Those who took part in the hikoi, along with supporters around the country, both Maori and non-Maori, consider the Bill to be a betrayal of the commitments made at the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The Waitangi Tribunal has voiced its deep concern.

It says if the Bill were to be enacted, it would fundamentally change the nature of the partnership between the Crown and Maori by "substituting existing Treaty principles for a set of propositions which bear no resemblance to the text or spirit of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi".

Likewise, in September this year, 440 Christian leaders signed an open letter to MPs urging them to oppose the introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill. Why should this be a matter of concern to Christian leaders?

The Covenant

Soon after the Treaty had been signed in 1840, Maori began to refer to the Treaty as a covenant. This is biblical language.

Covenant is the word used to describe an unconditional commitment that God makes to humankind.

It is a commitment grounded in love and describes a relationship that is to be unbreakable and in which the parties involved seek the welfare of the other come what may, "in sickness and in health, for richer for poorer, till death do us part", as the traditional vows of the marriage covenant put it.

Maori understood, apparently, that the Treaty established a relationship of this sort.

God's faithfulness and steadfast love and, derivatively, the faithfulness and commitment of marriage partners to one another was the model for the relationship established between the Crown and Maori signatories on behalf of their respective iwi.

Imagine then their dismay when the betrayals began, first with the seizure and illegal confiscation of land, then with the Native Lands Act, then with the efforts to suppress Maori language and culture.

Then came betrayals with the Tohunga Suppression Act, then with the payment of a pension to Maori during the 1920s and 30s at a rate 25 percent lower than non-Maori received, and so on and on.

The Treaty Principles Bill is yet another attempt to annul the promise of the covenant relationship that Maori saw embodied in the Treaty.

Biblical concepts

There were other biblical concepts in play when the Treaty was signed.

The word used in Te Tiriti, the Maori translation of the Treaty, to describe the authority being granted to the Crown is "kawanatanga".

That is not a native Maori word. It is a word coined to translate the term governorship. The governor in English became the kawana in te reo Maori.

Such a word was needed to translate the office held by Pontius Pilate, who is described in Matthew 27:15-26 as the governor.

Pilate, of course, was not the Emperor, he was not sovereign. He was an official answerable to a higher authority elsewhere and had strictly circumscribed authority himself.

His primary role was to maintain law and order. This was the level of authority being accorded to the Crown in the first article of the Treaty.

What kind of authority is then assigned to Maori in the second article? The words used in this case are ‘tino rangatiratanga'.

Rangatiratanga means chieftainship, sovereignty, self-determination.

It too appears in the Maori translation of the Bible, notably in the Lord's prayer, where the disciples of Jesus are enjoined to approach God with the prayer ‘Your kingdom come' — Kia tae mai tou rangatiratanga.

Then at the conclusion of the prayer they are instructed to pray, "For yours is the kingdom ..." — Nou hoki te rangatiratanga.

The modifier "tino" used before rangatiratanga in the second article of the Treaty heightens the quality being referred to. It means that something is unrivalled or of great intensity.

Within the framework of biblical thought, with which Maori had now become very familiar and which the Reverend Henry Williams, translator of the Treaty, likely appealed to when encouraging the chiefs to sign, rangatiratanga is clearly a more elevated authority than kawanatanga.

The biblical provenance of the language used in Te Tiriti should dissuade us, therefore, from the frequently heard contention that in signing Te Tiriti Maori ceded sovereignty.

What they ceded was kawanatanga, the same kind of authority to maintain law and order that Pontius Pilate held as Governor of Judaea.

It was promised to Maori in return that they should retain their already existing tino rangatiratanga, their sovereignty, over "o ratou wenua o ratou kainga me o ratou taonga katoa", that is, over their lands, their homes (or habitats) and over all their treasures.

With the Native Lands Act of 1863, a mere 23 years after the signing of the Treaty, this promise had been betrayed, the land confiscations had begun.

Rebuild relationships

Far from betraying further through the Treaty Principles Bill the covenant relationship that was understood to have been established at Waitangi in 1840, we should instead be devoting our efforts to rebuilding the relationship on the terms that were first agreed.

• Republished with permission of the ODT
• Murray Rae is a University of Otago professor of theology.

The Church and iwi have joined forces to "unequivocally" oppose the Bill which they say reinterprets the 184-year old Te Tiriti o Waitangi - the Treaty of Waitangi.

The Bill, which sets out proposed principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation, is repeating historic mistakes the Church and iwi say.

On Thursday, Parliament was suspended briefly during the Bill's first reading as Maori MPs staged a haka to disrupt the vote.

Once order was restored, the Bill passed its first reading and will be voted on again next year.

It is not expected to go through a second reading as National and NZ First say they will not support it beyond the first.

Rewriting a sacred covenant

The Bishop of Wellington Justin Duckworth and Assistant Bishop of Wellington Anashuya Fletcher said "For us, the Treaty is a sacred covenant".

The Bill's misinterpretation of the Treaty between the British Crown and Indigenous Maori undermines "this sacred covenant" and diminishes "the mana of our forebears and all parties who signed it".

They agree the Treaty Principles Bill "has echoes" of a far-reaching judgement which the long-dead supreme court judge Sir James Prendergast made in 1877 concerning the Treaty, Ngati Toa and the Anglican Church.

The rift, the judgement and the Treaty

The 176-year rift between the Church and iwi had its roots in 1848, when Ngati Toa gifted land in Porirua to the Anglican Church.

In return, the Church promised to build a school for the iwi's rangatahi (young people).

No school was built. Later, the Church received a Crown grant to the land without Ngati Toa's consent.

Offended Ngati Toa chief and Executive Council member Wi Parata took the church to the Supreme Court in 1877.

The judges dismissed the case.

The Chief Justice of the day, Sir James Prendergast, in his ruling called the Treaty of Waitangi a "simple nullity" and "worthless".

It couldn't be of value because it was signed "between a civilised nation and a group of savages" he claimed.

"The dismissal of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in this landmark case was a grievous error that disregarded the sovereignty guaranteed to Maori under Te Tiriti" said Dr Taku Parai, Ngati Toa's Pou Tikanga.

The King's Counsel oppose the Bill

The Anglican Church and Ngati Toa's joint statement joins a chorus of opposition against the Bill, including a many thousands-strong hikoi that will arrive at Parliament grounds today.

Those on the hikoi are bringing with them a letter signed by 42 of the country's prominent King's Counsel.

The letter calls the Bill an attempt to rewrite the Treaty.

It will effectively unilaterally change Te Tiriti and its effect in law without the agreement of Maori as the Treaty partner, the King's Counsel say.

Source

• The Post

He was responding to Monday's open letter from over 400 religious leaders who, sight unseen, wanted the Bill voted down at the first reading, preventing it from going to a Select Committee for public comment.

Luxon added that the National Party needs to honour its agreement with ACT as part of a democratically elected MMP government with coalition partners.

"I have a coalition agreement [and a] commitment, I honour those commitments" Luxon said.

"We have a coalition agreement, very clear, [we] went to the election, we have an MMP system, people voted, those are the cards they gave us."

Luxon reiterated his position, explaining that while ACT would prefer a full public referendum after the Select Committee process, that is not going to happen.

No one has read the Treaty Principles Bill

ACT leader David Seymour confirmed that only a "broad outline" of the Bill was discussed at the Cabinet meeting before a draft version would be created and publicly released in November.

Seymour said that no one has read the Bill yet.

He told Newstalk ZB's Heather du Plessis-Allan on Monday that "the Government and the parties had agreed to the Bill's broad outline. It now goes off to Parliament's drafters who will take some time to write the exact wording".

He said the religious leaders who sent the open letter have tried to halt public comment at the Select Committee stage.

Seymour argued that the Churches' pushback undermined the democratic process and attempted to stifle debate.

He also accused the religious leaders of playing politics.

On Tuesday, CathNews reported that a range of Catholic individuals had signed the open letter.

Among New Zealand's six Catholic bishops, Michael Dooley, Steve Lowe and Archbishop Paul Martin signed the letter, as well as several sisters, priests and emeritus bishops.

CathNews also learned from some signatories that they had not seen a draft of the Treaty Principles Bill and were not fully aware of the content of the open letter before signing it.

In attacking the signatories and discrediting them, one said it seemed ironic that Seymour appeared to be trying to prevent them from engaging in the democratic process, then doing precisely what he accused them of doing.

Labour and Greens congratulate religious leaders

Labour and the Greens have congratulated the Christian leaders for condemning the Treaty Principles Bill.

Willie Jackson, Labour's Maori development spokesperson, praised them saying "I'm really pleased and congratulate them on their actions and their bravery... this takes some courage and bravery, and they deserve to be complimented and supported as far as I'm concerned".

Marama Davidson, co-leader of the Green Party, expressed gratitude for the church leaders' strong stance.

She viewed their action as demonstrating a deep commitment to upholding the centrality of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Sources

• NZ Herald
• CathNews
• NZ Herald
• 1 News
• RNZ

The 440 senior leaders from Catholic, Anglican, Salvation Army, Baptist and Methodist denominations, under the "Common Grace" umbrella, expressed their views in an open letter.

On Monday, September 9, the Cabinet saw a draft version of David Seymour's controversial bill for the first time.

The ACT leader's bill will have its first reading in November and, if supported, will be sent to a select committee for discussion.

As part of their coalition agreement with ACT, National and NZ First said they would not support the bill beyond the first reading.

However, as a matter of process, the Church leaders who signed the letter want National or NZ First to break their coalition agreement and vote down the bill at the first reading.

Failing to garner support at the first reading would prevent the bill's progress and potentially destabilise the Government.

Allowing the bill to progress to the Select Committee stage opens the process to what Richard Harman in Politico labels as a "procession of extremists from either side of the Treaty debate".

The religious leaders say they have fears for the country if it progresses beyond its first reading.

One of the Christian leaders, the Very Reverend Jay Ruka, Dean of Taranaki Cathedral, labels the bill "dangerous".

"He is tricking New Zealanders into thinking that to honour our founding contract is to demerit democratic representation. This is a lie. As a Christian leader, I steadfastly oppose this falsity. The Treaty Principles Bill is holding our nation in contempt," says Ruka.

Catholic signatories

A range of Catholic individuals featured in the letter's 400-plus list of signatories.

Bishops Michael Dooley, Steve Lowe, and Archbishop Paul Martin from the New Zealand Catholic Bishops Conference signed the letter.

While other Catholic leaders including sisters, priests and emeritus bishops supported the initiative, CathNews learned from some signatories that they had neither seen a draft of the Treaty Principles Bill nor were conversant with the content of the open letter.

A covenant

In the Open Letter, the Christian leaders express their commitment to Te Tiriti - the Treaty of Waitangi.

"As Christian leaders from across Aotearoa New Zealand, we express our commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi."

"Te Tiriti o Waitangi provides a basis for finding common ground, recognising and reconciling past wrongs, and acts as a moral and equitable compass for our democracy" write the leaders.

The signatories say the Treaty is a covenant between people.

"We believe God takes covenants seriously and that we are likewise called to honour our promises.

"As Christian leaders from across Aotearoa New Zealand, we express our commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

"As inheritors of the legacy of the missionaries involved in the drafting, promoting and signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, we acknowledge a duty of care for upholding the mana of Te Tiriti o Waitangi."

The leaders say they commit their churches to deepening Treaty education and pursuing reconciliation.

"We will work to ensure the flourishing of life in Aotearoa New Zealand for all peoples living here, both Tangata Tiriti and Tangata Whenua, as Te Tiriti of Waitangi enables."

Seymour unhappy

David Seymour is not pleased with church involvement in his political plans, saying the churches do not own New Zealanders' moral compass.

In a post on social media Seymour said the "core Christian principle of imago dei" automatically meant everyone has equal dignity, and the belief was at odds with the recent interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi.

"It would be unusual, to say the least, for two thousand years of Christian faith to be overturned by a one page Treaty signed by a few hundred people in one country" he said.

"If you wonder why church attendance and reported Christianity is in decline in New Zealand, today's display of church leaders abandoning a core, if not the core, Christian belief to play politics might be a clue."

He told the Herald that the churches' "pushback" was undemocratic.

He said it wasn't the first time churches had tried to interfere in democracy, citing the End of Life Choice Act as an example.

His coalition partners, National and NZ First, say they won't support the bill past a first reading.

They reiterated their stance last month at the late Kingi Tuheitia's 18th coronation celebrations at Turangawaewae.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon stressed this remained the case when the Common Grace letter was published yesterday.

Source

• RNZ
• NZ Herald
• Politik
• RNZ
• David Seymour

The history of our Church belongs in that covenant, the unfailing promise of love. Quite simply, God is in love with us, whether we are aware of it or not. When the word "covenant" is considered in a deep place of meditation, we find our hearts are filled with the light of God's presence.

There is a sense of spaciousness, of warmth, of loving connection with all creation. And while no words can accurately describe an experience beyond language, for me, the word "covenant" is a doorway to it. That word holds a promise that can never be broken.

Another doorway word is "transfiguration." The story of Jesus' moment of glory on the mountain holds an important lesson for us all. Why did Jesus go up the mountain that day? We don't know. But he often went to a wilderness place to pray, and he probably knew the mountain well.

At this time, however, Jesus was nearing his death and carrying the burden of that knowledge. His disciples didn't understand. He must have been in a very lonely place.

On the mountain, he was given a for-taste of his resurrection. It was a glorious moment in which he went beyond the boundaries of his human senses to return to the spiritual realm.

That must have been a huge experience for Jesus. So, what happened next? The two disciples acted as we probably would. They wanted to hold on to the miracle by making shrines, three tents on the mountain.

But Jesus? No, he immediately went down to the plains, back to his life of compassion and healing.

I'm a bit like those disciples. Little tastes of God can lead to an addiction to sweetness, a fondness for the mountain experience. I admit I am very fond of what I call spiritual pavlova. I want to linger with the sacred moment and build little shrines in an attempt to hold onto it.

But I know that the mountain experience exists so that it can be taken to the plains to people in the everyday busyness of life. That's what "call" is all about. We witness Jesus on the mount of transfiguration, and afterwards, we all go with him to the plains.

To use another image, we are like little paper cups under a waterfall of love. We get filled. We get emptied. We get filled again. And we know the rightness in the process.

It's all about covenant. It's all about the mountain and the plains.

It's all about God's Love.

• Joy Cowley is a wife, mother, grandmother, great-grandmother and retreat facilitator.

30 years ago an ecumenical covenant was established between four inner-city churches of Napier to forge a stronger Christian church for the city through working together.

The churches involve St Paul's Presbyterian Church, St Patrick's Catholic Church, Trinity Methodist Church, and the Waiapu Cathedral of St John the Evangelist. Continue reading

Marking 50 years of Catholic-Jewish dialogue since Vatican II, the Pontifical Council for Religious Relations with Jews has published "The Gifts and Calling of God are Irrevocable".

The document states that Catholics are called to witness to their faith in Jesus before all people, including Jews.

But Christianity and Judaism are intertwined and God never annulled his covenant with the Jewish people, stated the document.

"The Church is therefore obliged to view evangelisation to Jews, who believe in the one God, in a different manner from that to people of other religions and world views," it said.

"In concrete terms this means that the Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews."

The document explicitly states that it is not a "doctrinal teaching of the Catholic Church", but a reflection.

Dr David Kessler, director of the Woolf Institute for the study of inter-religious relations in Cambridge, said it was the first time a repudiation of active conversion of Jews had been so clearly stated in a Vatican document.

How God will save the Jews if they do not explicitly believe in Christ is "an unfathomable divine mystery", the document states.

The new document states "there can only be one single covenant history of God with humanity".

At the same time, however, the document says God's covenant with humanity developed over time: it was first forged with Abraham, then the law was given to Moses, then new promises were given to Noah.

"Each of these covenants incorporates the previous covenant and interprets it in a new way," the document states

"That is also true for the New Covenant, which for Christians is the final eternal covenant and, therefore, the definitive interpretation of what was promised by the prophets."

Sources

• The Guardian
• The Tablet
• Image: UptoJerusalem.com

The covenant, born of an idea in 2004 to try to set boundaries in belief and practice for the Communion's 40 members churches, appears dead after a majority of dioceses within the Church of England voted to reject it.

With results still being counted, supporters of the Covenant effectively lost their battle within the Church of England when the Diocese of Lincoln cast the 23rd vote against it last week.

"The covenant is either buried or disabled," said Simon Barrow, co-director of the independent British think tank Ekklesia, in the aftermath of the decision.

Whatever now happens, there is no way that anyone can say that the "Anglican Covenant" is regarded in the Church of England as some sort of consensus document. Even if the necessary majority is now found, and the Church of England General Synod passes the "Anglican Covenant" as a leaving present for Archbishop Rowan, the document clearly does not have the clout that its backers must realise that it needs.