The Church of England has removed a Gaza memorial tapestry from Leeds Minster following allegations that it honored known terrorist fighters. The "Stitch Their Names Together" exhibition was taken down after the Leeds Jewish Representative Council provided evidence suggesting militant names were included on the display.
The 18 names that triggered the Leeds Minster removal
The "Stitch Their Names Together" tapestry was designed to serve as a poignant tribute to the indivviduals killed during the ongoing conflict in Gaza. however, the exhibition's mission was derailed when the Leeds Jewish Representative Council (JRC) alleged that at least 18 known terrorists were listed on the fabric. This follows an earlier, high-confidence identification by the London-based Jewish Leadership Council, which flagged 12 names as matches for members of designated terrorist groups, includig Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
The display was intended to be a traveling exhibition that would remain at Leeds Minster until Sunday. While the Minster initially promoted the project as an act of remembrance to honor the "immense loss to humanity ," the inclusion of these specific names has transformed a gesture of mourning into a significant religious and political controversy. The presence of these names on a public display within a Church of England building has raised immediate questions regarding the accuracy of the memorial's content.
Simon Myerson KC and the lack of community consultation
Simon Myerson KC, the chairman of the Leeds JRC, has voiced serious concerns regarding the lack of due diligence performed before the exhibition went live. He pointed out that the Jewish community was not consulted about the plan to display these names, which is particularly sensitive given the timing of the event. The exhibition was scheduled to run during the Ten Days of Awe, which is considered the holiest period of the Jewish year.
Beyond the lack of consultation, Myerson has called for a formal investigation into the administrative failures that allowed the tapestry to be displayed. He specifically questioned how such an event could proceed without apparent oversight from the local diocese. the controversy highlights a growing tension for religious institutions attempting to host sensitive political memorials without rigorous, multi-party vetting processes.
The Reverend Paul Maybury's initial screening process
The Rector of Leeds Minster, Rev Paul Maybury, had originally defended the decision to host the exhibition, framing it as a way to commemorate the lives of adults and children killed in Gaza since October 2023. According to the report, Maybury stated that members of the parochial church council had personally examined the panels on the day the exhibition opened and found no problematic names. This suggests that the church's internal review process failed to catch the names that were later identified by Jewish leadership organizations.
The chuurch only moved to remove the exhibition after receiving more detailed information from the Leeds JRC. This delay between the opening of the display and its removal has intensified the scrutiny on the Minster's leadership. The discrepancy between the church's internal findings and the external evidence provided by the JRC suggests a significant gap in the vetting of the "Stitch Their Names Together" project .
The police report and the disputed "smear campaign" claim
While the controversy has unfolded within the church, it has also moved into the legal sphere.. As reported by the Jewish Chronicle, the matter has been reported to the police , indicating that the allegations of terrorist names being honored have moved beyond a mere religious dispute. This legal escalation adds a layer of gravity to the situation that the church must now navigate.
In response to the backlash, Mary Evers, the founder of the "Stitch Their Names" project, has dismissed the criticisms as the product of a "smear campaign." However, the specific claims made by the Jewish Leadership Council regarding Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad members remain the central point of contention.. It remains unclear whether the error was a result of intentional inclusion or a failure in the data verification process used by the project organizers.
Comments 0