The Search for Unity by J J Lewis, A K Petch & R D Rakena historical/41 the...The Search for Unity...

The Search for Unity by J J Lewis, A K Petch & R D Rakena

Wesley Historical Society (NZ) Publication #41 – 1983



CONTENTS

Preface

The Catholic Spirit

Mission in Diversity

The New Climate

Methodist Initiative

The Era of the Joint Standing Committee

The Joint Commission on Church Union

The Maori Response to Ecumenism

The Response of the Churches

Epilogue: The Continuing Call



PREFACE

The pause in the movement towards the recovery of the Church's unity calls for

reflection and reappraisal.

The story of the long and sustained involvement of the Methodist Church in New

Zealand in ecumenism makes its own impact. What is it that keeps the impulse alive?

What is to be learned from the most recent attempt at the union of five Churches?

Where are the inhibiting factors? What is the next step to be taken in the way of

obedience for the sake of the worship, message, and mission of the Church in the

world?

The following account has been written to offer a context and some detail for the

discussion of the issues raised. It begins necessarily with what really constitutes

Methodism and with what has been characteristic from the days when John Wesley

preached on 'The Catholic Spirit'. The line must be drawn even further, since Wesley

himself was steeped in the biblical tradition and since he lived on the boundaries

where theological insight and all experience meet. Throughout the record, there is a

recognisable continuity of spirit and thought.

Significant in itself and integral to the story in Aotearoa is the Maori and ethnic

dimension. The relevant chapter has been contributed by the Tumuaki of the Maori

Division, the Rev. R.D. Rakena.

The Rev. W.J. Morrison has read the full manuscript and contributed important

material.

The hope is expressed that this record will enable the theological and practical issues

to be taken up that the vision may continue

J. J. Lewis

A. K. Petch,

Auckland, 1982



CHAPTER I

THE CATHOLIC SPIRIT

John Wesley sketched an ecumenical dimension around the life and action of the

people called Methodist in his sermon on- 'The Catholic Spirit'. Echoing Jehu's

question to Jehonadab,1 he asked:

'Is thy heart right, as my heart is with thy heart? If it be, give me thine hand.'

This was not the gesture of an easy sentimentality. Nor was uniformity of opinion at

all in his mind. On the contrary he maintained:

'Every wise man will allow others the same liberty of thinking which he desires

they should allow him; and will no more insist on their embracing his opinions,

than he would have them to insist on his embracing theirs.'

Furthermore it is clear that he did not look for regimentation in worship:

'I dare not, therefore, presume to impose my mode of worship on any other. I

believe it is truly primitive and apostolical; but my belief is no rule for another.'

Quite specifically he adds:

'I believe the Episcopal form of Church government to be Scriptural and

apostolical. If you think the Presbyterian or Independent is better, think so still,

and act accordingly.'

Prior to all other considerations was a right relationship with God 'filled with the

energy of love' and expressed in a passionate concern for all people, doing good to all

'neighbours or strangers, friends or enemies, good or bad.' 'Do you love even the

enemies of God', he asked, 'the unthankful and unholy'? Love then for Wesley lies at

the root of the 'Catholic Spirit' and provides the dynamic for mission which is itself

doxological, both a response of wonder and praise and a very sign of transcendent

presence in the world.

This largeness and generosity of spirit should not be interpreted in terms of an easy-

going, laissez faire, free-lance indisicipline and individualism. Such would have been

entirely opposed to his very nature and, indeed, he maintained that a Catholic spirit is

neither a practical nor speculative 'latitudinarianism' with rootless indifference to all

opinions, to public worship or to the congregation. One thing above all others stamps

its true character:

1 II Kings 10.15



'Catholic or universal love ... is a Catholic spirit', expressed in enlargement of

heart 'toward all mankind, those he knows and those he does not' embracing 'with

strong and cordial affection neighbours and strangers, friends and enemies'.

Caring with its blazing sense of accountability and catholicity with its fulness were to

mark the nature and content of Wesley's own ministry in the world he called his

parish. In a day of cold intellectualism when any enthusiasm was feared, he had no

'cheap grace' to offer but a knowledge of God encountered in liberating experience

and a sharing of insight freshly experienced. It was not to the experience nor the

emotion that he was pointing but to the sovereign grace of God going into action for

the deliverance of all the world. Nor was it an anti-intellectualism that he embraced

for this new awareness reached down to the very roots of his mind and new thoughts

came tumbling through into significant action. It was a doing of the truth that

concerned him and a pragmatic reality of response that similarly he sought from

others:

'Love me not in word only but in deed and in truth'.

Methodism was, however, to pass through its own period of fragmentation. Divisive

factors were at work. The missionary situation both at home and in America

developed too quickly and powerfully for the slower orthodoxy to handle. The zeal of

the new convert brought impatience with old restraints while desire to match the

evangelical need led Wesley into innovation that did not come easily to him. Although

he himself never ceased to belong to the Church of England, his acts of ordination

made separation inevitable.

The new movement was itself to develop inner tension and disruption. The Methodism

which emerged from the Church of England still today bears marks of its origins

especially in liturgical form and practice, varied though these have become. The

renewal of the eighteenth Century Church was sacramental as well as evangelical, the

Anglican morning Eucharist being one of its fruits.

'The doctrines we preach', said Wesley, 'are the doctrines of the Church of

England; indeed, the fundamental doctrines of the Church, clearly laid down,

both in her Prayers, Articles and Homilies'.

For a century after separation, it was common for many to attend the Parish Church

with its context of Catholicity and in the evening the Chapel with its spontaneity and

exuberance of adoration. Methodist people have sometimes found confusion in their

thinking of membership, whether it is of the Church, declared in Baptism, or whether

it is of a Society within the Church calling for adult profession of faith. Church and

Chapel really belonged together. Transplanting overseas often led to their further

separation, laying upon later generations a need for the recovery of Churchmanship.



Methodist became home also for many who had never been in the Church of England

but had come out of Dissent or out of the generation that long since had lost touch

with the Church. They brought with them new strengths not least in social conscience

and intellectual courage. What had been a movement within the parent Church now

had to face the task of itself becoming a Church. Questions of polity took on a new

urgency as did issues concerning the rights of preachers and of the local Church

Courts, the celebration of the Sacraments, ordination, relationship to Establishment. A

resolution of these matters was often difficult to find, sometimes leading to division.

The Methodist New Connexion appeared in 1797, the Primitive Methodist Connexion

in 1812 and the Bible Christians in 1815, the latter two concerned less with polity than

with unrestrained and adventurous evangelism.

But across the branches of the Methodist family, there remained a substantial likeness

and an inner dynamic which led to an eventual reunification.2 Differences were to

remain, some of them culturally conditioned, but Methodists everywhere shared the

evangelical vision and sang their faith:

"Thy sovereign grace to all extends,

Immense and unconfined:

From age to age it never ends;

It reaches all mankind.

Thoughout the world its breadth is known,

Wide as infinity:

So wide it never passed by one,

Or it had passed by me."

(M.H.B. 77)

They rejoiced in the diversity of the gifts of the Spirit held together in the unity of the

Christian fellowship:

"Love, like death, hath all destroyed,

Rendered all distinctions void;

Names, and sects, and parties fall:

Thou, O Christ, art all in all"

(M.H.B. 720)

Furthermore the witness of Methodism, in all its varieties, was rooted in the living

biblical story and still is nourished by its ever contemporary insights. In the biblical

word of grace was the spring of holiness, wholeness and health for all. No limits could

2 Robert Currie, 'Methodism Divided' , quoted by N.E. Brookes in "New Zealand

Methodists and Church Union" an important M.A. thesis. University of Canterbury, 1976,

suggested as reasons for reunification, decline, secularism, economic pressure, conflict

between ministry and laity. These are carefully considered in the thesis.



be set to the liberating and creating love of God nor any to the range of that present

and ultimate concern for the whole person in the whole life of society. At the head of

his delightful book "Primitive Physic", Wesley placed a quotation from Terence: "I

count nothing human as alien".3 It is not surprising that those called Methodist found

themselves committed to the great missionary outreach of the Nineteenth Century and

then to the ecumenical expansion and exploration of the Twentieth Century that

emerged from it. In the search for wholeness, there was no jettisoning of the

particularities of Christian loyalty. If it could not be local it could not be real.4 But in

the unity of the Christian experience there was also universality. Nothing less than the

whole Gospel for the whole life of mankind would do. Methodism by its very nature is

committed to the making of this good news credible not only locally but also in the

oikumene, the whole inhabited earth.

3 Homo Sum, humani nil a me alienum puto.

4 Based on a comment by G.K. Chesterton.



CHAPTER II

MISSION IN DIVERSITY

Out of the missionary dispersion of the Nineteenth Century came the urgency and first

attempts in the recovery of unity. Fragmentation was to subject the evangelised to

confusion and place upon them an intolerable burden of choice.

Pioneers in New Zealand brought the Church with them. They came as part of a series

of migrations from Britain and Europe into the islands of the Pacific with hopes

caught up in such names as New Britain, New Hebrides, New Ireland, New Zealand.

An Anglican voice in 1814 declared the "good tidings of great joy" at Oihi. Samuel

Marsden, himself sympathetic to Methodism through the influence of his childhood

home 'dominated by the spirit of piety born of the new evangelical movement

originating in the work of John Wesley',5 invited his young Methodist friend, Samuel

Leigh, in 1819, for health reasons, to visit New Zealand but, in so doing, he was

opening a further chapter in the mission in this country. Leigh ministered to the

Anglican community in the Bay of Islands, made contact with the indigenous Maori

community and even, at the request of six villages, drew up a regular preaching plan.

Three years later, he returned to establish the Methodist Mission at Wesleydale.6

James Watkin was the first to open the Christian Mission in the Otago area of the

South Island. Charles Creed followed Watkin in this area where later, in 1848, the

Presbyterian Settlement established a further beginning of lasting and creative

influence in the story of New Zealand. Bishop Pompallier and two priests founded the

Roman Catholic Mission in 1838 at Papakawau (Omanaia). Others were to follow.

Relations between Anglican and Wesleyan Missions began and continued in harmony,

Maoris accepting them as two sections of the larger Christian family. To show fairness

to all, two brothers were baptised, one Patuone by an Anglican as Marsh Brown and

the other, Nene, by a Wesleyan as Thomas Walker (Tamati Waka).7 The advent of

Roman Catholicism, however, introduced the element of doctrinal division and a

competitive spirit. Friction also developed in the overlapping of spheres of influence.

Pastoral concern for the Maori people led to the suggestion that Anglicans concentrate

on the Eastern side of the Island, Wesleyans on the Western, with the Waikato River

as a boundary. When the matter was referred to the authorities in England, an even

further limitation was imposed restricting Wesleyans to the North of Manukau. This

was quite unacceptable. The first Comity proposal was continued but it was put under

strain in the inevitable movement of population. Denominational division proved

5 "Letters and Journals of Samuel Marsden", ed Elder P.17

6 Kaeo

7 Wm Morley "The History of Methodism in New Zealand", p.66.



inhibiting. Bishop Selwyn records that the Maori Chief, Te Heu Heu, once replied to

him 'that when he had made up his mind between ourselves (Anglicans), the

Wesleyans, and the Papists, he should join that body which he should see reason to

prefer".8

1844 saw the arrival of the Primitive Methodist Connexion, 1860 the United

Methodist Free Churches, and 1876 the Bible Christians. In the early years, if not in

the later period, relations were cordial. Members of the Wesleyan High St Church,

such as John Probert, gave assistance on the Board of Trustees of the Primitive

Methodist Church.9 The country, however, was too small for such diversity and in

1896 Free Methodists and Bible Christians joined the Wesleyans as part of the

General Conference of the Methodist Church of Australasia.10

Union with Primitive

Methodists was consummated later in 1913.

In the later years of the century the Churches in England and in the Colony drew

further apart doctrinally and in spirit. They were not able to provide adequate

leadership in the tragic years of the Land Wars although missionary concern persisted

even to the cost of martyrdom. Church division became the excuse for following the

Red-Brick tradition of the University with its exclusion of Theology and for the

secular clause in the Education Act.

Presbyterian Initiative

At the turn of the century Dr Erwin11

of Knox Church proposed a union of

Congregationalists, Methodists and Presbyterians. The overture that came eventually

from the General Assembly was gladly received by the Conference of 1903 in

Christchurch. A Central Committee with the Rev. H. Bull as convener together with

five regional committees was appointed to continue discussions. The intention was to

seek "the basis upon which a comprehensive union may be carried out”.12

According to the Conference report of the following year, certain Articles of Faith,

prepared by the Presbyterian Church of England and revised by the New Zealand

Presbyterian Committee, were to become a "basal statement of doctrine subject to a

8 Bishop Selwyn's Letters — Visitation Journal for 1843 and 1844 Church in the Colonies

Series No. 7 , Society for Propagation of the Gospel 1847. Note that Professor Keith

Sinclair in his "A History of New Zealand", Pelican 1959 records a more colourful version

of this incident as recorded in "Fifty Years of Primitive Methodism in New Zealand" — J.

Guy and W.S. Potter 1903. 9 Note contributed by E.W. Hames.

10 E.W. Hames "Out of the Common Way" , p.97, notes that a tentative scheme for union

was produced in 1883 but New Zealand could not act independently. 11

"History of the Presbyterian Church in New Zealand", p. 178 Elder. 12

"Minutes Annual Conference of Methodist Church of Australasia" 1903, p.74



final revision and setting by a select and representative committee of the Churches

concerned". These were not discussed at the October Assembly, however, where the

decision was made to remit "the question of union itself without reference to questions

of doctrine or polity" to "Presbyteries and Sessions throughout the Colony". It is clear

that opposition was mounting within the Presbyterian Church.13

The Minutes of 1905 reported, from the Presbyterian voting on the issue, a majority in

favour of union but a considerable minority against it. The General Assembly decided

that it would be imprudent to proceed but sought instead the appointment of an inter-

Church Council for the preventing of overlapping, especially in rural areas and for

furthering "great national issues like Bible in Schools and the promotion of

righteousness in the community".14

No report had been received from the

Congregational Church.

The Methodist Conference expressed regret at the breaking off of negotiations towards

organic union "which, when first made by the General Assembly, seemed bright with

the promise of a practical and happy realization. .... The Conference feels assured that

such harmonious relations will be unceasingly cultivated between the Evangelical

Churches as will be in accord with the mind of Christ and afford evidence of the

essential oneness of all Christian believers''.15

When the matter was taken up in the General Australasian Conference, it was declared

that "such an organic union is eminently desirable provided that a satisfactory basis of

union can be formulated".16

This Conference appointed a Committee of ministers and

laymen in parity, representative of the several Conferences of Australasia to "act and

confer with the appointed representatives of the Presbyterian Church with a view to

the formulation of a basis of union "and to negotiate with any other of the Evangelical

Churches.17

The Rev. H. Bull was again Convener of the New Zealand Committee.

Momentum, however, was lost and the negotiations lapsed.

A further Attempt

Meanwhile overseas the Ecumenical Movement was gaining ground. The New

Zealand Churches caught something of the enthusiasm engendered by the Student

Volunteer Movement that sought "the evangelisation of the World in this generation".

They were visited by men of vision such as Dr John R. Mott, a pioneer of the Student

13

Minutes 1904, pp.73-74 14

Minutes 1905, p.71. During this period, there was interesting experiments in ecumenical

journalism. For some years Presbyterian, Congregational and Methodist Church journals

were combined in the one publication under the name: "The Outlook". 15

Minutes 1905 p. 72 16

Ibid p.72 17

Ibid p.72



Christian Movement which was later to become the inspiration and meeting ground of

so many of the leaders of the Churches across several generations. In 1917 the now

united Methodist Conference noted "with gratification the progress in many countries

of the movement for close relations of the Christian Church" and reappointed its

Committee on Unity and Co-operation with the Rev. H.E. Bellhouse as Convener.

In 1913 the New Zealand Methodist Church had become independent of the General

Conference of Australasia and at the same time Wesleyan and Primitive Methodists

united as one Church under one Conference. While there was a tendency for the larger

group to absorb the smaller, there were continuing differences of viewpoint especially

in matters of faith and order that still add vitality and valuable controversy to

contemporary Methodism. Sometimes the diversity has been sociologically

conditioned. Both shared an inherited pragmatism, evangelical concern and

commitment to social righteousness.

The older more settled way of life of the pre-1914 era crumbled with the outbreak of

the First World War. The 1918 Conference recognised that the Church faced problems

"that will need for their solution all the strength that comes from unity of purpose and

counsel and action amongst the various religious denominations". Conference judged

organic union beyond present reach and opted for "such a federation as would, while

safeguarding the autonomy of the individual Churches, provide for the mutual co-

operation in Christian service and thus prepare the way for a yet fuller measure of

union and concord".18

Chaplains returning home added their voices. On a battlefield,

Denominationalism did not count as they ministered to all in need wherever they

were. In the desperate urgency the needs of the Gospel were paramount.

At the following Conference an overture was received from the Presbyterian General

Assembly: "That in view of the manifest weakness and loss occasioned to the work of

the Christian Church through its manifold divisions, and especially of the waste of

men, money and effort in our own country through the overlapping and over-

multiplication of churches in sparsely-peopled rural districts; in view of the pressing

need of at least a living federation of the Churches for the solution of the exacting

problems that the War is thrusting upon all the Churches; in view of the fact that

several denominations working by our side in this Dominion are very near us, both in

their interpretation of the Evangel and their general methods of work, and, above all,

in view of the mind of our Lord, reflected in His Word, that His people should,

wherever possible, without sacrifice of essential conviction, manifest their inward

unity in an outward union", the membership be asked to indicate whether they would

"consider sympathetically a definite movement aiming at a union of the Presbyterian,

Methodist and Congregational Churches in New Zealand, and of such other Christian

bodies as may find it possible to come together on the basis of a common polity". The

18

Minutes 1918, p.103



Conference, in reply, affirmed its "allegiance to the principle of union, providing that

a satisfactory basis of union both as to creed and polity, can be agreed upon".19

When

again the Presbyterian voting prevented the Assembly from proceeding further, the

Conference of 1920 indicated its regret and expressed the hope that union would yet

come for the sake of the Gospel and set up a Committee to explore this further. The

Rev. J.H. Haslam was made convener.20

Conference did not feel that the time was ripe

for the joint training of theological students, as suggested by the Presbyterians. Before

any further advance was to be made, the Churches were committed to deeper

theological searching.

19

Minutes 1919, pp.120-124 20

Minutes 1920, pp. 123-124.



CHAPTER III

THE NEW CLIMATE

The outbreak of War in September 1939 found the Churches in New Zealand inwardly

divided on the ethical issues involved, hesitating in leadership in the community,

looking for new vision to match the need of the times. There were, however, across

the Churches, men and women of insight who were beginning to reach out to fresh

understanding and who, in so doing, transcended denominational barriers.

It was the National Council of Churches that helped create the climate for advance

towards union. The unification of the Churches was not of course its task but, since its

inception in April 1941 under the chairmanship of Archbishop West-Watson,21

the

Council kept bringing them together in a sustained stimulus of searching discussion in

a mutual self discovery, leading frequently to common worship and action. Overseas

leaders were enabled to make their impact upon the wider New Zealand Community,

L. Newbigin, T.Z. Koo, D.T. Niles, Visser t'Hooft, M.M. Thomas, for example,

catching the imagination of so many in the student world as in the leadership of the

Church.

The Campaign for Christian Order of March 1942 was a serious attempt on the part of

the Churches of the N.C.C., using press, radio, public platform, and pulpit, to confront

the nation with the claims of the Gospel for the renewal of society. The New

Zealander was invited to look to the world beyond the present conflict and to consider

the urgent need for freedom and justice, and for a true enlargement of life for the

individual citizen, the family, and the community. Congregations were persuaded to

meet locally in dialogue and, where initiative appeared, there was a response. This

was a first cautious step outside the barricades where men and women across the

denominations were surprised to recognise one another as Christians. A new

dimension had appeared in Church life to make possible the era of ecumenical

consultation in the twin areas of Life and Work, Faith and Order.

Life and Work

The desire to act together constructively led to the first Life and Work Conference in

August 1945 in Christchurch.22

Nearly 200 representatives of the Churches discussed

the themes of the Gospel in relation to World Community, to the Maori People, to

Industry, Commerce and Land, and to Education. Social justice not only here but also

in the Pacific was of special concern. The consultation on the Maori People was led by

Bishop F.A. Bennett, Bishop of Aotearoa. Out of this developed in 1947 the Maori

21

Story told in "Forty Years On", Colin Brown, N.C.C. 1981. 22

"They Met at Christchurch", N.C.C., 1945.



Section of the N.C.C. under the guidance of Bishop Bennett, and to it J.G. Laughton

and G.I. Laurenson were to add their contribution. For some years the secretaryship

was in the hands of H.A. Darvill. Effective Maori leadership has shaped the Section

into Te Runanga Whakawhanaunga I Nga Haahi Aoteroa. Those Pakeha privileged to

share in the Section Huis noted the deep sense of community underlying all the

diversity and often heard it said that denominationalism was an intrusion upon Maori

life. A parallel concern was later to emerge that a close union of the Churches might

cut across existing relationships with religious communities, especially the Ratana and

the Ringatu Churches, not involved in any negotiations. Another emerging fact

focussed upon the shaping of Maori Theology.23

The Christchurch Conference also lent its support and gave impetus to the movement

towards the establishment of a Faculty-of Theology in the University of Otago, a

development of great significance for this country.

While co-operative ventures brought people together for specific times and purposes,

at their conclusion there would be a return to separate ways. A stronger dynamic was

needed and recognition gained ground that there could be no advance towards union

without first going deeper. The search for wholeness in Church and Society must

reach for roots in the theological.

Faith and Order

Marsden College, Wellington, in 1947 provided the venue for the first New Zealand

Faith and Order Conference. 165 representatives of the N.C.C. Churches met in the

now lengthening ecumenical traditions of the Edinburgh Missionary Conference of

1910 (where Churches out of their missionary dispersion around the world confessed

together the urgency on the mission field itself to demonstrate unity for the sake of the

Gospel) the Lausanne Conference of 1927, and the Edinburgh Faith and Order

Conference of 1937. They took up the themes of the latter Conference, the doctrines

of Grace, Church, Ministry, Sacraments and with some excitement discovered that

areas of agreement far exceeded those of disagreement. Differences were by no means

minimised but now could be examined more objectively in the new understanding of

the underlying intention. Caution still prevailed, representatives stepping out from the

battlements to find the air fresh and invigorating but occasionally retreating in

apprehension of being quoted back home. In each denomination, the discovery of

theological inadequacy was shattering, Methodists meeting every lunch hour to

discover their position, Presbyterians gathering into another corner, Anglicans once

staying up all night in similar pursuit. One result of the Conference for the Methodists

was the formation of the Faith and Order Committee which has never since been

23

"The Maori Response to the Gospel" R.D. Rakena, W.H.S., 1970.



without living issues of faith and order to consider at the request of the Conference.24

The Marsden Conference reaffirmed the Edinburgh statement: "We humbly

acknowledge that our divisions are contrary to the will of Christ, and we pray God in

His mercy to shorten the days of our separation and to guide us by His Spirit into

fullness of unity. ..... We desire also to declare to all men everywhere our assurance

that Christ is the one hope of our unity for the world in face of the distractions and

dissensions of this present time".25

It was felt as a grief and hurt that those who shared

the one faith could not yet meet together around the Table of the one Lord of the

Church.

The Second Faith and Order Conference was held in May 1955 in Sumner,

Christchurch, this time under the chairmanship of the Rev. H.L. Fiebig, also chairman

of the N.C.C. Preparatory questions were submitted to the participating Churches with

their answers collated in the N.C.C. publication, "Towards the One Church". In their

response to the question on the disunity of the Church, Methodists claimed their place

within the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church. The Church is intended to be

'visible to the world as one in Spirit and love, one in faith, purpose and hope' . . that

this unity 'be a witness to the world of her divine character'. Unity as a gift of God

permits within it both liberty and diversity, while the mission of the Church in the

world provides motivation for the recovered of unity. The statement further owned a

responsibility to 'preserve and present within the world Church her distinctive

witness'. The essential emphases of Methodism 'have been partially absorbed by other

Communions, but in their combination Methodism has developed a distinctive life and

ethos'. When Methodism is true to itself, this ethos is 'characterised by joyous

religious experience within the Church, and by a strong social righteousness within the

community'. On the matter of the relationship of the Bible to worship, faith and order,

the authority was recognised of God's self-disclosure through the biblical record but it

was stated that it is neither possible nor necessary to reproduce the worship and order

of the New Testament Church. Fidelity to the apostolic Gospel provides continuity.

The Sumner Conference began where the Marsden one left off. Dr JJR. Nelson,

Secretary of the World Council Faith and Order Section helped the representatives to

see and to articulate the convictions of faith that lay behind all that was happening.

The Conference was notable for a change of method away from decision by majority,

often unhelpful in a '49/'51 situation, towards one individual's appraisal of the

discussions, followed by community reflection and suggestion, leading to consensus.

Here the Conference learned from the experience of the Society of Friends and of

Congregationalism.

24

The Faith and Order Committee developed from an ad hoc Conference Committee on

the Probationary System and the Diaconate in 1949. 25

N.C.C. Report pp 11-12.



Among the affirmations that emerged were these:

* The Unity of the Church is not to be created but manifested, grounded as it is

in God's redeeming act in Jesus Christ. New Testament metaphors for the

Church, Body, Vine, Israel, suggest organic unity with continuing life and

growth.

* The unity is obscured, no one part of the Church having arrived at the fullness

of catholicity. Division at the

Eucharist hides from the worlds the sufficiency of Christ's atonement.

* The constraint towards reunion is of the Spirit, the pressure both theological

and missionary. It is not expediency but obedience, a movement of penitence

towards reconciliation, not to give away but to offer up to receive again from the

Lord of the Church.

* Recovery of union must be local to be real. Super-structures and power

combines are not part of such a Church, where the fullness of Christ is made

available to all people everywhere. The question facing the contemporary

Churches is: 'Do you want to be made whole'?26

If the beginning of the Conference, representatives might have wondered if even God

knew what he was up against, they were very moved to find that they had reached a

point of unity not experienced before. When each denominational group was asked if

there was anything in Scripture or tradition to prevent their moving towards organic

union, the answer in each case was a clear 'No'. When the question was raised

concerning sectional unions preparatory to a larger final union, a consensus emerged

that it would be better for as many of the Churches as possible in New Zealand to

move together out of their fragmentation into union. Smaller groupings could harden

into power blocs and even make the final decisions more difficult. The present

disarray at least offered some freedom of common search and action.

The emphasis upon theology as a doing of the truth, a praxis, was underlined again at

the Second Life and Work Conference at the Ardmore Teachers' College in 1959.27

Its

theme, 'The Christian Faith and the Common Life of New Zealand' was developed,

under four topics in Christian Education, International Affairs, Technical Assistance,

Radio and Television. Stimulus was provided by two visitors T.Z. Koo and Robert S.

Bilheimer of the World Council. Dr Bilheimer sharpened consciousness as to personal

factors involved in aid programmes both for givers and receivers and pointed to the

26

These statements are abridged from those issued at the Conference. 27

The Methodist Conference had suggested a second Life and Work Conference in 1955,

Minutes p.180/8. R. Thornley was a Section Chairman and W. Greenslade presented the

paper on Radio and Television. Preacher at Conference Service J.J. Lewis.



development of self help pilot projects in which receiving countries were enabled to

make their own decisions and responses with the aid of the necessary tools.

The movement towards union in New Zealand had lost none of its concern for the

healing of divisions in the context of the recovery of wholeness in society. The unity

of all society is the setting for the reunion of the Church.

The Third Faith and Order Conference brought together at Massey College,

Palmerston North,28

a broad spectrum of the Churches in New Zealand, Protestant and

Catholic, Lutheran and Ukrainian Orthodox, and the Ratana Church, representatives

from Australia and the Pacific, scientists and theologians. Considering in particular

Christian dialogue with the historian, other religions, with the scientist, and the

dialogue about the Bible, the Conference finally faced the question 'What is the

Gospel'? It was given to Dr Munroe Peaston to present a personal statement that won

an immediate and positive response and then some questioning as to what it means to

be 'honest to God' in a specifically scientific world. The secular debate was still to

break open in New Zealand. Nevertheless the Conference had declared science and

theology to be complementary in their search for truth and that for both the scientist

and the theologian the relatedness and unity of all truth as one reality was a matter of

faith. The approved statement affirmed as good news that, 'out of sheer love', God has

acted in Jesus for the salvation of mankind. The news is good because it promises to

all people, individually and corporately, in their brokenness, dividedness, 'the total

renewal of their condition'. It offers them 'wholeness in the love of God'.29

While there

was a clearly articulated desire to continue to seek new ways of expressing the

message committed to the Church so that the Twentieth Century citizen could hear it

as good news, the Conference itself reached a clear conviction that there was nothing

to stop all the Churches represented from going out to New Zealand together with the

Gospel.

Joint Working Committee

Ecumenical relationships widened significantly in the establishment of the N.C.C.

Joint Working Committee in June 1969, designed to provide liaison and dialogue

between the Roman Catholic Church and those of the National Council.30

A statement

on Baptism with an agreed common Baptismal Certificate were among the first

results. Discussions led to the production of the N.C.C. publication, 'Authority,

Conscience and Dissent' and work has continued on questions of mixed marriage,

28

Now Massey University. 29

Abridged. The full statement and coverage are given in the N.C.C. report, "Massey

1964", pp.56-57. 30

P.M. Guthardt, W.S. Daws on, J.J. Lewis were Methodist representatives, then

replacements made by J.A. Ziesler and J. Silvester.



ministry, social justice. This post-Vatican II joint exploration has itself helped to

produce a new climate for ecumenism in New Zealand. Commencement has been

made also with the development of a Roman Catholic - Methodist dialogue following

the pattern of such consultations as have already taken place in the United States.31

The N.C.C. has produced reports of all these ecumenical events and they call for fresh

study. Such has been the climate of thought that developed over a period of 20-30

years, indicating a widespread desire, lay as well as professional, for the recovery of

the unity of the Church in New Zealand, and providing dynamic and direction for the

work of the Joint Standing Committee on Church Union and the present Joint

Commission on Church Union

31

New moves have been initiated by T. Wall, Bishop Ashby, with the approval of the Faith

and Order Committee. Minutes, 1980 p.296, 298/6.



CHAPTER IV

METHODIST INITIATIVE

Following a further abortive attempt by the Presbyterian Church in the early thirties to

secure the support of Sessions for the opening of conversations on Church Union with

the other Churches, the initiative passed to the Methodist Church.

In 1939 the Conference re-affirmed its historical position on Church Union to the

effect that "we are prepared to make and receive advances from either the

Congregational or Presbyterian Churches or both with a view to a discussion of a

possible basis of union"32

and urged the Public Questions Committee to take

appropriate action. This met with a sympathetic reply from the Presbyterian Assembly

which authorised their Life and Work Committee to enter into conversations on the

issue. In the same year the Congregational Union responded favourably and set up a

special committee for discussions with the other two Churches.

In 1940 the Conference received a draft Basis for the Union of the Methodist Church

and the churches of the Congregational Union of New Zealand which had been

approved by a joint committee of the two churches.33

It included a brief Statement of

Faith and a basis of Church Order. The Statement of Faith was based on the New

Catechism of the Methodist Church together with the doctrinal clauses in the Standing

Orders of the British Methodist Conference. It also drew upon the short Statement of

Faith issued by the Church of Scotland.

The Conference thereupon declared its conviction "that it is the will of God for his

church in this age that she should seek to express her inner unity in Christ Jesus in

terms unmistakable to the world and also that she should use her resources in a

manner that will transcend all denominational rivalry and best promote the interests of

the Kingdom of God . . ."34

A Committee on Church Union was appointed with the

Rev. W.A. Burley as Convener.

In the same year the Presbyterian Assembly adopted a recommendation of the Life

and Work Committee that actual negotiations, as distinct from conversations, be

entered into the appointed a special Church Union Committee with convener the Rev.

J.M. Bates. An amendment that "it is not expedient to enter upon so highly

controversial a matter as union with another church when the Empire is fighting for its

32

Conference Minutes 1939. p.68. The question was raised in the Auckland Synod and in

Conference by the Rev. G.I. Laurenson. 33

Conference Minutes 1940, pp.74-82. 34

Idem p.83.



life"35

was rejected by a large majority. The Congregational Union also considered

that the time was ripe for tripartite discussions to be initiated, and reconstituted its

Committee on Church Union to continue discussions with a view to preparing the way

for an early union of the three churches. The Rev. Herbert Newell was appointed

Convener of the Committee.

The pressure of events in the outbreak of World War II together with the growing

impact of the Ecumenical Movement was bringing a new sense of urgency in the

search for unity. During the next few years the representatives of the three negotiating

churches gave themselves to the preparation of a Basis of Union. The first two joint

meetings were held in 1941 under the Chairmanship of the Rev. J. Thompson Macky

and, despite differences and difficulties, the outcome was a proposed Basis of Union

which it was hoped would be accepted by the three churches. In all its work on the

Basis the Methodist Church Union Committee established a close liaison with the

eight District Consultative Committees which had been appointed by the Conference.

In order to ascertain the mind of the Connexion the 1942 Conference resolved to

forward the proposed Basis,36

together with an exposition of its contents, to June

Quarterly Meetings and the Synods. The following issues were submitted to Quarterly

Meetings and Synods for a vote:

(a) I vote for the proposed Basis of Union;

(b) I vote for the proposed Basis with Amendments;

(c) I vote against the proposed Basis of Union.

The result of the voting as reported to the 1943 Conference was as follows:

Quarterly Meetings - for the Basis,, 275;

For the Basis with Amendments, 1268,

Against the Basis 1204.

Synods - For the Basis, 41;

For the Basis with Amendments, 215;

Against the Basis, 152.37

In the light of the voting Conference reaffirmed its desire to pursue Union with the

other two churches and appointed a central Committee on Church Union and

empowered it "to continue negotiations . . . with a view to the production of a more

acceptable basis and that the several Committee be asked to give careful consideration

to the principle adopted in Canada whereby congregations of the Churches entering

35



Conference Minutes 1943, p.134 for detailed results.



Union may continue the organisation and practices enjoyed by them at the time of

Union."38

It was now recognised that more education of the membership of the Church on the

issue of Church Union was needed. The view of the Church Union Committees of all

three Churches was that while the prospects for final organic union were good, union

should not be unduly hurried.

Serious attention was now given to the fostering of fraternal relations amongst

ministers and people of the negotiating churches and to the exploring of all possible

means for effective co-operation and joint action "in matters in which it was possible

to make common cause." An invitation from the Presbyterian Church to the President

to visit the Assembly was received with appreciation by the Conference which

cordially reciprocated by inviting the Moderator of the Assembly and the Chairman of

the Congregational Union to visit the Conference as honoured guests.

Meantime the Amendments39

to the Basis of Union proposed by the Methodist

Committee were considered by the Joint Committee with special attention being given

to the Eldership, the qualifications for membership of the Higher Courts and questions

of ministerial tenure.

In 1945 the amended Basis of Union was presented to the Churches and this was

referred by the Conference to the Synods for their consideration and report.

Arrangements were made for a delegation representative of each of the negotiating

committees to present the Basis as amended to Presbyteries, Synods and

Congregational District Committees.

The work of the Joint Committee was now marked by a spirit of optimism and sub-

committees were appointed to explore the possibilities of joint action in the following

areas: Union Churches, the alignment of the curricula of the three Theological

Colleges, and reciprocal church membership where a member resides in a district in

which his denomination is not represented. Committees were also set up with a view

to co-operation in women's work, in literature and publicity and in interchange of

ministries. The Youth Departments were already co-operating in combined camps and

in the publishing of a common Bible Class Syllabus. The Conference of 1946

requested the Church Building and Loan Fund to consult with the official

representatives of the other two negotiating churches to help formulate a suitable

constitution for Federal or Union Churches in new housing areas and to define the

relation of such churches to the Connexional departments and funds. Reference to the

success of the Union Church at Raglan and to moves towards local union in other

parts of the country was made in the report of the Church Union Committee to the

38

Ibid p.135. 39

Conference Minutes 1945, p.157.



1947 Conference. A further significant step in closer co-operation between the three

Churches was the approval by the Conference of a resolution on Mutual Eligibility of

Membership.40

It declared that "Communicant Membership in any of the negotiating

Churches shall be recognised as sufficient for clear transfer into full membership in

any other of the three Churches".

The 1948 Vote on the Basis of Union

The key event reported to the 1947 Conference as the action of the Presbyterian

Assembly in approving the Basis of Union by an overwhelming vote. The Assembly

also decided that during 1947 and 1948 congregations would be contacted by

members of the Church Union Committee and that a vote in the congregations would

be taken in 1948. Believing that the time had come for the Conference to vote on the

adoption of the Basis of Union the Methodist Church Union Committee recommended

"that the Conference approve the Basis of Union as an outline of the doctrine and

polity on which we can unite with the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches and

submits it to the Quarterly Meetings for June, 1948, for approval".41

This was carried

by an impressive majority of the Conference and arrangements were made for every

Quarterly Meeting to be visited by a Church Union Committee member to explain the

Basis before the vote was taken.

The final arrangements for the taking of the vote were made at the 1948 Conference,

in addition to the vote at June Quarterly Meetings, it was resolved that "in order to

ascertain the mind of the full Membership of the Church, ... in each Circuit and Home

Mission Station a ballot of all Church members be taken on the Basis of Union, such

ballot to be taken prior to the voting of the June Quarterly Meeting . . ."42

The voting

was to take place in properly constituted meetings of Church members but an

opportunity was to be given to those unable to attend to record their vote. In the

Quarterly Meetings only those present were eligible to vote and the voting was by

ballot. The wording on the ballot paper was as follows:

"I vote in favour of the Proposed Basis".

"I vote against the Proposed Basis".

In order to ensure full discussion and enlightenment upon every aspect of the Church

Union proposals the Conference agreed to the appointment of an accredited committee

which was permitted to express the views of those who, while strongly adhering to the

principle of union, were unable to accepted the Proposed Basis.43

The Convener of

40

Conference Minutes 1947 , p.167 Res. 5. 41

Ibid p.167 Res. 2. 42

Conference Minutes 1948, p.167. 43




this committee was the Rev. Henry Ryan, one of Conference's most redoubtable

debaters, who had become the leading spokesman for those opposed to the Basis of

Union.

The results of the voting were:44

Members: For the Basis of Union 60.14%, Against 39.86%;

Quarterly Meetings: For the Basis 61.1% Against 38.9%.

The Conference, while expressing gratification at the increased official vote as

compared with 1942, recorded its regret that only 55.5% of Church members

exercised the privilege of voting. In the Presbyterian Church 58.9% of those who

voted were in favour of the Basis of Union and 39.86% were opposed.

Both the Methodist and Presbyterian Churches realised that although they had a

majority in favour it was not large enough to proceed with Union. In conveying the

results of the voting to one another, each of the Supreme courts expressed regret that

the majority in favour was not large and reaffirmed earlier resolutions - the

Presbyterian Assembly the resolution of 1933 "that it is the will of God that greater

visibility should be given to the unity of Christ's Church in this land . . . ", and the

Methodist Conference 1940 resolution "that it is the will of God for His Church in this

age - that she should seek to express her inner unity in Jesus Christ in terms

unmistakable to the world . . ." The Conference also reciprocated the desire of the

Assembly "that the increased measure of mutual understanding and practical co-

operation which the negotiations have fostered may be preserved.'45

It appeared at first that this would be the end of Church Union for a while but

subsequent events proved otherwise. The Presbyterian Assembly discharged its

special Church Union Committee only to re-establish it as one of its Standing

Committees with a clear order of reference "to preserve and foster further co-operation

with the Methodist and Congregational Churches, and, to this end, to enter into

conference when necessary with the Church Union Committees of these two

churches". The Methodist Conference also set up a new Church Union committee to

pursue a campaign of education in the progress and principles of Church Union and to

explore the possibilities of the formation, wherever desirable, of Union Churches

similar to those at Raglan, Costorphine and Taita with a constitution agreed upon by

the Supreme courts of the three churches. The Committee was also given authority to

approach the other negotiating churches with a view to closer co-operation in Maori

Mission work, ministerial training, Youth work, the establishment of a School for

Christian Workers and along such other avenues as may be desirable and practicable.

44


Ibid p. 152, Res. 5.



The Conference took opportunity to record its thanks to the Rev. W.A. Burley, M.A.

as Convener of the Church Union Committee for the preceding ten years for his

outstanding contribution to the cause of Church Union. The Rev. A.K. Petch was

appointed to succeed him as Convener.



CHAPTER V

THE ERA OF THE JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON

CHURCH UNION

The urgent need for mutual consultation between the Churches became apparent in the

first report to Conference of the new Committee on Church Union. Reports of the

Union Churches at Raglan, Taita and Corstorphine revealed harmonious working

within each local congregation but highlighted certain practical difficulties, requiring

immediate attention, in their relation to the various departments of the participating

Churches. Church extension, which was being undertaken by both the Methodist and

Presbyterian Churches in the new housing areas which were mushrooming at the time,

called for clarification of policy, as between the two churches, through conversations

at the highest possible level. Further it had become clear to the Committee that any

programme of education in the progress and principles of Church Union, to be

effective, required that it be prepared and implemented simultaneously by the three

Churches.

In 1950 both the Conference and the Assembly agreed to open the way for such

consultation by the calling of a meeting in 1951 at the Moderator - President level.

There agreement was reached on the need for the two churches to consult together on

such matters as the selection of sites in new areas, investigating problems arising in

Union Churches and defining a system of reciprocal membership. It was also agreed

that a combined meeting of the Church Union Committees of the Presbyterian,

Methodist and Congregational Churches should be held in May, 1951.

This Joint Meeting was the first occasion on which representatives of the three

churches had met since the Vote on the Proposed Basis of Union was taken in 1948.

The most far reaching decision in furthering united action was the appointment of a

Joint Standing Committee of the three churches to be located in Wellington and to

report annually to the co-operating churches through their respective Church Union

Committees. Composition of the Committee was on the basis of five Presbyterian, five

Methodist and two Congregationalist representatives. The original members of the

Committee were: Presbyterian - Rev's J.G.S. Dixon, J.M. Bates, L.G. Geering, J.R.

Shaw and Mr T.C. Brash; Methodist: Rev's G.H. Goodman, M.A. McDowell, A.K.

Petch and Messrs R.H. Ellis and T.M. Pacey; Congregational: Rev. R.L. Challis and

Mr C. Gibson Young. The Committee was fortunate to have as its first Convener the

Rev. L.G. Geering whose clear thinking, balanced judgments and deep ecumenical

concern helped the committee tackle its task with confidence and hope.46

46

Subsequent Conveners of the Joint Standing Committee were: Rev. A.K. Petch (1956);

Rev. R.S. Anderson (1957-60); Rev. J.E. Stewart (1961-65).



The Joint Standing Committee after developing procedures in regard to Reciprocal

Membership and dealing with other practical matters affecting Union Churches and

their oversight, turned its attention to the basic issue of Church Union. Its first concern

was the preparation of an educational programme on the principles and history of

Church Union. To this end the Presbyterian Church supplied the Committee with "the

Ten Propositions re the Unity of the Church and Church Union"47

as adopted by the

Assembly and which had been welcomed by the Methodist Conference (1952) as

providing a fitting beginning to further negotiations for the organic union of the three

churches. The Methodist Conference also presented to the Committee its own

"Statement on the Unity and Reunion of the Church"48

in which it reaffirmed the

doctrine of the Church as set forth -in a Statement approved by the British Methodist

Conference, 1937, entitled, "The Nature of the Christian Church" and also its earlier

Statements on the unity and reunion of the church including those in the report of the

Faith and Order Committee of 1952. It was clear from these Statements that both

churches had not only established an adequate basis for a joint educational programme

but also had gone a considerable distance towards committing themselves to the

principle of union. The Methodist Conference had already empowered its

representatives to re-open negotiations in regard to organic union, should the response

from the other two churches prove favourable.

The next step was clearly enunciated in No. 7 of the Ten Propositions: "It is the duty

of the' separated denominations .... to examine their differences with a view to

discovering whether the grounds of their separation are any longer of essential

importance, and where no fundamental principles are found to divide them, it is their

duty to enter into corporate union as soon as it is convenient and practicable". The

Joint Standing Committee unanimously agreed that it found no matters of essential

importance which necessitated continued separation and affirmed its conviction that

corporate union between the three denominations was both desirable and practicable.

When the question was referred to the three churches the Presbytertian General

Assembly and the Methodist Conference both expressed their conviction that there

were no insuperable obstacles which would make corporate union impossible between

them and that the consummation of union was a matter of urgency. The

Congregational Union did not declare its mind so clearly but expressed its continued

interest in Church Union. The stage was now set for the re-opening of negotiations.

In approaching Church Union afresh the Joint Standing Commitee dealt first with the

question of principle. In 1953 a programme of "Eight Steps Towards Union,"49

was

outlined by the Joint Standing Committee and submitted to the co-operating churches,

47


Ibid pp.159-160, 161. 49

Conference Minutes 1953, pp.166-7 .



each of whom approved them. The Steps included the preparation and adoption of a

common baptismal certificate, the annual observance of a programme of united

services, fellowship and study on or near World Communion Sunday, a "Church

Union Year" culminating in simultaneous gatherings in the same centre of the

Presbyterian General Assembly, the Methodist Conference and the Assembly of the

Congregational Union, a first vote on the principle of Union, the preparation of a

common Statement of Faith and a minimum framework of a Basis of Union followed

by a second vote for or against the Statement of Faith and the Basis of Union as

prepared.

At this stage the Supreme courts of the three churches approved an increase of the

membership of the Joint Standing Committee to 8 Presbyterian, 8 Methodist and 3

Congregational representatives.50

One of the early steps was the holding of a Retreat widely representative of the three

churches, at Feilding in May, 1954, for prayer and the study of the theological

implications involved in church union, and for the selection of material to be used in

the programme of education.

Arising out of the material and the discussions of this Retreat a Study booklet, "Shall

We Unite?" was prepared to encourage a careful study of the subject by all members

of local churches of the three denominations. Included in the study booklet was a final

study incorprating the views of those who were not convinced of the desirability of

Church Union. Approval was given by the Supreme Courts of the Churches for the

study programme to be implemented during 1956. To this end steps were taken to

ensure that Joint Regional Committees were set up in areas where they were not

already established. One of their functions was to initiate the Church Union study

programme and to encourage the holding of joint meetings of neighbouring

congregations, united ministerial retreats and youth camps for the purpose. This year

of study of church union at all levels of church life was to culminate in the holding of

Simultaneous Assemblies and Conference in Auckland in November 1956,

preparatory to a vote on the Principle of Union to be taken by the co-operating

churches in 1957.

It also became clear that before another Basis of Union was prepared it was desirable

to reach agreement on an adequate Statement of Faith. In 1954 the Churches gave

authority to the Joint Standing Committee to proceed with the drafting of a Common

Declaration of Faith, to be undertaken in close consultation with the doctrinal

committees of the three churches and to be submitted to the churches for adoption.

50

Ibid p.169, Res. 5.



Invitation to other Churches in the N.C.C.

In 1953, at the time when re-negotiations were about to commence, the Joint Standing

Committee recommended to the three churches that an invitation be sent to the other

constituent members of the National Council of Churches in New Zealand to share in

preliminary discussions on Church Union.51

This was agreed to and in 1954 an

invitation was sent over the signatures of the Moderator of the Presbyterian Assembly,

the President of the Methodist Conference and the Chairman of the Congregational

Union. Replies indicated that the Baptist Church, the Salvation Army and the Society

of Friends found themselves unable to take any positive step. The General Synod of

the Church of the Province of New Zealand (Anglican) appointed a special

Commission whose duty was to examine what had thus far been achieved by the Joint

Standing Committee, examine what had been done or was being planned in other

branches of the Anglican Communion and advise the next General Synod (1958) of

what action it recommended should be undertaken. The Associated Churches of Christ

accepted the invitation and after reporting on a preliminary meeting with the Joint

Standing Committee indicated their intention "to continue association with the present

Joint Committee on Church Union and with any other organisation established for the

same purpose". The Joint Standing Committee, in response, invited five

representatives of the Associated Churches of Christ to become members in full

standing of the Joint Standing Committee.

The advent of the Associated Churches of Christ into Church Union negotiations gave

a new stimulus to the work of the Joint Standing Committee and added a new

theological dimension to the preparation of a Common Declaration of Faith especially

in regard to Baptism and Ministry. Their presence meant also that four churches

would now be involved in the vote on the Principle of Union and a Church of Christ

supplement to the study booklet "Shall We Unite?" was prepared. It included two

appendices one historical, setting forth the traditional attitude of the Churches of

Christ to Christian Unity and the other, doctrinal. A representative of the Associated

Churches of Christ was also invited to join the Arrangements Committee for

simultaneous Assemblies and Conferences in Auckland, 1956.

Simultaneous Assemblies & Conferences, 1956

The holding of simultaneous Assemblies and Conferences marked a further milestone

in the growing together of the negotiating churches. Three United Acts were observed

- United and Simultaneous Communion Services on Friday, 2nd November in St

David's Presbyterian Church, Pitt Street Methodist Church and Beresford Street

Congregational Church with representatives of each court present at each service; a

United Act of Worship in the Auckland Town Hall on Sunday, 4th November,

51

Conference Minutes 1953, p.169, Res. 2.



conducted by the Heads of the four participating churches; a United Act of Witness in

the Auckland Town Hall on Tuesday evening, 6th November, which took the form of

a dramatic presentation of the missionary work of the participating churches both at

home and overseas, with the Rev. S.G. Andrews, M.A., General Secretary for Foreign

Missions of the Methodist Church of New Zealand, as the speaker.

The high moment of the Joint Assemblies and Conferences came during the United

Act of Worship when the representatives of the four Churches present declared,52

"before God and the world, that sharing the Christian faith we do now enter into a new

relationship, convenanting with God and with one another in all matters of common

concern to learn from one another, as the Spirit may direct, and to seek all

opportunities to express the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, in the service of

the Lord Jesus Christ whom we acknowledge to be the sole Head of the Church".

Vote on the Principle of Union

The significant decision made was that which authorised the taking of a vote on the

principle of Union during the period 14th - 24th June 1957, of all who were members

in full communion of each of the four negotiating churches. This was to be the first of

two projected votes. It was to be, in effect, a referendum to gauge clearly the desire

and willingness of the members of the churches involved to unite with one another,

provided a suitable basis could be found. Once a basis of union had been prepared a

second vote would be taken on whether the members of the churches concerned were

willing to unite with one another on that particular basis.

In late February 1957 the Joint Standing Committee, with the approval of the

churches, held a conference of representatives of Joint Regional Committees at the

Salvation Army Hostel, Akatarawa. Reports were received of action taken or

contemplated to ensure that, in all congregations, members were acquainted with the

issues involved in the vote on the principle of Church Union. The reports revealed that

enthusiasm and activity varied in each locality but that the over-all situation was

reasonably satisfactory. Plans were made for preparing for the vote in June and for

clarifying the procedure for the taking of the vote. A unanimous recommendation to

the Union Committees was that each church be responsible for preparing its own

"Every Member Statement" setting out the issues and implications of the vote on the

Principle of Union.

The issue submitted to our people was: "I am persuaded that the Methodist Church of

New Zealand should seek union (should not seek union) with the Associated Churches

of Christ in New Zealand, the Congregational Churches in New Zealand, the

Presbyterian Church of New Zealand and with other Churches which are similarly

convinced of the obligation to seek union".

52




Result of Vote53

Methodist voting returns indicated that 78% of members voted. Of that number

92.7% voted in favour,

6.8% voted against and

.5% of votes were invalid.

The Maori Membership was not included in the vote since the membership was under

revision.

In the Presbyterian Church 64.4% of those on the roll voted. Of these

75% voted in favour, a majority in every Presbytery;

23.7% voted against.

It was estimated that out of about 396 congregations 24 were in opposition.

The Congregational Union reported that 71% of the membership voted and of these

88% were in favour.

This represented 62% of the total membership. Only 50% of the 600 Pacific Islanders

took part in the vote.

In the Associated Churches of Christ the vote was a favourable one as expected.

93.7% of the votes cast being in favour or 69.4% of the total membership.

While there was general satisfaction at the strong support in the vote for proceeding

together to find a satisfactory basis of union, it was clear to the Joint Standing

Committee that important decisions had now to be made by the four churches

involved in the voting. In 1956 the Methodist Church Union Committee had

forwarded a request to the Joint Standing Committee to call a joint meeting of the

Union Committees of the four negotiating churches in 1957, following the vote on the

principle of union. This suggestion was now taken up and the churches approved the

holding in 1958 of such a Conference to survey present relationships to each other and

also possible next steps in negotiations. Meantime the Methodist Conference, having

received the results of the vote, declared to the other negotiating churches its readiness

to proceed further with negotiations. It also welcomed and endorsed the resolutions of

the Presbyterian General Assembly requesting the Joint Standing Committee to

proceed with the preparation of a Doctrinal Basis and to investigate the possibility of

united Theological Training.

53

Conference Minutes 1957, pp.173-4.



Conference of Representatives of the Four Negotiating Churches.54

The Conference was held at St Stephen's Church, Lower Hutt, from August 19-21st,

1958 and was attended by Church Union committees of the four Churches and other

representatives at their invitation. The Conference met in an atmosphere of worship

and against the background of the vote on the Principle of Union. The issues before

the Conference were matters of doctrine, co-operation in theological education,

spheres of practical co-operation and common action, the study of various bases of

union and policy concerning the future of Union parishes. Reports on these five fields

of study had been prepared by committees of each of the negotiating churches and

were discussed both in sections and in full Conference.

At an early stage it became clear that the Conference wanted the Joint Standing

Committee to proceed immediately with the preparation of a Basis of Union and a

resolution was prepared to this effect. It was greatly assisted by a report on a study of

various Bases of Union from overseas. The report defined the Nature of the Unity we

seek55

and set forth the principles which determine a Basis of Union. It affirmed that

"the nature of the unity we seek is simply the unity which Jesus Christ is seeking to

realise in and through his people" and is a given unity. Further it declared that "the test

of any union is that it expresses locally the great catholic unity of the Body of Christ"

and that "the ultimate aim is an indigenous Church that will be the New Zealand

expression of the Church Universal". It cautioned that unity does not mean uniformity

in thought and practice and that a union of any group of Churches should be on such a

basis that the way is opened and made easier for negotiations to proceed with yet other

churches when they are moved to seek union.

So strong was the feeling among representatives that a basis of union be prepared as

soon as possible and submitted to the vote of the people that a time-table to this end

was actually prepared and agreed to. The Joint Standing Committee, while sharing the

view that no time should be lost in preparing a draft basis of union and in referring it

to the courts of the churches and finally to a vote of church members, believed that the

process should not be rushed. It was concerned that all possible care should be taken

in the preparation of the Basis and in ensuring that before the vote was taken, all

members of the Churches be fully informed and clearly understand the issues they

were being called upon to determine. It therefore recommended to the churches that

the work of preparing a basis of union should be commenced immediately with a view

to submitting a proposed basis to the Supreme Courts of the Churches in 1959/60 for

referral to district and local courts in 1960/61, and for the vote of members of the

churches as soon thereafter as possible. This approach met with the approval of the

four churches.

54


Ibid p.168.



In the area of doctrine the Conference revealed substantial agreement concerning

many of the central doctrines of the Faith but also a pronounced divergence of view in

regard to the nature and authority of the Church, Baptism and Ministry. The latter two

issues were to prove crucial to the future of negotiations and to the preparation of a

Basis of Union. Discussion on the subject and mode of Baptism and the question of

re-baptism were enlightened by "Guiding Principles in regard to Alternative Practices

of Infant Baptism and Believers' Baptism" as set forth in the Plan of Church Union in

North India and Pakistan.56

It was resolved that the Joint Standing Committee proceed

to prepare the doctrinal section of a Basis of Union and set up a Commission at the

highest theological level to consider the doctrine of Baptism. These recommendations

were subsequently approved by the four churches.

The Conference recognised that co-operation amongst the participating churches

already existed over a wide area of activity and recommended the extension of such

co-operation in theological training, Christian Education, in the publishing of Church

Papers, the training of Lay Workers, the exchange of Observers at Assemblies and

Conferences and in combined activity at Parish level. It also requested that

investigations be made into the possibility of extending co-operation in the Social

Services, Student Hostels and in the utilising and deployment of workers for mission

areas.

A major issue before the Conference was the future of Union Parishes of which, at the

time, there were five - Raglan, a seaside town and rural area, established in 1943, and

Corstorphine, Dunedin, established in 1947, Taita, Lower Hutt, 1947, Marchwiel,

Timaru, 1951 and Wainui-0-Mata 1953 all of which were in New Housing areas. It

was not until 1949 that a Model Constitution for Union Churches was adopted by the

Assemblies and Conference of the three co-operating churches at that time. In each

situation the Union Parish came about, not through suggestions of the Higher Church

Courts nor by the action of the Joint Standing Committee, but by the clear conviction

of large groups of Christ's people in developing communities that their church life

should be together and not denominationally divided. Besides the Union Parishes

working under the Model Constitution there had been established in several other new

areas a system of co-operative working on the basis of Reciprocal Membership

whereby a church of one denomination would receive into membership a member of

another denomination as a "reciprocal member" for as long as his/her particular

denomination was not represented in that area.

It was recognised by the Conference that any departure from the principle of Union

Churches would shake the confidence of members of established Union Churches in

the sincerity of the churches' intentions in regard to ultimate union. The Joint Standing

56

Methodists do have a Service for the Thanksgiving for the Birth of a Child, not to be

confused with 'Dedication'.



Committee was recommended to undertake a review of the Model Constitution with

special reference to legal difficulties in the making of capital grants and loans to

Union Churches and to the settlement and tenure of the ministry. There was general

agreement that the formation of further Union Churches on the basis of the Model

Constitution should be deferred until the Supreme Courts of the negotiating churches

had approved a revised basis and the certainty of ultimate union was reasonably

established. It was recognised that effective Joint Regional Committees were essential

for consultation on plans for Church extension and co-operative working.

The Lower Hutt Conference, by its comprehensive survey of the areas of co-operation

and its concentration on the theological issues involved in a union of the four

churches, deepened considerably the fellowship and the understanding registered at a

further Conference of the four Union Committees held at Feilding House, 17-18

February, 1960, made possible the presentation of a Draft Basis of Union to the

Supreme Courts of the four Churches later that year.57

This draft Basis was the

outcome of a great deal of work undertaken initially by sub-committees of the Joint

Standing Committee and, following the Feilding Conference, by larger committees

situated in different centres - Ministry (Auckland), Convener: Rev. Dr Ian W. Fraser;

Doctrine (Feilding), Convener: Rev. J.E. Stewart; Polity and Organisation (Dunedin),

Convener: Rev. J.M. Bates; Sacraments of the Church (Lower Hutt), Convener: Rev.

E.R. Vickery; Worship (Wellington) Convener: Rev. A.M. Richards; Membership of

the Church (Christchurch), Convener: Rev. A.K. Petch. Reports of these Committees

along with the report of the Committee on Baptism, provided the material from which

the Basis of Union was prepared. In reporting to the Supreme Courts of the Church the

Joint Standing Committee made it clear that the Draft Basis was to be seen as a setting

forth of the main principles only, upon which a corporate union of the negotiating

churches could be effected. It was presented for submission to the district and local

Courts and to the congregations of the Churches for discussion at every level of

Church life. Comments and amendments were reported through the respective Church

Union Committees to the Joint Standing Committee with a view to the preparation of

a further draft to be presented, on completion, to the Supreme Courts and, if found to

be acceptable, to be submitted to the vote of the membership of the negotiating

churches.

Reply from the Anglican Church

It will be seen that the preparation of a Basis of Union was well advanced when, in

1959, the Joint Standing Committee received a reply from the Archbishop of New

Zealand, the Most Rev. R.H. Owen, to the invitation sent in 1954 by the Heads of the

three Churches to the other churches in the National Council of Churches to join them

in negotiations for Church Union, should they wish to do so. It was in response to this

57




invitation that the Associated Churches of Christ had already entered negotiations.

The Archbishop's letter indicated that, at the General Synod in 1958, the report of the

Commission, established to examine matters relating to corporate union of the

churches, had been received and that eight Anglican representatives had been

appointed to engage in exploratory conversations with the Joint Standing Committee

on Church Union.

After due preparation, the first Joint Meeting58

for exploratory conversations took

place at Feilding House on 16-17 February prior to the Conference of Union

Committees. The Joint Standing Committee was suitably strengthened for the

occasion by the presence of representative leaders of each of the four Churches. The

strong representation from the Anglican Church included the Rt Rev. N.A. Lesser,

Bishop of Waiapu, the Rt Rev. A.K. Warren, Bishop of Christchurch, the Warden of

St John's College, Auckland. Following a strong introductory statement by the Rev.

R.S. Anderson, convener of the Joint Standing Committee, on the history of Church

Union negotiations thus far, a very helpful paper on "Apostolic Succession" was

presented by Canon R.E. Sutton. A Statement by the Bishop of Christchurch on the

constitutional episcopacy as practised in New Zealand proved most enlightening. As a

result of this initial meeting the Anglican Commission on Church Union

recommended to the General Synod of February 1961, that the conversations be

continued.

It was fortuitous that these conversations were followed a few weeks later, on 8th

March in Wellington, by a most stimulating and profitable meeting with Bishop

Lesslie Newbigin,59

to which the Joint Standing Committee had invited members of

Union Committees. Bishop Newbigin spoke on "Basic Issues in Our Approach to

Unity" and dealt with Matters of Faith, Matters of the Ministry (especially episcopacy)

and Matters of Form. His main emphases were that the true approach to Unity is the

missionary approach - a concern for the world - and that the quest for unity is not a

matter of patching together present administrations, in what might be called

"ecclesiastical joinery," but of recovering the true character of the Church as the

embasage of Christ.

The report of the initial conversations with representatives of the Anglican Church,

together with that of Bishop Newbigin's visit, led the Methodist Conference to request

the Faith and Order Committee to prepare a Statement from the Methodist viewpoint

on episcopacy.60

This Statement was later commended for study in March Ministerial

Committees.

58



Ibid p.191, Res. 3 and Conference Minutes 1961, pp.214-5.



In the meantime reports of discussions and comments on the Draft Basis of Union had

been received by the Methodist Church Union Committee from four Synod Standing

Committees, seven Ministerial Committees, eighty-seven circuits, and from a few

branches of the Local Preachers' Association. The study of the Draft Basis had proved

stimulating and profitable. The issues of greatest concern to many Methodists and

those calling for careful revision were as follows:61

Section III, Polity and Organisation: the inclusion of a requirement that elders be

elected for a stated term and the need to define the relative functions and

responsibilities of the Parish Council and the congregational Board;

Section IVA, The Ministry of the Church Members: the need to provide for the

inclusion of the office of Local Preacher and the Order of Deaconesses;

Section IVB, 5, Ministerial Appointment and Discipline: While preferring "the

appointment" system to that of "the call" system of ministerial appointment, all

replies asked for safeguards, should the call system be adopted, in the provision

for the review and the termination of an existing ministry and for ensuring an

appointment for every minister, along with machinery to prevent long vacancies;

Section VB, the Practice of Baptism: Concern was expressed in some areas as to

whether a workable scheme could emerge and whether the proposals would

make the witness of the Church uncertain. But no adequate reason was given for

discontinuing negotiations;

Section V,2, The Sacrament of Holy Communion: Replies revealed a widespread

concern to safeguard the principle of "the Open Table".

A number of replies indicated general approval of the Basis as a whole and some

qualified their comments by stating that they did not wish their criticisms to hold up

negotiations for Union.

The Joint Standing Committee, after considering the replies sent in by the Union

Committees of the four Churches, submitted to the Churches material dealing with

four important matters requiring further consideration before a full revision of the

Basis of Union could be completed. It wished to inform the Churches of the problems

which had emerged and of the way the Committee was approached them. The first

was the need for a Preamble to the Draft Basis to express the nature of the convictions

which resulted in the negotiations for Church Union. The next had to do with the

Polity and Organisation of the Church. The replies called for greater clarity regarding

the office of elder, the authority of the Parish Council and the meeting of the

congregation. As a result of the reaction from the Churches to the section on the

Ministry of the Church, the Committee took a fresh approach to the whole question of

61




the settlement of ministers. Its objective was to preserve the rights and responsibilities

of congregations and ministers as well as to secure a general oversight of the Church

so as to ensure the most effective use of its ministerial resources. The most difficult

problems were those concerning Baptism, particularly in regard to the provision for

the presentation of infants and the clause concerning those baptised as infants who

might wish to be baptised as believers. A new draft of this section was submitted to

the Commission on Baptism which was representative of the four Churches.62

At the same time the Joint Standing Committee reported good progress in the

preparation of a Declaration of Faith.63

The Committee was greatly assisted in the task

by the work of two groups, one in Auckland with Principal E.W. Hames as Convener

and one in Dunedin with Principal John Allan as Convener. The intention was that

such a declaration be formally adopted by each of the four negotiating Churches

before the Basis of Union was submitted for vote. When a year later, following a study

of the Draft Declaration by the four churches, the revised Declaration of Faith was

submitted to the Churches for formal adoption, a Preface to the Declaration made its

intention abundantly clear. It stated that "As they approach each other with a view to

Union, the negotiating Churches wish to declare to each other that they stand firmly in

the Christian tradition and can therefore freely accept one another as Christian

Churches holding the one apostolic faith. In order to let this be clearly seen the

following Declaration is addressed by each to the others".

Certain resolutions of the 1962 Methodist Conference suggest a measure of

restlessness within the Church at the apparent slowing down of negotiations, due very

largely to persistent opposition which was being encountered within certain of the

churches. The Conference drew the attention of the Church Union Committee to the

urgent concern for progress in negotiations with the three other churches bearing in

mind the pressure and tension within new housing areas which the negotiating

churches were serving. This resolution was followed by another which declared that

Conference, "having heard explanations of its negotiations by the Church Union

Committee expresses its appreciation of the work of the Committee and affirms its

confidence in the Convener and the members of the Committee". It is significant that

in the report of the Joint Standing Committee to the Assemblies and Conferences that

year, 1962, there is this paragraph which introduces the section dealing with the

revision of the Draft Basis of Union: "We recall that these negotiations for Union

began and are continued because of the conviction that it is our Lord's will that His

Church should be one. We regard Union, therefore, not as a matter of expediency but

of obedience to Christ who is the one Head of the Church. This obedience does not

require us to disregard the convictions of those who do not feel obliged to seek visible

62


Conference Minutes 1962, pp.210-214; 1963 pp.196-7; 1964 p.184.



unity. But at the same time we must answer to Christ for the progress made in these

negotiations".64

It was against this background that the conversations between the Joint Standing

Committee and the Anglican representatives continued. There was a widespread

feeling within the Methodist Church and also within others of the negotiating churches

that it would have been more helpful if the Anglicans had delayed their approach until

the four churches had achieved Union. Inevitably the Anglican pressure would further

delay the possibility of Union. However, many who were closest to the negotiations

were of a different opinion. There was no guarantee, given the state of the play in

negotiations at the time, that Union between the four churches would be quickly or

easily achieved. Negotiations were proving difficult especially in regard to Baptism

and, at certain points, in regard to the Ministry.

The advent of the Anglicans would certainly confront the negotiating Churches with

further major doctrinal issues such as episcopacy but, as Bishop Newbigin had

reminded us, the more comprehensive the Union the more certainty there was that the

fundamental theological issues in regard to the Unity of the Church would be faced.

Further, a more comprehensive act of church union would the better serve the mission

of the church in New Zealand and beyond its shores.

As the conversations with the Anglicans progressed it became clear that a new

dimension was entering the negotiations. The openness on the part of Anglican leaders

brought a freshness of insight and at certain points where negotiations appeared to be

stalling, a sense of liberation.

At the second meeting in Feilding65

on May 30-31, 1961, agreement was reached in

the affirmation that the form of the Church springs from the Gospel and must declare

the Gospel. The gathering was greatly assisted in its discussions by a paper by the

Rev. J.M. Bates on the definition of unity suggested by the Commision on Faith and

Order of the World Council of Churches. At the third meeting at Feilding House on

15-16 February 1962, the Rt Rev. A.H. Johnston, Bishop of Dunedin, presented a

paper on "The Nature of the Gospel" in which he stated that "the Gospel arises from

the revelation of God in history. The Gospel is Jesus Christ Himself witnessed to in

the Apostolic teaching, the kerygma, which is both a proclamation and a part of God's

redemptive acts in history. Where Christ is, there is the Church which arises from the

Gospel and which is in itself part of the good news of God to man. The works of the

Church, each to be considered not in isolation from the others but in relation to the

totality of the Church, must also proclaim the Gospel to the World. This is done when

the Church maintains reverence for all the works of God in created life, keeps before it

64





and the world the scandal of the Cross and holds to orthodoxy, the true and whole life

of the Body of Christ". Discussions took place against the background of two periods

of Bible Study led by the Rev. Dr J.J. Lewis of Trinity Theological College.

On 14 and 15 November, 1962, at Feilding House a special meeting was held with

members of the Anglican Commission to meet with the Rev. Dr Eugene Carson

Blake,66

Stated Clerk of the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., who was

visiting New Zealand in response to an invitation from the Presbyterian Church acting

jointly with the National Council of Churches. Members of the N.C.C. Faith and

Order Commission were invited to attend. Dr Blake shared the concerns that led to his

call to unity in the sermon preached in Grace Cathedral, San Francisco, 1960, and

outlined the basic convictions which shaped his suggestions.

On November 16 Archbishop Lesser advised the Joint Standing Committee that the Rt

Rev. A.H. Johnston, Bishop of Dunedin, was to succeed him as Convener of the

Anglican Commission on Church Union. The first communication from Bishop

Johnston stated: "It is our desire to seek from the General Synod in April 1964, a more

specific commitment to the cause of union and to obtain for the Commission a more

particular function regarding its future relationship with the Joint Standing Committee

..." It was at the fifth meeting of the Joint Standing Committee and Anglican

representatives at Wallis House, Lower Hutt, 14-15 May, that the meeting received,

with deep joy and thankfulness, the communication of the General Synod67

indicating

willingness to enter into negotiations with a view to organic union with the other four

churches. It was fitting that in the light of this significant decision the meeting should

hear from His Excellency the Governor General, Sir Bernard Ferguson, a stimulating

account of discussion in Great Britain between the Church of Scotland and the Church

of England, to be followed by a further survey by the Rev. Dr J.J. Lewis of

negotiations in Great Britain for Union between the Church of England and the

Methodist Church. The Rev. Dr I.W. Fraser, in a challenging address on Mission as

the context of discussions on Church Union, declared that "reunion is God's urgent

call to His Church that it might be enabled to meet the demands of the age".

A memorable occasion concluded with the expression of a common conviction that in

this venture the five churches would move forward together. A new phase in Church

Union negotiations was about to begin.

66





CHAPTER VI

THE JOINT COMMISSION ON CHURCH UNION

Appropriately the first meeting of the Joint Commission Church on Union took the

form of a service of worship and dedication in St Paul's Cathedral, Wellington, on

May 18th 1965. Its Convener, the Rev. J.D. Stewart, spoke of the need to seek 'in

things essential unity; in things doubtful liberty; in all things charity'. The 35

representatives of the Anglican, Congregational, Methodist and Presbyterian Churches

and of the Associated Churches of Christ were to find over the years in their common

search not only a growing understanding of the Church and its mission but also a

deepening commitment to one another. They had set out on a road of obedience from

which there could be no turning back. They recognised from the outset that the

orientation of the Church is towards the world and they come to discover the

enrichment that arises from the meeting together of the diversity of Christian faith and

practice.

The decision to form the J.C.C.U. had been the recommendation of the previous Joint

Standing Committee in its 1964 report. The General Synod of that year, in giving its

consent, expressed the hope that 'a basis of union may be found' accepting 'as a

starting point the Lambeth Statement reaffirmed in 1958'.

The Rt. Rev. A.H. Johnston, later Archbishop, was chosen to be the first Chairman

and the denominational Conveners, D.J. Brown, D.C. Evans, A.K. Petch, and E.R.

Vickery together with the Commission Chairman and Convener formed the Executive

which met frequently, and with personal cost in time and effort, to make adequate

preparation for the full meetings of the Commission.68

At that first meeting, the decision was unanimous to invite the Church's to engage in

an Act of Commitment which would, from the beginning, 'make evident our mutual

and serious intentions as well as provide a basis of confidence which would encourage

and facilitate various forms of joint action. It proposes a serious action by the

responsible courts of the Churches by which we commit ourselves in common

obedience to Christ to the use of our best endeavours to achieve that unity which is

according to His will'. The service took place on May 10th, 1967, in St Paul's

Cathedral, Wellington, 'for the Act of Commitment to Seek a Basis of Union and

Ways of Common Action'. In his sermon on the encounter of Peter with Cornelius, the

preacher, the Most Rev. Frank Woods, Archbishop of Melbourne, spoke of the world

knocking on the door of the Church. In the morning, representatives had met together

68

First Methodist representatives, 1965-67: A.K. Petch, Convener, D.C. Clark, W.F. Ford,

G.H. Goodman, R.D. Rakena, J.J. Lewis, W.J. Morrlson, P.A. Stead, R.T. Garlick, W.J.

Morrison becoming convener in 1967.



and then in groups for discussion and fellowship. In the afternoon they gathered in the

Cathedral for an Act of Meditation and Prayer.69

In the evening service, they joined in

affirmation:

'In our faith in Jesus Christ as our one Lord and Saviour, and in our concern to

serve His mission to the world, we now commit ourselves in a common

obedience to Him and offer to Him our utmost endeavours that by the Holy Spirit

we may be brought into one Church according to His will, to the glory of God

the Father.

We affirm that in this Church, as essential to its life, there will be found the

Word of God in the Holy Scriptures as the supreme rule of faith and life, the

historic faith as expressed in the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, the faithful

preaching of the Gospel, and divinely instituted sacraments of Baptism and Holy

Communion, ministry acknowledged by the whole Church, and a life ordered by

the Holy Spirit in worship, godly discipline, humble service and loving

fellowship.

With the obedience we offer, we acknowledge our obligations to receive new

insights and now to do together many of the things which in the past we have

done separately.'

This was followed by affirmation, thanksgiving and prayer for renewal. In the ensuing

weeks, Services of Thanksgiving were held around the country for the Act of

Commitment, giving very many opportunity to declare for themselves the words of

affirmation and dedication. Despite set-backs that have been experienced, this action

has never been repudiated but rather many times reaffirmed.

The Joint Commission also began its work immediately on those areas in which the

former Joint Standing Committee had found difficulty and intransigence despite a

large measure of agreement, the Faith of the Church, Baptism and Ministry:

The faith of the Church

The question put to an Auckland committee70

was 'Is there sufficient theological

agreement on which the Churches can proceed'? At first there was evident in the

committee some hesitation and little enthusiasm for the task. There had been before

the Churches already a statement produced by J.M. Bates, fresh and lively in

approach, offering some excitement and hope. Its necessary vagueness at some points

of historical controversy proved unsatisfactory to some and subsequent amendments

seemed to kill its spirit. The story of 'creed' making has often been unhappy and

divisive. There is always a danger of imprisoning truth in unimaginative words and of

69

Led by J.J. Lewis. 70

Convener J.J. Lewis, Chairman R.S. Foster.



standing in the way of the Spirit. Technical brevity and a desired neatness of

expression can sometimes unchurch those already within the fellowship. In a living

Church, the theological is not to be packaged and pigeon-holed. Four of the Churches

represented stated that there were sufficient affirmations of faith in existence and there

was no need for any more. It was the Presbyterian Church, however, that made it clear

that no step further could be taken until the participating Churches could assure one

another that the new Church would in sincerity safeguard the theological insights

already held in trust. The need of the one Church became the desire of all. A short and

tentative statement with explanation was submitted to the Churches in 1965. In the

light of the responses received, especially the wish of the Presbyterian Church for the

addition of a preamble describing the relationship of the new Church to the historic

creeds and affirmations, a revision was prepared to present to the Churches in 1968

under the title 'The Faith We Affirm Together'. There had been no intention to write a

creed, attempt a definition of the Faith, nor in any way to address the world at large.

This was a means by which the participating could talk to one another and offer

mutual assurance as to their relationship to the historic Christian Faith. Certain

limitations had been accepted, the exclusion of colourful imagery because it

introduced ambiguity and the use of technical language since that was in current

terminology in the Churches and understood. The statement was 'contemporary'

insofar as it was expressed in the idiom of the Churches of the 1960's. While it made

clear that the Churches do hold and proclaim the same faith in Jesus Christ, it was

also-stated that the united Church was in no way inhibited from using its combined

resources to seek ways of expressing the Faith in words and deeds relevant to the

needs of the age.71

'The Faith We Affirm Together' was accepted by all five Churches, the Presbyterians

gathering it amongst their accepted standards, the Anglican General Synod not only

approving it but rejoicing 'that it has clearly expressed the conviction of the Creeds

which have come down to us from the undivided Church'. With such consensus, union

became both a possibility and a theological necessity.

The Sacraments

The Wellington based Committee on the Sacraments72

began with the premise that the

sacraments of a united Church must be those of the Gospel deriving their authority

from the Lord of the Church. Concerning the necessity for faith, nothing may be said

of the sacraments which may not be said of Christ himself.

The varied practice of Baptism rather than the doctrine presented the Commission

with a difficult task that involved more than two years of patient listening and

71

'The Plan for Union' p.10. 72

Convener Bishop H.W. Baines.



reflection. While the Associated Churches of Christ defer Baptism until years of

discretion and living faith, all four others practise the Baptism of infants within the

context of the living faith of the Church as also the Baptism of adults in maturer years.

The fact that all five shared a common doctrine of Baptism as a setting forth of the

Gospel, administered within the community of faith, anticipatory of the divine

consummation, and as the rite of entry into the visible Church, this made possible a

genuine acceptance of one another's membership within the Body of Christ. The

question that remained for the Church of Christ representatives was whether they

could accept the baptisms of other Churches, especially those of children.

In the discussions, it was clear that those who held exclusively to Baptism by

immersion could not be expected to accept for themselves the Baptism of infants, even

though they accepted the sincerity of those who did. On the other hand, there were

those who could not equate infant dedication with Baptism. Dedication is not an act of

the Church but of the parents who dedicate themselves to bring up their children in the

Faith.73

What should happen when those baptised as children wished to offer

themselves for Baptism by immersion as adults? Attempts at re-baptism brought into

question the very integrity of the sacrament and the Church. It is God who makes

members of his Church.

The Commission at first endeavoured to build in safeguards to prevent confusion in

baptismal practice and understanding. A breakthrough came when it was realised that

the doctrine itself is its own safeguard, and following the precedent in the North India

scheme of union, the additional protective clauses were dropped. Baptism is itself a

life-long sacrament with an interplay of grace and faith involving, at each stage, the

individual and the Church. It declares the offer of the grace of God upon which the

baptised at any age is dependent on reception into Christ's Church and it affirms the

necessity of faith, in the congregation where a child is baptised, and in both the person

and the Church in the case of an adult. With integrity it was now possible to move into

union with faith in one Lord and with one baptism involving a diversity of practice.

Loyalty would be maintained towards the United Church in its teaching and action

while the conviction of conscience would be respected as to the mode of Baptism.

The whole discussion had moved into a new dimension with the understanding of

Baptism as part of the total process of Christian initiation which also involves

Confirmation and reception at the Lord's Table.

The Sacrament of the Holy Communion evoked less discussion but was described as

being integral to the life and obedience of the united Church. 'In the Lord's Supper the

people of God, invoking the Holy Spirit, are met by Christ through the Spirit and fed

73

Methodists do have a Service for the Thanksgiving for the Birth of a Child, not to be

confused with 'Dedication'.



by him, so that they grow up together into him and are strengthened for their

participation in mission of Christ in the world;74

As Eucharist in thankful offering and

celebration, as commemoration actualising in the present and participating in Christ's

redeeming action, as communion sharing the new life in him in the unity of the Spirit,

as anticipation of Christ's final victory over evil and death, as a showing forth of his

complete self offering through which Christians offer themselves in living sacrifice,

this Sacrament like that of Baptism gathers the whole people of God into Christ's life

and mission.

Ministry

It was the method of the Joint Commission to take the Churches into its confidence

and, at each stage, to involve them in the discussion of reports and seek their

guidance. By 1966 the section on Ministry, handled by a Committee based in

Dunedin,75

had been approved by the Churches, although the Anglican General Synod

earlier had asked for an additional statement. This too provided a major advance in an

area of sensitivity.

Would it be possible for an episcopal Church to unite with those whose ordinations

took place through Presbyteries, Conference, the local Congregation? The paper

delivered by Canon Sutton at the preparatory meeting in Feilding House cleared the

way for common search into the question of ministry. Apostolic Succession is 'an

historical fact, or a series of historical facts, rather than a doctrine', the fact being

distinct from any interpretation of it. As interpretations appeared in the early Epistle of

Clement or in Irenaeus, 'it was not the succession which made a bishop; but a bishop

was one who was duly appointed to his office and thereby received the succession'. It

was not until the third Century that writers, such as Cyprian of Carthage, began to

speak of bishops 'not merely as "in the succession from" the apostles, but as

"successors of" the apostles'. Succession was now becoming thought of as the

possession of the bishop whereas before it had been described as coming from the

apostles through the Church. Participants discovered how important the idea of

succession is within their own experience as a sign of continuity and for the ordering

of the life of the Church. While pipe-line theories of succession did not now need to

be raised, all set value upon continuity with the Church of the ages and upon fidelity

to the apostolic witness and life.

The Commission was thus able to affirm that all ministry derives from Jesus Christ

who as prophet makes known the word of God, as priest offers himself for the life of

74

Plan 1971, p.26, par 100. 75

Convener: J.M. Bates.



the world and lives to make intercession for us, and as shepherd king makes effective

God's reign of love over the life of mankind.76

In Christ all members of his Church share his universal ministry, making corporate

offering as a living sacrifice, interceding, reconciling, communicating the good news

of grace, caring, nurturing and serving.

Within the ministry of the whole people of God, not above nor apart from it, from the

beginning there has been given a special ministry which in its diversity of expression

includes elements that are episcopal, presbyteral, and diaconal.

The basic ministry is that of the diaconate, service within and beyond the Church, a

cutting edge for the Church and a reminder of its participation in the towel and basin

ministry of Christ.

Orders are inclusive and so the essential element of service is not absent from the

presbyterate, the ministry of word, sacrament, and pastoral care, reminding the whole

Church of its sharing in the nurturing, sacramental ministry of Christ. It is not an

individual as such but the Church that celebrates the Eucharist, this authority being

delegated through ordination.77

Episcope, as pastoral oversight in the care of the Churches and its ministries and as

leadership in mission, belongs to all the negotiating Churches and cannot be given to

them since it is already there, being exercised in various ways, corporately through

Conference and Assembly, individually through Moderator, Chairman,

Superintendent. It was helpful to members of the Commission to be reminded that

episcopacy, as it is made visible in an order, is primarily a form of ministry rather than

of Church government and that is how they were urged to consider it. The ministry of

bishop is a reminder to the whole Church of its sharing in Christ's mission in and to

the world and in the care of the Church as the Shepherd. The bishop does not cease to

be servant.

The effect of this exploration was to set ministry free to fulfil its various callings, the

diaconate ceasing to be a stepping stone to some 'higher' order, the presbyterate with

more flexibility in expression, episcopacy clearly seen to be not in isolation but in

partnership with the total ministry, each however entrusted with authority and with

room for initiative in fulfilment of special obligations. Underlying all this is the

conviction that there is one calling, to be a Christian, and that all Christians

corporately share in Christ's ministry in, to, and for the world.

76

Plan 1971, pp.28-31, 39-45. 77

Even when ad hoc authorisation, for special circumstances, is granted a chosen lay

person, it is still the Church that acts. Ordination would be the norm for the United

Church.



Church Government

Once the work of the Commission on the Faith of the Church, the Sacraments, and the

Ministry had been accepted by the Churches, it was possible to proceed with the

shaping of an outline of the form of the emerging united Church. A Waikato

committee, with W.J. Morrison as Convener, presented its report on Church

Government first at the August meeting in 1967 and then at the February meeting of

the following year. The Commission discussed the question of eldership and also set

its preference for a threefold structure in the united Church: the Parish, comprising all

congregations within its bounds under a Parish Council; the Diocese, consisting of a

group of Parishes under the care of a diocesan Synod; the National Council, through

its Dioceses representative of the whole Church. In the light of the already approved

statement on the Church's Ministry and of these discussions, the committee prepared

its plan of Church structure. Of special importance were the principles under which it

was shaped, the priority of mission, freedom for ethnic groups to make their own

response to the Gospel and share fully in the life and councils of the Church,

theological insight into the nature of ministry. Such a Church would need 'openness to

the future, flexibility, willingness to make fresh approaches and use new methods, and

even readiness to see the basic message in new perspective. It must always be

prepared to reform itself according to the will of God. At the same time it must also

have workable forms and procedures in order to exist and carry out its mission'.78

The plan recognised the basic importance of the congregation and parish in the work

of the Church as also of the essential lay and professional partnership in its mission.

The Parish Meeting would be open to all members of the congregation, the Parish

Council a sharing of responsibility by Presbyters and Elders. The Diocese would be

composed of about 50 present Parishes, oversight being exercised by a Bishop in

council with the Diocesan Synod, voting by simple majorities, except in special

circumstances involving the Constitution or Faith and Order when the National

Assembly would be brought in. Final authority in the united Church would rest with

the National Assembly. This would have lay and ministerial representatives of the

Dioceses comprising its membership together with the Bishops, one of whom would

be elected President of the Assembly for a period of three years. There would also be a

Moderator to act as chairman and a Deputy Moderator, elected annually, one of whom

would be a lay person.

The participating Churches approached the envisaged plan and the issues it raised

necessarily from their particular stance and point of view. Methodist representatives

found that it would not be difficult for them, from their own tradition, to move into

such a Church.

78

Plan, p.45.



The Commission now turned to other contingent questions, legal matters in

preparation for an enabling Act of Parliament, ethical questions, Marriage and

Divorce,79

the relating of existing parallel work in the Boards of Mission80

and

Education, Social Services,81

Theological Education, Church Trusts. A Joint Regional

Committee, with C.D. Clark as convener, was appointed to co-ordinate local ventures.

The Joint National Committee on Church Extension was authorised to bring together

the planning of Church development in new areas.

Throughout the discussions and especially after the meeting on the Wellington Ngati

Poneke Marae, the Maori voice came to be heard with increasing clarity concerning

their relationship to a united Church. From within the Maori group, different

denominational approaches produced many questions that were unresolved by the

time the Plan was produced. The report of a later meeting of the Commission on the

Te Tina Hou Marae in 1975, at which R.D. Rakena presented one of the key papers,

contains the statement:

'We heard the deep sense of grievance which Maoris have about the injustice,

rejection and paternalism in the New Zealand Society of which the Church is a

part'.82

The Commission expressed its firm intention 'that the unity of faith

should be explicit in the diversity of races' and that freedom should be given to

all racial groups within the Church to express their faith in appropriate ways.'83

Acting Together

The context had been provided for the bringing together of much of the work of the

Churches. The Anglican and Methodist Social Services was formed in Auckland, the

Presbyterians and Methodists established a Joint Board of Mission Overseas and there

was further development of Co-operating Parishes. Some hoped for schemes did not

eventuate such as the production of an ecumenical newspaper to which the Methodist

"New Citizen" had pointed the way.

In May 1965, representatives of seven theological colleges met at St John's College,

Auckland, in such profitable discussion that they were able to present a very positive

report to the next meeting of the Commission three days later. A Committee on

Theological Training was appointed84

and the following year a constitution was

79

Convener of Committee, W.S. Dawson. 80

G.G. Carter involved in earliest discussions. W.G. Tucker and D.C. Evans became joint

Secretaries. 81

D.B. Gordon was from the beginning involved in the venture. 82

. J.C.C.U. Report 1975, p.5. 83

Plan, pp.8, 17, 46. 84

Convener J.J. Lewis, Chairman R.S. Foster.



prepared for a Joint Board of Theological Studies. An agreed syllabus was constructed

to gather in the major disciplines, biblical, theological, pastoral, historical, leading

towards the Diplomas Licentiate in Theology and Scholar in Theology. Initially place

was made for the inclusion of field work in the pastoral section. Amongst the

assumptions that lay behind the more formal aspects of the syllabus, it was stated that:

The mission of the Church in the world provides the context of all theological

training;

The Ministry of Word, Sacraments and Pastoral Care must be trained for service

in a rapidly changing world and equipped to meet situations as they arise.

The Colleges were seeking for relevant people for ministry rather than attempting to

prepare for specific situations which so rapidly are superseded. This placed the

primary emphasis upon the development of the person, as well as upon relationship to

the resources of the Church, and the acquisition of skills in ministering. By 1968 the

Diploma courses were launched as an addition to the existing degree courses in the

Otago Faculty of Theology. Flexibility in operation was retained in the constituent

Colleges and, indeed, as need has arisen, these diploma courses have been

considerably modified to meet changing conditions.

A further fruit of this new co-operation was the bringing together of the Associated

Churches of Christ College and the Presbyterian Knox Theological Hall,

Congregational students, particularly those from the Pacific Islands, came again, this

time as Presbyterians, to Trinity College and the staff there was strengthened by the

addition for one year of the former Principal of the Presbyterian Maori College at

Whakatane, Te Wanganga-a-Rangi, the Rev. J. Irwin. In 1973, at the invitation of the

Board of Governors of St John's College, Auckland, independently of the movement

towards union, but as expressing the Lund Principle of doing together all that could be

done with integrity, both Trinity and St .John's Colleges were formally brought

together as two-colleges-in-one on the same site.85

The arrangement involved a

pooling of resources and of the traditions of two Colleges.

It had been hoped that the Trinity College buildings could continue to serve the

Churches especially as a centre for multi-racial lay education.86

A combined

Methodist-Anglican committee worked for about two years exploring the possibilities

which included that of a therapy centre. In another context, there had been an early

suggestion that, to assist the bringing of a Christian Education Director to Auckland

and to offer him a base of operations, one of the College houses might be used. This

did not eventuate and Christian Education representatives on the Committee

85

'The Trinity College Story' pp.45f. Joint teaching occurred in 1972 and earlier. 86

Dr G.A.F. Knight had also expressed the hope that Trinity College might become an

ecumenical Lay Institute.



themselves subsequently reported to a later meeting that, while the houses were of

potential value, the main College building was not really suitable for a new education

programme. Since no consensus had been reached, the College Council and the

Conference decided to take up a new option that had just emerged to lease the

buildings to the Government as a School of Physiotherapy and for other educational

purposes.

Lay training did indeed continue in the Combined College at St John's to the extent

that considerable numbers took advantage of the three year Diploma course, both in

College classes and extra-murally through correspondence, and at a level not possible

before. Further development still was looked for in the wider ecumenical context.87

Another ecumenical venture was initiated in 1979 with the appointment of a field

worker in Continuing Education for Ministry. Behind this lay the conviction that

appropriate education must accompany the whole course of ministry and be made

available and relevant for each significant stage, both pre- and post- ordination, as

well as in the College setting. The Anglican St John's Board of Governors made it

possible for the first appointment to be based at the College, this without in any way

committing the future. The Rev. B.K. Rowe was selected and much was achieved

during the five year period. When he moved into full time theological education, no

ecumenical replacement was made.88

The choice of a name for the united Church not surprisingly came late in the work of

the Joint Commission. Names can sometimes acquire suggestions of arrogance or

exclusiveness, but with Roman Catholic assistance and goodwill, the Commission

finally selected the name 'The Church of Christ in New Zealand'.

The confidence of the Churches in the work of the Commission was such that in 1968

the Rev. J.E. Stewart had been made full-time Secretary, a position held with great

effect. A sense of urgency marked particularly the October meeting of that year as the

movement towards unity was set within the dimension of the concerns of the recent

Uppsala and Lambeth conferences. In the face of mounting world need, the Churches

could not delay, with integrity over lesser matters in the minutia of negotiations. At

the Service for the induction of the Secretary, the Rev. A.K. Petch, (back from

Uppsala) reminded the Commission that 'the cry for justice is not opposed to the quest

for authentic unity'.

In 1969, the first draft of the Plan for Union was offered to the Churches for their

detailed comment and suggestions for revision. The final text of the Plan was

87

College Staff at Trinity College had come to be very conscious of the need for the School

for Christian Workers to have its own staff for more effective work. The new venture

offered new possibilities. 'Trinity College Story', pp.33-34. 88

J.C.C.U. Report 1974, pp. 19-22.



completed in 1971, setting out first the principles governing it, then the structure, and

finally the description of the inauguration procedures, plus certain appendices.

The Commission could not have worked at depth more rapidly. So much depended

upon the Chairman, Secretary and Conveners. Archbishop Johnston who had given

much magnificent service in so many spheres of ecumenical activity was succeeded as

Chairman, in 1973, by the Rev. A.K. Petch who continued until 1976 in that office.

Some years earlier, the Rev. W.J. Morrison, in 1967, had become the Methodist

Convener and with strength of leadership he carried his work through with distinction

until retirement in 1981.89

In 1976, the Commission paid warm tribute to Mr Petch's

vision and statesmanship.90

While the demands of the Commission itself took so much

of the available time, in the context of a full Circuit ministry, the leadership was

involved also, throughout the Church, in the work of presentation and explanation. In

all the years of the Commission's operation, the membership of the Methodist Church,

as of others, was kept informed and was drawn into the total process of decision.91

89

The Reverend B.E. Jones succeeded as Convener. 90

. J.C.C.U Report 1976, p.130. 91

Very much is owed the many who served on the Church Union Committees.



CHAPTER VII

THE MAORI RESPONSE TO ECUMENISM

Somewhat indicative, both of a level of understanding and acceptance that has been

reached between us, and of. our continuing Methodist commitment to the ecumenical

vision was the ready way in which Conference 1979 approved the constitution for

setting-up Te Runanga Whakawhanaunga inga Hahi o Aotearoa (the Ecumenical

Maori Council). In anticipation Conference even went as far as to confirm three

nominations for its executive.

Although not finally realized until March 1982 with minor amendments to the earlier

constitution, Te Runanga Whakawhanaunga Hahi has come to embody, albeit perhaps

in embryo, a great deal of Maori Christian hope and response to ecumenism. At this

point in time Te Runanga Whakawhanaunga Hahi represents a culmination of some

significant events, learning experiences and analysis that have been going on within its

constituent member churches, both separately and collectively for some years now.

Except in the case of the Hinota Maori of the Presbyterian Church, which began

savouring a sense of freedom to respond to the Gospel in its own way from 1953, first

with the granting of Presbyterial powers in that year and in 1955, the exercising of full

Synodal status,92

the 'tributaries' may be seen to have started flowing from the '60s.

Presently, the ecumenical Maori response and vision is tending to find expression in

reference to a future 'Aotearoa1 rather than 'New Zealand' society. The distinction is

of particular significance for Te Runanga Whakawhanaunga Hahi. Furthermore, it is

conceived in cultural, economic and political terms as well as religious. Such hopes as

the following for instance will help illustrate:

+ Establishing Aotearoa as a bi-lingual nation.

+ Extending research into, reviving and enabling the creative development of

Maori arts, crafts, theatre, literature, song and dance forms as a continuing means

of expressing and reinforcing Maori cultural identity.

+ Maori controlled media that more accurately reflects Maori cultural values and

perceptions.

+ Realising a financial system in which our people can more fully participate and

share the benefits of, and which enhances community values and life.

+ Ensure the retention of existing Maori designated lands together with the return

or more adequate preparations for land that was confiscated.

+ Establishing Maori controlled companies with urban and rural interests.

+ Maori political organizations and a bi-cultural expression of government at all

levels.

92

Laughton, J.G. 1961, From Forest Trail to City Street.



+ A Maori expression of ecumenism; Maori theologising and the asserting of

Maori religious values and ways of responding to

God in worship, pastoral care, mission and service.

+ Increased Maori representation and leadership at all levels.93

The NCC Maori Section

Today's pilgrimage has its beginning back in 1947 with the forming of the National

Council of Churches Maori Section. Its particular aims were stated as follows:

1. To maintain relations with the ecumenical movement in New Zealand and

throughout the world, and also the encourage

Christian fellowship with the corresponding churches and councils among the

Polynesian peoples.

2. To promote co-operation and to study existing differences in such a spirit that

the underlying unity may become clearer.

3. To facilitate common action on all matters where there is agreement or the

possibility of agreement.

4. To arrange commissions as may be necessary, to study matters concerning

Faith and Order, and Life and Work on specific subjects as occasion may

require.

5. To arrange occasional conferences in the form of open forums with leaders of

other Maori religious bodies to seek measures of common action on urgent social

problems.94

At that time, membership of the National Council of Churches (long referred to by

Maori Section members as the 'parent body') was also in the nature of a pre-requisite

for membership of the Maori Section. Consequently, for its first 20 years membership

was confined to the Anglican, Methodist and Presbyterian churches. Although some

overtures were made by the Apostolic Church the only additional member has been

the Baptist Union, which joined in 1967. The newly constituted Te Runanga

Whakawhanaunga Hahi is therefore of considerable significance in this context, as not

only does it bring the Catholic Church into membership, but more openly invites

membership from other Maori churches or religious groups.

Our own Methodist Maori involvement is noted in the Minutes of Conference 1948 as

follows: "It is pleasing to record that our Maori Mission is now officially part of the

Ecumenical Movement". From 1947 our official Methodist representatives were the

Rev's George I. Laurenson, Harold A. Darvill, Eruera Te Tuhi and Sister Heeni

Wharemaru. The latter was replaced in 1955 by the Rev. Ranginohoora Rogers, but no

further changes to our representation were made until 1964. However, Annual General

93

Adaptations of NCC Maori Section's Wananga Tuarua Vision, 1981. 94

Minutes of Conference, 1947, Pages 137, 138.



Meetings of the Maori Section were always occasions to be shared by other than those

officially appointed by their churches. Furthermore, the rotating of hosting by member

churches always ensured some participation by tangata whenua.

A fuller record and commentary on the activities of the Maori Section as it set about

fulfilling the above aims has yet to be written. However, something of an overview is

offered in the 1981 publication "Forty Years On" by Colin Brown. For the purposes of

this reflection attention is drawn to a statement emerging from the Maori Section

during 1963.

It was the third to be issued and continued to express the Maori Section's grave

concern over the divisions in the Christian Church. Urging parent churches to seek

more urgently a practical solution for this state of affairs, the statement goes on to say:

. . . many factors are forcing us to realize the harmful hindrance to the work of

the Christian Church as a whole, that is caused by our present divided state. We

are caught in various currents, all of which draw attention to our disunity. We are

convinced that unity is God's gift and his purpose for his Church. World tides are

surging around us, and we are caught in the middle of them and cannot escape

their implications.

One is the simple but great fact of the Ecumenical Movement. Our Maori Section

has shared in the coming and going of representative men and women who have

widened our vision and deepened our awareness of the growing challenge facing

Christianity in the world. We are sure that a divided Church has no convincing

word for a divided world. We are also sure that the rebuke of our many

denominations is one of the most potent forces dulling the edge of our impact on

the non-Christian world. This is especially noticeable as our representatives

return from 'near neighbour' countries where the Missionary situation reveals

many new pressures. Our representatives who have visited these countries and

Christian visitors to us from these other lands have all impressed us deeply with

their accounts of the confusion and embarrassment of Christian disunity, and the

resulting weakening of the Missionary witness.95

It was the view of the Maori Section that the problem was not, however, one that the

Maori people could resolve on their own. Although persuaded that a united church in

New Zealand was possible, nonetheless, the contention was that a 'green light' for

union among Maori members could only come from the parent churches.

Twenty years later, however, awareness has deepened further. The coming and going

has increased, and a wider sharing of the ecumenical vision as well as resources has

led to a sharper analysis of why things are the way they are. For many who now face

95

NCC Maori Section Minutes, 1963 A.G.M.



the pain and hurt of today's realities, waiting is no longer a luxury they can afford. If

change is to alleviate their burden then they must take action to bring about that

change themselves.

THE JOINT COMMISSION ON CHURCH UNION

It was two years after the above statement was issued that the 'parent' churches of the

constituent members of the NCC Maori Section got together in earnest, along with the

Congregational Union and Associated Churches of Christ, to work out a basis for

union. Although Pacific Island representation was included from the start through

membership of the Congregational Union, Maori representation did not appear until

1967, and only through the Methodist Church. Presbyterian Maori representation

followed virtually 2 years later, with the then Bishop of Aotearoa appearing among

the Anglican representatives in 1971, some 6 years after negotiations commenced and

by which time, the 1969 edition of the Plan for Union was already in circulation.

There was, however, early recognition of the need for Maori responses in the process

of negotiation. This featured initially in the discussions on theological education. An

exploratory conference held in Auckland during 1965 recommended that the question

of Maori, Pacific Island and European students' training be looked at by a special

committee.96

Subsequently, it was decided to appoint a committee on Theological

Training, which in turn set-up a sub-committee on 'Multi-racial Training'. Included in

its terms of reference was a consideration of separate centres for theological education

and training. Te Wananga-a-Rangi of the Presbyerian Maori Synod, located in

Whakatane, featured especially in the discussions held. However, seemingly before

any specific conclusions had been reached the College was obliged to close and the

training of Maori Presbyterian students continued at Knox College, Dunedin.

By 1967 both recognition and response had increased. The process was helped along

by an expression of concern from the NCC Maori Section. Its membership now

included the Baptist Union. Consequently, due sensitivity was required to ensure

JCCU matters didn't intrude on those of the Maori Section—the intrusion either way

was not entirely averted. However, it was proposed in that year that a consultation on

Maori work be held in conjunction with the 1968 Annual General Meeting of the NCC

Maori Section.97

Held at Te Maungarongo, Ohope (a church-based marae whose bush-clad setting has

witnessed and inspired numerous ecumenical gatherings), the Consultation merely

served to uncover the many issues that awaited a concerted Maori response. Two

further meetings were held in that year. At the Ohope Consultation it was agreed to

set-up study committees on a regional basis and allot each specific areas of study and

96

First Report of the JCCU, 1965, Page 31. 97

Third Report of the JCCU, 1967 , Page 26.



work. An Auckland committee picked up the matter of theological education and

training, its initial report posing the question of Maori-oriented study as an extra, or as

integral to the total course of training. A Rotorua/Bay of Plenty committee worked on

possible ecumenical orders of worship in Maori. One order for general use found the

light of day. On the initiative of the Bishop of Aotearoa an Ecumenical Translation

Committee later came into being. No known Ecumenical Maori Service book emerged

however from these earlier efforts. The various committees themselves gradually

disappeared off the records.

1969 saw the setting-up of a JCCU Study Committee on Maori Participation, and July

saw the publication of the first edition of the Plan for Union. The Study Committee

had been proposed in order to bring the Maori response into sharper focus and

facilitate study and discussion on the same basis as the other Study committees of the

JCCU. Under the convenership of Canon R. Hamiora Rangiihu, the Study Committee

on Maori Participation was given the task of considering:

1. Maori Participation in the total structure, life and programme of the united

church.

2. Provisions enabling the Maori people to make their full and distinctive

contribution to the richness of the life and witness of the united church.

3. Maori Participation in the Mission of the church, with particular reference to

their own distinctive responsibilities and opportunities.98

The Committee's first report related specifically to the area of church government.

Thinking that had emerged during the 1969 discussions was presented in 2

diagrammatical forms. One (A) reflected a parallel structure, the other (B) a structure

that allowed co-mingling and withdrawal to occur at Parish, Diocesan and National

court levels.

The diagrams with their implications for Maori participation in the government of the

united Church, remained a pre-occupation throughout the next two years. At the time

reported to be the first Maori Anglican clergy meeting held in 40 years, a Rotorua

gathering called by the Bishop of Aotearoa, the Rt Rev. Manu A- Bennett, deliberated

over the alternative proposals. The choice of (B) rather than (A), reported to be

favoured by the Presbyterians and Methodists, prompted the column heading "Maori

Clergy want to go Pakeha Way".99

In December of 1970 a Methodist proposal (C) was

offered, which provided for a parallel structure at each level, then an over-riding

National Assembly. However, in addition Canon Rangiihu was advised that "our

people feel that the JCCU Committee on Maori Participation should be facing up to

98

Sixth Report of the JCCU, 1970, Page 25. 99

Dominion 18 July 1970, press clipping.



far more fundamental and basic issues. For example the committee should be saying

something about the Maori response to the Gospel, something about the nature of the

Church in which the community values of the Maori and other racial groups can find

expression. In other words the Committee should be setting out the basic principles

which should guide structure and organisation. We feel some attempt should be made

to spell out the nature of the ministries that the clergy and people of the church will

provide for the Mission of the church".100

Subsequently, a proposal (D) was arrived at

and at the 1972 meeting of the JCCU the convener was able to report all round

approval. In September of that year The Plan for Union was launched with supporting

study resources. "Together as One Church" was translated by the Presbyterian Maori

Synod for its members, and on the request of the Bishop of Aotearoa a draft resource

on "Maori Participation" prepared in 1974 was translated into Maori by Canon John

Tamahori for use in Maori Pastorates.

During 1974 it was resolved to re-constitute the Study Committee on Maori

Participation to become "The Maori Council on Church Union". The Council's

functions were:

1. To deal with all matters relating to Maori participation in church union.

2. To encourage and facilitate corporate action on matters relating to the

development of Maori work where agreement has been reached.

3. To study and recommend action to the member churches on issues affecting

the welfare of Maori people, and Maori-Pakeha relations in general.

4. To foster and sustain relationships between member churches and the Maori

section of other churches, Maori churches and Maori organisations.101

The same year also saw the forming of the Joint Committee on Continuing Education

for Ministry, which sought to remain sensitive to and serve Maori and Pacific Island

needs within member churches.

The first meeting of the Maori Council on Church Union was held in February 1975.

Owing to ill-health Canon Rangiihu had to terminate his memberhip of the Council.

The Rev's Morehu Te Whare and Waiohau Te Haara were duly elected chairman and

secretary respectively. Business centred mainly on the resource leaflet to assist with

the study and discussion of The Plan for Union, and the necessary arrangements for

the next meeting of the Joint Commission. It had been decided to held the meeting on

a marae, and that the primary topic for discussion be "On Being a Multi-racial

Church".

100

Personal correspondence, Methodist Maori Division files. 101

Eleventh Report of the JCCU 1975,page 13.



An approved summary of the discussion included the following remarks:

We heard the deep sense of grievance which Maoris have about the injustice,

rejection and paternalism in the New Zealand society of which the church is a

part. The reaction of participants varied between puzzlement, frustration and

anger. But as part of the Marae experience this has been the beginning of real

understanding.102

Any Methodist frustration or puzzlement arising out of the occasion was due to an

obvious ignorance displayed by some Maori Anglican participants of much that had

gone on in the previous 9 years of negotiations, a state of affairs due in part to the late

arrival on the JCCU scene of a direct representative.

Little or nothing of significance has trickled further from this tributary. The June 1982

meeting of the JCCU launched, among others, a discussion on "The multi-cultural

dimensions of our search for unity within the context of the New Zealand society". Of

eight issues identified, one was to find ways of opening up multi-lateral discussions

between mainline churches, Pentecostal churches, Ringatu, Ratana, Pai Marire and

any others with significant Maori following.103

THE CULTURAL RESPONSE WITHIN DENOMINATIONS

That which occurred within the Presbyterian Church in the '50s found similar

expression in the Methodist and Anglican churches during the '70s. "Culture was

shaping the human voice answering the voice of Christ". In February of 1973 the

Maori Division was inaugurated and had as a primary objective, the realizing of a

Maori response to the GospeL In 1978 the General Synod of the Church of the

Province of New Zealand duly enacted the Statues providing for the Bishopric of

Aotearoa, and the establishing of the Aotearoa Council Both events occasioned

considerable euphoria among the people. The fulfilling of hopes and aspirations,

however, remained and the gathering clouds of economic recession were already

forecasting a troublesome time ahead in this one respect, at least.

The cultural motif was appearing also in other churches. It had found concrete

expression within the Baptist Union, and a Maori Department was formed, later

becoming the "Maori Ministry" of the church. The advent of the Arbuckle report, The

Church in a Multi-cultural Society, in 1976 prompted a nation-wide appraisal within

the Catholic church. The Maori membership was reviewing its own position and

exploring more appropriate forms in which to couch its response. A Catholic identity

that was more 'Aotearoa' than 'Roman' was being consciously sought. Furthermore,

thoughts about a 'Maori' Bishop are being exchanged.

102

ibid., Page 5. 103

Minutes of the Thirty-sixth JCCU meeting.



As well as the prompting and support each was giving and receiving from the other

through the years, the stimulus and learning that was continuing as a result of visits to

and from overseas Christian groups and leaders was taking effect. In particular, the

experiences, challenge and encouragement arising out of meetings of one sort or

another occurring under the auspices, and with the practical support of the World

Council of Churches, the Christian Conference of Asia, the Catholic Commission on

Evangelization, Justice and Development and other related ecumenical and

international agencies. Not only was the ecumenical vision being sharpened by such

visits and encounters, but Maori commitment and response was also deepening and'

extending. The forming of Te Runananga Whakawhanaunga Hahi this year104

therefore, is a logical climaxing of much that has been going on, especially in the past

decade and including the virtual failure of the more deliberate 'church union'

negotiations.

But other tributaries had been and continue to flow in respect to the Maori response.

They contribute to today's realities and perhaps in the course of events down through

the years, constitute the most important and vital factors relating both to the vision and

responses. These have become very familiar: the Treaty of Waitangi; Maori land

rights; Maori political representation; economic recession and continuing

unemployment; increased confrontation as a means of effecting change; tension and

conflict in human relationships at all levels; personal and institutional racism; an

idolising of our New Zealand myths, and more.

The people and the conditions they represent in our own community and world-wide

are in essence seen to be what the response to ecumenism is all about. Since the

middle of the nineteenth century 'ecumenical' has tended to be used in respect to

achieving the unity and renewal of the Church. Its earlier connotation, however, had to

do with the whole 'inhabited earth'. Maori response in the '80s is poised to take this

earlier meaning a lot more seriously. Renewal and unity are implied. But also, a

responding in obedience to the voice of Christ himself, arising loud and clear from the

midst of those around us and in the world at large, who struggle for a fuller life in the

now, and a greater assurance of that life for their children and generations to come. At

the centre of that response, inescapably, is the cross.

104

1982.



CHAPTER VIII

THE RESPONSE OF THE CHURCHES

The Plan for Union was presented to the Church Courts in 1971 and commended

nationwide in a series of meetings in strategic centres. Members of the Commission,

in pairs and representing different Churches, described and explained it. Questions

were lively and wide ranging but they received full and strong answers arising out of

the years of discussion. The response was enthusiastic and considerable interest was

aroused in the wider community. Press representatives were urgent for more detailed

prediction than was ever able to be given. In some instances there was emotional

resistance from those who felt threatened, a Methodist asked if it meant that 'the

Anglicans will swallow us up', but also at least one Anglican asking if the Methodists

were about to swallow them up! In some quarters there was a surprising ignorance of

the major thrust of the Plan and a clear need for much more basic information than

had been given over the years. In the uncertainty, there was a natural fear that the

familiar world with its cherished traditions might vanish. No attempt was ever made to

minimise these feelings and reactions.

Procedures may have seemed cumbersome to many in the community but scrupulous

care was taken to ensure that every section of the Church could express its point of

view. The Plan was first received at national level, handed down to parishes and

Synods, then, in the light of the local response, reviewed by the chief courts. The

voting of the general membership was taken very seriously when the decision of each

Church was finally made. Methodists were meeting in Conference in Whangarei for

the commemoration of their 150th year of service as a Church in New Zealand. In this

1972 Conference the historic pride of Methodism surfaced in the celebrations under

the leadership of the Rev. W.S. Dawson as President. It was at this same Conference

that there was an overwhelming vote in favour of proceeding to union on the basis of

the Plan with the other Churches involved.105

In this no contradiction was felt.

In the over-all voting through the Churches, a varied pattern emerged:

Anglican: Parishioners 58.06% for

Clergy 53.98% for

Bishops 7 for 3 against

Churches of Christ 55% for

Congregationalist 5% for

Methodist 86% for

Presbyterian 69% for

105

296 for, 7 against; 1 informal,



The Plan had not been rejected but there was again not a sufficient majority on which

to act. The Anglican Church needed to wait until the next General Synod in 1974 to

clarify its position and to use the interim period for further study and for commending

the Plan again to its parishes. The other Churches were willing to wait until a clear

answer could be given. While the work of the Churches went on as before, there was

definite hesitation regarding any possible new ventures which might complicate and

even hinder the process of union. The Methodist Church Union Committee also put a

check upon the development of Union Parishes not only to avoid further ambiguity at

this crucial moment but also the maintain a significant number of strategically placed'

Methodist causes to be able to continue negotiations out of strength. Two thirds of

Methodism in New Zealand was already involved in co-operating or union schemes of

various kinds;106

larger issues needed first to be resolved before further ventures could

be undertaken. This caused some local disappointment. The diversifying of

Methodism had not however really been its dispersion and eclipse since there existed

and, still does, a strong sense of family and an even greater closeness amongst the

Circuits than ever before.

The Anglican General Synod took its next vote in Hamilton in 1974 and, although the

majority was still not enough on which to move towards unification, there was a

growing sense of expectancy. Methodist observers reported in the discussions a new

confidence and stated that it was now no longer 'if the Anglicans would join but

'when'. Significant in the voting was a strengthening lay support for the proposals:

Bishops 6 for 2 against

Clergy 12 9

Laity 21 7

The other Churches agreed to wait for a further two years until the 1976 Synod, by

this time, opposition to union had grown more vocal still and the Plan was coming

under renewed criticism particularly in the area of ordination. The Joint Commission

received the official reply: "In view of the fact that three dioceses have voted against

the Plan for Union 1971 as the basis of union with the negotiating Churches (this

General Synod) regretfully resolves that it cannot enter into union at this time".107

A new proposal nevertheless was put forward by the Synod to the effect that the

Churches should first work towards the unification of the reconciliation of their

ministries as a preliminary step. Within the Commission and in Methodist thinking, it

was frequently affirmed, that ministry should not be considered apart from the Church

but, from the Anglican point of view, ministry inevitably involves the Church and, if

the one should be reconciled it follows that the other must be brought also into unity.

106

J.C.C.U. Report 1972, pp.8-10. 107

Report 1976, p,131.



It was noted that much had been achieved in the common affirmation of faith, in the

acceptance of inter-communion, and in the recognition of one another's ministries and

there was acknowledgement that separated ministries could not really be regarded as

an adequate expression of the will of Christ for his Church. Other Churches were

invited to join in a covenant to seek this unification of ministry.

The increasing delay was beginning to have a negative effect, inhibiting the real work

of the Churches. In 1977, the Methodist Conference sent through the Joint Commision

an invitation to the other Churches to move away from actual negotiation for a

moment and to meet in a Church to Church consultation to appraise the situation and

possibly to recover the theological vision with which they had begun the journey

together.108

This was to meet with resistance and there were those on the Commission

who stated that the time for more words was over but, at the Conference, one of the

younger ministers expressed the hope that such a consultation would be possible. A

whole generation had arisen that had not had the ecumenical stimulus and opportunity

given in the days of the Faith and Order, Life and Work consultations.109

The Joint Commission itself accepted the lead of the General Synod. Committees

worked on the form of the Covenant and of a proposed act of unification of ministry.

It reaffirmed its own conviction that it could not avoid the given task to seek a basis of

union and stated its belief that there was a compulsion laid upon it to continue the

search for corporate union.110

The momentum was dissipating and it was difficult to create enthusiasm for a new

convenant for Churches who had already made their act of Commitment. A spirit of

weariness began to take over in those whose dedication could not really be called in

question. Above all there was the question of stewardship and Methodists, among

others, began to say that they could not in good conscience spend more time and

expense in protracted negotiations. The 1978 Conference made a special statement:

reported by the J.C.C.U.111

"Within this period of delay, the Methodist Church finds itself in a dilemma. It

cannot move backwards because of its overwhelming commitment expressed

through Union and Co-operating Parishes and other combined ventures. On the

other hand it finds difficulty in committing further Churches or causes to union

or co-operative ventures as this further depletes the Methodist entity. If we are to

remain a viable Church we must seek, in the interim, new ways of expressing the

108

Report 1978, pp.7f. 109

G.D. Pratt. 110

Report 19768, p,285, 111

Report 1979, pp. 5f.



covenant relationships which will not further deplete our numbers but at the

same time express real commitment.

The decision of the Conference was 'that the Methodist Church accepts the

proposals contained in the Covenant and Unification of the Ministries and

declares itself willing to enter the Covenant and to participate in the unification

of the ministries of the negotiating Churches, and that the Methodist Church

requests the J.C.C.U. to give priority to working out the practical implications of

the Covenant and Unification of the Ministries prior to their implementation'."

In July 1979 the Methodist Church Union Committee put out for consideration the

following appraisal and declaration:

'The Methodist Church of New Zealand affirms again the decision taken at

congregational, district and Conference level to support and participate in the Act

of Commitment 1967 and affirms that it is still its desire that it should lead

ultimately to the visible unity of the negotiating Churches.

The Methodist Church of New Zealand affirms again:

(i) Its place within the Church Catholic, for all people in every situation, and

apostolic, sent into all the world with good news of liberation and wholeness;

(ii) Its conviction that the Church is called as compellingly as ever before to

show its divine character in reconciliation and its given unit as a sign of the

future of a divided humanity;

(iii) Its intention to stay with every movement within the Church and the world

that makes for reconciliation and health.

The Methodist Church further affirms, in the present delay in union negotiations;

(iv) Its rejection for itself of any conscious action which leads to further division

or to an uncreative isolationism;

(v) Its responsibility to press forward with its given task in life and mission

wherever opportunity offers;

(vi) Its obligation to challenge or be challenged on any unilateral action within

the fellowship of the Churches, which is felt to contravene the spirit of the Act of

Commitment, and thus to seek discussion of mutual concerns.

Believing that it is time for new ideas and a new momentum to break through, the

Methodist Church urges that opportunities be provided for younger leadership and

membership to experience and share in the ecumenical vision.112

112

J.C.C.U. Report 1979, p,5.



The Anglican General Synod of 1980 again was unable to move ahead and indeed,

while accepting the idea of a covenant, rejected the second proposal for the unification

of the Ministries. In the other Churches, including the Methodist, the response

indicated a widespread uncertainty and, in some instances, a stepping back. It was

widely held that the movement had been defeated by ecclesiastical procedures. In the

meantime, there had emerged an evident recrudescence of denominationalism with its

promise of security and of the attainable.

Once more the membership of the other four Churches was called to declare its mind,

this time in 1981, on the Presbyterian proposal to unite 'with one or more of the

negotiating Churches' on the basis of the 1971 Plan. The Methodist Conference of the

previous year had already given its consent by a majority of 287 for and 27 against but

this needed to be tested locally. Within the Presbyterian Church however, opposition

to the Plan steadily increased, with special reference to the section on episcopacy. 14

Presbyteries voted against the proposal with only 8 in favour while 79.26% of the

Methodist votes in favour with 19.77% against, a reduced total number taking part in

the decision.

The Anglican General Synod meeting in Wellington, April 1982, rejected Church

union on the basis of the 1971 Plan but reaffirmed its readiness to search for

partnership with the other four. The Plan itself was stated by the convener of the

Anglican Commission on Church Union, Bishop P.W. Mann, to be dated since much

had happened since 1971, especially in the recognition of Baptism and Ministries

within the Churches, and in the practice of intercommunion. The Commission was

charged by the Synod to report back in two years' time on 'the next concrete step.

.towards reconciliation with the Catholic Church.113

The Joint Commibsion declared ih own belief that the work of reconciliation must

proceed. 'The way forward is not clear to us. .It is our conviction that God is at work

in this uncertainty.114

It added further that 'a new bold facing of our society is an

essential part of our understanding of the unity God intends for the Church.'115

113

As reported in the New Zealand Herald, April 23, 1982. 114

J.C.C.U. Report 1981, p.4. 115

Ibid.



EPILOGUE

THE CONTINUING CALL

The venture that excited so much hope and offered so many possibilities has ground to

a halt. Keen disappointment can easily turn to cynicism, and inverted idealism. The

time has come for a reappraisal and for putting down even deeper roots to enable the

journey to take up at a new level. The question, on the one hand, is not whether it was

really necessary but whether the route was somehow mistaken, its basis inadequate.

On the other hand comes the word of D.T. Niles that, since it lies within the will of

God who gives us the Church, the recovery of unity will surely come, in an orderly

fashion should the Churches really want this, but if not through disorder.116

Since the

1967 Act of Commitment, so much that is positive and creative has already come as a

by-product of the Churches' rediscovery of one another in common work and worship.

Certainly for those who have been in any way involved there can be no turning back

to the situation that preceded it.

The importance of the element of time in the process of negotiation has been noted by

the Methodist Convener, W.J. Morrison. Only a brief span can exist within which

major decisions may be made, since delay inevitably brings with it new situations and

attitudes which add a touch of obsolescence. The kairos is always short. Again certain

inhibiting factors contributed to the slowing down of the enterprise, not least the

resurgence of a conservative withdrawal into an individualistic 'personal religion'.

Furthermore the Gospel itself has often been trivialised in a reduction into purely

psychological or sociological categories. Added to this, experience has shown that the

negotiators did not take sufficient account of the power of the deep rooted story and

tradition of denominations to draw everything and everyone who will into various

distinctive moulds. The most significant fact has been a general failure to sustain

creative theological thought, and this not only in the realm of unity. There can still be

no neutrality towards the issues confronting the Churches. Inertia will only mean

deterioration into further isolation and even withdrawal from the GospeL

N.E. Brookes, on the analogy of the reunion of Methodist Churches in the United

Kingdom as examined by Robert Currie, has asked whether similar factors have

helped to shape the motivation towards reunion in New Zealand, numerical declines,

the rise of secularism, conflicts of interest between ministry and laity, the desire for

efficiency and economy.117

No doubt, in varied form, all these elements are present in

116

From a sermon preached at the Induction Service of A. Ganasunderam in the Pitt

Street Methodist Church. 117

Brookes Op.cit. This thesis deserves close attention, as a valuable piece of research and

an aid to objectivity.



the thinking of the Churches but the dynamic behind the work of the Joint

Commission, as representing the Churches, is of another character. The pressures are

indeed urgent in a rapidly changing, fragmented, and menacing world. The fact that

some of these forces are economic, the frightening escalation of costs causing the

Churches to rethink the nature and deployment of the ministry in an increasingly

deprived and needy society, this does not reduce to mere expediency the concern for

unity. Nowhere in the reporting of the Commission is there evidence of any desire to

establish some effective, supermarket Church or to place store upon largeness of

numbers in some power grouping. The secularist controversy broke out after the

Commission had begun its work, not as a cause of any movement towards a unity of

self protection but as a fresh challenge of ideas. The motivation of the whole venture

was theological, in the given unity of love, a response to the Lord of the Church

himself in prayer that all Christian should become visibly one that the world may

believe. N.E. Brookes notes that neither 'decline' nor 'secularism' were the focus of

attention for the Churches in their negotiation for union and that focus of attention for

the Churches in their negotiation for union and that on the whole, 'New Zealand

Methodists. . . .strongly support moves towards Church Union. In so doing they agree

rather than disagree with the ministry'.118

The question, as he rightly asks, is Why?

Throughout the years of Methodist involvement in ecumenism, there has been evident

a strong continuity and consistency not to be explained by the dependence of one

report upon another but arising from the very character of the fellowship itself. It has

not been, as some may well have thought, a pathological death wish, a desire to find

protection in some larger grouping, nor even a device to save money, a vain hope

anyway because it never works out that way. The will to unity is inherent in the very

life of a community that cannot imagine anything or anyone lying outside the range of

the Gospel and, from the beginning, it has been integral to Wesley's catholic vision

seeing God at work in creation as in history for the liberation of the whole person in

the whole of society. The Church is the world being reconciled and the context of

unity is the unity of humanity. To this end, Methodism at its best has regarded itself as

expendable, not carelessly throwing away its treasures but offering them up for the

furtherance of the Gospel.119

In the biblical City of God, where all things are brought

into a harmony of liberties in the direct service of God, there is no Church, for Church

and world have been gathered into the fullness of healing and reconciliation. All

things have become new.

There is an ever present danger of withdrawal into the comforting but illusory security

of the smaller group, of a docetic separation of spirit and form, even of elevating the

118

Op.cit. pp. 35f, 48, 121. 119

Cf the Presidential address of the Rev, G.H. Goodman, 'Towards the One Church',

Hamilton, 1964.



peripheral above the central and the abiding. It was with sure touch that the

Conference of 1981 declared again its theological orientation and set its sights upon

the continuing task. It took up once more the affirmations made over the years

concerning the Church, its unity, and the place of Methodism within it. It also stated

that 'whether in or out of a church union the Methodist movement has a historic task to

fulfil': the confession of Christ, the life of love lived out especially amongst the poor

and underprivileged, the work of transformation of both 'persons and society', and the

life of a 'genuinely Catholic spirit'.120

A question remains: why is it that movements towards union can come so close to

fulfilment and then fall back? The late C.H. Dodd raised it long before the Joint

Commission came into being. Over a period of forty years, he had observed a repeated

failure of ecumenical conferences, even though they were marked by enthusiasm and a

true spirit of unity, to achieve their goals. The real stumbling block, he concluded, lay

in the non-theological factors, the dated emotions which effectively inhibited action.121

Sociological differences, battles of long ago, disappointing and negative experiences,

and pride in achievement can persist with strong and sometimes destructive force in

the non-rational areas of personality. Why is it that we reject one another? When we

have cleansed of error and sharpened as much as we can every theological affirmation

and when we can speak together on commonly shared insight, why is it that we do not

wish to take the next step? There are unspoken questions which need to be placed on

some agenda for the sake of koinonia, however much they embarrass or hurt. Does the

practice of the Sacrament show that it is really understood or taken seriously? Does

the claim to distinctiveness in doctrine involve a downgrading of the witness of

others? Does the diversity of response to social issues carry more weight in the final

decision than the theological? Is evangelical fervour sometimes matched with an anti-

intellectual conservatism? Is the inhibiting, rigidity sometimes morphological,

resisting change in established forms and institutions, as well as sometimes being

biblicist, threatened by new challenges to thought? In the light of what is frequently

seen and experienced, are minister and priest really the same? Would some not really

prefer union with the older sections of the Christian community, a 'Protestant'

regrouping for them standing in the way of the 'Catholic' dream? Is there a common

understanding of the meaning of those terms?

Whereas in the past there has been a call to the Churches to meet one another again to

recapture the vision, may not the present need be for the Churches to seek acceptance

of one another in the realm of personal? Is there a call to examine the practice as well

as the faith of the Church, to discover the content as well as the character of the

'Catholic spirit'?

120

Minutes of Conference 1981, pp.646-647. 121

From a letter of the World Council of Churches.



The story of the Methodist involvement with ecumenism in New Zealand, in the

optimism of grace,122

offers the ever fresh vision and hope of the world's recovery into

fullness of living, and confronts us with an old question;

'Do you want to be made whole?

MEETING of the Joint Commission on Church Union at Christchurch College, Christchurch,

11-13th February, 1969.

BACK ROW: Rev. D.L. Woolf, Rev. R.K.J. Clarke, Rev. G.D. Rose, Mr D.M. Wylie, Rev. W.

Harford, Mr R.W. Beadle, The Ven. W.M. Davies, Rev. D. Glenny.

MIDDLE ROW: Rev. P.A. Stead, Mr R.T. Garlick. The Ven. S.F.N. Waymouth, The Most Rev.

N.A. Lesser, Rev. D.A. Connor, Rt Rev. H.W. Baines, Rev. R.D. Rakena, Rev.

C.D. Clark, Rev. W.F. Ford, Rev. C.L. Gosling, Mrs J.M. Anderson, Rev. G.F.

McKenzie, Rev. Canon J.D. Rymer, Rev. Dr J.J. Lewis, Rev. A.K. Petch, Mr H.J.

Voice, The Ven. A.R. Anderson.

FRONT ROW: Rev. D.J. Brown, Rev. E.R. Vickery, Rev. J.E. Stewart (Secretary),

Rt Rev. A.H. Johnston (Chairman), Rev. W.J. Morrison, Rev. D.C. Evans, Rev.

J.M. Bates.

122

A phrase from the pen of E.G. Rupp.

The Search for Unity by J J Lewis, A K Petch & R D Rakena historical/41 the...The Search for Unity...

Documents

Transcript of The Search for Unity by J J Lewis, A K Petch & R D Rakena historical/41 the...The Search for Unity...