Spiritual Leadership in the Upheaval of Settler Colonialism

Abstract

In the current global landscape, characterized by religious fervour, social and political unrest, economic instability, and environmental challenges, spiritual leaders stand as pivotal agents of change. Their role is especially crucial in contexts marred by ingrained injustices and persistent conflicts, such as the Palestinian–Israeli settler colonial context—a reality I have been intimately involved with over three decades of reconciliation work. This paper contextualizes scholarship on spiritual leadership within the Palestinian–Israeli context by integrating it with settler colonial theory. By applying insights about spiritual leadership to this context, three key traits of spiritual leaders—(1) spiritual authority, (2) discernment, and (3) the ethical use of power—are identified as essential for envisioning an alternative future. By embodying these traits, spiritual leaders can effectively guide their communities through the multifaceted realities, advocating a transformative approach to leadership and interreligious work.

1. Introduction

In settler colonial societies, where the reverberations of historical grievances and the pervasive shadows of systemic injustices loom large, the call for spiritual leadership assumes a critical urgency. My journey into understanding the essence of spiritual leadership in such contexts began during my time in seminary when I studied the works of Robert Clinton (1987). His seminal teachings on biblical leadership provided a pivotal framework, defining a biblical leader as one endowed with a God-given capacity and responsibility to guide God’s people towards divine purposes. This concept was revelatory, emphasizing not just the leader’s importance but also the intricate balance between leaders, followers, context, and divine intentions. In the mid-1980s, when the discourse on leadership heavily leaned towards the leader’s prominence, Clinton’s approach was refreshingly holistic, underscoring the indispensable role of a leader’s spirituality.

Interestingly, Clinton’s teachings on leadership resonate deeply with Palestinian cultural values and the broader narrative of Christian tradition. Palestinian shepherds demonstrate practical leadership through their daily responsibilities—navigating difficult terrains, protecting their flock, and ensuring their welfare—mirroring Clinton’s vision of leaders who guide with wisdom, compassion, and a commitment to the community’s well-being (Clinton 1987). Similarly, the biblical shepherds who announced Christ’s birth embody humility, faithfulness, and a willingness to serve a higher purpose, reflecting the core qualities of biblical leadership. Thus, whether tending to their flocks in the rolling hills of Palestine or journeying to honour the newborn king, the imagery of the shepherd illustrates a model of leadership grounded in active service, moral integrity, and an alignment with divine mandates, providing a concrete example of Clinton’s leadership ideals in action.

Nevertheless, whilst Clinton’s teachings are rooted in a Christian framework and hold limitation to interreligious settings such as Palestine–Israel, it is essential to recognize that spirituality’s interplay with leadership extends beyond sectarian boundaries. As highlighted by Avolio et al. (2009), spirituality and leadership intertwine on both theological and inner motivational levels, providing a rich tapestry of understanding that is applicable across diverse belief systems. This inclusive, ecumenical perspective on spiritual leadership becomes particularly critical in settings fraught with division and oppression, where leadership’s scope broadens to include healing and the restoration of hope within fragmented communities.

While Clinton and others’ definition of leadership offers insightful perspectives within a Western context, applying his framework to the settler colonial reality of Palestine–Israel highlights limitations. Hence, drawing on Clinton’s writings, the settler colonial literature on Palestine–Israel, and my own personal experience as a practitioner of more than 30 years in the interreligious context of Palestine–Israel, I argue that leadership in such contexts necessitates the expansion of three critical traits: (1) spiritual authority, (2) discernment, and (3) the ethical usage of power. These attributes are pivotal for spiritual leaders in settler colonial contexts, providing a foundation to navigate the complexities of realities with integrity and empathy so to envision an alternative future and pedagogy. Currently, amidst the ongoing events in Gaza following the attack of Hamas on Israel on 7 October 2023, within the broader context of more than 76 years of settler colonialism, the urgency of spiritual leadership among religious leaders is vital.

Firstly, I will engage with settler colonial theory in relation to Palestine–Israel to identify the realities and nature of the context. This will allow for the contextualization of various insights about spiritual leadership in relation to Palestine–Israel and identify critical traits for spiritual leaders from different religious backgrounds. I will conclude that these traits are necessary for interreligious studies, movements, and trainings in Palestine–Israel and beyond in the endeavour to be better shepherds.

2. Settler Colonialism

Prior to delving into settler colonial theory, spiritual leadership, and more, it is crucial to note my own positionality. My positionality as a Palestinian Christian based in Jerusalem who holds Israeli citizenship and who has worked for years conducting interreligious work in Palestine–Israel shapes my approach and purposes for this article and knowledge production in general. Indeed, Donna Haraway’s argument about the situatedness of our knowledge illuminates the inescapability of our biases and the necessity of noting our positionalities in knowledge production (Haraway 1988). Therefore, noting my own positionality is necessary to understand the contexts and purposes of my arguments.

To contextualize the various insights about spiritual leadership in Palestine–Israel, it is essential to identify the nature of the context and the definition of settler colonialism. Over the past few years, there has been a shift in defining the Palestinian–Israeli reality from one of conflict to one of settler colonialism (Amoruso et al. 2019). It is important to note that settler colonial theory is a legitimate historical, social, and anthropological framework applied to the Palestinian–Israeli context and should not be reduced to a superficial moral standpoint (Ibid). This identification of Zionism as settler colonialism1 reshapes one’s understanding of the dynamics between Palestinians and Israelis, and the remedies to the problem. Although settler colonialism and “Standard” colonialism share the same fundamental principle of the domination of indigenous populations by a foreign group, there are significant differences (LeFevre 2015). The crucial distinctions that exist between the two forms of colonialism are seen in their objectives and outcomes (Wolfe 1999). Whereas colonialism primarily aims at resource extraction, relying on the indigenous population for labour, settler colonialism is centred on the acquisition of land with the intent of permanent settlement (Wolfe 2008). In cases of settlement, therefore, the indigenous population is dispensable, and conflict is inevitable (Wolfe 2006). Hence, Patrick Wolfe identifies settler colonial projects with the “Logic of Elimination” (Wolfe 1999). Now more than ever, the logic of elimination is starkly evident in the Israeli military operations in Gaza following the Hamas attack on 7 October, which the International Court of Justice has recognized as involving “plausible acts of genocide” (ICJ 2024).

In distinguishing settler colonialism from “standard” colonialism, one can observe the differences, such as those between Britain’s colonial rule over India in the 20th century and the colonial project of “Manifest Destiny” in Turtle Island. Furthermore, the settler colonial framework allows the natives living under settler colonialism to better understand their reality by learning from similar contexts such as Alegria, South Africa, and Australia, just to name a few. This trend is increasing within Palestinian scholarship, improving our understanding of the Palestinian–Israeli reality by looking at other settler colonial contexts (Amoruso et al. 2019).

In applying this framework to the Palestinian–Israeli reality, this article draws upon the work of Palestinian, Israeli, and international scholars like Lorenzo Veracini, Patrick Wolfe, Ilan Pappe, and Rashid Khalidi who interpret Israel’s formation and expansion over the years through the objectives of the settler colonial project (Veracini 2010; Wolfe 2012; Pappe 2018; Khalidi 2020). Specifically, the periods of 1948 and 1967 marked significant land seizures by Israeli forces, transitioning the settler project from military conquest to legal and bureaucratic appropriation of lands in the territories (Pappe 2018; Khalidi 2020). This shift has not only marginalized the Palestinian people but has also led to a dependency of the Palestinian economy on Israel, exacerbating poverty and economic disparities (Ibid).

However, it must be noted that the Palestinian–Israeli case does present unique features that distinguish it from other settler colonial models. For example, the Zionist movement did not originate from a pre-existing territory, although it was a predominantly European movement (Wolfe 2012). Second, the Zionist acquisition of land began primarily through purchase rather than conquest—though this method’s fairness remains contested—and later stages involved ethnic cleansing since 1948 (Wolfe 2012). Finally, unlike settler colonialism in the United States and Australia, where the assimilation of indigenous populations was pursued, the Israeli approach has focused on maintaining a distinct Jewish identity for the state, prioritizing exclusion and segregation of the Palestinian population (Munayer 2022).

Overall, this paper identifies the nature of the context of Palestine–Israel as one of settler colonialism. By applying the settler colonial framework to the context, one can better contextualize the works of Clinton to provide insights into spiritual leadership in the interreligious and multi-layered reality in Palestine–Israel.

Despite its distinctive aspects, the Palestinian–Israeli context provides valuable lessons about spiritual leadership in settler colonial systems globally. The traits identified can be contextually applicable in other contexts, especially interreligious ones akin to Palestine–Israel. These qualities equip leaders to foster dialogue, promote healing, and envision a future that transcends the oppressive legacies of the past. In diverse settler colonial settings, where indigenous populations face displacement, cultural erasure, and systemic inequality, the principles of spiritual leadership distilled from the Palestinian–Israeli experience offer a blueprint for transformative change.

After defining the context of Palestine–Israel, I will now turn to Clinton’s work and others on leadership to contextualize their work. By contextualizing their work in relation to the Palestinian–Israeli context, there are three areas which are vital for spiritual leadership that will serve as important insights and tools for interreligious matters and for envisioning a better future.

3. Spiritual Authority

Within the challenging dynamics of settler colonial environments, traditional pathways to leadership and authority are often obstructed by a confluence of patriarchal norms, family-oriented and tribal traditions, and the manipulative practices of the settler colonialist elite (Khalidi 2020). These complexities render conventional models of authority inadequate, necessitating an alternative approach to mobilizing and inspiring communities towards collective goals, such as liberation, decolonization, and reconciliation.

Here, the concept of spiritual authority emerges as both relevant and essential. Clinton (1987) defines spiritual authority as “that characteristic of a God-anointed leader developed upon an experiential power base which enables a leader to influence followers through persuasion force of modeling and moral expertise toward God’s purposes.” At its core, spiritual authority—inspired by the teachings of Watchman Nee (1972)—advocates a leadership ethos that transcends hierarchical control. Instead, it is a synthesis of spiritual connectedness, moral fortitude, and experiential wisdom. This framework empowers leaders to influence their followers through the compelling force of their own example, underpinned by unwavering moral integrity and a deep alignment with transcendent objectives (Clinton 1987). It must be noted that whilst Clinton articulates his vision of spiritual authority within a distinctly Christian framework, the concept reflects fundamental aspects of moral integrity, authenticity, and the transformative power of leading by example, which are valued across a broad spectrum of religious and spiritual convictions.

The necessity of spiritual authority in settler colonialist settings is multifaceted. First, spiritual authority provides an alternative route to leadership that circumvents restrictions imposed by both internal societal norms and external colonial forces. Indeed, settler colonialist contexts are often characterized by patriarchal, family-oriented, and traditionally tribal societies and are further complicated by colonial imposition, where settler power often manipulates social and political structures to maintain control (Makdisi 2019). This manipulation not only distorts existing leadership dynamics but also strategically limits the emergence of new leaders who could challenge the status quo. Thus, for the Palestinian–Israeli context, spiritual authority is significant for mobilization, community building, and leadership, which are necessary for addressing topics such as liberation, reconciliation, and collective healing.

Second, settler colonialist contexts are often characterized by deep-seated grievances, systemic oppression, and a breakdown in traditional mechanisms of trust and authority (Dana and Jarbawi 2017). In such contexts, conventional sources of power, based on hierarchical positions or coercive capabilities, are likely to be viewed with suspicion or outright hostility, rendering them ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst.

Finally, spiritual authority is better capable of transcending entrenched divides as it is founded on the recognition of shared human values and the pursuit of the common good that surpasses immediate self-interests and partisan agendas. Leaders who embody this form of authority are better positioned to foster dialogue, build bridges of understanding, and catalyse the processes of restorative justice and reconciliation. They do so not by imposing solutions but by inspiring collective movements grounded in a shared commitment to higher principles and values (Nee 1972).

An example of spiritual authority within the Palestinian–Israeli context is Emeritus Patriarch Michel Sabbah, the first Palestinian to be appointed as the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem. Known affectionately by Palestinians as the “Patriarch of the People”, this title reflects the profound respect he commanded among all Palestinians (Habash and Alatar 2020). Through his pastoral work, letters, and dedicated service to all people living in Palestine–Israel, Patriarch Sabbah emerged as a leader who challenged colonial structures, including those within his own church, and offered an alternative model of leadership. His integrity and credibility were especially evident during his service as a patriarch throughout the first and second Intifadas. By leading through example, Patriarch Sabbah embodied spiritual authority.

This pivot from traditional power dynamics to a leadership model anchored in spiritual authority is not merely strategic but essential for the cultivation of trust and the restoration of fractured communities. Truly, within the urgency to address interreligious tensions, settler colonialism, and the overall multi-layered reality in Palestine–Israel and generally around the globe, spiritual authority should be viewed more seriously amongst theorists and practitioners who are attempting to address interreligious matters in Palestine–Israel. However, in Palestine–Israel, spiritual authority alone is not enough to effectively mobilize communities towards a more just reality. It must be coupled with a keen understanding of the environment within which one is operating. I have tried to do this in my own work “Reconciling Justice: concepts of justice in the Multireligious Context of Palestine/Israel” (Munayer 2024). This is where the concept of discernment becomes crucial in guiding effective leadership. While Clinton’s exploration of spiritual authority does not fully address the role of discernment, I seek to contribute to this conversation, particularly within the multifaceted context of Palestine–Israel.

4. Discernment

In the complex journey towards effective spiritual leadership in settler colonist contexts, the attribute of discernment emerges not only as a pivotal skill but as a foundational principle for navigating multifaceted challenges. Discernment, as articulated by Elisabeth Koenig (2014), means “to separate or distinguish between or among things”. In religious contexts, discernment involves distinguishing between influences that enhance or detract from a deeper relationship with a transcendent reality or, in secular terms, from a fuller appropriation and implementation of one’s value system.

However, the concept of discernment can be expanded in a leadership context to involve a deep engagement with the world—listening intently to both the mainstream and the marginalized. It is about discerning the times, reading the signs of societal shifts, and understanding the nuanced narratives that influence communities. Specifically, in settler colonial contexts, leaders are tasked with discerning not only the overt manifestations of internal conflict and settler colonialism but also the subtle, often overlooked narratives that perpetuate division and injustice. Furthermore, often in settler colonial contexts, indigenous individuals and communities may not fully understand what they are experiencing, and it is only through proper discernment that abuse can be recognized and paths forward planned. Therefore, discernment is essential for spiritual leaders in recognizing the contexts in which they are operating, which will lead to applicable solutions.

Hermans and Anthony (2020) describe spiritual discernment as a composite of multiple elements—spiritual traits, capital, and experiences—concepts that scholars assert are the core of “lived spirituality”. Therefore, for spiritual leaders to properly engage in discernment, these spiritual character traits are important to comprehend. Due to the space of this article, I will not explore in depth what those elements entail but focus on the four stages of discernment.

Four Stages of Discernment

The process of discernment unfolds through a structured and reflective journey, moving from external considerations to deep personal introspection, collaborative deliberation, and ultimately, decisive action (Cebollero 2024, pp. 34–59). This nuanced approach offers a comprehensive framework for spiritual leaders, especially those navigating the complexities of restorative justice, in reconciliation settler colonial environments to cultivate discernment in a way that is informed, intentional, and aligned with the ultimate purpose of their mission.

• Circumspection (Looking Outwards): Initially, leaders broaden their outlook, actively incorporating diverse insights, with a particular focus on amplifying marginalized voices, such as those of women and youth, often sidelined by systemic biases. This foundation of diversity and inclusivity sets the stage for a more comprehensive discernment process.
• Introspection (Looking Inwards): Leaders then turn inwards, engaging in self-reflection to envision futures beyond the immediate reality. This introspective stage encourages alignment between personal values and the broader potential for transformation, which is crucial for overcoming biases that impede the work of reconciliation.
• Intervision (Deliberative Exchange): At this stage, the focus shifts to collaborative deliberation. By valuing diverse opinions through open dialogue, this phase challenges autocratic norms, advocating a model of leadership that is participatory, egalitarian, and deeply respectful of diverse opinions and experiences.
• Decision (Conclusive Judgment): The discernment journey culminates in decision- making that reflects a profoundly inclusive and thoughtful process. Decisions are made with clear plans for action, emphasizing accountability and community-wide engagement.

Reflecting on my own experiences and the lessons learned in reconciliation work within the Palestinian–Israeli context at the faith-based organization Musalaha, there are several instances where discernment has served as a guiding force, shaping Musalaha’s efforts towards justice, inclusivity, and reconciliation. First, Musalaha has grounded its approach to reconciliation work in Palestine–Israel through extensive research in social psychology, theology, interreligious studies, history, settler colonial studies, and other disciplines, alongside the voices of program participants who come from diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds. Over the past 30 years, this has led Musalaha to shift its perception of the context in Palestine–Israel from one of intractable conflict to that of settler colonialism. This ongoing learning process, shaped by research, diverse perspectives, trial and error, and most importantly, by listening to our participants—many of whom are marginalized voices such as women and young people—demonstrates Musalaha’s keen discernment of the environment in which it operates. Second, Musalaha’s diverse work environment, encompassing both staff and participants, has been fundamental in developing a collective understanding of the roadmap to reconciliation, rooted in biblical principles of liberation, justice, and ethical responsibility to the Other. This model of leadership and intervention is based on collective dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis from various backgrounds—Christians, Muslims, secular individuals, and others. Consequently, Musalaha’s spiritual leadership is inherently grassroots, emphasizing collective action and fostering the capacity for discernment.

Through a foundation of continuous learning, grassroots methodology, and a willingness to learn from both successes and failures, Musalaha has been able to effectively embody discernment in spiritual leadership within the complex context of Palestine–Israel. This serves as a powerful example of how discernment can guide spiritual leadership in reconciliation work.

Contexts like Palestine–Israel, and more generally, multi-religious and ethnic contexts, are often characterized by patriarchal and authoritarian structures which inhibit discernment by centralizing decision-making among a select few, excluding essential perspectives. Such environments, where power is centralized and decisions are made in isolation, not only limit inclusive dialogue but also perpetuate cycles of oppression and censorship to maintain the institutional status quo (Mayo 2022). Thus, religious institutions and their leadership in Palestine–Israel are losing credibility, spiritual authority, and relevancy due to their lack of discernment. This may explain why several grassroot independent faith-based organizations formed especially in times of crisis. Examples are the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, Musalaha-Vision for Reconciliation, Rabbis for Human Rights, the B’Tselem-the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, and the Al-Liqa Center for Religious and Heritage Studies in the Holy Land, among many others. These organizations partially formed due to the lack of discernment and therefore spiritual leadership of religious institutions.

The inability of religious institutions and their leaders to effectively discern the need for adaptation in these complex environments highlights the urgency for re-evaluating existing cultural and organizational frameworks. This re-evaluation is essential for creating spaces where inclusive dialogue can truly thrive. This approach to discernment not only challenges systemic injustices but also ensures that each decision contributes to a more equitable, decolonial, and peaceful future. In this way, discernment serves as both a moral compass and a practical tool, guiding leaders as they navigate the intricacies of deeply divided societies.

In settler colonial environments, discernment becomes a multifaceted journey, requiring careful attention to personal, political, and spiritual dimensions in the pursuit of peace. It represents a collective effort to redefine and reconstruct decision-making processes based on principles of equity, inclusivity, and the common good, bringing us closer to lasting reconciliation grounded in justice. By focusing on the Palestinian–Israeli context, this approach also contributes to the broader literature on spiritual leadership, offering valuable insights into the unique challenges and opportunities presented by this specific environment, and how they shape the evolution of spiritual authority and leadership.

5. Ethical Usage of Power

While power often carries negative connotations, a deeper understanding of its various forms and sources reveals its critical role in effective spiritual leadership. Max Weber’s foundational definition of power describes it as the ability to realize one’s will in communal action, even against the resistance of others (Warren 1992, p. 19)2. Within this broad definition, power manifests in several distinct but interconnected forms, each bearing implications for leaders in high-stakes environments.

Power can be broadly categorized into two primary dichotomies: Identitive versus Assertive and social versus physical (Rummel 1976). Identitive power derives from one’s innate identity, allowing for unintentional influence over one’s surroundings and other individuals. Assertive power, in contrast, is exercised with intention and purpose, aimed at achieving specific goals through outward projection. This distinction underscores the varied nature of power, from the subtle influence of presence (Identitive) to the deliberate actions taken to effect change (Assertive).

In the realms of reconciliation, especially in settler colonial contexts, the distinction between social and physical power becomes particularly salient. Social power, which influences others’ psychological states and motivations, is better suited to reconciliation and interreligious dialogue efforts than Physical power, which relies on force. The transformative potential of social power lies in its ability to foster understanding, empathy, and change at a psychological level, making it a preferred tool for spiritual leaders navigating divisive environments.

Focusing on the nuanced forms of power spiritual leaders possess, one finds a rich tapestry of influences that can be leveraged in efforts for grassroot mobilization and engagement towards just reconciliation, interreligious dialogue, and more. These forms of power—bargaining, intellectual, authoritative, altruistic, and manipulative—offer a spectrum of strategies that, when applied with discernment and ethical consideration, can significantly shape the outcomes of reconciliation processes (Spears 2008).

• Bargaining power facilitates compromise through negotiation, laying the ground- work for mutual understanding and trust.
• Intellectual power influences through persuasion and reasoned dialogue, bridging divides and articulating shared visions for the future.
• Authoritative power is derived from recognized leadership roles and guides communities towards cooperative action and constructive dialogue when applied with integrity.
• Altruistic power: This form is perhaps the most transformative of those discussed and is characterized by selfless acts of compassion. It has the transformative potential to alter attitudes and foster empathy among adversaries.
• Manipulative power: Finally, this form, while ethically contentious, serves as a cautionary tale in the use of influence, emphasizing the need for transparency and integrity in reconciliation processes (Spears 2008). Indeed, some interfaith dialogue initiatives have been accused of manipulating power when declaring specific topics as off-limits for discussion (Safi 2018). The challenge for leaders in settler colonial contexts lies in recognizing and harnessing the appropriate forms of power to foster healing and unity and reduce the severity of colonial violence. Identitive and social powers, along with intellectual and altruistic forms, emerge as particularly effective in these settings. These powers, integrated with the discernment process—from inclusive circumspection to intentional decision-making—equip leaders to address the underlying issues of settler colonial conflicts with empathy and dialogue.

By ethically leveraging their influence, spiritual leaders can play a pivotal role in transforming settler colonial tensions into opportunities for understanding, growth, and lasting peace. This approach not only acknowledges the complexity of power but also highlights its potential as a catalyst for positive change, embodying a leadership that is both wise, compassionate, and non-violent in the face of enduring conflicts.

6. Insights for Interreligious Studies

By situating various works on spiritual leadership within the settler colonial reality of the Palestinian–Israeli context, several key insights emerge for interreligious studies, practitioners, and initiatives working towards reconciliation, decolonization, and envisioning a better future. I will focus on three essential areas that can benefit interreligious studies globally and in Palestine–Israel: understanding the context, recognizing the transformative power of spiritual leaders, and developing a pedagogy for training future spiritual leaders. These insights contribute to interreligious studies, spiritual leadership scholarship (such as that of Clinton), and the broader study of settler colonialism, offering both theoretical and practical value.

Engaging with diverse religious traditions necessarily entails encountering the intersections with the history, politics, and social structures which these traditions are situated in. Thus, scholars and practitioners can better grasp the complexities of these environments to better know how to be agents of positive change or at least avoid unintentional perpetrating systems of injustice. This understanding is crucial for spiritual leaders and intellectuals who must operate within a multi-layered reality where religious, cultural, and political identities are intertwined and used to oppress or maintain hegemony.

For instance, in the context of Palestine–Israel, understanding the nature of the reality of settler colonialism allows us to better comprehend how spiritual leaders in settler colonial contexts can effectively resist coloniality and the various means to do so. Indeed, the theological underpinnings in Palestine–Israel are shaped by the various political structures and realities in the land; to ignore the context or misidentify it would eventually lead to misinterpretation and inaccuracy of reconciliation, justice, and peace work. Interreligious studies offer the tools to dissect these narratives, allowing spiritual leaders to approach interfaith dialogue with a deeper awareness of the historical wounds and theological claims that shape the identities of the communities involved. This depth of understanding is indispensable for fostering genuine dialogue and working towards a just vision of reconciliation (Munayer 2024).

Another insight surfaced from the contextualization of spiritual leadership and settler colonialism is the power spiritual leaders possess. As seen above, spiritual leaders encompass the ability to influence communities, shape collective identities, and mobilize them towards social and political change. By noting the power spiritual leaders possess, interreligious studies and initiatives can harness this power for positive contribution, contributing to processes of decolonization. In settler colonial contexts, where conventional power structures often perpetuate inequality and division, spiritual leaders equipped with an interreligious perspective can utilize their authority to advocate justice, peace, and reconciliation in ways that transcend sectarian divides for the purposes of “divide and rule”. This is particularly important in contexts like Palestine–Israel, where religious narratives are often weaponized to justify exclusion and violence. Spiritual leaders who can draw upon interreligious studies are better positioned to counter these narratives.

Lastly, this article gives insights into pedagogy for interreligious studies and spiritual leaders. By looking at the spiritual leadership literature and contextualizing it to the Palestinian settler colonial reality, it shows the need for contextualization in interreligious studies, which is both academically rigorous and practically relevant. Such a pedagogy would emphasize the importance of contextual awareness, ethical discernment, and the ability to engage in interfaith relations as key components of effective spiritual leadership.

Training programs that incorporate interreligious studies can equip future leaders with the skills to critically analyse the power dynamics at play in their contexts, understand the historical and theological roots of their reality, and develop strategies for reconciliation that are informed by a deep respect for religious diversity. In this pedagogy, people are encouraged to theorize with their context as a point of departure and use their experiences for epistemological contributions. In the Palestinian–Israeli reality, that may take the form of promoting indigenous intellectual sovereignty in interreligious matters and opening new methodologies and avenues for interreligious studies which may be applicable in similar contexts. Moreover, in the quest to decolonize our epistemologies and provide alternative frameworks of knowledge, learning, and cultivation, spiritual leadership within interreligious settings can emphasise communal knowledge co-production with people so that the theories and insights may serve practically in efforts of mutual flourishment, reconciliation, and political emancipation. This paper has shown that effective spiritual leadership holds transformative powers since it is a collective effort. Thus, interreligious studies may be shaped by its pedagogy by grounding itself with communities who are not necessarily “experts” on religious matters. This may compensate for the gap between academia and people from various walks of life.

7. Conclusions

In the discourse surrounding reconciliation, justice, and peace work, the pivotal role of spiritual leaders cannot be overstated. Throughout this paper, I have elucidated the importance of spiritual leaders in guiding communities towards healing and improved relations in the face of adversity. It has been argued that in such complex landscapes, spiritual leaders must possess and cultivate several key attributes, namely (1) spiritual authority, (2) discernment, and (3) the ethical usage of power.

Central to the leadership ethos delineated in this investigation is the concept of spiritual authority—a form of influence that transcends conventional hierarchical structures. Spiritual leaders exercise this authority not through coercive means, but through the embodiment of moral integrity, empathy, and alignment with higher purposes. By nurturing dialogue, fostering understanding, and championing reconciliation, spiritual leaders navigate deep-seated divisions with grace and efficacy.

Moreover, discernment emerges as a crucial competency for spiritual leaders operating within environments of oppression. By embracing a multifaceted understanding of current contexts and engaging with diverse perspectives, leaders can make informed decisions that propel reconciliation and interreligious dialogue efforts forward while promoting the common good.

Furthermore, the ethical use of power serves as the cornerstone of effective spiritual leadership in reconciliation endeavours. By acknowledging and harnessing various forms of power—be it through negotiation, persuasion, or acts of compassion—leaders can bridge societal divides and empower communities towards lasting peace.

These three traits are crucial given the evolving expectations of new changing realities and the upcoming generations. In an era marked by the stark realities of settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, consistent violence, and systemic injustices, the emerging generations stand at the forefront of demanding profound change. These individuals, increasingly disillusioned with traditional power structures that have sustained cycles of oppression, are vocal in their demand for leaders who embody radical transparency, inclusivity, and ethical integrity. They envision leadership that not only acknowledges but actively confronts and dismantles the entrenched systems of violence and injustice.

For spiritual leaders, this era presents an urgent call to action: to align with and propel the transformative aspirations of these emerging voices. This commitment involves creating environments where trust is nurtured, collaboration is the norm, and genuine empowerment prevails—effectively challenging and healing the divisions wrought by systems of injustice. The urgency for these processes cannot be overstated. As I write this article, the level of suffering is immense, and there is little hope that restorative justice will be achieved in the near future. Indeed, beyond structural changes in international courts or global politics, there is a pressing need for a deeper societal transformation—one that spiritual leaders must actively pursue within interreligious contexts. In embracing these guiding principles, spiritual leaders can lead the way towards a future defined not by the legacy of colonialism but by a collective resistance rooted in mutual respect and shared humanity.