New South Wales’ Conversion Practices Ban Act has just come into effect — along with guidelines from Anti-Discrimination NSW that many Christian leaders believe overstep the legal boundaries and impact ordinary pastoral ministry.
We are joined by legal expert Associate Professor Neil Foster, South Sydney Bishop Michael Stead, and Summer Hill Anglican Assistant Minister Simon Swadling.
Together, we unpack the implications of the new law for Christian preaching, prayer, counselling, and discipleship — especially in matters of sexuality, marriage, and gender.
We discuss:
- The difference between the legislation and the government’s explanatory materials
- The implications for pastors, parents, and churches
- The tone and posture of faithful gospel ministry in a hostile legal environment
- Why some pastors are calling for civil disobedience — and others for restraint
The Church Co
thechurchco.com is a website and app platform built specifically for churches.
Advertise on The Pastor's Heart
To advertise on The Pastor's Heart go to thepastorsheart.net/sponsor
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
it is the pastor's heart and dominic steel.
And what should the christianpastor do about the new
conversion therapy legislationjust coming to force?
Here in new south wales?
Neil foster, simon swaddlingand michael stead are with us.
The message of sy's AnglicanArchbishop Kanishka Rafel to
Sydney ministers, teachconfidently God's plan for
(00:29):
sexuality, marriage and gender.
We should continue to do this,notwithstanding the confused and
unhelpful explanatory materialprovided by Anti-Discrimination
New South Wales.
And in another letter he haswritten we will obey God.
We can do nothing less.
Today we talk to the lawprofessor, the bishop and the
(00:53):
pastor.
New legislation has come intoeffect here.
It was passed by the Parliamentin Sydney around 12 months ago
just come into effect and withit a set of guidelines that go
further than the legislation inrestricting the practice of
Christian ministry.
At first glance, the flashpointis in the frequently asked
questions of the guidelines,where it says the conversion
(01:15):
practices ban does not prohibitprayer.
However, praying with or over aperson with the intent to
change or suppress theirsexuality or gender identity is
unlawful.
It is unlawful even if thatperson has asked you to pray for
them to be able to change orsuppress their sexuality or
(01:37):
gender identity.
Now there has been a range ofreactions from pastoral leaders,
a wide range of reactions.
One group has set up a petitionto the Parliament.
The lead there is being takenby the Presbyterians, but a
significant number of otherleaders have signed it.
And then there are all sorts ofother reactions as well.
(01:58):
Neil Foster is on the line fromNewcastle.
He's the Associate Professor ofLaw at Newcastle University.
Michael Stead is with us, theBishop of South Sydney.
He's the Associate Professor ofLaw at Newcastle University.
Michael Stead is with us, theBishop of South Sydney.
He chairs the interfaith groupFreedom for Faith and is also
chair of the Sydney AnglicanMinistry, living Faith, which
serves people in the church whohave same-sex attraction or
gender incongruence.
And Simon Swadling is with usas well.
(02:20):
Simon's an Assistant Ministerat Summerhill Anglican Church in
inner Sydney and also involvedin the Living Faith ministry.
Simon, I wonder if we couldstart with you and your pastor's
heart, your heart for thesame-sex attracted person in the
church, the gender incongruentperson in the evangelical church
, with this debate going onaround and conflicting emotions.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Yeah, well, I think anything that is kind of deeply
on your pastor's heart is oftenthings that are deeply personal
to you, and so this debate ispersonal to me and my own
experiences of same-sexattraction and that wrestle of
thinking about how faith andsexuality and those things all
go together, and so that kind ofreally drives my pastor's heart
to care for these people andfor people to know that the
(03:04):
gospel is good, that God's wordis good.
It's both true and good at thesame time and it's good for
people in my position who aresame-sex attracted, people who
struggle with genderincongruence and all of those
different things that put yououtside of the sphere of the
norm that people would assume ofyou.
All of these things in God'sword is good for everyone, and
I'm really keen for people toknow that and to know its
(03:27):
goodness and to be confident inthe goodness of God's word,
because it is better than anyother story the world might have
for us and for how we shouldlive.
And so I really want us to growin our love and confidence in
knowing God and livingfaithfully for him and why that
is actually good for us and notsomething just hard to be
endured.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Michael, your heart in this.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
I really feel for people in our churches at the
moment who are confused at thismoment because where we have in
the past and want to continue tooffer support for people who
want to live faithfully forJesus, the anti-discrimination
New South Wales materials looklike they're saying you can't do
that anymore.
We can't actually provide thepastoral support that people are
asking for and looking for andfind valuable and, yeah, I'm
(04:19):
disappointed in whereanti-discrimination has landed
but I'm disappointed for what itmeans for people in our
churches who we have been tryingto support through ministries,
through Living Faith and otherministries.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Now we've talked about this a lot, but a year ago
, when the legislation came out,you were saying it was possible
to actually be a biblicalChristian and obey the New South
Wales government, actually be abiblical Christian and obey the
New South Wales government.
But actually today, when thismonth, as the guidelines have
(04:52):
come out from the New SouthWales Anti-Discrimination Board,
they've gone way beyond the lawthat was passed a year ago.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, absolutely, and I'm sure Neil will provide more
detail in a moment.
But the law is very clear thatit's not the same law.
That's in Victoria, In NewSouth Wales.
The government made very clearthat it was not going to be a
conversion practice to say tosomeone if you want to live as a
(05:16):
faithful Christian, if you wantto follow the teachings of
Jesus, then you shouldn't act onyour sexual desires.
And that was not going to be aconversion practice and that was
clear in the legislation, itwas clear in the minister's
second reading speech and thematerial from
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales says exactly the opposite.
It says if you tell someonethat they have to be celibate,
(05:37):
that's a conversion practice.
Maybe a conversion practice istheir language, but it leaves
the implication that you can'tdo that.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Neil Foster, what's your reaction to these
guidelines that have just comeout?
Speaker 4 (05:48):
Yes, well, I agree with Michael in terms of the
fact that it was very surprisingreally and disappointing to see
that aspects of the guidelinesactually went further than the
law.
Guidelines actually wentfurther than the law and in
(06:10):
particular, the part that youread where it was sort of
asserted as a blanketproposition that seeking to pray
and counsel with someone and tohelp them to change their
behaviour would be unlawful,even if they asked you to do so.
And that is absolutely not whatthe New South Wales legislation
says in the part of thelegislation which deals with
(06:35):
what's called the civil regime.
So there are two.
Just to set the scene a bit,there are two parts to the
legislation.
There is a criminal offenceunder Part 3, which is only
engaged when there's veryserious harm that can be proven
to be committed beyondreasonable doubt, and that's
going to be very rare that thatwill happen be able to be proven
(06:55):
, and very rare that it willhave happened actually, but
certainly very rare that thatwill go through.
And in that criminal provisionit says yes, it doesn't matter
whether someone asked you or not, but when you come to part four
, which is where where most ofthe discussion is going to be
and where there's going to be,you know, possibility of
complaints and other things madeto the anti-discrimination
(07:18):
Board.
It does not contain thatprovision.
It does not say that you haveto ignore the request that might
be given to you by somebody,and that's a very misleading
thing for them to have put up intheir guidance.
And unfortunately, it does seemthat what's happened is that
some of the people who areputting the guidance together
(07:38):
have simply decided to be blunt,to copy the guidance that's
been issued in Victoria, and theVictorian law is different.
It's not the same law and theNew South Wales government was
very clear it was not simplygoing to recycle the Victorian
legislation.
So it is a matter of someconcern that that's been put
forward.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
I take it you'll be pointing out to the government
that their bureaucrats are doingsomething that they promised
you that they wouldn't.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Indeed, for the last three weeks, we've been making
very clear representations tothe government and to
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales about this inconsistency.
It's disappointing that, tothis point, anti-discrimination
New South Wales hasn't doneanything about it.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Are they answering the phone?
Are they talking to you?
Speaker 3 (08:17):
No, they're not even responding to us.
So, yes, it's disappointingthat they're not engaging on
this issue.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
What about the minister?
Speaker 3 (08:29):
He is talking to us and it's been confirmed to us
that our understanding from theminister's point of view and
what the Act actually says iswhat it is actually what it's
supposed to be saying.
It's consistent with the secondreading speech.
They've acknowledged that thereis a difference between what
the Minister said when heintroduced the legislation and
the guidelines.
They've communicated that toAnti-Discrimination New South
(08:51):
Wales and Anti-DiscriminationNew South Wales still haven't
made any changes and thedifficulty is that at the moment
the government can't compelanti-discrimination New South
Wales.
They are an autonomous agencyset up by the government but at
the moment they can't tell themto take the guidelines down.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Let's just explore what they're saying, what
anti-discrimination New SouthWales is saying for a moment.
And I mean we've been sayingthe last couple of minutes that
they have copied the Victorianguidelines rather than drawn
their information from the NewSouth Wales legislation.
And they've copied the.
They've taken it from theVictorian legislation, not from
(09:33):
the New South Wales legislation,Correct?
Let's watch their little promovideo and compare it, and Wayne
Conner's done the work ofcomparing the New South Wales
version with the Victorianversion.
For those listening to us, theNew South Wales version has the
female voice and the Victorianversion has the male voice and
(09:54):
if you're watching, the NewSouth Wales version is on the
left-hand side of the screen.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Most people are attracted to the opposite sex
and live their lives as thegender on their original birth
certificate.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Some people have a different sexual orientation or
gender identity.
Speaker 5 (10:11):
There's nothing wrong with being heterosexual or
straight or with being lesbian,gay, bisexual, transgender,
queer or asexual All of theseare perfectly natural.
Everyone deserves to be lovedand cared for by their family,
friends and community, andpeople can still be a person of
faith or not, whichever theyprefer.
(10:34):
In Victoria, the law says allpeople, regardless of sexual
orientation or gender identityshould feel welcome and valued
and are able to liveauthentically and with pride.
There are those who believe thatbeing LGBTQA is an illness, a
choice or a disorder.
They believe it can be changedor hidden.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
They believe that things can be done to stop a
person being LGBTQA or to fixthem.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
These actions might look like counseling or they
might be disguised as prayer orpastoral conversation that is
intended to change or hidesomeone's gender or sexuality,
or hide someone's gender orsexuality, some people who
believe these things alsobelieve that a person who has a
different sexual orientation orgender identity can't also be a
person of faith, but we knowthese so-called conversion
(11:31):
practices are deeply harmful.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
They don't work and they are damaging to the whole
community.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Victoria's laws protect people's rights to have
religious beliefs and peoplealso have the right to be safe.
Speaker 5 (11:46):
The laws in New South Wales protect people's rights
to have religious beliefs.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
And people also have the right to be safe and free
from harm.
Maybe, simon Swadling, we couldstart with you.
I mean, I know you like I havebeen working really hard to try
and see people with same-sexattraction flourish in the
Christian church, and so how doyou feel when you kind of see
the Christian faith or theChristian ministry kind of
(12:12):
caricature it in that way?
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah, it can be hard to see it caricatured in that
way.
That is quite negative when,like you say, I and I know many
others have worked quite hard tofigure out ways of making sure
that people from LGBTQbackgrounds would feel welcomed
into the church and accepted aspart of the church community,
even as we preach the gospel topeople from all sorts of
(12:36):
backgrounds and with all sortsof different histories, as we
preach the gospel to people fromall sorts of backgrounds and
with all sorts of differenthistories, and so it can be hard
to to see something that Ibelieve as good and true and
beautiful for everyone, and forme particularly, be represented
as something that is negativeand harmful alongside things
that are negative and harmful.
You know the Anglican church hassaid that they don't agree with
(12:56):
those forced conversionpractices.
That's statements they've made,and so you know there are those
things that we would willfullyacknowledge are harmful that
people have done in the past,but to then have everything
about our faith kind of, andthese things that we believe is
true and good to be lumped intothat is quite hard to see and
(13:17):
kind of is painful for me in theway that it kind of pushes a
divide between faith and who Iam and how I live my life in a
way that can be painful and thatI've had to work really hard at
working out what it looks liketo live a holistically faithful
Christian life.
Sometimes these discussions canpush a greater divide there
(13:41):
than there should be, even if inthose videos they say, hey,
that's not what they want to do.
You can be both and you can beboth.
But yeah, it can be hard to seethat and kind of wrestle with
how I'm feeling, with thepositive and negative and the
things that are hard and alsowanting to be faithful to Jesus.
Speaker 1 (13:58):
So, michael'sead, I guess there's two aspects for
you.
One is there's the annoyance atthe misrepresentation in the
video, but then, secondarily,the fact that it's come out.
It's a direct copy of theVictorian legislation rather
than actually.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
Yeah, it is.
I mean, it is quite literally adigital cut and paste with a
very thin editing, so much sothat they've like they haven't
even turned their mind to whatthe New South Wales Act actually
says.
In the video they lift the partof the Victorian video that
says in the legislation it saysthat everybody gets to live
authentically and with pride.
(14:32):
That's actually in theVictorian Act.
That's not in the New SouthWales Act.
There's nothing equivalent tothat.
But they were so literally justcut and paste that they have
changed the opening sentence inNew South Wales Act.
There's nothing equivalent tothat.
But they were so literally justcut and paste that they have
changed the opening sentence inNew South Wales, in Victoria.
But they haven't even turnedtheir mind to what does it
actually say in our Act?
And we had some engagement withanti-discrimination in New South
Wales before the video came outand we said whatever you do,
(14:54):
don't copy the Victorian Act.
And we highlighted all thethings that were offensive,
deeply offensive, about that.
And, apart from a very minorchange of wording, they took out
a line that says this might bedisguised as prayer and it's
changed to this is just prayer.
We were offended by disguisedas prayer.
So I acknowledge they have madeone change in response to, but
(15:17):
they actually missed the wholepoint of what we were saying,
which was in Victoria.
It's a different act.
There are things which areoffences, which are not offences
here.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
So I guess the first thing is you're fighting the
anti-discrimination board.
What's the next round for thatfight?
Look like.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
So it looks like going back through proper
channels, through the government.
So the New South Wales FaithAffairs Council, either
collectively or members of it,saying to the government this is
deeply problematic for ourfaith communities because that's
the body that the governmentset up to advise it.
That was the body that wrotethe letter to
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales saying don't do this.
(15:54):
In the past They've doneexactly what we said please
don't do.
And now we need to say we needyou to fix it and we'll have to
go back through the channels totell the government, to
officially try and tellAnti-Discrimination New South
Wales and in the meantime I takeit.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
the word is to ministers ignore the New South
Wales Anti-Discrimination Boardand follow God.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Yep, yes, we are sending out communication that
says do not rely on the advice,the so-called explanatory
materials produced byAnti-Discrimination New South
Wales, because they've got itwrong and if you follow them,
it's saying things are offenceswhich are not offences according
to the Act.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
Neil.
However, if we just now putaside the Anti-discrimination
guidelines and just come back tothe law itself, there are some
areas where the Christian isgoing to have a problem with the
law itself.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
Is that right, professor Foster, is going to
require careful considerationwhen some counselling practices
are happening and it willpresent some challenges and,
depending on the way that it isinterpreted by, I guess,
(17:18):
tribunals which well actuallythe process will be, a complaint
might go through theAnti-Discrimination Board first
and then possibly to a tribunal,possibly considered at some
stage down the track by a court.
There are going to be sometricky issues.
I mean, there are a couple ofthings that come up.
(17:39):
One of the things is to saythat there is explicit, there
are explicit provisions in theNew South Wales law which
provide recognition of faithpractices.
There's no, it's not aconversion practice to preach to
(18:23):
a congregation or to provideteaching to a small group in
general about what the Bible'sview is of appropriate sexual
activity, that it should bebetween a man and a woman in the
context of a marriage and thatpeople ought not to engage in
activity outside that.
So general subsection 3.4 ofthe legislation says that, you
know, stating relevant religiousteachings, all those sorts of
things are allowed, but it'ssubject to this caveat of it
still must not amount to aconversion practice, and so
defining what a conversionpractice is is going to continue
to present challenges.
I think one could argue that thething that a person who's asked
(18:44):
to provide biblical counselwill be saying is I'm concerned
about your behaviour and theBible says you should behave in
certain ways rather than dealingwith your underlying
orientation, rather than dealingwith your underlying
orientation, and so I think anargument can still be made that
you know what we're asking, whatGod asks from us is obedience
(19:06):
to his word, and here is whatthe Bible says, and let me pray
for you that you can obey thisin terms of the way you behave.
But that's going to bechallenged in some context.
So there's going to be somefuzziness and some difficulty
around whether that's going tobe accepted or not.
(19:28):
I think, unfortunately, it hasto be said that because we've
seen anti-discrimination in NewSouth Wales willing to put out
unhelpful and inaccurateguidance and I have to say it
doesn't increase one'sconfidence that when a complaint
is made to that same body, thatit will be fairly treated.
But nevertheless, one wouldwant to continue to say the law
(19:51):
should be applied andadministrative bodies can't just
change the law in accordancewith what they think is the best
law.
They need to follow what thelaw has been said said and not
to buy a whole new conversation,but we've seen that this week
in the UK, where the UK SupremeCourt handed down its decision
(20:16):
on the meaning of sex and womanin discrimination law and said,
contrary to what had been saidby bureaucrats, it's a
biological fact.
So you can see that the courtsare willing to push back where
there's been an erroneousinterpretation of law offered,
and so I think those are thesorts of issues that pastors are
going to have to continue towrestle with.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Let's go to you, michael, and this line between,
if you like, suppression ofthought and behaviour, because
that seems to be the issue.
I'm just thinking about aconversation I had this week
with a man, and it was over hisstruggle with pornography.
And he doesn't just want to besomebody who doesn't look at
(20:57):
pornography, he wants to besomebody who isn't tempted to
look at naked women who are nothis wife, and he wants to
suppress that thought, tosuppress that temptation.
I want to be a one-woman guyand that's a behaviour and a
pattern of life that I want toencourage as a pastor.
(21:18):
Over to you.
Speaker 3 (21:23):
Again, I still think you can do that kind of
counseling without it beingcharacterized as a suppression
practice.
So what, what we're trying totalk about is the suppression of
a sexual orientation or tryingto change a sexual orientation.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
So saying to that man you're not trying to change his
sexual I.
I know we're talkingheterosexual here.
I'm just making.
I've just started with a simpleone before I get I narrow in
with tougher questions.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
So in that case that is simple, because you're not
trying to change his sexualorientation.
He is still a man attracted.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
But we're trying to suppress a sexual feeling.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
Well, no, you're trying to suppress a particular
expression of a sexualorientation, but his underlying
sexual orientation is still aman attracted to a woman.
That's not change.
You're just saying there areinappropriate ways to express
that orientation, and a desirefor pornography is not an
appropriate action for aChristian.
(22:19):
So I'd still want to say thatyou're not trying to suppress
his sexual orientation bypraying that he doesn't want to
look at porn.
That is a distinction I thinkthat you can make.
Sexual orientation means who Iam attracted to.
You're not trying to changethat or even suppress that.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Now I think I've married 90 couples over 20 years
.
I think about five, 90heterosexual weddings, I think
about five couples have sharedwith me before marriage that in
the past one of them had beeninvolved in gay sex and so that
(22:56):
was part of their narrativeprior to their wedding.
Now, as a Christian pastorgoing forward, I want to
encourage this newly marriedcouple to only have eyes for
their new bride or their newhusband, and to suppress other
(23:20):
sexual thoughts.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
And that would be true whether it was a same-sex
attracted or heterosexuallyattracted couple.
And that, I think, is thedistinction that we want to
continue to make is that we'renot singling out people because
they are gay or lesbian andsaying there's special rules
that apply to you.
These are general rules thatapply to all Christians.
That is, when you get married,you should only have sex with
(23:44):
your spouse.
You should only be thinkingabout having sex with your
spouse and not desiring sex withsomebody who is not your spouse
.
That's the Christian teachingthat we're trying to encourage
within the church, and I wouldbe relying on the part of the
Act that says I'm expressing aChristian teaching and I'm
encouraging people to liveaccording to that, which is one
of the explicit exemptions inour Act, which is not in the
(24:06):
Victorian Act, and I think thatI can do that without risk of
that being a conversion practice.
So, to be very clear, aconversion practice is when I
say to someone I will pray withyou or I will exhort you to
change you from gay to straight,to use that kind of language,
(24:28):
that God can make you straightif you just believe Jesus enough
.
That's a conversion practice.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Yeah, I wonder if maybe sometimes this language of
suppression is a bit unhelpfulin that way of thinking, in the
way that it leans into that morelegal language of what we're
trying to do as pastors is notto suppress parts of people but
to help people bring all thosethings under the Lordship of
Christ and to know what it lookslike to give those things over
to Jesus's Lordship.
(24:54):
So we're not asking people tosuppress parts of themselves,
but to understand how theirwhole self might follow Jesus
faithfully.
And so it's not.
We're asking people to suppressbits of themselves, but we're
asking them to say what doesevery part of me living under
the Lordship of Christ look like?
How can I love Jesus more thanthese other bits of myself?
(25:14):
How can I live faithfully, evenwith these complexities and
with these desires that I mighthave, and grow to love what
Jesus loves more than the thingsthat I just want, which I don't
think is suppressing things,but rather growing to love what
a godly life looks like morethan other things?
What if?
Speaker 1 (25:30):
I'm not married yet and I've been involved in gay
sex and straight sex and I'mcoming to Christ, you know, and
I'm now wanting to live the newlife in Christ.
Or maybe I'm not even sure thatthat's what I want, but I'm the
(25:51):
pastor talking to that personabout what it looks like to live
the new life in Christ, am I?
I've got a clear sense of whatGod would have me do, but it
feels to me like not just theguidelines, but the law is not
allowing me to.
Is that right?
(26:11):
Am I reading it right or not?
Speaker 3 (26:15):
It depends what you're trying to, what the
pastoral intent of theconversation is.
If you're saying to that personin order to be a Christian, you
have to become straight, youcan't be gay anymore and you
have to… I'm not saying that.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
No.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
And that's what I'm saying that definitely is a
conversion practice.
At the other end, if you'resaying to someone that every
Christian, when we follow Christ, it's a call to worship him
with all of our life, whichincludes worshipping him with
our bodies, and that does meansaying no to the expression of
desires which are contrary tothe will of Christ.
Speaker 4 (26:53):
And that's the truth for every person coming to
Christ, gay or straight.
I'm sorry, I just wanted to add.
I think it's always importantto remember that part of the
legislation that says thatconversion practices under
Section 3.3b do not includegenuinely facilitating an
individual's coping, skillsdevelopment or identity
exploration to meet theindividual's needs, including by
providing acceptance, supportor understanding to the
individual.
An individual approaches you.
(27:15):
They want to cope with life Interms of being a Christian
person obeying God.
It seems to me that that'sanother part of the legislation
that would authorise you helpingthem in those ways, and that
would be the sort of thing thatmany people would like to, would
be able to rely on in thosecontexts.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
So are you saying, then, that there's nothing in
the Act that I need to worryabout?
Speaker 3 (27:43):
I wouldn't say that because there are some
Christians who do want to engagein they would describe it as a
deliverance ministry, believingthat if they do pray with people
, they can change a person'ssexual orientation.
That will be a change practice.
If I say, come and if you praywith me and we will pray, that
(28:03):
God will change your underlyingdesires so that you no longer
have desires for men but forwomen, that's a change practice
and that would be prohibited bythe Act.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Are you saying then, in our regular evangelical
churches, whether they bePresbyterian or Baptist or
Anglican, you're not seeing thatthere's a clash between the act
and….
Speaker 3 (28:30):
I'm not aware, so it's not a concern.
I'm not saying it's not aconcern for any Christian, but
in the circles in which I move Idon't know of any Christians
who are holding out the promiseof a changed sexual orientation,
and in the ministries that I'veinvolved with we're
acknowledging that people have asame-sex attraction and we're
helping them to live faithfullyto Jesus with that attraction,
(28:52):
people are praying to reduce mytemptations to sin.
And that's about the expressionof the desire which I'm
distinguishing about theexpression of the desire which
I'm distinguishing between theexpression of living out our
desires as distinct from achange of orientation.
So I can be to take it awayfrom the same-sex attracted.
(29:13):
I'm a heterosexual man.
I have sexual desires which arenot compatible with following
Jesus and therefore part ofbeing a faithful Christian is
not acting on those desires.
That's not a conversionpractice.
It's not a suppression practice, because I'm not trying to
either change my underlyingorientation or even suppress it.
So you have to pretend thatyou're not heterosexual.
(29:35):
I can acknowledge that.
That's not the problem.
The problem is having thatorientation leads to desires
which are not appropriate for meas a Christian, and it's
entirely appropriate for me as apastor to encourage people to
not act on temptations which areinconsistent with Christian
faith.
Simon.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Yeah, I mean, I agree with that.
I think it's helpful for us.
Sometimes we can be confusedwith what we mean by language.
There's a lot of different waysthat people talk about these
things.
That can leave us to be alittle bit confused.
But I think, speaking from apersonal perspective, I don't
ever expect my attractions tochange across my life.
I mean they might but I don'texpect that.
But what I have noticed achange in me is what I want is
(30:18):
more and more to be faithful toJesus.
And so while those attractionsare there and they remain, I
actually have a greater desireto be faithful to Jesus, and
what that looks like, and soactually, I'm more and more
convinced that being faithful toJesus is good for me, and so if
I'm convinced of the goodnessof those things, then it's a joy
and a privilege for me to livefaithfully to Jesus.
(30:38):
Convinced of the goodness ofthose things, then it's a joy
and a privilege for me to livefaithfully to Jesus, even if I
don't expect those underlyingattractions to change.
The thing that I want to do ischanging, because I am wanting
more and more to be faithful toJesus, and so there's that
tension there that maybe we canbe confused about with language
that the people we're attractedto may not change, may change.
That's a complicated thing thatis somewhat separate from then
(30:59):
how we live our lives, becausethat's the choices we make to be
faithful to Jesus and to lovehim more.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
So, michael, we're seeing different Christians
respond differently and somedoing petitions, some writing
quite strong blog posts andthose kind of things.
Talk to me about both.
Well, firstly, just when werespond differently in debates,
what's your sense there?
Speaker 3 (31:25):
I think in these things we want to give each
other grace and not be overlycritical of the different
positions that people take, asthough one of them is more
faithful to Jesus or not.
They are, if you like,different strategies towards the
same end.
So at the moment, my strategyis about getting the
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales to change its advice so
(31:47):
that it actually reflects whatthe legislation is supposed to
be providing, and to providesome clear guidance to what is
permissible for faithcommunities.
So that's what I'm trying toachieve at the moment.
Other people are trying toachieve a wholesale repeal or
amendment of the legislation.
I don't think that that'seither necessary at the moment
(32:09):
nor politically likely Now.
The second thing is a judgmentcall, and so I'm happy that we
land differently on that, but atthe moment, I think the most
important thing is to getclarity about what is already
the state of the law before wetry and change the Act.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
Neil.
Speaker 4 (32:26):
I guess I'm very, in general, supportive of
approaches made by folk likeMichael, for whom I'm very
grateful, and others inconversations with the
government to talk aboutclarifying the way the law works
.
And I think, from that point ofview, in a democratic society
(32:47):
one would hope that people wouldlisten to members of the
community and, in particular,you know, it's very important
that where you've got again notto harp on it too much but where
you've got public servants whoare meant to be implementing
what Parliament has passed, thatthat's what they do, rather
than implement their own view ofwhat the law should be.
(33:09):
So I think that that's anappropriate way to go.
If I can step out of my legalframework just for a second, I
guess there's an issue aboutwhat's the wisest course of
action in terms of saying I'mgoing to do what the Bible says,
regardless of what the law says.
I think that all Christian folkwill acknowledge that there
(33:32):
does come a point where one willhave to say I can't disobey God
and I have to obey God ratherthan man.
But I would not be looking forthat fight.
I think my view at the momentis we should be seeing how the
law works, how the law is putinto practice through the courts
and other things like that,before jumping too quickly to
(33:56):
taking stands that may not benecessary.
So I guess and again as Michaelsays, that's a question of
wisdom and different Christianfolk will have different views
on those matters.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
Simon, I wonder whether we might finish just by
asking you to lead in prayer,just particularly for well, the
Christian in our church who'snavigating same-sex attraction
or gender incongruence, yeahyeah sure.
Speaker 2 (34:21):
I pray, heavenly Father, thank you that you are
sovereign over all things, thatyou are in control, and that you
are good and your word is good.
I pray in times and seasonswhere we feel this tension of
living in the world, but livingfor you in the world.
You would help us to be wise,help us to be humble and
(34:42):
gracious, help us to beconfident in you and your
goodness, and help us seek thegoodness of your word and be
confident in that, even beforeothers.
Father, we pray for those inour churches for whom these
issues we're discussing todayare personal and painful and
complex.
I pray that you would help themto know your love, your
(35:04):
goodness and grace and that,through those working in
ministry and to care for thosepeople, that they would know
your love through them as well,and that they would be
encouraged to continue followingyou, to be faithful to you and
to grow in their love for you.
May we all be pointing eachother to grow in our love for
Jesus and grow in our likenessof Jesus as we grow to love him
(35:27):
more and more.
Speaker 1 (35:28):
Amen.
Thanks, simon.
That is Simon Swadling.
He is an assistant minister atSummerhill Anglican Church in
inner Sydney and also involvedin the Sydney Anglican Ministry,
living Faith.
Also with us today, michaelStead, bishop of South Sydney.
He chairs the interfaith groupFreedom for Faith and is also
the chair of the Sydney AnglicanPastoral Ministry, living Faith
(35:49):
, attempting to minister tosame-sex attracted Christians in
the churches and genderincongruent people in our
churches.
And also today joined on theline from Newcastle the
Associate Professor of Law, neilFoster, who is also the author
of the Law and Religion inAustralia blog.
My name's Dominic Steele.
Thanks for joining us on thePastor's Heart.
We will look forward to yourcompany next Tuesday afternoon.
it is the pastor's heart and dominic steel.
And what should the christianpastor do about the new
conversion therapy legislationjust coming to force?
Here in new south wales?
Neil foster, simon swaddlingand michael stead are with us.
The message of sy's AnglicanArchbishop Kanishka Rafel to
Sydney ministers, teachconfidently God's plan for
(00:29):
sexuality, marriage and gender.
We should continue to do this,notwithstanding the confused and
unhelpful explanatory materialprovided by Anti-Discrimination
New South Wales.
And in another letter he haswritten we will obey God.
We can do nothing less.
Today we talk to the lawprofessor, the bishop and the
(00:53):
pastor.
New legislation has come intoeffect here.
It was passed by the Parliamentin Sydney around 12 months ago
just come into effect and withit a set of guidelines that go
further than the legislation inrestricting the practice of
Christian ministry.
At first glance, the flashpointis in the frequently asked
questions of the guidelines,where it says the conversion
(01:15):
practices ban does not prohibitprayer.
However, praying with or over aperson with the intent to
change or suppress theirsexuality or gender identity is
unlawful.
It is unlawful even if thatperson has asked you to pray for
them to be able to change orsuppress their sexuality or
(01:37):
gender identity.
Now there has been a range ofreactions from pastoral leaders,
a wide range of reactions.
One group has set up a petitionto the Parliament.
The lead there is being takenby the Presbyterians, but a
significant number of otherleaders have signed it.
And then there are all sorts ofother reactions as well.
(01:58):
Neil Foster is on the line fromNewcastle.
He's the Associate Professor ofLaw at Newcastle University.
Michael Stead is with us, theBishop of South Sydney.
He's the Associate Professor ofLaw at Newcastle University.
Michael Stead is with us, theBishop of South Sydney.
He chairs the interfaith groupFreedom for Faith and is also
chair of the Sydney AnglicanMinistry, living Faith, which
serves people in the church whohave same-sex attraction or
gender incongruence.
And Simon Swadling is with usas well.
(02:20):
Simon's an Assistant Ministerat Summerhill Anglican Church in
inner Sydney and also involvedin the Living Faith ministry.
Simon, I wonder if we couldstart with you and your pastor's
heart, your heart for thesame-sex attracted person in the
church, the gender incongruentperson in the evangelical church
, with this debate going onaround and conflicting emotions.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Yeah, well, I think anything that is kind of deeply
on your pastor's heart is oftenthings that are deeply personal
to you, and so this debate ispersonal to me and my own
experiences of same-sexattraction and that wrestle of
thinking about how faith andsexuality and those things all
go together, and so that kind ofreally drives my pastor's heart
to care for these people andfor people to know that the
(03:04):
gospel is good, that God's wordis good.
It's both true and good at thesame time and it's good for
people in my position who aresame-sex attracted, people who
struggle with genderincongruence and all of those
different things that put yououtside of the sphere of the
norm that people would assume ofyou.
All of these things in God'sword is good for everyone, and
I'm really keen for people toknow that and to know its
(03:27):
goodness and to be confident inthe goodness of God's word,
because it is better than anyother story the world might have
for us and for how we shouldlive.
And so I really want us to growin our love and confidence in
knowing God and livingfaithfully for him and why that
is actually good for us and notsomething just hard to be
endured.
Speaker 1 (03:48):
Michael, your heart in this.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
I really feel for people in our churches at the
moment who are confused at thismoment because where we have in
the past and want to continue tooffer support for people who
want to live faithfully forJesus, the anti-discrimination
New South Wales materials looklike they're saying you can't do
that anymore.
We can't actually provide thepastoral support that people are
asking for and looking for andfind valuable and, yeah, I'm
(04:19):
disappointed in whereanti-discrimination has landed
but I'm disappointed for what itmeans for people in our
churches who we have been tryingto support through ministries,
through Living Faith and otherministries.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Now we've talked about this a lot, but a year ago
, when the legislation came out,you were saying it was possible
to actually be a biblicalChristian and obey the New South
Wales government, actually be abiblical Christian and obey the
New South Wales government.
But actually today, when thismonth, as the guidelines have
(04:52):
come out from the New SouthWales Anti-Discrimination Board,
they've gone way beyond the lawthat was passed a year ago.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, absolutely, and I'm sure Neil will provide more
detail in a moment.
But the law is very clear thatit's not the same law.
That's in Victoria, In NewSouth Wales.
The government made very clearthat it was not going to be a
conversion practice to say tosomeone if you want to live as a
(05:16):
faithful Christian, if you wantto follow the teachings of
Jesus, then you shouldn't act onyour sexual desires.
And that was not going to be aconversion practice and that was
clear in the legislation, itwas clear in the minister's
second reading speech and thematerial from
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales says exactly the opposite.
It says if you tell someonethat they have to be celibate,
(05:37):
that's a conversion practice.
Maybe a conversion practice istheir language, but it leaves
the implication that you can'tdo that.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Neil Foster, what's your reaction to these
guidelines that have just comeout?
Speaker 4 (05:48):
Yes, well, I agree with Michael in terms of the
fact that it was very surprisingreally and disappointing to see
that aspects of the guidelinesactually went further than the
law.
Guidelines actually wentfurther than the law and in
(06:10):
particular, the part that youread where it was sort of
asserted as a blanketproposition that seeking to pray
and counsel with someone and tohelp them to change their
behaviour would be unlawful,even if they asked you to do so.
And that is absolutely not whatthe New South Wales legislation
says in the part of thelegislation which deals with
(06:35):
what's called the civil regime.
So there are two.
Just to set the scene a bit,there are two parts to the
legislation.
There is a criminal offenceunder Part 3, which is only
engaged when there's veryserious harm that can be proven
to be committed beyondreasonable doubt, and that's
going to be very rare that thatwill happen be able to be proven
(06:55):
, and very rare that it willhave happened actually, but
certainly very rare that thatwill go through.
And in that criminal provisionit says yes, it doesn't matter
whether someone asked you or not, but when you come to part four
, which is where where most ofthe discussion is going to be
and where there's going to be,you know, possibility of
complaints and other things madeto the anti-discrimination
(07:18):
Board.
It does not contain thatprovision.
It does not say that you haveto ignore the request that might
be given to you by somebody,and that's a very misleading
thing for them to have put up intheir guidance.
And unfortunately, it does seemthat what's happened is that
some of the people who areputting the guidance together
(07:38):
have simply decided to be blunt,to copy the guidance that's
been issued in Victoria, and theVictorian law is different.
It's not the same law and theNew South Wales government was
very clear it was not simplygoing to recycle the Victorian
legislation.
So it is a matter of someconcern that that's been put
forward.
Speaker 1 (07:56):
I take it you'll be pointing out to the government
that their bureaucrats are doingsomething that they promised
you that they wouldn't.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
Indeed, for the last three weeks, we've been making
very clear representations tothe government and to
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales about this inconsistency.
It's disappointing that, tothis point, anti-discrimination
New South Wales hasn't doneanything about it.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Are they answering the phone?
Are they talking to you?
Speaker 3 (08:17):
No, they're not even responding to us.
So, yes, it's disappointingthat they're not engaging on
this issue.
Speaker 1 (08:26):
What about the minister?
Speaker 3 (08:29):
He is talking to us and it's been confirmed to us
that our understanding from theminister's point of view and
what the Act actually says iswhat it is actually what it's
supposed to be saying.
It's consistent with the secondreading speech.
They've acknowledged that thereis a difference between what
the Minister said when heintroduced the legislation and
the guidelines.
They've communicated that toAnti-Discrimination New South
(08:51):
Wales and Anti-DiscriminationNew South Wales still haven't
made any changes and thedifficulty is that at the moment
the government can't compelanti-discrimination New South
Wales.
They are an autonomous agencyset up by the government but at
the moment they can't tell themto take the guidelines down.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Let's just explore what they're saying, what
anti-discrimination New SouthWales is saying for a moment.
And I mean we've been sayingthe last couple of minutes that
they have copied the Victorianguidelines rather than drawn
their information from the NewSouth Wales legislation.
And they've copied the.
They've taken it from theVictorian legislation, not from
(09:33):
the New South Wales legislation,Correct?
Let's watch their little promovideo and compare it, and Wayne
Conner's done the work ofcomparing the New South Wales
version with the Victorianversion.
For those listening to us, theNew South Wales version has the
female voice and the Victorianversion has the male voice and
(09:54):
if you're watching, the NewSouth Wales version is on the
left-hand side of the screen.
Speaker 5 (09:59):
Most people are attracted to the opposite sex
and live their lives as thegender on their original birth
certificate.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Some people have a different sexual orientation or
gender identity.
Speaker 5 (10:11):
There's nothing wrong with being heterosexual or
straight or with being lesbian,gay, bisexual, transgender,
queer or asexual All of theseare perfectly natural.
Everyone deserves to be lovedand cared for by their family,
friends and community, andpeople can still be a person of
faith or not, whichever theyprefer.
(10:34):
In Victoria, the law says allpeople, regardless of sexual
orientation or gender identityshould feel welcome and valued
and are able to liveauthentically and with pride.
There are those who believe thatbeing LGBTQA is an illness, a
choice or a disorder.
They believe it can be changedor hidden.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
They believe that things can be done to stop a
person being LGBTQA or to fixthem.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
These actions might look like counseling or they
might be disguised as prayer orpastoral conversation that is
intended to change or hidesomeone's gender or sexuality,
or hide someone's gender orsexuality, some people who
believe these things alsobelieve that a person who has a
different sexual orientation orgender identity can't also be a
person of faith, but we knowthese so-called conversion
(11:31):
practices are deeply harmful.
Speaker 5 (11:34):
They don't work and they are damaging to the whole
community.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Victoria's laws protect people's rights to have
religious beliefs and peoplealso have the right to be safe.
Speaker 5 (11:46):
The laws in New South Wales protect people's rights
to have religious beliefs.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
And people also have the right to be safe and free
from harm.
Maybe, simon Swadling, we couldstart with you.
I mean, I know you like I havebeen working really hard to try
and see people with same-sexattraction flourish in the
Christian church, and so how doyou feel when you kind of see
the Christian faith or theChristian ministry kind of
(12:12):
caricature it in that way?
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Yeah, it can be hard to see it caricatured in that
way.
That is quite negative when,like you say, I and I know many
others have worked quite hard tofigure out ways of making sure
that people from LGBTQbackgrounds would feel welcomed
into the church and accepted aspart of the church community,
even as we preach the gospel topeople from all sorts of
(12:36):
backgrounds and with all sortsof different histories, as we
preach the gospel to people fromall sorts of backgrounds and
with all sorts of differenthistories, and so it can be hard
to to see something that Ibelieve as good and true and
beautiful for everyone, and forme particularly, be represented
as something that is negativeand harmful alongside things
that are negative and harmful.
You know the Anglican church hassaid that they don't agree with
(12:56):
those forced conversionpractices.
That's statements they've made,and so you know there are those
things that we would willfullyacknowledge are harmful that
people have done in the past,but to then have everything
about our faith kind of, andthese things that we believe is
true and good to be lumped intothat is quite hard to see and
(13:17):
kind of is painful for me in theway that it kind of pushes a
divide between faith and who Iam and how I live my life in a
way that can be painful and thatI've had to work really hard at
working out what it looks liketo live a holistically faithful
Christian life.
Sometimes these discussions canpush a greater divide there
(13:41):
than there should be, even if inthose videos they say, hey,
that's not what they want to do.
You can be both and you can beboth.
But yeah, it can be hard to seethat and kind of wrestle with
how I'm feeling, with thepositive and negative and the
things that are hard and alsowanting to be faithful to Jesus.
Speaker 1 (13:58):
So, michael'sead, I guess there's two aspects for
you.
One is there's the annoyance atthe misrepresentation in the
video, but then, secondarily,the fact that it's come out.
It's a direct copy of theVictorian legislation rather
than actually.
Speaker 3 (14:12):
Yeah, it is.
I mean, it is quite literally adigital cut and paste with a
very thin editing, so much sothat they've like they haven't
even turned their mind to whatthe New South Wales Act actually
says.
In the video they lift the partof the Victorian video that
says in the legislation it saysthat everybody gets to live
authentically and with pride.
(14:32):
That's actually in theVictorian Act.
That's not in the New SouthWales Act.
There's nothing equivalent tothat.
But they were so literally justcut and paste that they have
changed the opening sentence inNew South Wales Act.
There's nothing equivalent tothat.
But they were so literally justcut and paste that they have
changed the opening sentence inNew South Wales, in Victoria.
But they haven't even turnedtheir mind to what does it
actually say in our Act?
And we had some engagement withanti-discrimination in New South
Wales before the video came outand we said whatever you do,
(14:54):
don't copy the Victorian Act.
And we highlighted all thethings that were offensive,
deeply offensive, about that.
And, apart from a very minorchange of wording, they took out
a line that says this might bedisguised as prayer and it's
changed to this is just prayer.
We were offended by disguisedas prayer.
So I acknowledge they have madeone change in response to, but
(15:17):
they actually missed the wholepoint of what we were saying,
which was in Victoria.
It's a different act.
There are things which areoffences, which are not offences
here.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
So I guess the first thing is you're fighting the
anti-discrimination board.
What's the next round for thatfight?
Look like.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
So it looks like going back through proper
channels, through the government.
So the New South Wales FaithAffairs Council, either
collectively or members of it,saying to the government this is
deeply problematic for ourfaith communities because that's
the body that the governmentset up to advise it.
That was the body that wrotethe letter to
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales saying don't do this.
(15:54):
In the past They've doneexactly what we said please
don't do.
And now we need to say we needyou to fix it and we'll have to
go back through the channels totell the government, to
officially try and tellAnti-Discrimination New South
Wales and in the meantime I takeit.
Speaker 1 (16:06):
the word is to ministers ignore the New South
Wales Anti-Discrimination Boardand follow God.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Yep, yes, we are sending out communication that
says do not rely on the advice,the so-called explanatory
materials produced byAnti-Discrimination New South
Wales, because they've got itwrong and if you follow them,
it's saying things are offenceswhich are not offences according
to the Act.
Speaker 1 (16:35):
Neil.
However, if we just now putaside the Anti-discrimination
guidelines and just come back tothe law itself, there are some
areas where the Christian isgoing to have a problem with the
law itself.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
Is that right, professor Foster, is going to
require careful considerationwhen some counselling practices
are happening and it willpresent some challenges and,
depending on the way that it isinterpreted by, I guess,
(17:18):
tribunals which well actuallythe process will be, a complaint
might go through theAnti-Discrimination Board first
and then possibly to a tribunal,possibly considered at some
stage down the track by a court.
There are going to be sometricky issues.
I mean, there are a couple ofthings that come up.
(17:39):
One of the things is to saythat there is explicit, there
are explicit provisions in theNew South Wales law which
provide recognition of faithpractices.
There's no, it's not aconversion practice to preach to
(18:23):
a congregation or to provideteaching to a small group in
general about what the Bible'sview is of appropriate sexual
activity, that it should bebetween a man and a woman in the
context of a marriage and thatpeople ought not to engage in
activity outside that.
So general subsection 3.4 ofthe legislation says that, you
know, stating relevant religiousteachings, all those sorts of
things are allowed, but it'ssubject to this caveat of it
still must not amount to aconversion practice, and so
defining what a conversionpractice is is going to continue
to present challenges.
I think one could argue that thething that a person who's asked
(18:44):
to provide biblical counselwill be saying is I'm concerned
about your behaviour and theBible says you should behave in
certain ways rather than dealingwith your underlying
orientation, rather than dealingwith your underlying
orientation, and so I think anargument can still be made that
you know what we're asking, whatGod asks from us is obedience
(19:06):
to his word, and here is whatthe Bible says, and let me pray
for you that you can obey thisin terms of the way you behave.
But that's going to bechallenged in some context.
So there's going to be somefuzziness and some difficulty
around whether that's going tobe accepted or not.
(19:28):
I think, unfortunately, it hasto be said that because we've
seen anti-discrimination in NewSouth Wales willing to put out
unhelpful and inaccurateguidance and I have to say it
doesn't increase one'sconfidence that when a complaint
is made to that same body, thatit will be fairly treated.
But nevertheless, one wouldwant to continue to say the law
(19:51):
should be applied andadministrative bodies can't just
change the law in accordancewith what they think is the best
law.
They need to follow what thelaw has been said said and not
to buy a whole new conversation,but we've seen that this week
in the UK, where the UK SupremeCourt handed down its decision
(20:16):
on the meaning of sex and womanin discrimination law and said,
contrary to what had been saidby bureaucrats, it's a
biological fact.
So you can see that the courtsare willing to push back where
there's been an erroneousinterpretation of law offered,
and so I think those are thesorts of issues that pastors are
going to have to continue towrestle with.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Let's go to you, michael, and this line between,
if you like, suppression ofthought and behaviour, because
that seems to be the issue.
I'm just thinking about aconversation I had this week
with a man, and it was over hisstruggle with pornography.
And he doesn't just want to besomebody who doesn't look at
(20:57):
pornography, he wants to besomebody who isn't tempted to
look at naked women who are nothis wife, and he wants to
suppress that thought, tosuppress that temptation.
I want to be a one-woman guyand that's a behaviour and a
pattern of life that I want toencourage as a pastor.
(21:18):
Over to you.
Speaker 3 (21:23):
Again, I still think you can do that kind of
counseling without it beingcharacterized as a suppression
practice.
So what, what we're trying totalk about is the suppression of
a sexual orientation or tryingto change a sexual orientation.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
So saying to that man you're not trying to change his
sexual I.
I know we're talkingheterosexual here.
I'm just making.
I've just started with a simpleone before I get I narrow in
with tougher questions.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
So in that case that is simple, because you're not
trying to change his sexualorientation.
He is still a man attracted.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
But we're trying to suppress a sexual feeling.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
Well, no, you're trying to suppress a particular
expression of a sexualorientation, but his underlying
sexual orientation is still aman attracted to a woman.
That's not change.
You're just saying there areinappropriate ways to express
that orientation, and a desirefor pornography is not an
appropriate action for aChristian.
(22:19):
So I'd still want to say thatyou're not trying to suppress
his sexual orientation bypraying that he doesn't want to
look at porn.
That is a distinction I thinkthat you can make.
Sexual orientation means who Iam attracted to.
You're not trying to changethat or even suppress that.
Speaker 1 (22:36):
Now I think I've married 90 couples over 20 years
.
I think about five, 90heterosexual weddings, I think
about five couples have sharedwith me before marriage that in
the past one of them had beeninvolved in gay sex and so that
(22:56):
was part of their narrativeprior to their wedding.
Now, as a Christian pastorgoing forward, I want to
encourage this newly marriedcouple to only have eyes for
their new bride or their newhusband, and to suppress other
(23:20):
sexual thoughts.
Speaker 3 (23:24):
And that would be true whether it was a same-sex
attracted or heterosexuallyattracted couple.
And that, I think, is thedistinction that we want to
continue to make is that we'renot singling out people because
they are gay or lesbian andsaying there's special rules
that apply to you.
These are general rules thatapply to all Christians.
That is, when you get married,you should only have sex with
(23:44):
your spouse.
You should only be thinkingabout having sex with your
spouse and not desiring sex withsomebody who is not your spouse
.
That's the Christian teachingthat we're trying to encourage
within the church, and I wouldbe relying on the part of the
Act that says I'm expressing aChristian teaching and I'm
encouraging people to liveaccording to that, which is one
of the explicit exemptions inour Act, which is not in the
(24:06):
Victorian Act, and I think thatI can do that without risk of
that being a conversion practice.
So, to be very clear, aconversion practice is when I
say to someone I will pray withyou or I will exhort you to
change you from gay to straight,to use that kind of language,
(24:28):
that God can make you straightif you just believe Jesus enough
.
That's a conversion practice.
Speaker 2 (24:33):
Yeah, I wonder if maybe sometimes this language of
suppression is a bit unhelpfulin that way of thinking, in the
way that it leans into that morelegal language of what we're
trying to do as pastors is notto suppress parts of people but
to help people bring all thosethings under the Lordship of
Christ and to know what it lookslike to give those things over
to Jesus's Lordship.
(24:54):
So we're not asking people tosuppress parts of themselves,
but to understand how theirwhole self might follow Jesus
faithfully.
And so it's not.
We're asking people to suppressbits of themselves, but we're
asking them to say what doesevery part of me living under
the Lordship of Christ look like?
How can I love Jesus more thanthese other bits of myself?
(25:14):
How can I live faithfully, evenwith these complexities and
with these desires that I mighthave, and grow to love what
Jesus loves more than the thingsthat I just want, which I don't
think is suppressing things,but rather growing to love what
a godly life looks like morethan other things?
What if?
Speaker 1 (25:30):
I'm not married yet and I've been involved in gay
sex and straight sex and I'mcoming to Christ, you know, and
I'm now wanting to live the newlife in Christ.
Or maybe I'm not even sure thatthat's what I want, but I'm the
(25:51):
pastor talking to that personabout what it looks like to live
the new life in Christ, am I?
I've got a clear sense of whatGod would have me do, but it
feels to me like not just theguidelines, but the law is not
allowing me to.
Is that right?
(26:11):
Am I reading it right or not?
Speaker 3 (26:15):
It depends what you're trying to, what the
pastoral intent of theconversation is.
If you're saying to that personin order to be a Christian, you
have to become straight, youcan't be gay anymore and you
have to… I'm not saying that.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
No.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
And that's what I'm saying that definitely is a
conversion practice.
At the other end, if you'resaying to someone that every
Christian, when we follow Christ, it's a call to worship him
with all of our life, whichincludes worshipping him with
our bodies, and that does meansaying no to the expression of
desires which are contrary tothe will of Christ.
Speaker 4 (26:53):
And that's the truth for every person coming to
Christ, gay or straight.
I'm sorry, I just wanted to add.
I think it's always importantto remember that part of the
legislation that says thatconversion practices under
Section 3.3b do not includegenuinely facilitating an
individual's coping, skillsdevelopment or identity
exploration to meet theindividual's needs, including by
providing acceptance, supportor understanding to the
individual.
An individual approaches you.
(27:15):
They want to cope with life Interms of being a Christian
person obeying God.
It seems to me that that'sanother part of the legislation
that would authorise you helpingthem in those ways, and that
would be the sort of thing thatmany people would like to, would
be able to rely on in thosecontexts.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
So are you saying, then, that there's nothing in
the Act that I need to worryabout?
Speaker 3 (27:43):
I wouldn't say that because there are some
Christians who do want to engagein they would describe it as a
deliverance ministry, believingthat if they do pray with people
, they can change a person'ssexual orientation.
That will be a change practice.
If I say, come and if you praywith me and we will pray, that
(28:03):
God will change your underlyingdesires so that you no longer
have desires for men but forwomen, that's a change practice
and that would be prohibited bythe Act.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
Are you saying then, in our regular evangelical
churches, whether they bePresbyterian or Baptist or
Anglican, you're not seeing thatthere's a clash between the act
and….
Speaker 3 (28:30):
I'm not aware, so it's not a concern.
I'm not saying it's not aconcern for any Christian, but
in the circles in which I move Idon't know of any Christians
who are holding out the promiseof a changed sexual orientation,
and in the ministries that I'veinvolved with we're
acknowledging that people have asame-sex attraction and we're
helping them to live faithfullyto Jesus with that attraction,
(28:52):
people are praying to reduce mytemptations to sin.
And that's about the expressionof the desire which I'm
distinguishing about theexpression of the desire which
I'm distinguishing between theexpression of living out our
desires as distinct from achange of orientation.
So I can be to take it awayfrom the same-sex attracted.
(29:13):
I'm a heterosexual man.
I have sexual desires which arenot compatible with following
Jesus and therefore part ofbeing a faithful Christian is
not acting on those desires.
That's not a conversionpractice.
It's not a suppression practice, because I'm not trying to
either change my underlyingorientation or even suppress it.
So you have to pretend thatyou're not heterosexual.
(29:35):
I can acknowledge that.
That's not the problem.
The problem is having thatorientation leads to desires
which are not appropriate for meas a Christian, and it's
entirely appropriate for me as apastor to encourage people to
not act on temptations which areinconsistent with Christian
faith.
Simon.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
Yeah, I mean, I agree with that.
I think it's helpful for us.
Sometimes we can be confusedwith what we mean by language.
There's a lot of different waysthat people talk about these
things.
That can leave us to be alittle bit confused.
But I think, speaking from apersonal perspective, I don't
ever expect my attractions tochange across my life.
I mean they might but I don'texpect that.
But what I have noticed achange in me is what I want is
(30:18):
more and more to be faithful toJesus.
And so while those attractionsare there and they remain, I
actually have a greater desireto be faithful to Jesus, and
what that looks like, and soactually, I'm more and more
convinced that being faithful toJesus is good for me, and so if
I'm convinced of the goodnessof those things, then it's a joy
and a privilege for me to livefaithfully to Jesus.
(30:38):
Convinced of the goodness ofthose things, then it's a joy
and a privilege for me to livefaithfully to Jesus, even if I
don't expect those underlyingattractions to change.
The thing that I want to do ischanging, because I am wanting
more and more to be faithful toJesus, and so there's that
tension there that maybe we canbe confused about with language
that the people we're attractedto may not change, may change.
That's a complicated thing thatis somewhat separate from then
(30:59):
how we live our lives, becausethat's the choices we make to be
faithful to Jesus and to lovehim more.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
So, michael, we're seeing different Christians
respond differently and somedoing petitions, some writing
quite strong blog posts andthose kind of things.
Talk to me about both.
Well, firstly, just when werespond differently in debates,
what's your sense there?
Speaker 3 (31:25):
I think in these things we want to give each
other grace and not be overlycritical of the different
positions that people take, asthough one of them is more
faithful to Jesus or not.
They are, if you like,different strategies towards the
same end.
So at the moment, my strategyis about getting the
Anti-Discrimination New SouthWales to change its advice so
(31:47):
that it actually reflects whatthe legislation is supposed to
be providing, and to providesome clear guidance to what is
permissible for faithcommunities.
So that's what I'm trying toachieve at the moment.
Other people are trying toachieve a wholesale repeal or
amendment of the legislation.
I don't think that that'seither necessary at the moment
(32:09):
nor politically likely Now.
The second thing is a judgmentcall, and so I'm happy that we
land differently on that, but atthe moment, I think the most
important thing is to getclarity about what is already
the state of the law before wetry and change the Act.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
Neil.
Speaker 4 (32:26):
I guess I'm very, in general, supportive of
approaches made by folk likeMichael, for whom I'm very
grateful, and others inconversations with the
government to talk aboutclarifying the way the law works
.
And I think, from that point ofview, in a democratic society
(32:47):
one would hope that people wouldlisten to members of the
community and, in particular,you know, it's very important
that where you've got again notto harp on it too much but where
you've got public servants whoare meant to be implementing
what Parliament has passed, thatthat's what they do, rather
than implement their own view ofwhat the law should be.
(33:09):
So I think that that's anappropriate way to go.
If I can step out of my legalframework just for a second, I
guess there's an issue aboutwhat's the wisest course of
action in terms of saying I'mgoing to do what the Bible says,
regardless of what the law says.
I think that all Christian folkwill acknowledge that there
(33:32):
does come a point where one willhave to say I can't disobey God
and I have to obey God ratherthan man.
But I would not be looking forthat fight.
I think my view at the momentis we should be seeing how the
law works, how the law is putinto practice through the courts
and other things like that,before jumping too quickly to
(33:56):
taking stands that may not benecessary.
So I guess and again as Michaelsays, that's a question of
wisdom and different Christianfolk will have different views
on those matters.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
Simon, I wonder whether we might finish just by
asking you to lead in prayer,just particularly for well, the
Christian in our church who'snavigating same-sex attraction
or gender incongruence, yeahyeah sure.
Speaker 2 (34:21):
I pray, heavenly Father, thank you that you are
sovereign over all things, thatyou are in control, and that you
are good and your word is good.
I pray in times and seasonswhere we feel this tension of
living in the world, but livingfor you in the world.
You would help us to be wise,help us to be humble and
(34:42):
gracious, help us to beconfident in you and your
goodness, and help us seek thegoodness of your word and be
confident in that, even beforeothers.
Father, we pray for those inour churches for whom these
issues we're discussing todayare personal and painful and
complex.
I pray that you would help themto know your love, your
(35:04):
goodness and grace and that,through those working in
ministry and to care for thosepeople, that they would know
your love through them as well,and that they would be
encouraged to continue followingyou, to be faithful to you and
to grow in their love for you.
May we all be pointing eachother to grow in our love for
Jesus and grow in our likenessof Jesus as we grow to love him
(35:27):
more and more.
Speaker 1 (35:28):
Amen.
Thanks, simon.
That is Simon Swadling.
He is an assistant minister atSummerhill Anglican Church in
inner Sydney and also involvedin the Sydney Anglican Ministry,
living Faith.
Also with us today, michaelStead, bishop of South Sydney.
He chairs the interfaith groupFreedom for Faith and is also
the chair of the Sydney AnglicanPastoral Ministry, living Faith
(35:49):
, attempting to minister tosame-sex attracted Christians in
the churches and genderincongruent people in our
churches.
And also today joined on theline from Newcastle the
Associate Professor of Law, neilFoster, who is also the author
of the Law and Religion inAustralia blog.
My name's Dominic Steele.
Thanks for joining us on thePastor's Heart.
We will look forward to yourcompany next Tuesday afternoon.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!