This occasional weekend column called ‘Pondering:…’ is where people from within the collective of 240 Baptist churches across the country can share issues they are thinking about in a way that opens up a topic from a particular perspective. Feel free to comment on these pieces via our Letters to the Editor. These opinion pieces are the views of individuals and need to be considered within the context of the diversity of our union of Baptist churches in New Zealand. When commenting or contributing, please follow our Guidelines for articles, opinion pieces and online comments.
In this piece, Stu McGregor, Minister of Cityside Baptist Church in central Auckland, contributes to the topic of Te Tiriti and biculturalism. He shares why he is an advocate for Tiriti justice and why he sees it as a priority for most churches to address. For more info, check out baptist-tiriti.net.
One of the most profound turning points for me in investing myself into Te Tiriti o Waitangi advocacy and allyship was when I was the short-lived pastor of Ōrākei Baptist Church, 2007–2009.
In 2008, Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei were holding a commemoration of 30 years since the Bastion Point land occupation/protest. Since the marae was a neighbour of our church and a few of Ngāti Whātua were part of our congregation, I suggested that it would be appropriate for us to attend as a church. I’ll get to that story in a bit, but that’s when I heard the phrase, “Don’t mix politics and the pulpit. Just preach the gospel.” I’ve never felt comfortable with that statement, and I stridently reject it now, nearly 20 years later.
First, some background.
In 1841, when Ngāti Whātua extended the invitation to Hobson to build what is now Auckland, they were kaitiaki of 100,000 ha. In 1869, the Native Land Court’s rulings enabled the Crown to divide the Ōrākei block into 13 titles held by 13 individuals. This stripped hapū of their control of the land and paved the way for nefarious negotiations where land would be acquired by the Crown for as little as 1/120th of its value. Later, in 1886, the Crown used the Public Works Act to take ownership of 5.3 ha of Takaparawhau (Bastion Point) for defence purposes. In 1941, instead of returning it to the iwi, the Crown gifted the land to Auckland City Council to be established as a reserve. In 1977, the Muldoon government green-lit the elite-housing development of Takaparawhau reserve, which was the last remaining green space historically owned by Ngāti Whātua whenua. It was now, when the original 100,000 ha had been reduced to just 1/4 ha, that the iwi protested with a land occupation for 500 or so days, after which the government evicted them, arresting around 200 people for trespassing on someone else’s landIn 1978, the protesters were arrested en masse—but the wider effect of their action had mobilised Māori across Aotearoa. In 1984 (revised in 1986) Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal stating the following (italics mine):
- Ngati Whatua were wrongly deprived of the 283 ha Orakei block.
- The Orakei block ought to have been reserved in tribal ownership and control forever. They did not seek the return of the whole block. They asked only for the return of Crown land which had not been turned into roads or had houses built on it. They did not seek the return of any land in private ownership.
Read that request again. They did not seek the return of the whole block, nor of any land in private ownership. In 1988, in one of the first ever treaty settlements, the Crown returned around 24 ha of land as well as a $3 million development fund. From 100,000 ha to 24 ha. That’s 0.024%. It was still a win, but hardly the gravy train these claims have often been described as.
So, as the 30-year commemoration was taking place on a Sunday, I wondered if we should forget about holding a service so we could all join with the marae. Well, after one or two rude emails and, to be fair, some constructive ones, we reached a compromise and decided to still hold a church service, but a cohort of interested people could attend the commemoration.
And that’s where I heard more of the Ngāti Whātua story from Joe Hawke. As a child in 1952, he saw his papakāinga (village) in Ōkahu Bay being burned to the ground by the Auckland City Council. The dwellings were deemed as sub-standard and an “eyesore” needing to be cleared before the Queen’s visit the following year. The iwi were relocated to state housing on Kitemoana Street, dubbed Boot Hill, as they were ‘booted’ up there. The Auckland Council converted their village land (except the urupā and church) to recreation and sports grounds.
It seems to me that the land upon which Orakei Baptist Church currently sits was, at best, pilfered or, at worst, stolen. (Finding these things out is not easy, but reading Tribunal reports is an excellent—if harrowing—place to start.)
How strange then that a pākehā church could feel free to worship on pilfered land. How can we ask for God’s blessing on this without acknowledging the sins of our forebears?
This and the story leading up to it is why I believe honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi is so important for churches of all denominations in Aotearoa New Zealand. Simply put, many (not all) of us have benefited from Māori alienation from their land. This goes for private residences, corporate land holdings, and church land. I question the ethics and integrity, as well as the theology and hermeneutics that ignore this reality.
‘Don’t mix politics and the pulpit,’ I was told. But several Māori told me they didn’t feel welcome in our church, not just because of this fact about the whenua, but also because they knew we would expect a certain change in behaviour from them. We were ineffective neighbours and, as we drilled deeper, it became clear that the only relevant thing to us was ‘sharing the Gospel’, while ignoring how hollow it sounded coming from our cream-walled silo.
A previous column entry on this site questioned (sincerely, I accept) whether biculturalism is something we as Baptists should be prioritising. The author went on to make a case for ‘all being equal in God’s sight’ and to assert that culture is not a priority for the Kingdom of God and therefore the church. The standard verses were quoted to justify this.
Let’s take Galatians 3:28:
There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.
Years ago, I remember being corrected for incorrectly using this verse when making a case for egalitarianism. It was pointed out to me that the context for this verse was actually about the gift of faith in Jesus and being baptised into the Body of Christ. Just after the verse, St Paul talks about how we receive adoption as God’s children. That is to say, then, that when it comes to salvation and relationship with God, cultural binaries and hierarchies are irrelevant (thank goodness). Through faith, there are no barriers to entering a relationship with God.
Here’s the rub though. In spite of how some read Galatians 3:28, the church still had slaves and free, it still had Jews and Gentiles (still separate identities as per Acts 15’s Jerusalem Council where the Jews conceded Gentiles need not be circumcised), and yes, the church still had male and female. Not one of these distinctions was eradicated by baptism into Christ. Our oneness is in Christ, but that is not at the expense of social status, cultural differences or sexual identity.
These verses do not support a ‘melting-pot theology’ of the church, which is implied in the oft-used phrase, ‘why not all be one?’ Eerily, it sounds like Don Brash’s ‘Kiwi, not Iwi’ campaign (a slogan still in use).
Saying ‘Baptists should not prioritise biculturalism’ asks us to ignore how intrinsic culture is to our humanity and identity.
If you’re not convinced, let’s game it out a bit and test the effectiveness of this ‘melting-pot theology’. If we all leave our ‘cultural identity at the door’ and become ‘one in Christ’ in a new non-cultural identity, what is being given up, and by whom? Examples: We have two languages; which do we use? Are we just saying everything needs to be in English, or do we make and learn a new language that’s neutral? What about music style, liturgical format, scripture translation, and hermeneutical frameworks? Which understanding of family and whanau will we use? How will decisions be made (democracy is a Western construct)? Importantly, which values around property will be adopted? Who will hold the title to the land? Whichever the answers to these questions, I am confident you can see that Māori will lose out by sheer force of numbers.
There is no such thing as a generic universal ‘melting pot’ of culture that ‘being one in Christ’ will look like. And if you think there is, then I’d bet good money it will look a lot like your own culture. This is exactly what colonisation is: subsuming other cultures under a dominant power and attempting to eradicate difference, difference being defined as that which is different from the dominant culture.
Should biculturalism be a priority within Baptist Churches?
The answer from my story at Ōrākei is obvious to me. We cannot be ‘one’ if we do not right wrongs. And the biggestissue around Te Tiriti o Waitangi is actually not the systemic alienation of Māori from the whenua, it is that Te Tiriti has systemically and casually not been honoured, and it’s still happening as I write this. This is a major issue for Aotearoa New Zealand to address, not just the Crown either, but all of us as citizens and neighbours. As Churches are made up of citizens and neighbours, we have a divine mandate to seek truth and justice and shine light on some superuncomfortable history.
The options going forward seem quite simple to me.
First, if you want everyone to ‘be one in Christ,’ then you have to accept biculturalism (and by extension multiculturalism, but that’s another essay). This, by its very nature, acknowledges the pain of injustice carried by Māori, and then understanding why it happened and how Pākehā contributed to this. Then, to ‘be one’, we work towards the restoration of this relationship. This is what it means to honour the agreement of Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the founding document of Aotearoa New Zealand. Start by understanding that wherever you are in this country, the land you are standing/sitting upon was originally Māori land. There are numerous ways it may have been transacted out of Māori ownership, a few above-board and honourable, but most, if not just confiscated or stolen, lacked transparency and fairness.
Second, if you want Māori to be part of your congregation and able to participate fully in church, you have to de-prioritise Pākehā liturgical structures, governance and even constitutions. Making room for Māori is through abdicating power and control, thereby leaving equitable space where Māori can be fully Māori and flourish. I reiterate that it’s de-prioritising, not getting rid of. ‘Being one’ is a shared space where shared power exists with care for the other and held in check by Christ’s love.
Third, if you want to simply be ‘one in Christ’ and not feel the need to address cultural, gender and societal identities, then you have an impossible task and will fail. And largely that’s because it’s predicated on an incorrect reading of certain scriptures.
What I would love to see is evidence of Te Tiriti affirmation in how the Baptist Union and Associations conduct their business, e.g. with property, with financial distribution and governance being equitable and fair. We can start by looking into the provenance of the land to which we hold title. Each title will have a story.
Most of our church properties are held in Trust by the Baptist Union of New Zealand, which by default means we encounter Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Land alienation is one of the biggest injustices committed against Māori. It’s not even a secret how egregiously many of these acquisitions were made. Ignoring this is ignoring justice and, in cases, reaping the benefits from outright theft for the sake of Christ. How does that work?
When we, as Baptists, have affirmed the Treaty of Waitangi, then I believe we are fulfilling a righteous calling for our particular corner of the world. It’s a commitment to justice.
They said to me, ‘Don’t mix politics and the pulpit’, and I now counter, ‘That’s cowardice’. You can’t seek justice without being political. Let’s actually do the hard work of Micah 6:8 like we’ve talked about time and time again: ‘to act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.’
Image supplied: Taken at Ōkahu Bay during Hīkoi mō te Tiriti, November 13, 2024
For other ‘Pondering:...’ opinion pieces from people in New Zealand Baptist churches, click here.
