Interesting, Percy. So it’s not only about money but about using money to promote a particular right wing version of Anglicanism, which ACT espouses but MAT does not, although MAT does as good a substantive job or better than ACT. So MAT gets the push for being doctrinally incorrect.
I’ve only just read in this morning’s Mercury another act of evangelical vandalism at Richmond (strong>Pictured) — subdivision of the beautiful landscape around St.Luke’s Church. Then let us not forget the sale of the Trinity properties and the saga of Holy Trinity church itself.
In all these cases the Anglicans have shown a typical neo-con stance: maximise profits in the short term, decisions driven by ideological commitment (whether it’s market forces or evangelicism as in this case), and to hell with community, cultural and aesthetic values. At least in the case of the Wellspring development in Lord St., cultural and heritage values have put a stop to that bit of vandalism — so far.
