In the run-up to the election I read some interesting posts, comments and conversations on the internet. The gist of these communications from senior and future leaders in our church was, in my summary, “A vote for National is a vote for oppression, for making the wealthy wealthier, and for keeping the poor in poverty.”

By contrast I couldn’t find any contrary views offering a counterpoint. No hints from one of our seniors that, actually, the economy at this time might be best managed by a National-led government, or that partial sales of assets could be better for the future of New Zealand than taking on more debt.

Certainly, I could not come across any hint that within our leadership we have an appreciation that the most effective way to assist the poor, to pay for education, and to fund great health services is to build a strong economy.

As for the possibility that mining might be a good thing, or that discovering oil off-shore might reduce transport costs for everyone, the poor included, do not even go there in Anglican circles!

But here is the thing: in the election itself the National-led government was not just returned, it increased its share of the vote from three years ago (45% to 48%).

Overall ,Aotearoa New Zealand voted 52.5% for the centre-right and right parties (National, Conservative, United Future, ACT). If we dared allow ourselves the thought that New Zealand First has a ‘right wing’ element in it, then that percentage increases by more points.

In other words, in a situation in which all parties got their messages across pretty clearly, and the media were not acting as propagandists for the right, our country has signalled through the polling booths that it does not see National and its supporting parties as agents of oppression, serving the needs of the wealthy at the expense of the poor.

John Armstrong of the NZ Herald is on the money about what happened on Saturday as he gives six reasons why National won the election. Reasons 2 and 6 are the important ones in this context: competency in managing the economy, and concern about debt.

(Incidentally, there’s a seventh reason, which has turned out to be a bit surprising: appreciation for the way National has handled the quakes in Christchurch has led to a significant change in support for the National Party in Canterbury).

What does this mean for our church? We Anglicans pride ourselves as a church on being the church of and for the people of Aotearoa New Zealand: all are welcome, we are inclusive. We sing that chorus again and again.

Well, do we mean it? Are the 48% of voters, up from the 45% in 2008, who supported National, to say nothing of the 52.5% who voted National, Conservative, ACT or United Future, welcome in our church? Or are we the church who really feel most comfortable with the 40% who voted Labour or Green or Maori or Mana?

Could the price to be paid for National voters being included in our church be a willingness on their part to be subject to intense criticism?

In fact ,that will not do. We should not be a church which conveys the impression that voting National makes one an outcast from the love of God (as one pundit scribed a few days before the election on a church website).

As a church which intends (rather than pretends) to be serious about being inclusive and welcoming to all, does our leadership need to make peace with the majority of New Zealanders?

An alternative scenario is one in which our church presents itself to NZ society as the church for a chosen minority: what the gospel really means for social and economic life is an amalgam of centre-left and left-wing ideas.

But measured across many elections, Kiwis who support these ideas are a minority (e.g. since 1951 National has been in power for 39/60 years). And yet a church which exists for a chosen minority is a sect not a church!

What do we want to be? A church for all the people or a sect for the chosen few?

• For the record, on Saturday I did not vote for National on either the electorate or the party vote.

The Rev Dr Peter Carrell is Director of Theology House, Christchurch