Embracing Te Tiriti o Waitangi: A Covenant for Justice, Unity, and Shared Life in the Christian Community!

David from Remuera

In today’s Christian church space, we face a crucial imperative in addressing the Treaty of Waitangi, focusing on vital areas such as reconciliation, ethics, professionalism, and discrimination, as well as how the church can engage with this vital document to foster clarity, justice, and unity within Aotearoa.

As many of us are aware, on an annual basis, on 6th February, New Zealand pauses to remember the significant event in its history that remains contentious today. In 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi was signed on the front lawn of British missionary James Busby’s home at Waitangi. The Treaty, known to the Māori as Te Tiriti o Waitangi, was signed by a Crown representative and over 500 chiefs, signalling the arrival of British rule in New Zealand. It was translated and presented to the Māori chiefs by Reverend Henry Williams, with the help of his son, Edward. At the same time, discrepancies arose between the English and Māori versions, with only thirty-nine chiefs signing the English version, fuelling differences in expectations regarding power and rights.

First and foremost, the English version of the Treaty granted New Zealand’s sovereignty to Britain, which in turn granted the Crown the exclusive right to purchase Māori lands, ensuring that Māori retained full ownership of their lands and possessions, alongside the rights and privileges of British subjects and Crown protection. Conversely, the Māori version conveyed different meanings, leading to misunderstandings regarding governance, land rights, and equality. Prior to 1840, Britain had not officially claimed New Zealand, and issues regarding land purchases became apparent upon Hobson’s arrival. Despite efforts to negotiate with the Confederation of Chiefs, challenges emerged due to conflicting interpretations of independence and sovereignty.

Firstly, the ongoing reconciliation process concerning Te Tiriti o Waitangi remains crucial even centuries after its signing. Despite Māori exercising significant control over Aotearoa in 1840, their authority was later reduced to a mere four per cent of the land. Nonetheless, this loss of mana whenua has contributed to persistent tensions between Māori and Pākehā. Hence, the complex relationship is deeply rooted in colonial history, and today, it is further complicated by Pākehā attempts to redefine their identity and connection to the land, which inevitably affects their interactions with Māori communities.

Hereafter, the Christian public theology of social reconciliation provides a significant framework to address these issues. In accordance, this theological perspective emphasises forgiveness and reconciliation in Aotearoa and highlights the church’s historical commitment to peace. Back in the early nineteenth century, the church focused on Māori inter-tribal warfare and later addressed the consequences of colonialism. Historian Claudia Orange noted that the 1840 Treaty would not have been signed without missionary mediation. However, from the 1860s to the 1980s, the church remained largely silent on issues of colonisation, focusing instead on pastoral care for settlers.

During the 1980s, the church’s prophetic voice became more prominent, especially regarding race relations and the political and economic plight of Māori. Thus, Christians have traditionally promoted reconciliation solutions, advocating for justice, truth-telling, forgiveness, and repentance. Notably, reconciling Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the strained Māori–Pākehā relationship underscores the complexities of forgiveness and reconciliation in Aotearoa, as such developments underscore the necessity for ongoing dialogue, understanding, and action to address historical injustices and promote a more equitable society.

Secondly, it is crucial to delve into the three articles that define the Treaty’s meaning in the context of ethics and professionalism. The first article clearly outlines the authority governing New Zealand. In the Māori text, the British are granted kāwanatanga, a term with significant historical implications, while the English version asserts British sovereignty over the country. Moreover, the critical differences between the Māori and English versions in this article pertain to the translators facing a challenge with the term sovereignty, which does not exist in Māori. Since no single ruler governed the entire country, kāwanatanga was used instead. Besides rangatira, who held authority over smaller territories, Māori understood this term from the New Testament in the Bible, believing the Queen had governance power but not authority over their affairs, expecting protection in return.

The second article addresses Māori land rights and possessions. Similarly, the Māori text refers to rangatiratanga, promising Māori tribes authority over their possessions, whilst the English text ensures property and ownership rights under the Crown. Moreover, the Crown regulates land sales, holding the right of first purchase to ensure communities retain sufficient land for sustenance.

The third article pertains to equality, with the Crown vowing protection and full citizenship to all Māori. Consequently, the blunt disparities between the English and Māori texts in the first article convey divergent meanings. Thereafter, the Māori translation suggests that the British are granted kāwanatanga, the right of governance. In contrast, the English translation implies that the Māori surrendered sovereignty and absolute power to the British.

Thirdly, a paramount concern arises regarding discrimination linked to the Treaty, and we must refrain from any form of discrimination while striving to honour the Treaty with respect and integrity. On the other hand, we ought to strive to balance diversity in our Eldership, Ministry Leadership, and Pastoral Staff roles by including individuals from diverse abilities and minority ethnic groups, including Māori. Similarly, a vital question arises for us to consider: do we also value our public servants who are Christians, and if so, do we acknowledge that many of them suffer under the weight of hierarchical stress and the demands of leadership? In light of this, we are called not only to pray for them but also to stand in solidarity, recognising their struggles as part of our collective responsibility in promoting justice and compassion.

On that note, it is imperative to acknowledge and honour Te Reo Māori as one of the official languages of Aotearoa, whilst we should embrace Te Reo Māori as a cherished heritage, promoting its utilisation in our church services, such as using Te Reo Māori in our welcoming, sermons, worship, and karakia, since God created us differently and with various languages. Hence, in Aotearoa, we are a unique country with Te Reo Māori.

In Aotearoa, the Human Rights Commissioner integrates Te Tiriti into its work to achieve continuous improvement in human rights, creating a credible and effective organisation that makes Te Tiriti and human rights relevant and positively impacts individuals, whānau, and iwi. Most importantly, we should not discriminate against people of different abilities, cultures, or races, including our indigenous people of this land.

Whereas, we ought to implement courses such as Ethics and Professionalism in all qualifications offered by both secular and Christian tertiary institutions and make them compulsory. By contrast, my initial Information and Communication Technology qualification training at Manukau Institute of Technology required a minimum pass mark of 80%, where students needed to be fully competent and professional within their field before finding suitable employment, whilst people like myself find it incredibly discouraging that, despite such rigorous training, many who work hard to gain their qualifications are left struggling to find employment, which feels like being punished for their commitment and sacrifice. With that said, a strong plea must be made for all academia to ensure that every programme of study, within the current qualification framework, includes not only the understanding of their respective culture but also the code of ethics that governs their professional responsibilities as a compulsory component.

As per the New Zealand Baptist affirmation statements, it is emphasised on the vital importance of embracing diversity, for which we ought to be responsible and accountable. God has given us the task of exemplifying His eternal word, which shapes and strengthens us through Christ. Not only that, it is critical to educate against negative attitudes towards people with different abilities, particularly those with autism, which are often misrepresented in theological discussions and lead to a lack of empathy and discrimination. In saying that, such attitudes contradict the principles of the Treaty and the Human Rights Act, which must be recognised and respected. Moreso, we ought to value ethnic diversity as essential for fostering peace and unity within our church.

Ultimately, as a church whānau and faith community, there is a significant role in promoting understanding and advocacy of the Treaty, encouraging every Christian who serves as a leader or volunteer to register under the Baptist Leader’s Registration. As part of the Baptist Churches of New Zealand whānau, it is crucial to be aware of the vital Treaty statements that have been affirmed. Examples include recognising the Treaty’s impact on the relationship between Tāngata Whenua and other citizens, breaking barriers for Māori to respond to the gospel authentically, and fostering reconciliation and development between Tāngata Whenua and Pākehā, as echoed in Ephesians 2:19. Conversely, it encourages churches to engage with Māori communities, promote Treaty understanding and pre–1840 history, and advocate for Treaty honour by the government, where implementing the Treaty affirmation statements is vital to ensure accountability, responsibility, and adherence to the Treaty within our church roles at our Baptist Churches.

In light of the above, it is vital to commit wholeheartedly to our mission by educating our church whānau and community regarding reconciliation, learning to act ethically and professionally while adhering to the Treaty within our church space, where we ought to leave behind the stigma of the past and focus on Isaiah 43:19–21, as discussed by Matt Renata at the 2022 Baptist Hui, where he emphasised reflecting on our story and its significance for the future of the Baptist movement in Aotearoa, highlighting the ongoing presence of the Holy Spirit among Māori. On the other hand, we must also learn from past injustices towards Māori, which deprived them of identity and community, exposing a gap in all churches and to be thankful to God, Māori, and Pākehā Christians for spreading the gospel and Jesus Christ’s teachings across our nation.

In conclusion, Romans 13:1–7 urges us to submit to governing authorities, as all authority is from God, emphasising respect out of fear of punishment and conscience. Henceforth, culture raises questions of power within the Christian community, focusing on context and cultural change for the church’s future. Theologians believe in the imago Dei,18 which reflects aspects of God’s nature and suggests that humans share some of God’s essence. Moreso, the relational and functional views emphasise relationships and our role as stewards of creation. It is vital that we value each other, recognising our unique creation in God’s image and our shared belief in the Triune God.

Consequently, it is disheartening that some Christians neglect laws, fail to honour the Treaty, and lack ethics and respect for diverse perspectives.20 Nevertheless, we are called not only to honour the Treaty but also to be thankful for the everyday rights and freedoms we enjoy, such as the ability to live, work, and establish homes in this country, which are not to be mistaken merely for matters of overseas investment but recognised as blessings that remind us of the deeper responsibility of belonging to and caring for this land.

Finally, as believers and non-believers, there remains the same responsibility to respect the land and its governing authority, valuing the privilege of living here and not taking it for granted, while also being encouraged to follow us in upholding truth, justice, and reconciliation for the sake of all. Let us move forward as a united people, closing this generational gap issue, ensuring that fresh voices are heard at the table, including a good balance of a strong leadership culture that brings wisdom to be shared across all generations, and that diversity remains the strength of both the church, our workplaces, and the environment of our community in today’s society.

In light of the above, you can refer to the full written article published on Substack: substack.com....