One case study in the guide to the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act (CSP Act), devised by the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC) for the Baptist Union of Victoria (BUV), is especially troubling to this observer.
Elizabeth and Pastor Anselm This case study raises the issue of church discipline. Elizabeth is a musician at his church. “Pastor Anselm believes that practising homosexuality is a sin. He believes Elizabeth is leading a sinful lifestyle as she has said that she is open to dating women. He is worried that having her lead worship would look as if he endorses what he sees as her sinful choices and feels that she should not act on her attraction to women.”
In Providing Safety for LGBTQA People of Faith produced for the VEOHRC for the BUV, this scenario merits a warning. “It’s one thing for Pastor Anselm to believe that practising homosexuality is a sin. It’s another thing to require Elizabeth to change or hide who she is because the church’s stance is that romantic and sexual relationships should only occur between one man and one woman. Saying that Elizabeth must only date men to be able to continue in her role may be a change or suppression practice, as it may be seen as conduct directed towards Elizabeth on the basis of her sexuality for the purpose of changing or suppressing her sexual orientation.”
The Other Cheek posed a similar but possibly more serious scenario to the VEOHRC and BUV. “Suppose a candidate for a pastor’s position is an LGBTQIA person. Can a Baptist church refuse to hire them on the basis of their sexuality? Suppose a pastor comes out as gay, can a Baptist church dismiss them on the basis of their sexuality?”
Neither answered directly. As reported earlier, the BUV’s Rev David Devine, Head of Church Health & Capacity Building, said that as it called for a legal opinion, he was not qualified to answer.
“We commend the Baptist Union of Victoria for their courage in being among the first to engage with the Commission, providing an opportunity for clear guidance and support for their faith leaders and congregations on the Change or Suppression Practices Prohibition Act.” a spokesperson for the VEOHRC told the Other Cheek. “We are in discussions with leaders from other faith communities to co-design this important work to suit their specific needs.”
The VEOHRC response – and like the BUV, they have helpfully responded to The Other Cheek’s questions about In Providing Safety for LGBTQA People of Faith – also pointed to the overlap between the new conversion law and older anti-discrimination legislation.
There are aspects of the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 that intersect with the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021.
- Under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010, religious bodies and schools cannot discriminate against people on the basis of their sexual orientation in either employment decisions or decisions about school students. However, they can discriminate based on religious beliefs, in limited circumstances, if the discrimination is reasonable and proportionate.
- Religious bodies can discriminate in relation to ordaining or appointing priests, ministers of religion or members of a religious order; training or educating people seeking to be ordained or appointed as priests, ministers of religion or members of a religious order; or selecting or appointing people to perform functions relating to, or participating in, any religious observance or practice.
This is helpful in understanding the possible answers to how the CSP act affects hiring a pastor or a worship leader. B
But the Factsheet about Religion Exemptions Reform to the Victorian Anti-Discrimination Laws has this case study (which is heavily highlighted)
Example of change
A person who is both Christian and transgender applies to be the Deputy CEO of a
large Christian charitable organisation.
The Christian organisation cannot refuse to employ the person because they are
transgender. This is because they cannot discriminate based on gender identity.
However, this does not mean the organisation would be forced to employ the person
if they weren’t the best candidate.
This reflects a major change in Victoria, where schools and other religious bodies can only discriminate on the basis of religion in employment, where the job has an “inherent requirement” for the person to be a believer.
But as the earlier quote says, there is a still-existing exemption (alongside exemptions for ordaining or appointing priests, ministers of religion or members of a religious order) for “selecting or appointing people to perform functions relating to, or participating in, any religious observance or practice.”
This is where there is a possible collision between the Victorian anti-discrimination law and the CSP Act.
In the Pastor Anselm and Elizabeth case study, Providing Safety for LGBTQA People of Faith suggests that refusing to have Elizabeth lead Worship “may be seen as conduct directed towards Elizabeth on the basis of her sexuality for the purpose of changing or suppressing her sexual orientation.”
One possible answer may be for Pastor Anslem to tell Elizabeth that in refusing her/they the role of worship leader, he is not seeking to change her/their sexuality or conduct, despite having views about both.
The Pastor Anselm and Elizabeth case study can be seen as undermining a religious body’s right to discriminate in choosing pastors and ministers and in”selecting or appointing people to perform functions relating to, or participating in, any religious observance or practice.”
For local Baptist churches church or BUV, one response might be to articulate rules about who can participate in roles at church.
They could go further and set up a formal religious order – the Baptist Diaconate (body of Deacons) in each church could be one such body.) The BUV has sample descriptions of Pastors, Elders and Deacon’s roles. To be a member of a BUV church “holds as their general tenets the doctrines set out in the Doctrinal Basis of the Union.” The Doctrinal Basis, and Principles, and Ideals of the Baptist faith in the BUV constitution contain nothing on marriage or sexuality. However, the Australian Baptist Ministries – the national umbrella body defines marriage as between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.
However, in Victoria, BUV churches can appoint non-ordained, locally accredited ministers who may not share that belief. A number of Victorian Baptist churches have LGBT ministers at present.
This contrasts with the NSW/ACT Baptists’ inclusion of a position statement on marriage and establishment of a process that requires pastors and churches to assent to it. “Marriage is a covenant relationship ordained by God as a lifelong faithful union of one man and one woman. Sexual intimacy outside such a marriage relationship is incompatible with God’s intention for us as his people.”
The presence of gay pastors may make it difficult for the BUV to argue that there is an “inherent requirement” for pastors, let alone worship leaders, to not be gays or lesbians. The BUV may then be in difficulty with the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 in addition to the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021.
The BUV also has grades of churches: A Constituted Member Church is a ‘full’ member of the BUV, and as such is committed to: “Acceptance of the Doctrinal Basis and the Principles and Ideals of the Baptist Faith contained in our BUV Constitution”. There are two other categories:
• A Faith Community is an ‘associate’ member of the BUV. Faith Communities
are usually existing non-BUV churches who want to explore BUV membership.
• A Missional Community is an ‘associate’ member of our BUV. Missional
Communities are usually new church plants
Without committing all the BUV churches to their doctrinal basis, and the Baptist Ministries Australia marriage statement, the “inherent requirements” bar may be hard for a Victorain Baptist church to meet when appointing a pastor.
Perhaps it goes without saying, that this writer hopes he is wrong about this scenario.