Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. INVOLVEMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE AUCKLAND DIOCESE OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH IN THE PEACE MOVEMENT SINCE 1945 A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Religious Studies At Massey University by Kenneth George Stead Massey University Albany Campus 1999 ABSTRACT The subject of this thesis is the involvement of members of the Auckland Diocese of the Anglican Church in the peace movement since 1945. 2 An introductory chapter on the deve lopment of Christian attitudes towards peace and war concludes that although the Augustinian just war model became the standard Anglican tool for justifyi ng Christian participation in warfare, the limitations on violence explicit in that model also gave a theological justification for o pposing modern warfare. The second and third chapters document the activities of the Auckland sub-branch of the Ang! ican Pacifist Fellowship. This o rganisation. despite its small size. was active in promoting an absolute pacifist view of Christianity. It is suggested that much of its failure was a result of it being over ambitious. expecting people to make a major leap when a series of smaller steps may have been more appropriate. The fourth chapter, on the Vietnam War. contrasts two public marches in Queen Street symbolic of the unwillingness of most Anglicans at this time to consider foreign policy issues independently of considerations of patriotism, but also suggests that disillusionment with Vietnam provided a foundation for anti-nuclear protests. Chapter five is based mainly on the recollections of George Armstrong concerning the peace squadron, but also documents how one inner city parish responded to the challenges of the 1970s and 1980s. the final chapter concludes that Auckland Anglicans were more likely to respond to peace issues in response to some personal feeling of threat than because of a commitment to Biblical principles and that in most instances their theology is used to justify their actions rather than as a reason for those actions. PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis grew from work done as a religious studies student. A research exercise for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (Hons) taking the form of an annotated bibliography identified ., . l certain gaps in material available. There was, for example, a considerable amount of material on conscientious objectors, but none on the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship. This is an attempt to fill some of those gaps. The thesis was written to pursue a personal interest in the issue of the relationship between war, peace and religion and this has influenced its writing. In particular, it has been influenced by personal be! iefs as a practising Christian. These include a belief that the teachings of Christ are pacifist, and a belief that the Bible is inspired scripture. The w illingness of other Christians to assist in this project has proved invaluable. Christopher Barfoot of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship deserves special thanks for providing full access to his personal records covering many years . Without those records and those of the Wellington sub-branch of the Fellowship housed in the Alexander Turnbull Library the writing of the chapters on this organisation would not have been possible. The assistance of the Auckland diocesan archivist was also appreciated. As a -religious studies student enrolled at a campus with no religious studies lecturer to act as supervisor, I am very grateful to those of the School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, and in particular to Associate Professor Peter Donovan, for arranging for me to enrol as a history.student with· a history supervisor, Dr Peter Lineham. The financial support of the Post Graduate research Fund also proved invaluable. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the invaluable services of Anne Johnston. Anne ' s willingness to provide emergency typing services during the stressful final weeks of compil ing this thesis made all the difference in ensuring its completion. Thank you, Anne, for your very special effort . GLOSSARY Pacifism This is used to refer to the total repudiation of violence under all circumstances. ABBREVIATIONS APF Anglican Pacifist Fellowship 5 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract 2 Preface and Acknowledgements 3 Glossary and Abbreviations S Chapter l War, Peace and the Anglican Tradition 7 Chapter 2 Anglican Pacifist Fellowship : The Vietnam War Years 18 Chapter 3 The Anglican Pacifist Fellowship : After Vietnam 33 Chapter 4 Vietnam - A Tale of Two Marches 47 Chapter S Anti-Nuclear and Anti-Tour Protests 57 Chapter 6 Does Theology Matter? 74 Bibliography 90 7 CHAPTER ONE WAR, PEACE AND THE ANGLICAN TRADITION Few Christians would disagree with the proposition that the teachings of the Bible provide the basis for Christian belief and practise . But the Bible must be interpreted, not least because it covers a diversity o f beliefs and practises spanning many centuries. Such questio ns as the relationship of the Law of Moses to the teachings and example o f Jesus can be taxing problems. The Bible provides believers with a means of approaching such problems. God in the person of the Holy Spirit is to provide the believer with the necessary guidance. But how is inspired guidance to be distinguished fro m human interpretations? If several people ho lding a di versity o f views all claim to have been guided by the Spirit o f God, w ho is to be believed? As a means of addressing this problem numerous means of testing for inspiration have been devised, but none have met with uni versal support . It is thus possible for a plurality of doctrines to exist as to the proper Christian response to violence, air based on the same scriptural authority. Yet these diverse views can never be based on scripture alone. Even for those Christians who insist that the Bible is the sole basis of their religious beliefs. the reality is that personal background and experiences and the influences of others will be carried by the believer as he or she attempts to understand the Bible. How the Christian of today will understand the Bible's teachings on violence and non violence will to a large extent be influenced by the pas~ . It is thus necessary to tum to that past to understand the influences which led some New Zealand Anglicans to actively participate in the " peace movement" during the second half of the twentieth century. The difficulty is well demonstrated by the twenty-second chapter of the Gospel according to Luke. Jesus instructs his followers to arm themselves with swords, but is satisfied when just two are produced. a number too small for meaningful defence. When one of these swords is used in hi s defence, Jesus rebukes the wielder. ls the demand for swords in verse 36 to be interpreted as an acceptance by Jesus of killing in self defence, or a part of a staged demonstration that violence could not be justifi ed even in self defence? 8 In genera l terms. it may fair ly be said that for the first three centuries of its existence the w itness of the Church was overwhelmingly pacifist. The official teachings of the Church still survivi ng nowhere authorise the shedding of human blood, even in self defence or in the name of the state, but contain numerous rejections of vio lence during the period prio r to the accession of Constantine. From the second hal f of the second century there is evidence of Christian participation in the armed forces. This can, however, be largely attributed to three major factors . The first is that Christians do not always live up to the standards of their faith, necessitating the rebukes recorded in the Fathers. The second is that many Christian soldiers were already legionaries at the times of their conversions, as had been Cornelius before them. The Christian objection was to the shedding of human blood rather than to the holding of a particular office, so it was possible for the Christian legionary to live with the ambiguity of his situation as long as his legion remained at peace. In the event of war, however, the expectation of the Church was that he would not take the lives of enemies. This may have given rise to the third explanation. The legions of Rome were charged not just with defending the empire against external enemies but also with maintaining internal order as police officers . It appears that the primitive Church did not object to its members acting as police officers provided that they did not shed blood 1 9 The quasi-official end of pacifism as the normative position of the Church is generally taken as the Battle of the Malvian Bridge, although it would not have been possible for the Church to so quickly accept the wielding of the sword by Constantine in the name of Christ had it not been for a general and continuing decline in the standards of practise of Christians generally and the acceptance of this decline by Church leaders . Seen in this context, the influence of Augustine in this matter parallels the Pelagian dispute . Whatever the official theological reasons, the heart of his dispute with Pelagius was the latter ' s insistence that all Christians should strive to achieve a Christlike standard, whereas Augustine regarded this as a futile denial of the inevitability of ongoing sinfulness. Human depravity was inevitable; all which could be done was to accept this inevitability, rely on God's grace and try to make the best of following Christ. Where Pelagius sought to avoid accommodating the ways of the world, Augustine saw such accommodations as more or less inevitable and sought to mitigate them and commute their consequences within a Christian framework . Such an accommodation was the Augustinian just war. Warfare was recognised as being innately sinful, as was participation in warfare by a Christian. But such were the consequences of humanity's fall that at times there was no alternative to a believer sinning. 1 Roland H. BaintoilChristian Attitudes Toward War and Peace, Hodder and Stoughton (London, l 960)pp79-8 l lO There were, therefore, times when it was acceptable for a Christian to reluctantly take human life in order to oppose some other greater sin. Such a killing was still sinful, but if committed for good motives could be justified. The circumstances in which such a killing was justified were limited and it was still necessary for the soldier to repent and make confession. Nevertheless, Augustine ' s writings on warfare as codified and interpreted by subsequent theologians provided a theological basis for what had since Constantine ' s day been an uncomfortable accommodation with the ways of the world . It was within the context of the Augustinian just war that the embryonic Church of England develo ped. Christianity had found its way to England during the Roman occupation, probably carried by Christian legionaries. but failed to gain widespread acceptance. Subsequent missionary work. particularly by Celtic monks. had met with some success but England, Scotland and Wales were overwhelmingly pagan when Columba began his missionary endeavours on the Scottish isle of Iona. If the mission of Columba is taken as being the genesis of the Church of England, it may truthfully be said that it was founded through bloodshed. According to tradition, Columba departed from his native Ireland for lona as penance for having caused a war in which there was heavy loss of life. The Roman Church may have forbidden those in orders from bearing arms,_ but combat between monks was not uncommon in the Celtic tradition. They were, however, true to Augustine in recognising the underlying sinfulness of such killings, and Columba appears to have accepted his mission to Iona as a penance predicated in terms of gaining for Christ as .. many souls as the number of believers who had fallen in battle.2 Nor ~ Brendan Lehane. Ear~v C 'el tic < 'hristianity. Constable and Co. (London. 199-') pp.118-119 11 was Augustine of Canterbury, who led the Roman mission which introduced Christianity to southern England, entirely averse to the use of violence. As an example, he was quite willing to see the Welsh defeat at the Battle of Chester as constituting a divine punishment for their insistence on following Celtic rather than Roman practices. ·1 It is relatively simple to identify the influence of the Augustinian just war on English thinking, whether it be Bede writing in support of the Battle of Chester being a sign of God ' s judgement or papal endorsement of the justness of the Norman invasion of 1066. But it is relatively difficult to see the impact of Urban II ' s call for the first crusade three decades later. The theory of the holiness of crusading is dependent on a theology of indulgence which in turn depends on the acceptance of the existence of purgatory. Those were part of official church teachings up to the time of the Reformation, but from the time of the English Reformation on there was no longer any room for such beliefs. It thus became impossible for the reformed Church of England to support in or advocate any war of crusade in its technical sense. But it would be wrong to assume from that that the crusade had no part in the development of reformed theology. The concept of war as a holy act had taken root. It was impossible for a Protestant to fight a true crusade - a holy pilgrimage in which the normal presumption of innate sinfulness was replaced by the gaining of divine merit by mean~ of a papal declaration of an indulgence. But while it was the indulgence which made a crusade what it was in a purely legal sense, it was warfare as an act of pilgrimage which lent crusading its spiritual merit. If indulgences and paper authority were anathema to Protestant leaders, pilgrimage was a concept which the reformers could relate to, albeit in a form · 1 Lehane. p. l ·H 12 heavily modified by the omission of remission of time in purgatory. If warfare as a pilgrimage was holy, it was because its cause was holy and because it was prosecuted in a holy fashion . Thus there was a fundamental shift in the perceived nature of war. The sinfulness of warfare was not innate. Rather, it was rendered either sinful or holy by whether it was against or for the dominion of God, and by the motives and conduct of participants. This was a view which was particularly attractive within Calvinism, and this appeal to Calvinists may have played an important role in ensuring that despite the Church of England being the official Church of the leaders of the British Empire throughout its often violent history, the ancient tradition of the innate sinfulness of all warfare remained a significant part of Anglican thinking. Many attempts ways have been made to explain the origins of the English Civil War, and no attempt is made here to question their validity . But if the war is reduced to the purely religious terms in which its prosecutors insisted on portraying it, it may simplistically be said to have been a conflict between those who wished to continue the process of religious reform, creating a holy theocracy, and those who were content to maintain the status quo . Without doubt the true causes of the conflict were vastly more complex than this, but it was the religious aspect of the war which would influence English theology. The Augustinian model met the needs of the royalists because of its emphasis on princely authority, but also because they could portray themselves as fighting a defensive war to protect the status quo and the rights of the Crown. These limitations were avoided by Cromwell by resort to the reasoning described above. 4 Despite its many abuses, the Augustinian model at least attempted to impose -severe limitations on the circumstances in which recourse could be made to war. ~ Bainton pp. l.i8-l.J9 With its theology favouring the royalists, it is likely that its influence not only during the war but also at the time of the Commonwealth and restoration cemented in place the Augustinian view in official post-restoration Anglican thinking. The Church of England was (and still is) the official English church, with state patronage and state appointment of bishops. This circumstance made it unlikely that it would do other than sanction state diplomacy supported by the threat and if necessary use of armed force, albeit with the quasi-official qualifications of the Augustinian just war. Such theological limitations were not, however, relevant in the cases of nonconformist denominations, which have existed in material numbers in the centuries subsequent to the civil war. It was not uncommon for denominations with Calvinist learnings such as the Congregationalists to remain supporters of wars deemed by the State to be necessary There were, however, other denominations standing outside the Calvinist tradition advocating pacifism or near-pacifism, of which the Society of Friends is perhaps the best known. There were other groups, such as the Brethren, which if not wholeheartedly pacifist were nevertheless unwilling to wield the sword themselves . Such groups may have exerted no direct role in influencing Anglican thinking, but it is unlikely that they exerted no influence. Many nonconformists were willing to engage in public debate about the appropriateness of Government policy, especially after nonconformists were granted the right to sit in Parliament. The Church of England may have continued to trust in the sword, but it could never entirely escape from the need to relate warfare to questions of righteousness. To the extent that the theoretical conditions of a just war were not satisfied, there were grounds for questioning Christian participation. I~ Applied to a New Zealand context, it is possible to see this ambivalence in every major conflict. New Zealand had no Established Church, but the tradition of supporting the State was strong and there was a general acceptance that the Government was entitled to Church support in the event of war. But there was also a willingness amongst senior Church leaders to be critical of any injustice in the Government ' s actions . (In the nineteenth century, a similar willingness to see both sides of an issue is not apparent amongst the laity.) There was thus no contradiction between Selwyn acting as a chaplain to the armed forces during the land wars and his opposition to the Government ' s war policy . There was similarly no innate contradiction during the Second World War in the Bishop of Wellington, Rt Rev Herbert St Barbe Holland, opposing Government mistreatment of conscientious objectors held in detention while simultaneously supporting the war. The bishop had concluded the war to be justified but those who had reached contrary views deserved the right to act in good conscience Whatever the otlicial teachings of the Church, the reality has often been different. The early Church Fathers may speak of peaceable Christians, but long before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge there were Christians who were prepared to defy the official policy by taking up arms. St Martin of Tours, who as a soldier had been court martialled for refusing to fight lest he kill a fellow Christian (and who ironically later became the patron saint of soldiers) was as a bishop praised for his peacefulness. But implicit in the praise for Martin was criticism of other bishops who were somewhat less peaceable even in their dealings with each other. Similarly it is unlikely that there have been many lay Christians who have given a great deal of attention to either-the just war theory or its applicability of the just war theory. The ~David Grant,Out in the Cold: Pacifists and Conscientious Objectors in New Zealand during World War IL Reed Methven reactions of some to war may derive from the guidance of those whom they recognise as leaders. For others, it may be a result of a willingness to follow the example of their peers. For others it may be a privately formed opinion as to what they think is right in a particular situation. If theology forms a part of the decision. it is more likely to take the form of the rationalisation than the rationale. 15 Such decisions are influenced more by culture and circumstance than by scripture. The slaughter of the First World War had led to an increasing acceptance of Pacifism, in New Zealand particularly among Methodists. But this was always a minority view and was in any case subject to reappraisal over the question of how to oppose Hitler. New Zealanders had in any case a long fear of foreign invasion. In the mid and late nineteenth century the fear was of the Russian Pacific Fleet . With the destruction of the fleet in the war Russo-Japanese conflict the focus of this apprehension shifted to the Imperial Japanese Navy. Following Japan's defeat it became Russian's turn again with a fear of Soviet expansion. But just as the death toll of the First World War had raised questions about the value of that war and of war in general. the potentially high costs of nuclear war raised questions about whether nuclear defence could be justified. There was no need for any knowledge of theology for Christians to fear nuclear warfare (although such cost-benefit analyses had always been implicit in the Augustinian model.) The emergence of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship is perhaps surprising given the traditional Anglican support of the state's ability to wage war. It is, however, less surprising if one considers the Anglican tradition of intellectual freedom and willingness to accept a diversity Publishers (Auck.land. 19!!6) pp.121-126 16 of beliefs and practices where there has been a diversity of Biblical interpretations. What is perhaps more surprising is that the New Zealand APF has been more active than any other branch outside England despite a culture of insecurity and conformity which, for example, led to New Zealand treating its Second World War conscientious objectors more harshly than any other self-governing Commonwealth nation. But this needs to be kept in perspective. The New Zealand APF has always had a small membership and even smaller active membership and has made little headway in convincing the wider Church to adopt its absolute renunciation of warfare. More in keeping with Anglican tradition was opposition to the Vietnam War and to defensive security arrangements incorporating nuclear weaponry It was implicit in the just war theory that in any conflict at least one side must be fighting an unjust war, and both sides would be unless all stipulated criteria were met. "My country, right or wrong" was never officially an acceptable attitude. It was thus entirely appropriate for the Bishop of Chichester, GKA Bell, to have supported the war against Hilter while opposing the area bombing of German cities. If the model made it possible for the Church to support war in some instances, it was theoretically obliged to oppose war in all others. A theological opposition to either an unjust cause (as a number of New Zealanders perceived the Vietnam War to be) or to the fighting of a war by means which indiscriminately killed both combatants and non-combatants and caused such large-scale destruction as to ensure that the cost would outweigh the benefits (as was perceived with nuclear weaponry) was entirely consistent with and in fact required by the Augustinian model. For secular authorities attempting to gain Church support for warfare the just war ~eory always held the potential to be a double-edged sword. 17 Beyond the theoretical issues were the personal insecurities of ordinary New Zealanders. Those who in the autumn of 1942 had faced the threat of Japanese invasion may have been more willing to accept the American nuclear umbrella than those who had never lived with threat of foreign occupation but who feared the prospect of nuclear annihilation. This was a case of an issue which. it could be argued, was just as much secular as theological capturing the popular imagination for reasons other than the teachings of the Church, but with the Church then being enlisted as a vehicle (one among many) for advancing this cause. Whether the Church can be regarded as a cause of this movement through something of the Christian ethic permeating popular culture, or a medium of expression for a movement which had its roots outside the Church, is open to debate. If a guess is to be hazarded , it is that there were probably elements of all three present in the way the Anglican Church in New Zealand reacted to the nuclear issue. tempered always by the strong and sincerely held belief o f many Anglicans that nuclear deterrence was a regrettable but necessary measure for maintaining peace. The common feature which is agreed on, whether the believer be a pacifist, a non­ pacifist opponent of a particular war or of a particular means of warfare, or a supporter of a war, is that warfare is of its nature evil and that peace must be relentlessly sought by the best means available . The question is always which means are the best ·ones available. On that there is no agreement, but ample room for respect for those who come to different conclusions. Although the just war theory was based on the writings of Augustine, it was systematised by later theologians. Despite the debt owed by the theory to others, in this thesis it is referred to as the Augustinian model in accordance with convention and in the interests of convenience. 18 CHAPTER TWO ANGLICAN PACIFIST FELLOWSHIP: THE VIETNAM WAR YEARS The Anglican Pacifist Fellowship (APF) was formed in England in 1935 as a group within the Anglican Church committed to the complete repudiation of warfare and the advocacy of the belief that the participation of Christians in warfare is contrary to the Gospel. It rejects as contrary to the teachings of Jesus the Augustinian view that war is sometimes a necessary evil , and that in certain limited circumstances by those circumstances Christian participation in warfare may be justified. The concept of a "necessary evil" is regarded by APF members as being fundamentally at odds with the Gospel, involving a denial of the completeness of God's redeeming power and the defeat of evil on the Cross. The Fellowship instead takes the absolute view that Christians must never compromise on the principles of the faith by resorting to evil as a means of opposing evil. c, Membership of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship is open to all baptised members of the Church in the Anglican Communion who sign the following pledge: We, communicant members of the Church of England, or a Church in full communion ·with it, believing that our membership of the Christian Church involves the complete repudiation of modem war, pledge ourselves to renounce war, and to work for the construction of Christian peace in the world. 7 6 Untitled Anglican Pacifist Fellowship (A.P.F.) membership pamphlet 19 The history of the New Zealand branch of the APF can be traced to 11June1947 when Rev Roger Patrick Taylor, vicar of Kaiapoi, Christchurch, wrote to the APF in London requesting membership "prospectuses or whatever you call them" so that a New Zealand branch could be established . K The actual founding of this new branch occurred at a meeting of Christchurch Anglican pacifists at 7 Ilam Road on 27 January 1948 .9 As late as the 1960s the nature of the relationship between the English and New Zealand APF was called into question because of a practical problem which had arisen over membership . Several New Zealand Fellowship members were directly enrolled with London but were unknown to the New Zealand branch , even though the New Zealand APF operated independently under its own constitution. The question was whether or not the New Zealand branch was administratively autonomous and, therefore, responsible for all New Zealand members or was to be treated as a division of the English APF 10 It was concluded by both English and New Zealand APF executives that the branches of each Anglican province were administratively autonomous and that the New Zealand branch therefore had sole responsibility for New Zealand membership . Taylor, was a member of a family of pacifist priests, his father and brothers sharing his convictions. His father, Frederick Norman Taylor, was born in London and worked as a priest in Birmingham (where he came under the influence of Bishop Charles Gore) and Berkshire before immigrating to Christchurch in 1913. 11 F N Taylor was a High Church Anglican, as was his son, Roger, who became the first New Zealand APF chairman and 7 APF membership pamphlet 1 Letter from Taylor to London APF sa.-retary, 11 June 1947, Wellington APF records deposited in the Alexander Tl.Ullbull Library, Folder 21 .. 9 Anglican Pacifist Fellowship New Zealand branch minute book 10 Report to Wellington sub-branch meeting July 1965. Turnbull Folder 12 20 remained chairman for many years. Even after relinquishing the chair he remained a dedicated and committed member of the Fellowship. working for the promotion of peace for the rest of his life. Auck landers had started joining the New Zealand branch soon after its founding, but in very small numbers. The strongholds of the Fellowship in its early years were Christchurch, where Taylor was so active prior to moving to Dunedin, and Wellington. In December 1954, of a reported national membership of 58. only seven lived in the Diocese of Auckland. 12 No fo rmal organisation of the APF appears to have occurred in Auckland prior to the establishment of a diocesan sub-branch and as a result no formal "Auckland" records are known to have ever existed fo r the first few years of the New Zealand branch · s existence. Most of the early members have died. and the one surviving Auck lander whose membership dates back to 1948, the year of foundation, has been unable to supply any information. Philip Crump stated that his memory of both his own and the Fellowship's activities is now sufficiently vague and unreliable for it to be inappropriate for him to comment on either APF acti vities generally or his personal involvement. It is, however. known that Crump served as an APF delegate to the 1955 Convention on International Affairsu. · Little else is known about the activities of Auckland members during this early period apart from references in the records of the Wellington sub-branch of their attendance or non-attendance at annual conferences held in Wellington or Christchurch. 11 Michael Blain. Clergy in the Diocese of Christchurch 1890-1925: A Directory (Anglican Diocese of Christchurch. 199-1) 1 ~ Membership list 195-1. Turnbull Folder 16 1.' Letter to A.P.F. members from R.P. Taylor. 8 Feb. 1955. Turnbull Folder 13 21 The Auckland sub-branch came into existence in 1962 14 . As the sub-branch was formally constituted, full formal records were made from this time. However, the records covering most of its existence have been mislaid and attempts at tracing these records have thus far proved fruitless . Most of the following information relating to the period prior to the late 1980s has, therefore, been based on information about the Auckland sub-branch contained in the records of the Wellington sub-branch housed in the Alexander Turnbull Library. From the inception of the New Zealand branch of the APF it has been a feature of its organisation that a particular diocesan sub-branch serves for a time as the national executive, with all members of that sub-branch being deemed to be part of the executive. Christchurch, Wellington, Auckland and most recently Waikato have all from time to time served as the national executive in this way. At the time of the creation of the Auckland sub-branch, Wellington was serving this role, but on 13 June 1964, at the annual national conference which in this year was held in Auckland, the national executive passed to Auckland. Dean Charles Chandler was appointed chairman, Mrs Margaret Bowater was appointed secretary and Christopher Barfoot served as deputy secretary . 1 ~ This presumably created practical problems, as the majority of Auckland members lived in the Auckland urban area, but Bowater lived on the Coromandel Peninsula (which is in the Auckland Diocese) and Chandler was a priest at Leigh (over seventy kilometres north of Auckland). In consequence the meetings were often chaired by the deputy chairman, Crump, and judging from the large quantity of correspondence between Barfoot in Auckland and Bowater in Thames which has managed to find its way into the Wellington sub-branch files, it is reasonable to suppose that the total volume of ~orrespondence between them was considerable. 14 Letter from C. Barfoot to N Mountier. 15 March 1963. Turnbull Folder 5 22 The actual activities of the Auckland sub-branch and of the New Zealand branch as a whole followed from the perceptions of members as to what the proper roles of the Fellowship should be. The basic objective was to bring the Church to an understanding of Christianity being an essentially pacifist faith , from which followed the practical objectives of proclaiming a theology of peace and demonstrating how this theology could be related to the practise of peacemaking in the real world in both theoretical and practical terms. The perceived role of the Fellowship was, therefore, primarily educational, and this perception has strongly influenced the direction of the APF . So, for example, while it has often written to politicians to seek to influence them to support an anti-nuclear policy, there appears to have been no concerted ongoing campaign to influence the Government in this matter, the Fellowship instead attempting to influence other members of the Church to oppose nuclear weapons. Many of the Anglicans most closely connected with the anti-nuclear movement, at least in Auckland, were not APF members and often not pacifists. The APF has for the most part maintained such a low public profile that even many Anglican pacifists and near pacifists remained unaware of its existence. The Fellowship has also been strongly influenced by its identification of itself as a specifically Anglican organisation. It has recognised that it is a part of the wider Christian Chu_rch and has always been very happy to co-operate with the other like-minded Christian groups such as the Society of Friends and the Christian Pacifist Society. But such co­ operation appears to have been piecemeal and ad hoc. The primary emphasis has always been on promoting.pacifism within the Anglican Church, so much so that the hope has 15 Annual General Meeting minutes, 13 June 1964, Turnbull Folder 15 occasionally been expressed that the time will come when the Church ' s Articles of Religion will be amended to state that participation in warfare is not lawful. 23 It was of great significance to the members of the Auckland sub-branch during the first decade and a half of its existence that one of its most prominent members was the Bishop of Auckland, Eric Gowing, who led the diocese from 1960 to 1978. It appears that Gowing was very willing to use his position as bishop to promote pacifism and peacemaking as normative Christianity and was active in the internal working of the APF. The Fellowship in return was happy to have the name of the bishop associated with its activities, so much so that Gowing can perhaps almost be regarded as having been the unofficial patron of the Auckland sub­ branch. Certainly the relationship between the bishop and his fellow Auckland members was warm and co-operative. The warm relationship between this bishop and the Fellowship was far from typical. An example of the tensions which could exist between the APF and non-pacifists was provided by the Bishop of Wellington, Norman Lesser, taking offence at the Fellowship writing to ordinands and promoting views which he considered to be contrary to their ordination vows. 16 Such explicit opposition from the Church leadership has not, however, been common. Non-pacifist bishops have often been happy for the Fellowship to contribute to the debate on peace issues. During the first decade of the Auckland sub-branch's existence two major issues were ballot~ conscription into the armed forces and New Zealand's participation in the Vietnam 16 Letter from Bishop Lesser to A.P.F .. Turnbull Folder 7 24 War. All young men were required to register for military training, with penalties for non­ registration. Only a portion of those registering were required to undergo compulsory military training, those conscripted being balloted on the basis of birth date. It was possible to register as a conscientious objector with a panel assessing sincerity of those so registered if they were ballotted. Those accepted as genuine conscientious objectors were subject to sanctions which included the forfeiture of all wages in excess of the rate paid to a private soldier for a period equivalent to the time which otherwise would have been spent in military training. Unlike Australia, New Zealand did not send conscripts to fight in Vietnam. There were undoubtedly those who feared that this policy of sending only volunteers might change, but given the small size of New Zealand's involvement in Vietnam this was unlikely as New Zealand could fulfil is commitment with volunteers only. A total of 3890 New Zealanders served in Vietnam between 1965 and 1972, the total commitment never exceeding 543 personnel, peaking in November 1968 17 . There was, however, sharp division within New Zealand society as to the appropriateness of any New Zealand involvement, following the example set by dissenters in the USA and Australia. Those with memories of the Pacific War generally regarded it as necessary for New_Zealand to demonstrate its commitment to a defence relationship with the USA, but a growing minority of citizens took the view that New Zealand should not participate in this conflict. The Auckland APF attempted to address both issues, primarily through efforts at educating Church m.~mbers in its interpretation of the teachings of the Bible. 25 In response to the conscription issue Auckland members undertook to produce an information pamphlet targeted at young men approaching registration age1 R. The proposal to produce the pamphlet was made in 1966 and it was written during the second half of 1966, publication occurring early in 1968 19 . It was intended to be a balanced statement setting out the cases both for and against conscientious objection from a Christian perspective. The foreword was written by Bishop Gowing. The Right Rev GM McKenzie declined to write the anti- objection case on the ground that his naval involvement may have biased his thinking, suggesting Rev John Malcolm as more neutrai20 . The anti-conscientious objection case as eventually written by M J Houghton is essentially Augustinian just war in its approach, and expresses the sympathy towards those who refuse to fight which is implicit (and sometimes explicit) in the Augustinian position. The pro-objection case was written by Auckland APF members Christopher Barfoot, Philip Crump and Shaun Pennycook2 1 . These three and Miss R Miller were members of the subcommittee charged with its production.22 The four page pamphlet was entitled Militwy Serl'ice : A (iuidefor Those Required to Rexisterfor Militwy Trai11i11g It was widely distributed to Anglican secondary schools throughout New Zealand, and a small number of schools (including girls ' schools) are known to have made distributions to senior pupils, but in most instances it has not been possible to 17 Anny Public Relations : A Brief History t?{the New Zealand army in South l letnam 1964-1972, New Zealand Defence Headquarters (Wellington. 1973) Annex A 1x Annual General Meeting minutes. New Zealand Branch minute books. 10 Nov. 1966 19 Military Service : A Guide for those Required to Register for Military Training, Anglican Pacifist Fellowship New Zealand Branch (Aucldand, 1968) ~ Lener from G.M McKenzie to C. Barfoot. 25 Aug. 1967. Twnbull Folder 7 ~ 1 Letter from C. Barfoot to L. Robinson, 23 Aug. 1967 ~ A.G.M. Minutes. 12 Nov. 1966 26 ascertain whether or not distributions to pupils occurredD There was also distribution to numerous parishes. although the recipients were not always sympathetic. An example is provided by a request from the Archdeacon of Tamaki , David Dunningham, for Barfoot to address his Young Anglicans, who had already read it . Dunningham described them as " militaristic" and "coolly interested" in the pamphlet2 .i. It was also di stributed to parish clergy through the Anglican Department of Christian Education in Wellington.25 Talking to parishes and to groups within parishes was regarded as an important part of the work of the Fellowship and several members frequently offered their services to parishes to talk about their pacifist beliefs. APF members also attempted to educate the members of their own parishes. but those interviewed said that they met with little success . Margaret Bowater was in a particularly good position to perform this ministry, as from 1966 she was the leader of the Senior Anglican Youth Movement and the Inter-Church Senior Youth Fellowship in Thames26 She also used her position as worker in the interchurch library in Thames to ensure that a considerable body of material on peace was available, but she reported difficulty in interesting people in reading books on the subject. 27 Another initiative of the Auckland sub-branch during the time it constituted the national executive was the posting of the official English APF organ " Anglican Pacifist" to all clergy in the Auckland Diocese. The intention to do this was reported to the June 1964 annual conference, held in Auckland, and the publication was distributed for a period of one year. 28 1- 1 Report dated Feb. 1968, Turnbull Folder 8 ~~ Letter from D. Durmin_gham to C. Barfoot. 28 Feb. 1968. Turnbull Folder 8 ~Letter from Director ~fDept. for Christian Education to A.P.F .. 5 March 1968. Turnbull Folder 8 ~6 Letter from M Bowater to C Barfoot 10 Aug 1966. Turnbull Folder 6 '7 - Letter from M Bowater to C Barfoot 15 July 1968. Turnbull Folder 8 ::ii A.G.M. Minutes 13 June 1964 27 In July 1965 Bowater wrote to the APF suggesting that a questionnaire be sent to the clergy of the diocese requesting "constructive criticism or advice ... to strengthen our efforts to stimulate deeper Christian concern about matters of peace and war". 29 This survey was carried out, but the results were considered to be not entirely favourable. The majority of clergy did not respond and many of those who did were critical. This prompted the establishment of a committee consisting of Crump, Barfoot, Waller and Orr to produce a reply to the objections to pacifism raised in the survey, posted to Auckland clergy and New Zealand APF members . It was reported at the November 1966 annual conference that "some favourable comment was received, though it was possible that the paper was too long and involved for many." At this conference Crump moved that Cha/le11Ke, as the English APF organ was by now named, be distributed to all Anglican secondary schools in New Zealand for display in their libraries30 By the time of the November 1967 conference only one secondary school, Rathkeale College in Masterton, had replied accepting ( 'hal/enKe .1 1 Other sub-branches followed Auckland ' s example of Chal/e11Ke mailouts to clergy, starting with Wellington in early 196612 The Auckland sub-branch also had relations with non-Christian groups involved in activities opposing New Zealand involvement in the Vietnam War. It was affiliated to the Auckland Council on Vietnam, and worked with the International Committee of Conscience on Vietnam of the International Fellowship of Reconciliation.11 It has not proved possible to locate within the APF's own records any information detailing the extent of these involvements, but both the extent of involvement and the differences between the Christians ::?9 Letter from M Bowater 26 July 1965, Turnbull Folder 6 30 A.G.M. minutes 11 Nov. 1966 ·" Letter from C. Barfootto .. Dean .. (Chandler'?) 17 Nov. 1967, Turnbull Folder 7 3~ Letter Wellington branch to C. Barfoot 2 Apr. 1966 Turnbull Folder 7 28 of the APF and non-Christians from other affiliated groups appear to have caused some tensions between the groups. It was felt necessary to organise two meetings between Auckland APF members and members of Progressive Youth, the Peace Council and the Communist Party to address those tensions . This was largely a consequence of the disparate motivations of those involved in opposition to the war. Some, such as APF members, objected to war per se . Some other Christians believed that participation in warfare could be justified but that this particular war was unjust Some were non-Christians who opposed the war on ethical grounds and some were communists whose motivation for opposing New Zealand support for the South Vietnamese Government was a desire for a military victory by the communist North Vietnamese some no doubt were motivated by this being the latest cause to give a sense of purpose and belonging. Such diversity of beliefs and motivations within the anti-war movement was potentially devisive, making necessary the attempts at identifying common ground . These discussions were described by Barfoot as "most helpful in the common ground discovered and the understandings created" 14 Certain members of the Fellowship gained reputations in the wider community for leftist leanings. Dean Chandler, whose involvement with the New Zealand Peace Council and World Peace Council included international trips to attend conferences some of which were to communist countries and who was well known for his concerns on social issues, became known amongst his detractors as the Red Dean. Chandler stated that one of his greatest regrets was not having spoken more clearly during the Second World War. Js Another prominent Auckland member, Florence LeRoy White, was a member of the Peace Council, .n Interview with Christopher Barfoot .l4 Report from C. Barfoot to APF. H Apr 1969. Turnbull Folder 13 H APF Newsletter. May 1971. Turnbull Folder 15 29 the Society for Closer Relations with Russia and the China Friendship Association, and had a picture of Mao on a wall in her house, next to a crucifix. 36 About this she wrote "I find these societies not incompatible with my Christian beliefs "17 Kathleen Hall, a member who lived in Weymouth who had been a medical worker in China for twenty years, concluded an outline of her Chinese work with the words "and I was so thankful for the Chinese communists" 38 But there were other members of the Fellowship who considered their capitalist activities to be not incompatible with their Christian faith. Barfoot, for example, would eventually become a director of Barfoot and Thompson, the largest real estate agency in Auckland, a position he would hold for twenty-five years39 The APF active membership also included a disproportionately large number of people who could be described as High Church, raising the question of whether the Oxford Movement ' s deep concern for the urban poor may over a century later have influenced to some degree the antipodean APF . Such concern is demonstrated, for example, by Hall. After her return from China she devoted herself to working among Waikato Maori, whom she regarded as having been neglected by the Church prior to the appointment of Bishop Holland .40 On the initiative of the Auckland membership a national newsletter was introduced from April 196 7 and was issued quarterly. It was standard APF practise throughout New Zealand to issue members with lists of ordinands for whom to pray in the hope that through these prayers the Holy Spirit would influence these ordinands to adopt an acceptance of pacifism as Christian orthodoxy, and Auckland members were included in this activity. 41 36 Interview with Rev. Patricia Nicolas ·"Letter from F. White-to APF, 15 Nov. 19~ or 1955, Turnbull Folder 3 .lll Letter from K Hall to APF secretary 22 June 1959. Turnbull Folder 3 ·' 9 Telephone conversation with C Barfoot. January 1999 40 As per Note 38 ~ 1 Interview with C Barfoot 30 At the annual general meeting held in conjunction with the May 1969 annual conference the decision was made to shift the national executive from the Auckland to the Wellington sub- branch 42 . Over the following four years New Zealand forces were wit hdrawn from Vietnam and balloted conscription was abolished, resulting in the absolute pacifist message of the Fellowship losing much of its immediacy. The focus for Anglicans in general who were interested in peace issues was shifting to opposition to continuing French nuclear testing in the Pacific. Many of those Anglicans who were concerned about this issue were motivated by environmental concerns about atmospheric testing or by concerns about the level of destruction involved in nuclear warfare rather than because of opposition to war per se. In consequence the Fellowship fou nd itself proclaiming a message which did not specifically address the issue at hand in quite the way it had in the 1960s w hen the questions had been whether or not to participate in a war or prepare for war rather than the means by which wars could be fought . Auckland members had become discouraged because despite their efforts over a period of years, for the Anglican Church was remaining generally non-pacifist. Reports presented by Barfoot on behalf of the Auckland sub-branch and Mountier on behalf of Christchurch to the Wellington sub-branch in January 1974 indicated very little activity by the Fellowship in either centre. Apparently Barfoot and/or Mountier were sufficiently discouraged by a lack of tangible results to question the value of the Fellowship, for the Wellington minutes record that the meeting considered and rejected the suggestion made in the sub branch reports that the APF had outlived its usefulness. 43 4~ APF Newsletter Mav 1969 4 J APF minute book. Wellington meeting 30 Jan 197~ 31 Assessing the impact of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship during the Vietnam War years is made difficult by the problem of separating the influence of the organisation from that of key individuals. Such a separation of influences is necessary in making the assessment because of the roles of certain individuals in the diocesan hierarchy. Certainly Gowing was well known as a vocal critic of New Zealand ' s involvement in the Vietnam War, but the prominence given to his criticisms had more to do with his status as the Bishop of Auckland than with his membership of the APF. Similarly Chandler's prominence as a critic of the war owed more to his other roles in the Church than to his APF membership, and no doubt much the same could be said about others, albeit too a lesser extent. Indeed, it is likely that many (probabl y the vast majority) of people who were aware of Gowing 's and Chandler' s stands against the war were unaware of their APF membership, or even that the Fellowship existed. Yet their ultimate involvement with the APF and willingness to make significant contributions of time to its activities indicates that it was an organisation close to the hearts of these men. It was undoubtedly a source of support for them as they took what were often unpopular stands, and it is reasonable to suppose that they were strengthened and encouraged by this support from like-minded fellow Anglicans. The dedication and commitment of these more prominent members was matched by that of others who did not gain any great public prominence. Certainly their work, both individually and through their APF membership, had some impact on the Church. But the overwhelming majority of Anglicans were not ready to hear a message of absolute pacifism, while many were very ready to associate any opposition to the Vietnam War or a questioning of defence ties wi~h the United.States of America with support for communism. Much of the opposition to the war came from young people who had not lived with the fear of Japanese invasion and 32 for whom protest was perceived as being part of an international popular youth culture. But this same youth culture which rejected the Vietnam War was just as likely to reject other symbols of "The Establishment", including the Church. The violence associated with some anti-war protests (with accusation and counter-accusation as to whether protesters or police were primarily responsible) perhaps exemplified the extent to which an organisation proclaiming Christian pacifism failed to engage the public mood of the times. As New Zealand ' s involvement in the Vietnam War drew to a close, the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship found itself in a no-man ' s-land with no substantial constituency and, with the end of both ballotted conscription and the war, no clear cause to provide a focus for its message. The challenge facing the Auckland sub-branch was that of reinvesting itself with its earlier vigour and re-inventing itself as a vital, relevant organisation . CHAPTER THREE THE ANGLICAN PACIFIST FELLOWSHIP - AFTER VIETNAM It is perhaps surprising given the Auckland sub-branch ' s previous willingness to associate with a wide range of groups opposing the Vietnam war that during the late 1970s and early 1980s there was little official involvement with secular peace organisations beyond ongoing support for the New Zealand Foundation for Peace Studies44 , despite increasing awareness amongst Anglicans and the New Zealand public in general of the anti-nuclear debate. This is particularly surprising in view of the prominence of certain other Auckland Anglicans in the anti-nuclear movement. probably the best known example being Rev George Armstrong' s leading role in the Peace Squadron. The support for the Foundation for Peace Studies was entirely consistent with the APF's view of itself as an educational organisation, but even when visits to the Waitemata Harbour of nuclear powered warships of the US Navy became a matter of major public concern and the anti-nuclear movement was gaining increasing support, both inside and outside the Church, the Fellowship had little official contact with anti-nuclear groups, individual Fellowship members instead giving the movement such support as they felt able to provide. An Auckland APF member at the time, Rev Patricia Nicolas, has commented on a tendency to hold meetings of members rather than engage in prac~ical action despite growing public awareness of peace issues. 45 44 Barfoot interview 4~ Nicolas interview Meetings continued to be held periodically in the home of White and from 1982 in the crypt of St Matthew' s in the City, 46 but nothing of note appears to have happened until late 1982 when a debate was organised on the proposition "That war and armed violence are incompatible with the Christian faith" . The debate was open to all Anglicans and was widely advertised, with Tony Maturin, Barfoot, Joan MacDonald and Rev Patricia Nicolas touring fifteen Auckland parishes prior to the debate, discussing pacifism and peacemaking through the media of sermons, vestry meetings and meetings of women's and youth ' s groups. 47 The debate was held on 16 October, several weeks later than originally planned so that, in the words of Barfoot, people could "cool down after the Springbok tour and are able to think of deeper issues" 48 . Up to seventy people at a time were reportedl y in attendance. 49 Four invited speakers gave addresses of fifteen minutes each, and then an open discussion session was followed by a time for small group discussions on the Church ' s attitudes towards violence in both local society and international affairs . During the open discussion session the concept of "structural violence" was introduced to the debate. The claim was that the structures of society could constitute an act of violence against a section of that society, and that in New Zealand society women and Maori were the ones who were thus harmed . It was the handling of the discussion of this question which introduced a note of controversy to the debate. During the open discussion all of those present were free to express own views on any matter relevant to the proposition of the debate, and it was a person who was not a member of the 46 Nicolas interview 47 Report to Wellington meeting 2 Nov 1982. Turnbull Folder 14 ~Letter from C. Barfoot to Wellington sub-branch 3 Nov 1981. Turnbull Folder l.J ~9 See Note~. 35 Fellowship who introduced the issue of structural violence. According to Nicolas, as a result of a lack of firm chairmanship this person was able to use the session to push a personal political agenda which insisted that the structures of society did constitute acts of violence against women and Maori . This view was presented, Nicolas stated, in a radical manner, with those whose views were contrary having those views treated in an inappropriate manner. Nicolas is herself a person with a deep concern for issues of social justice, and her own attitudes towards these matters give credence to her belief that this session was not well handled by those running the debate and was distasteful for many of those present. However, prominent Wellington members Lance Robinson and the Mander family, who had attended the Auckland debate, commenting on the debate as a whole over all of its sessions, deemed the exercise to have "been a very worthwhile occasion" 50 Barfoot's comment above suggesting that warfare was a "deeper issue" than apartheid points to an important difference in priorities within the Church. How this affected the APF ' s own members is discussed later in this chapter. But the difference also affected the ability of the APF to relate to the wider Church. For Barfoot and others encouraging the Church to move towards a pacifist position was the major issue. But as was demonstrated by the introduction to the debate of the concept of structural violence, a range of opinion could exist as to what constituted a peace issue. For many Anglicans the immediacy of South African issues, including the often violent treatment by the South African Government of the opponents of apartheid, made these issues of great importance, perhaps on a par with the contemporary nuclear debate. Many Christians would have considered violent conflict between the South African Govemmen~. and its own citizens (the "Homelands" not being recognised by the 50 Report to Wellington meeting 2 Nov. 1982, Turnbull Folder 14 36 opponents of apartheid) to be just as deep an issue as violence between nations. As described later, some APF members concluded that the Fellowship was rendered ineffective by too narrow a focus at a time when other issues of violence were attracting a great deal of attention both within and without the Church. The questioning of the role of social and political structures as instruments of repression of the marginalised and disenfranchised and the belief that such structures could themselves constitute acts of violence was central to the teachings of, for example, Gustavo Gutierez, James H Cone and other liberation theologians. If the structures themselves constituted acts of violence, then an act of violence against such a society could be construed as an act of self defence . The role of the anti tour movement could then fall within the ambit of the peace debate. Far from being a "deeper issue", peace could have been deemed by this reasoning to have been the issue in the apartheid debate, peace and justice thus being inseparably linked. This issue was brought into sharper f .:us for New Zealand when in 1980 a New Zealand priest working in South Africa, Father Michael Lapsey, lost both hands to a parcel bomb.51 The bombing was widely blamed on the South African Government of which Lapsley was a critic. The APF ' s failure to engage directly in the ongoing debate' of the 1980s as to the appropriate Christian response to such a situation could possibly be regarded as a serious loss of an opportunity to make a contribution to a matter of great moment. It must be said, however, that individually many APF supporters were involved in anti-apartheid activities. The next significant activity of the Auckland sub-branch was a diocesan consultation on war and peace held prior to the 1988 Lambeth Conference, which was organised by and at the initiative of the APF . Again the event was widely advertised, but few people attended and most of those who did attend were APF members 52 So disappointing was the small number of non-members who had been present that in a report delivered to the APF annual conference in June of the following year Tollemache questioned the "worth of even attempting to communicate with the grass-root, pew-sitting Anglican". 51 The consultation was held in the hall of St Andrew' s Church, Epsom, following a service of Holy Communion in the church at which the Bishop of Auckland, Bruce Gilberd, was celebrant. Because of other commitments Gilberd was unable to stay for the full meeting and was not a part of the discussions which led to the passing of a resolution . He was, however, able to give an opening address in which he stated that he was opposed to the manufacture, deployment and use of nuclear weapons, but could not accept the full pacifist viewpoint. Following the bishop ' s departure there was a lengthy discussion of peace issues followed by the unanimous passing of a resolution that " membership of the Christian Church necessarily involves the complete repudiation of war and all preparation to wage war" and that eight proposals be placed before the Lambeth Conference, including that conscientious objection be the normative response of Christians to war and "that the basis Of military chaplaincy be reviewed by the churches to ensure that pastoral duties may be performed without identification with the military system" . 54 In view of the very small number of people present and the very high proportion who were APF members this "diocesan consultation" cannot be regarded as having in any way fulfilled 51 Alister. Taylor (Ed) New Zealand W'ho 's H 'ho 1996 Edition. New Zealand Who's Who Aoteraroa Ltd (Auckland 1996) p377 5~ Report in files of C Barfoot. 5~ AGM Minutes 2-5 June 1989, Turnbull Folder 13 18 its organisers ' ambitions of providing the bishop with an authoritative statement of the general views of ordinary Anglicans of his diocese. It can possibly be seen as indicative of the speed with which peace issues lost their relevance in the public mind following the passing into law of anti-nuclear legislation, participation by non members of the APF being insignificant compared with the numbers attending the debate described above held four years earlier, at a time when visits to New Zealand ports by nuclear ships of the US Navy were a controversial reality, although the difference in the nature of the event may also have been a factor affecting attendance. Three major events dominated APF Auckland branch activities during the 1990s. The first was the 1991 visit of Rev Sidney Hinkes. Hinkes had seen active service during the Second World War as a member of the Parachute Regiment of the British Army, but his war experiences led to him adopting a pacifist position after the termination of hostilities, and he subsequently became a leading member of the APF in Britain. At the expense of the New Zealand APF Hinkes toured every diocese of New Zealand except Polynesia, promoting the message that Christianity is essentially a pacifist faith . Auckland members were involved in preparations for his visit throughout 1990 and early and mid 1991 , 'with his time in the Diocese of Auckland being from 4 August to 30 September. 55 Duri~g this time Hinkes covered most of Auckland, Northland and the Coromandel Peninsula. Attempts at incorporating his visits in the formal programme at the College of St John the Evangelist were unsuccessful because of the college not being approached until after 54 Minutes of meeting, C Barfoot files 55 Report to APF. C Bar:'oot files 39 its formal programme for the year had been settled, ~<, leaving only the option of a talk outside the formal study programme. He was able to spend a two hour session with students in the Christian ethics class at the college, and according to C Barfoot it was a lively meeting with an interesting discussion and numerous questions being put to Hinkes. ~ 7 Many individual parishes were visited, with Hinkes delivering sermons and talking to informal gatherings of parishioners in homes. He also addressed the Auckland Synod. It has been impossible to assess the overall impact of this on those to whom Hinkes spoke, but anedoctal evidence from APF members involved in the organisation of the mission suggests a high level of apathy from most Anglicans. with few people attending home meetings and lukewarm responses to sermons, although there is agreement that Hinkes proved to be a knowledgeable and able communicator, who performed admirably in presenting his case. At the request of the New Zealand APF Hinkes wrote a book based on his addresses, but the decision was made to not proceed with publication because the market for such a work was considered to be too small. ~N No significant increase in APF membership was reported during or after his mission. His address to the Auckland synod appears to have been overshadowed by the controversy created by a motion presented to the same synod on behalf of the APF. Hinkes' s address was not widely reported and was generally unmentioned even in media' reports on the APF motion, despite the relevance to the motion and the subsequent controversy of both his message and his status as a former paratrooper. The motion presented to the Auckland synod called on all Anglicans to pray for non violent conflict resolution and pledging to renounce all preparations for war, and also calling on the 56 Letter from College to C Barfoot. Barfoot files 57 Telephone conversation with C Barfoot ss Undated repon. C Barfoot files Government of New Zealand to work for the prevention of all kinds of war. 59 It was presented by Rev John Marcon, who although not at that time an APF member was sympathetic to its objectives and who had gained a degree of recognition within the Church for his involvement in the anti-Springbok tour movement. The motion was drafted by APF members and then passed to Marcon to be moved at the synod, it being presented in exactly the form prepared by the APF despite Marcon having reservations about its specific wording, especially the description of warfare as sinful, which he believed was likely to be inflammatory w His reserve proved to be well founded, with the motion generating controversy It received some support, at least in principle from several synod members, although the view was expressed that it should be amended to denounce war rather than renounce it . But the motion was strongly opposed by Rev John Maclean, who was moved by his own personal experience of war as a soldier, and his deep abhorrence of war, to believe that armed deterrence, including nuclear deterrence, was necessary for the maintenance of peace. Rev Bryan Drake considered the motion to be unscriptural. On the motion of Professor Patrick Lacey, who believed that the motion's description of war as inherently sinful dishonoured the memory of his wartime comrades, but who believed also that it was inappropriate for the synod to vote against it the synod voted 92 to ·so to pass on to the next item on the agenda without voting on the APF motion. 61 This ~as not the end of the controversy. Although few people had spoken to the motion prior to Lacey and the resolution to move on to the next agenda item had rendered it virtually a non-event in terms of the formal business of the synod, the debate was reported in the secular s9 Minutes of 1991 Synod. Diocese of Auckland fiO Interview with Rev Hubert John Marcon 61 Report from C Barfoot to APF, Barfoot files ~l news media. the anicle in the New Zealand Herald prompting Marcon to write a letter to the editor making it clear that the motion was not intended to be an attack on the integrity of those who had from honourable motives participated in wars. but rather was prompted by a desire to promote a better and more Christian alternative.62 A similar defence was published in the diocesan organ. the AIJ Ni!ws _ <·~ Marcon had in fact stated in his synod address that it was not his intention to dishonour those who had fought in wars and Maclean remembers that Marcon made this clear. 6.t The debate for both Marcon and Maclean was over the theological and pragmatic issues involved in responding to evil. and both APF members and those who opposed the motion were in agreement that those who in good faith panicipated in warfare believing it to be their Christian duty should be treated with respect . Similarly both Marcon and Maclean were able to agree on the evil of war. but to Maclean it is impossible in this fallen world to completely avoid evil and sometimes necessary to accept the lesser evil in order to oppose the greater. For Maclean. a failure to reson to the lesser evil may sometimes amount to a default acceptance of the greater evil. To Marcon. evil was defeated on the cross and it is never necessary to choose between evils. A fundamentally different strategy was adopted for the 1992 synod. Marcon, who by now was an APF member, was firmly of the opinion that there was little point in attempting to persuade the synod to renounce warfare when most synod representatives had little understanding of the issues from a scriptural perspective, and he instead favoured an educational response. In an apparent attempt to avoid the controversy and misunderstandings of the previous year, the 1992 motion called on the synod to "affirm the integrity, faith and 6' - New Zealand Herald. 25 Sept. 1991 ~'AD News. Oct 1991. Diocese of Auckland. pp2 and 9 64 Interview with Rev John Maclean commitment of servicemen and servicewomen" and to " recognise the courage, faith and integrity of the conscientious objectors" who had been interned, and called upon the Social Justice Council of the Anglican Church to prepare a series of Bible studies on issues of war and peace in conjunction with the APF and other relevant groups. 65 -l2 The motion was passed without dissent and work commenced on the preparation of the studies. Attempts were made to involve armed forces chaplains but the bulk of work on the studies was done by Auckland APF members . A considerable amount of time and effort was expended on their preparation, including a weekend consultation with non-pacifists at which drafts were discussed in detail. Those present included an Air Force chaplain who had fought in Korea and an Air Force apprentice .(,(, The completed studies were published in the mid 1990s. They have been offered to parishes throughout New Zealand and were purchased by large numbers of parishes and individual clergy, but it has not been possible to establish how intensively they have been used by individual parishes, nor has it been possible to assess how effective they have been in promoting the views of the Fellowship . They do however help to illustrate in a manner described below the disagreement which has existed amongst members as to the proper role of the APF. Opinions of members differ widely concerning the successes and failures of the Fellowship, but there appears to be a consensus that its outcomes have been disappointing. Membership has remained small and the belief that Christianity is a pacifist faith has remained the view of small minority within the Anglican Church. There appears to be little confidence that this will 65 Minutes of 1992 Synod. Diocese of Auckland 43 change and this has led some members to even question their membership of the Anglican Church. Tollemache, for example, has considered becoming a Quaker67 , while Macdonald felt unable to continue any formal involvement in the activities of the Christian Church because of its failure to adopt what she considers to be the normative Christian position on a range of issues, including social justice issues and those of peace and violence.68 Generally, however, APF members seem to be content to remain as Anglicans. For Macdonald, peacemaking was an integral part of a wider commitment to social justice, and it was in fact this commitment to such issues which led to her involvement in the APF. For others, such as C Barfoot, pacifism was based on Biblical teachings related specifically to peace and violence and is thus approached from a theological perspective6 9 Applied generally to Auckland APF members whose opinions have been sought, this difference between members as to the reasons why they regard pacifism as normative roughly correlates with a contrast which has emerged in their views of the extent to which the Fellowship has been unsuccessful. To Barfoot, its narrow focus on pacifism has been one of its strengths, enabling it to avoid the internal conflicts which have afflicted some more broadly based peace groups. But to Nicolas, this tight focus was itself a source of internal tension, as it resulted in an unwillingness to address issues of family violence and other matters of more immediate concern to people' s day to day lives. This was felt to limit both the effectiveness of the organisation and its appeal to a broader catchment. 70 66 Barfoot interview 67 Interview with Hugh Tollemache 68 Interview with Joan Macdonald 69 Barfoot interview 70 Nicolas interview It is possible to exaggerate the extent of the differences. As an example, Tollemache was able to express the opinion that the narrow focus of the APF had not been a problem or an issue, but he had no hesitation when asked in agreeing that domestic violence was an issue of great importance and concern.71 But it remains true that for those Auckland APF members whose commitment to peacemaking is rooted in a commitment to social justice, there has been disappointment at a failure to address issues of peace and violence which extend beyond disputes between nations. Similar dissatisfaction was expressed over the emphasis (or lack of emphasis) on certain consequences of war. An example is provided by a Bible study prepared for the series of studies referred to above. MacDonald prepared a draft study on women and war, which was then refined by MacDonald, Nicolas and P Barfoot. This study was not, however, included in the final published set. MacDonald expressed personal disappointment at this non-inclusion and this disappointment was shared by others . Marcon, for example, considered the material included in the study to be of very great importance and did not know how a study of such significance came to be omitted from the published set. According to C Barfoot, however, the reason was simply that the study was very short and not of a high enough standard for inclusion, with the sub-committee of MacDonald, Nicolas and P Barfoot (C Barfoot's'wife) having failed to do the work necessary to raise the standard. In general males interviewed were more inclined to both a doctrinal basis to pacifism and the view that promoting peacemaking between nations and the rejection of participation in war should be the primary focus for APF activities, while female members were more inclined towards a social justice basis and a greater ~ncem for involvement in domestic violence issues. Marcon was an 71 Tollemache interview -l5 obvious exception, straddling both positions. The differences were, however, more differences of degree than of substance, and as those questioned represented only a small proportion of Auckland membership the above conclusions must be regarded as being highly tentative. In general it may be concluded that over a period of many years the Auckland sub-branch of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship has faithfully maintained its commitment to witnessing to the Church in promoting a message of non-violence and has had some notable achievements given its small membership . But its basic message that Christianity is a pacifist faith has never received widespread acceptance within the Church. Despite the many relevant issues which have confronted New Zealand Christians during its existence it has failed to capture the attention of the Church, to such an extent that even Anglicans sympathetic to its objectives have often been unaware of its existence. Its inability to engage Anglicans in general even when the nuclear ships controversy was at its height can perhaps be attributed to its promotion of absolute pacifism between nations being too limited a focus . In the words of Nicolas: I think in the congregations I think in some sense the APF in this age is too specific . I think that pacifism is an important aspect and we should never forget that but I think that somehow the peace movement has somehow taken over from pacifism in some sense. I think that people who want to work for peace are not necessarily always pacifists in a token sense and I somehow think about - and I might be absolutely wrong about this- but just in terms of the parishes I have been involved with both St Matthew's [in-the-City] and St Peter's, Onehunga, I feel that people generally feel that to take an obvious pacifist position is somehow tying them down in to small a knot but people today look at peace making and may be peace making is a softer option. - I think it probably is but maybe it ' s what people can deal with more.72 The Anglican Pacifist Fellowship has encouraged the Church to take a giant leap of faith when a series of small steps might have been more appropriate . When that leap was not made the result was, for many APF members, deep disappointment . 7 ~ Nicholas interview .p CHAPTER FOUR VIETNAM -A TALE OF TWO MARCHES On the evening of Good Friday 1968 a Vietnam War protest occurred in Queen Street, Auckland . Only a few people were involved in the protest, it was conducted peacefully and it was just one of many protests dealing with the Vietnam War issue. It would be easy to denote no more than two or three sentences to this protest, but to dismiss it so quickly would be a mistake. What made this incident so special was that it was an exclusively Anglican protest, and the dynamics of both the action and the reaction encapsulate the difficulties faced in attempting to come to terms with peace issues within the structures of the Anglican tradition. For a number of years it had been the practise of the Anglican Church to hold a procession in Queen St on the evening of Good Friday. This was a purely religious event which ordinarily had had no political overtones. A group of students and staff at the College of St John the Evangelist decided to join the 1968 procession carrying placards which they hoped would encourage people to apply the Easter message to the issue of western involvement in the Vietnam War. A report on this incident published in the New Zealand Herald states "We were really trying to show that Christ is really involved in every side of things ... We were not opposed to American policies, but we carrying these banners in the hope that we could make people think about these things". 73 This view is supported by the statement of one of the people involved in the demonstration. Rev George Armstrong. who saw the protest in 73 New Zealand Herald 13 april 1968. p8 terms of"public liturgy", a concept of his explained later. In Armstrong's view it was an attempt to stimulate people to apply Christian principles to the situation. 74 This is not, however, how some others involved in the Queen St procession viewed the protest, and it became a controversial action. The demonstration had its genesis amongst a group at St John ' s spending a period of a few hours studying and discussing issues of suffering and pain the world and listening to tape recordings on the subject of Third World problems from the World Council of Churches. The discussion group felt that they needed to take some form of action, so they decided to join the Good Friday procession carrying placards bearing such slogans as "Christ died for the Vietcong", "Christ died for LBJ" (US president Lyndon B Johnson), "Christ died for Anzacs" and "Christ died for all" . The slogans were not, according to the protestors, intended to advocate any particular political position, but rather to encourage Christians to address the issues of the day in theological terms . 7 ~ 48 As remembered by Armstrong, "The clergy at the procession turned the other way and pretended not to see us. One or two of the lay people close to the bishop were very angry about it and wanted to get us out of their procession instead of hijacking it" . The bishop agreed to the exclusion and the St John's College demonstrators and they were informed that they were not permitted to participate in the procession. As City Council permission was required for marching on a carriageway, with permission extending only to those deemed by organisers to be part of the march, such a restriction was legally enforceable. The demonstrators were· however legally entitled to walk parallel with the procession provided 74 Interview with Rev George Armstrong -l9 that they kept themselves to the pedestrian pathway. This they did, much to the consternation of some of those who formed the official procession . 76 Television and newspaper coverage at the time made both the demonstration and the exclusion of the demonstrators from the public procession matters of national attention, albeit briefly . But it is possible to argue that this event is significant not so much for this publicity as for what is reveals (or at least suggests) about attitudes held within the Church. It is of interest that Armstrong contrasts the attitude of clergy in the official procession with that of some laity, the former trying to ignore the St John ' s group while the latter actively opposed their participation. It is tempting to speculate that a greater familiarity with theological issues (although not necessarily of peace issues) and a need to serve congregations holding a diversity of views may have constrained them from adopting a position in opposition to the demonstration in unexpected circumstances for which they had not planned . Some laity, not wishing to be associated by implication with those seeking to add a political dimension to the procession, appear to have felt no such inhibitions. But this is speculation, and the question of motivations would profit from further research . For the Bishop of Auckland, Eric Gowing, the situation was more complex. As stated in the previous chapter, Gowing was a tireless peacemaker, an active member of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship and an outspoken opponent of New Zealand's involvement in the Vietnam War. It is inconceivable that he was unsupportive of the aim of encouraging theological reflection on the appropriateness of New Zealand's involvement. Furthermore, 75 Annstrong interview 50 he was supportive of APF and other Anglican involvement in public acts of demonstration on peace issues. But he was also diocesan leader of a church many of whose members did not support his stand. and whose view, deserved to be treated with respect . Furthermore, Armstrong and his companions probably failed to fully appreciate how others would react to the timing of their action. The day commemorating the crucifixion of Christ is for Christians the most sacred day of the year. Gowing, whose own leanings required him to treat such occasions with reverence would not have been impressed by such a demonstration. The Good Friday procession was never intended to be anything more than a religious event and most of those participating were unaware of the plan to politicise the march. Under these circumstances the actions of Gowing are understandable if seen as the responsible actions of a person determined to preserve the integrity of Christian witness. whatever his own personal views on the Vietnam War. Yet it is possible to wonder whether there may have been something more. The report on this protest in the New Zealand Herald quotes Gowing as having wished to discourage the involvement of "that kind of element," which seems a curious choice of words for the bishop to have used of the students and staff of his own theological college. If the Herald was accurate in its quoting of Gowing, it raises questions relating to Anglican attitudes towards what was a right and proper way of taking a stand on a particular issue. Protest marches were quite acceptable and "respectable" in appropriate circumstances. A protest march was organised by concerned citizens for September 1968 protesting against the Russia~ occupation ·of Czechoslovakia. the march up Queen St being led by city and borough 76 Allan K Davidson. Selu:vn 's legacy. The College of St. John the Evangelist (Auckland. 1993) pp.225-226 51 mayors of Auckland, trade union, University and Church leaders, with a number of Christians among the other participants. The protest was one which a broad spectrum of Anglicans would have felt able to support. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by Russian armed forces for the purpose of suppressing the move towards a popular Government with greater personal freedom was an act which received widespread condemnation amongst New Zealanders as well as from the New Zealand Government, and such a protest against an act by communist Russia was just as much a patriotic assertion of the values of New Zealand society as a protest against communist aggression. But matters were less clear cut where New Zealand's past or present allies were concerned . At the time of the Czechoslovakia march some of those involved were contemplating similar protests against French atmospheric nuclear testing in the South Pacific. At this early stage, when opposition to nuclear weapons had not yet become a popular cause, there was unlikely to be such broad support from civic leaders. At the other end of respectability for peace demonstrations were those organised against the visit to New Zealand in January 196 7 of a representative of the Government of South Vietnam, Air Vice-Marshal Ky. A small number of Anglicans ser\led on the committee which organised the Auckland protest against the Ky visit, and one Anglican on this committee, Rev EA Johnston, addressed a protest meeting held in the Auckland Town Hall. 77 Other Anglicans were amongst those involved in the protests. Such a protest was controversial for obvious reasons. South Vietnam was officially an ally. Whatever the reality, the Government of Vietnam was officially represented as supporting the values of freedom and democ~!lCY which were later to characterise the Prague Spring. New Zealand's 77 A.PF Newsletter. April 1967 52 willingness to support by military means the foreign policy of another ally, the United States of America, was seen by many New Zealanders as being necessary to ensure that the USA would continue to safeguard New Zealand . Such considerations made the 1967 Ky protests unpalatable to many New Zealanders who would have seen such actions as unpatriotic, but who would have had little or no difficulty in supporting protests against the invasion of Czechoslovakia. But even for those who were opposed to New Zealand's involvement in the Vietnam War the Ky and Czechoslovakia protests could be seen as falling into very different categories. This was an inevitable consequence of the diversity of views held by protesters against the Vietnam War, ranging from those who opposed New Zealand ' s military support for South Vietnam because they hoped for a military victory by the community North, to those who opposed war per se. Tactics favoured also varied, with some demonstrators being prepared to resort to violent means. There were some acts of violence carried out by a minority of those opposed to the visit by Air Vice-Marshal Ky, which caused a degree of discomfort for those involved in the protests who did not support such actions . This discomfort extended to those Anglicans involved, not least those who were members of the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship. The Good Friday 1968 demonstrators processed peacefully up the footpath of Queen St parallel to the official procession. There was no violence, nor any suggestion of violence. It would be difficult even to describe the demonstrators as protesters, for they were seeking not so much to oppose anything as to encourage the thoughtful, prayful consideration by their fellow ~glicans of the implications of the teachings of the Christian faith to a major public 53 issue of the day . The demonstrators were few in number and their placards could be regarded as being balanced and non-partisan. But it would perhaps have been naive to believe that such a demonstration would have failed to generate controversy, both among their fellow Anglicans and in the wider community. Any questioning of the appropriateness of supporting the foreign policy of the New Zealand Government while New Zealand was at war would have been considered by some to demonstrate a lack of patriotism. To others it was tantamount to supporting "godless communism" (an expression often used at this time by Christians opposed to communism). For others the appropriation of their non-political march by those with a political agenda would have been unacceptable, while for others there would have been associations in their minds with other protest groups. Whether justified or not, the St John ' s College students and staff, armed with their placards, would have created such connotations and a number of Good Friday marchers may have felt uncomfortable at the prospect of being associated with such a group. This could perhaps be compared with the discomfort felt by Anglican pacifists and near pacifists to the violence of some Ky protesters. The impact of any demonstration could easily extend well beyond the objective reality of the event to embrace a range of implicit issues. Those issues were not always ones which rank and file Anglicans were enthusiastic to face . It is also fair to say that protest marches such as the Ky and Czechoslovakia demonstrations and the Good Friday 1968 incident were not at that time a traditional Anglican method of influencing decision .. makers or of attempting to educate their fellow Anglicans. Formal methods of approaching potentially controversial issues were normative and public 54 demonstrations the exception. This is probably a partial explanation of why such Anglican involvement as there was, was most likely to take the form of individual Anglicans or Anglican groups becoming involved in actions primarily of a secular nature in terms of both other groups involved and the forms of protest, which generally did not emphasise any particular specifically Christian consideration . Both the Ky and the Czechoslovakia protests fell into this category. The other explanation is the diversity of views which exist within Anglicanism, which was a factor which caused the Good Friday demonstration to assume a level of reaction out of proportion to the number of people involved or their explicitly expressed message. These three incidents spread over a period of just 21 months thus demonstrate both the limitations and the problems of attempts made to make a public Christian proclamation from within the Anglican Church. Formal means of demonstrating on peace issues included the use of diocesan synods, both as a forum for debate and as a means of gaining official recognition through the passing of motions. Some examples have been covered in the chapter on the Anglican Pacifist Fellowship, but numerous other motions were put to synods, with APF members often involved. One such motion followed the 1968 Lambeth Conference. Since the 1930s the bishops attending successive Lambeth Conferences have regularly passed resoh,itions that state in various forms that warfare is ultimately incompatible with t~e Christian faith. This wording "ultimately incompatible" is not to be interpreted as an assertion that these bishops were advocates of absolute pacifism. for the "ultimate" position still lea~es room for .the traditional Anglican acceptance of the Augustinian just war model. It has nevertheless assumed a great deal of importance amongst Fellowship members. But it 55 also was the cause of debate and often controversy in the wider church. The limitation was always that the interest was limited to a small number of people. Synod resolutions on this issue often received little attention from the majority of lay Anglicans, and many of those at synod were interested only because as synod representatives they were a captive audience for the debate. The 1968 Lambeth Conference passed the traditional resolution and prompted a peace motion at the 1969 Auckland Synod . It had originally been intended to move that the synod address the issue of Vietnam directly . The original wording was to call for a complete withdrawal of New Zealand armed forces from Vietnam and, at a time when all young men were required to register for balloted conscription, calling on all young men to consider becoming conscientious objectors. There was, however, a feeling that this could be seen as seditious. It was therefore, agreed that the Lambeth Conference resolutions on war be substituted for the call for withdrawal. There were objections from some synod representatives to the extension of conscientious objection imp I icit in the motion ' s wording, although they were prepared to uphold this right . The bishop ruled that the motion had to be taken as a whole, including the call to consider conscientious objection, and the motion was defeated on the vote of the laity . In hindsight this could be regarded as a period of transition for the Church. It would have been difficult for most New Zealand Anglicans themselves to apply the teachings of the Bible to the question of how the New Zealand Government should react to the Vietnam War. Such applications of the Bible to Government policy were simply not the way things were done. Few were willing to _question Government foreign policy on religious grounds, and few clergy felt comfortable about risking controversy within their parishes over such issues. 56 Furthermore, many Anglicans, both lay and ordained, were firmly of the opinion that the New Zealand Government was correct in taking a stand against godless communism. But the precedents had been set and the first seeds of public dissent sown. Even as the last New Zealand soldiers were leaving Vietnam there was growing disquiet over the effects on New Zealand of a Northern Hemisphere nation ' s policies of nuclear deterrence. 57 CHAPTER FIVE ANTI-NUCLEAR AND ANTI-TOUR PROTESTS The mushroom cloud which appeared over Hiroshima on 6 August 1945 was for many a symbol of hope. It brought hope that the most destructive war in human history would soon be over without an invasion of Japan which would have been extremely costly in human terms, and it was a symbol of future world peace and prosperity under the benign protection of the world ' s largest democracy. For those New Zealanders who had lived with the fear of Japanese invasion following the loss of most of the US Navy Pacific Fleet's capital units and the failure of Britain ' s Singapore strategy, there was little doubt that the United States of America was a necessary ally. It was the US Navy which had defeated the Imperial Japanese Navy at Midway, Leyte Gulf and other key battles, and it was the US Navy which would protect New Zealand's strategic interests in the future. And if that navy would in the future include units which used nuclear propulsion, that was not a problem. Similarly there was widespread acceptance in the immediate postwar period of the American nuclear arsenal. They were the weapons which had defeated Japan, and they were the weapons which would in the future deter communist aggression. There was some early opposition to nuclear weapons. An example is provided by Kenneth Prebble, father of Richard Prebble. In the late 1950s a sermon of his was broadcast on radio in which he opposed British nuclear testing (in which the Royal New Zealand Navy was involved) at Kiritimati Atoll (then known as Christmas Island). As a result he was invited to address a public meeting opposing the nuclear tests. He agreed, but later withdrew when he discovered that communists were involved in the anti-nuclear movement . He remained opposed to nuclear weapons, but played no further public role in the issue. This was partly because of his concern that communists could use his words for their own purposes and partly because he considered a public stand to be inconsistent with his responsibilities as an Anglican vicar towards his parishioners. 7!! But there was at this time no widespread anti­ nuclear feeling in the diocese. During the three decades from the late 1940s to the late 1970s a major shift occurred in 58 public thinking in New Zealand. This would be a cause of disagreement within the Anglican Church. Angli