Two reports from New Zealand:
AnglicanTaonga Maori quash Anglican Covenant
The Anglican Covenant is all but dead in the water as far as this church is concerned. This follows a crucial vote by Tikanga Maori at its biennial runanganui in Ohinemutu today.
The Covenant will still come before General Synod in July, but a decision to accept it requires a majority vote in all three houses – lay, clergy and bishops – and by all three tikanga.
Today’s runanganui decision effectively binds all Maori representatives on General Synod to say no…
Bosco Peters writes at Liturgy Maori reject Anglican Covenant
In order for people to understand the significance of this news, you need to comprehend the decision-making processes of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia. Like other Anglican Churches, a decision made (for example at General Synod) needs the agreement of all three houses – bishops, clergy, laity. But in our Church, at General Synod level, it also needs the agreement of all three Tikanga (cultural streams)…
Thank goodness they’ve kept TEC from being the first to reject the covenant. It’s much better for a neutral province in our current fights to go first.
Bravo. Perhaps this bodes well for future results from all over the globe. The politics of hatred and disenfranchisement is NOT what Jesus stood for. May this poorly conceived “covenant” die a quick death in every place where decent people know this is so wrong.
Good news from New Zealand, a good example to the rest of the Thinking Anglican Communion.
I particularly like the part of the resolution that resolves:
To request its representatives to the Anglican Consultative Council to bring a motion to the 2012 meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council to affirm that full membership of the Anglican Communion is not conditional on adoption of the proposed Covenant.
Unless the Covenant is more coercive than even its strongest supporters wish it to be, such a resolution would be helpful in assuring all that Section 4.1.4 is an invitation and not a demand.
I thought Nigeria have already voted no?
Good for New Zealand, small but mighty!
The Maori Tikanga (cultural stream) in our Anglican Church of Aotearoa/New Zealand/Pasifika will not lightly give up its sovereignty in the shared cultural mix of ACANZP. Nor should they! Our Church decided some time ago, under Archbishop Paul Reeves, to re-structure itself into 3 separate cultural streams, with separate synods, as well as a joint General Synod to manage corporate matters. This has worked well for us. We in the Pakeha (European) stream are grateful beneficiaries of both Maori and Polynesian sets of cultural traditions, and many of us would not like to be party to a mono-cultural Anglican Communion… Read more »
I rejoice at this decision and hope that English Diocesan Synods and the General Synod will follow this example and vote against the proposed Covenant which is punitive and non Anglican.
While I rejoice with others about this wonderful decision by the Runanganui, I should point out to non-kiwis that a formal decision against the covenant is not yet a done deal. That decision will be made by General synod/Te Hinota whanui, at their meeting in May in Fiji. Before then, three important decisions will need to be made. First, the Diocese of Christchurch, who have had one or two other things on their mind, need to have their special synod in Feb. Given +Victoria’s well-known pro-covenant sympathies, it is likely that a pro-covenant vote will happen there, leaving Tikanga Pakeha… Read more »
Correction
In giving sole credit to Tony Fitchett for the wording of the proposed resolution at ACC, I was inadvertently being unfair to Archdeacon Turi Hollis, the mover of the motion at the Runanganui. As well as being my near neighbour, and fellow PhD student at St John’s College in Auckland, Turi Hollis is also the other NZ representative on the ACC. I am sure that he and Tony Fitchett worked together on the wording, a great example of inter-Tikanga co-operation.
It is of great concern that, as stated above by Edward Prebble, the bishop’s Covenant support means it is very likely to get through – to put it no higher. If so, what were the deliberations reported here about for heavens sakes ? Some form of authoritarianism is it ? If so it tells against the Covenant so-called greatly, and also points to weaknesses in current church decision-making, if not corruption. This theologically conservative woman bishop would be unlikely to have see women ministers, had the Covenant been in force. Why is so much of Christianity so authoritarian ? Can… Read more »
Laurence, I think I need to leap to + Victoria’s defence here. My posting above was already on the long side, so perhaps I was too cryptic, and therefore misleading. The bishop’s pro-covenant sentiments are by no means the only reason Christchurch is likely to vote in favour of the Covenant. That diocese has a strong and vocal Evangelical minority, who want the Covenant for “doctrinal” reasons, for want of a better word. +Victoria’s views I understand to be rather similar to those of ++Rowan, or to our own (Tikanga Pakeha) Archbishop, David Moxon, who are in favour of the… Read more »
I wonder how many people on this blog know that Bishop Victoria, when she was a Bishop in Canada, chaired a meeting of the Saint Michaels Commission that declared Same-Sex Blessings to be ‘adiaphora’ and not a matter of dogma. So she is certainly not bigoted against Gays. She is, however, part of the oversight team in the Communion sponsoring the Covenant procedure, As my N.Z. colleague, Edward, here suggests, Bishop Victoria, like Archbishop Rowan Williams and our Primate, Archbishop David Moxon, is doing her very best to keep all Provinces within the Communion. This is not my particular stance,… Read more »