we
find ourselves in circumstances where we must resist
evil of whatever kind.76 In this way the concept
of love, like the concept of hope, is given a pro-
found universal interpretation. This also is applied
when the authors elaborate on their understanding
of love. Love is explained as seeing the face of
God in every human being,77 evoking the notion
of all human beings being created in the image of
God (Genesis 1).
The thrust of the way in which the concept
of love is presented and discussed lies primarily in
the way it is combined with a strong insistence
on the need to resist evil: love seeks to correct
the evil and stop the aggression.78 This under-
standing of love is partly developed on the basis
of how the document understands the situation in
Palestine, and partly adapted to this situation. In
a straightforward manner the authors refer to the
Israeli occupation of Palestine as an evil and a sin
that must be resisted and removed, and that it is
precisely Christian love [that] invites us to resist
it.79 In line with this, it is argued that resistance
is a right and a duty for the Christian.80 But it
is resistance with love as its logic, which in turn
implies [s]eeing the image of God in the face of
the enemy.81
In the diversity of possible forms of resistance,
armed resistance is mentioned, and this is also
described as a Palestinian legal resistance.82 The
document does not explicitly and categorically rule
out the use of violence, but the emphasis is quite
different. The authors believe [t]he ways of force
must give way to the ways of justice.83 They think
one cannot resist evil with evil,84 and therefore
resist through civil disobedience.85 As an example
of non-violent resistance, economic boycott is men-
tioned. The document refers to the South African
kairos document86 and sees boycott and disinvest-
ment as tools of non violence for justice, peace and
security for all.87 Boycott is intended as a means
142 Dialog: A Journal of Theology Volume 51, Number 2 Summer 2012 June
of achieving a positive goal for all, but is geared
specifically toward Israel.88 This seems to apply
to the State of Israel, and is not limited to Israeli
operations in the occupied Palestinian areas.
It is worth noting that the emphasis through-
out the document is on non-violent opposition and
peaceful ways to solve the conflict. Accordingly,
when this chapter is summarized, the connected-
ness between opponents in the contemporary con-
flict, friends and enemies, is stressed: Through our
love, we will overcome injustices and establish foun-
dations for a new society both for us and for our
opponents. Our future and their future are one.89
To this point in the document, we have seen
examples of prophetic, ethical, and narrative dis-
course. Now, however, the document makes a turn
toward policy and participatory discourse. The call
to action is made explicit, and considerations about
conditions for appropriate action are (to some ex-
tent) alluded to. Clear policy recommendations are
not made, but there is a call to draw up concrete
political measures based on the stated concerns and
goals of the document.
Different Addressees
With this social analysis and review of the key
concepts of faith, hope, and love completed, the
foundation is laid for the authors to formulate their
more specific messages to different audiences. Note-
worthy here is the wide range of addressees. The
authors address, in turn, Christians, churches, the
international community, Jewish and Muslim lead-
ers, and finally the Palestinians and Israelis.
The message to our Christian brothers and sis-
ters90 underlines patience but also the need for
repentance, as does the message to the Churches
of the world.91 In the latter case, however, the
authors explicitly distance themselves from groups
and individuals who contribute to the suffering and
oppression, fundamentalism, racism, anti-Semitism,
Islamophobia, etc. The message to the international
community is primarily a reckoning with the prac-
tice of double standards, referring to the lack of
enforcement of international resolutions related to
the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Here eco-
nomic sanctions and boycott [. . .] against Israel
is again highlighted.92 The message to Jewish and
Muslim religious leaders is first and foremost a call
to stand together in defense of the oppressed.93
And finally, the message to the Palestinian people
and to the Israelis is primarily a call for construc-
tive dialogue.94 This also is phrased as a challenge
to revise trade plans and training in the educational
system so that one can see the face of God in the
other.95
Accordingly, in this final part of the docu-
ment, the participatory discourse is put center stage.
There is a practical orientation brought about by
a reference to shared concerns and joint action, a
universalist and inclusive language, and an emphasis
on empathy and notions of interdependence.
Conclusion: Invitational
Discourse
Above I have identified all of the varieties of
moral discourse outlined by Gustafson and Cahill
in Kairos Palestine. There is, however, one feature
of the document that needs to be considered in its
own right. As noted repeatedly, Kairos Palestine is
characterized by a universalistic and inclusive lan-
guage. The Holy Land is described as a land for
all, Gods love is a love for everyone, etc. Conflict
is evidently an important background for the docu-
ment, and issues of conflict are not harmonized or
disguised. However, the message is primarily con-
veyed as a forward-looking message of reconcili-
ation. And not least, Kairos Palestine emphasizes
dialogue, as opposed to monologue or violent
resistance. Through inclusive language and an ap-
peal to the connectedness between, and interdepen-
dence of, all human beings, these are the features
that dominate and characterize the document. The
other is repeatedly and consistently invited into a
process of reconciliation based on dialogue.
Put differently, Kairos Palestine emerges from
a particular group, Palestinian Christians, but its
message and addressees are universal. The other
is understood as comprising a broad category of
 The Power of Invitation: The Moral Discourse of Kairos Palestine
Christians, Jews, Muslims, politicians, and represen-
tatives of churches, states, or the international com-
munity; and they are all invited into a shared pro-
cess toward understanding, moral commitment, and
a common future. Indeed, this invitational charac-
ter is the very foundation and starting point for
Kairos Palestine. It was written by members of dif-
ferent parts of a fragmented and fragile Christian
community in Palestine. Coming from different tra-
ditions and denominations, they invite each other
into a shared reflection and moral commitment to
act together for a better future. In the document
this invitation is extended to the other. A wide
range of groups and individuals are invited into
a continued, critical discussion that does not shy
away from, but rather combines constructively so-
cial analysis with theology, and politics with ethics
and normative reflection.
The dominant moral discourse in Kairos Palestine
can thus be labeled with an expression borrowed
from peace education: invitational discourse. It is a
form of communication based on a commitment
to equality, recognition and self-determination,
and a discourse that promotes change and trans-
formation [. . .] through the incorporation of new
ideas and perspectives.96 Accordingly, invitational
discourse is fundamentally open and receptive, but
remains at the same time critical. The implied and
explicit criticism of religious leaders, politicians, and
others in Kairos Palestine does not exclude contin-
ued dialogue, but becomes the very reason for in-
volvement and invitation.
Christian ethics cannot rely on invitational dis-
course alone. Invitational discourse does not have
the conceptual clarity of ethical discourse, the
utopian aspect of prophetic discourse, the imme-
diate appeal of narrative discourse, or the prac-
tical considerations implied in policy and partici-
patory discourse. Invitational discourse might have
elements of all of these, but its main strength
and power lie in being empirically and realisti-
cally rooted, but still forward looking, inclusive,
and open. It articulates an invitation to dialogue
and participation, in order to seek conceptual clar-
ity where needed, constructing shared narratives
and identifying the policy implications of these.
It is this discourse that makes Kairos Palestine
Kjetil Fretheim 143
such a potent document both theologically and
politically.
Endnotes
1. James M. Gustafson, Varieties of Moral Discourse: Prophetic,
Narrative, Ethical and Policy, in Seeking Understanding: The Stob Lectures,
19861998, ed. Calvin College and Seminary (Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Eerdmans, 2001), 4376.
2. Lisa Sowle Cahill, Theological Bioethics: Participation, Justice, and
Change (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2005).
3. Kairos Palestine, A Moment of Truth: A Word of Faith, Hope, and
Love from the Heart of Palestinian Suffering, www.kairospalestine.ps (accessed
March 11, 2012) [hereafter cited as KP].
4. KP, introduction.
5. Ibid.
6. Kairos South Africa, The Kairos Document: A Theological Comment
on the Political Crisis in South Africa (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1986).
7. Kairos Central America, Kairos Central America: A Challenge to the
Churches of the World (New York: Circus Publications, 1988).
8. Catholic Institute for International Relations, The Road to Dam-
ascus: Kairos and Conversion (Johannesburg, South Africa: Skotaville Pub-
lishers, 1989). See also Robert McAfee Brown, Kairos: Three Prophetic
Challenges to the Church (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1990).
9. Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and
Salvation (London: SCM Press, 1988).
10. Albert Nolan, Kairos Theology, in Doing Theology in Context:
South African Perspectives, ed. John W. de Gruchy and Charles Villa-
Vicencio (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1994), 216.
11. Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology (Maryknoll,
N.Y.: Orbis, 2002).
12. Peter Scott and William T. Cavanaugh, The Blackwell Companion
to Political Theology (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publications, 2004).
13. Duncan B. Forrester, William F. Storrar and Andrew R. Morton,
eds., Public Theology for the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Duncan B.
Forrester (London: T&T Clark, 2004).
14. Gustafson, Varieties of Moral Discourse. See also Bernard V.
Brady, The Moral Bond of Community (Washington D.C.: Georgetown
University Press, 1998).
15. Gustafson, Varieties of Moral Discourse, 50.
16. Ibid., 53.
17. Ibid., 56.
18. Ibid., 57.
19. Ibid., 63.
20. Ibid., 6566.
21. Ibid., 69.
22. Ibid., 71.
23. Ibid., 7172.
24. Ibid., 72.
144 Dialog: A Journal of Theology Volume 51, Number 2 Summer 2012 June

25. Ibid. 62. KP 3.3.

26. Cahill, Theological Bioethics, 38. 63. Ibid.
27. Ibid. 64. KP 3.3.1.
28. Gustafson, Varieties of Moral Discourse, 55. 65. KP 3.3.2.
29. Ibid., 60. 66. KP 3.2.
30. Ibid., 69. 67. KP 3.3.2.
31. Ibid., 75. 68. KP 3.4.
32. KP 1.1.1. 69. Ibid.
33. KP 1.1.2. 70. KP 3.4.1.
34. KP 1.1.3. 71. Ibid.
35. KP 1.1.6. 72. KP 3.4.2.
36. KP 1.1.7. 73. KP 3.4.3.
37. KP 1.1.8. 74. KP 10.
38. KP 1.2.1. 75. KP 4.2.4.
39. KP 1.3. 76. KP 4.2.
40. KP 1.4. 77. KP 4.2.1.
41. Randall Collins and Stephen K. Sanderson, Conflict Sociol- 78. Ibid.
ogy: A Sociological Classic Updated (Boulder, Colo.: Paradigm Publishers,
79. Ibid.
2009).
80. KP 4.2.3.
42. KP 2.1.
81. Ibid.
43. KP 2, 2.1, and 2.2, respectively.
82. KP 1.5.
44. KP 2.1 and 2.2.2.
83. KP 4.2.2.
45. KP 2.2.
84. KP 4.2.4.
46. Ibid.
85. KP 4.2.5.
47. KP 2.2.1.
86. KP 4.2.6.
48. KP 2.2.2.
87. KP 6.3.
49. KP 2.4.
88. KP 7.
50. KP 2.5.
89. KP 4.3.
51. KP 2.2.2.
90. KP 5.1.
52. KP 6.1.
91. KP 6.1.
53. KP 2.3.3.
92. KP 7.
54. KP 2.3.
93. KP 8.
55. KP 2.3.1.
94. KP 9.
56. KP 2.3.2.
95. KP 9.2.
57. KP 3.1.
96. Donald Ellis and Yael Warshel, The Contribution of Commu-
58. KP 1.5.1 and 3.1.
nication and Media Studies to Peace Education, in Handbook on Peace
59. KP 3.1. Education, ed. G. Salomon and E. Cairns (New York: Psychology Press,
2010), 139. See also Sonja K. Foss and Cindy L. Griffin, Beyond Persua-
60. KP 3.5.
sion: A Proposal for an Invitational Rhetoric, Communication Monographs
61. KP 3.2. 62 (1995): 218.