Peter Lineham explains the reasons for the three tikanga structure of the Anglican Church in Aotearoa and the Pacific.

How can a church become genuinely bi-cultural? What should this look like? How can a church engage with the cultural circumstances of its time? There are various solutions, but one of the most radical must surely be what the Anglican Church in New Zealand adopted with its “three tikanga” structure, put in place in 1992.

From Extension of Church of England

The original constitution of the Anglican Church was something of a historic landmark. Initially Bishop George Augustus Selwyn was sent to New Zealand in 1841 with letters patent (the standard legal form for all royal appointments) issued by Queen Victoria as head of the Church of England in New Zealand. So colonial Anglicanism was simply an extension of the state Church of England. The funding for his appointment came from the Church Missionary Society (which funded the Māori mission), from the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (a Church of England organisation which supported colonial churches) and the Colonial Office of the government of the United Kingdom.

To Anglican Church

But when New Zealand became self-governing in 1856, the New Zealand parliament declined to recognise a state church or to pay its share of Selwyn’s support, so Queen Victoria could not take responsibility for appointing future bishops. The British Parliament failed to pass a bill recognising the Church of England in New Zealand. So Selwyn brought together lay and clergy leaders of the New Zealand church to stage a friendly coup d’état. In 1857 at a meeting in St Stephen’s chapel in Auckland, they “by voluntary compact” adopted a constitution as an independent self-governing church, and adopted a structure where people needed to place themselves on a roll as Anglicans, and then elected representatives of the laity as well as clergy and bishops comprised the government of the church.

No Leadership Role for Māori

That constitution worked well for 140 years, but it had one very serious problem. Despite the fact that guiding the Māori church was a key part of Selwyn’s role, no Māori played any part in the constitutional discussions, and there was no role assigned to Māori Anglicans, except as ordinary members. By and large the development of Māori Anglicanism was of little interest to the settler church, except in the diocese of Waiapu covering the Bay of Plenty and the East Coast (Tai Rāwhiti), which was initially a Māori-speaking diocese.

Māori Bishop of Aotearoa

This was long a bone of contention for Māori Anglicans, who had a powerful lay advocate in Sir Apirana Ngata. After Māori began to depart the church and follow the religious organisation of Tahupōtiki Wiremu Rātana, there was a campaign led by Ngata to appoint a “Bishop of Aotearoa”. The compromise solution adopted back in 1928 was the creation of a strange sort of bishop, a Māori Bishop without a diocese, who had no jurisdiction except as an assistant to any other bishop who requested assistance in caring for Māori Anglicans.

Very distinguished Māori served as bishops, although the first, Frederick Bennett, was surely chosen because he was very much in a Pākehā mould. Even so, at least one Bishop refused to permit him to minister in his diocese.

It was the debate over the Treaty of Waitangi in the 1970s and 1980s which forced a change. In 1978 after lengthy debates well-recorded by Hirini Kaa in his book Te Hāhi Mihinare, the Bishop of Aotearoa was made responsible in cooperation with the existing bishops for all the Māori and Māori ministry in the country. Bishop Huihui Vercoe was elected as the fourth Bishop of Aotearoa under these rules in 1981.

Bi-Cultural Commission Established

This did not seem a good long-term solution, for what belonged specifically to the Māori church? The Waitangi Tribunal was at the time familiarising New Zealanders with the concepts of partnership and bi-culturalism. A leading academic, Whatarangi Winiata, proposed that the General Synod establish a Bi-Cultural Commission to review whether the principles of the Treaty were embodied in the church. The Commission reported back in 1986, and proposed a further commission to review the church’s constitution. That commission drafted a new constitution, in which the church was defined as two parallel structures, with separate regional dioceses on both the Māori and Pākehā sides, which only met together at General Synod level.

New Structure: Three Tikanga

That was the structure approved in 1990 and which came into effect in 1992, but at the last moment a separate parallel structure was created for Polynesians, reflecting the fact that the Diocese of Polynesia (covering Fiji, Tonga and Samoa), did not have an obvious home in a bi-cultural church. So these became the three tikanga, or “cultural streams”: Māori, Aotearoa New Zealand, and Polynesia. Initially there was one archbishop over the whole church and teams of bishops, but in 2006 it was agreed that each tikanga would have its own archbishop.

The approach has revolutionised the Māori Anglican world. Every diocese has now provided the Māori tikanga with churches served by many Anglican clergy, although most of them are part-time, given that their congregations are small and poor. Although the move to the three tikanga had limited impact on the majority of Anglicans, Māori clergy and congregations moved to the new tikanga, individual Māori could choose where and with whom they worshipped, and some Māori clergy chose to remain in their existing dioceses.

Anglicans were increasingly conscious of the Māori aspect of their tradition, and the remarkable New Zealand Prayer Book (published in 1989) provided bilingual liturgies and recognition of Māori martyrs. Yet ironically there was less working together at the ordinary level, as Māori worked hard to build up a very fragile Māori church in the face of growing bitterness among many of their own people at their exploitation at the hands of the colonial state and the church.

Most Effective at General Synod Level

The major interaction of Māori and Pākehā occurs at General Synod level. Here it can be forceful. Māori Anglicans have been insistent that they should be treated as equals, and the constitution requires their voices must be heard for any measure to be agreed. Any of the three tikanga are permitted to call for a caucus by tikanga at the General Synod. At this point the Synod separates into these three groups, whereas in normal discussions, voting is by diocese. Māori church leaders are sensitive to any appearance of racist thinking by the church, but the exercise of their concern may appear to the Pākehā dioceses as a form of reverse racism. There is great need for listening across tikanga boundaries, but at present this is only really experienced at synod level.

The General Synod  this year heard a call for a further revision of the constitution, and a key concern has been to what extent the resources of the church should be shared out, given that the Māori dioceses are very poor and have few paid clergy.

Questions Raised

There has been some criticism of the new constitution in international Anglican circles. In South Africa, Anglicans resisted the pressure to create an apartheid church regime. Some churches asked if there was any theological basis for this division on the basis of ethnicity. I think we must say that the opinions are still divided about the structure. The exercise of leadership by Anglican Māori has clearly given them a much greater sense of self-responsibility, but the challenge is to make this work for extension of the church among the peoples of Aotearoa and for justice and peace in this nation.

Tui Motu Magazine. Issue 295 August 2024: 8-9