Risk assessment, health and safety, compliance, codes of conduct… Does this sound like your workplace?  It is also increasingly prevalent in the church.  But can we become too risk-averse and rule-based in the church?  Can we risk more important things in the process? 

There are a number of examples of the risk-averse, compliant approach weakening the churches, but let me just list three: 

1. Scholar and Pastor Mark Durie appeared recently on the Bolt Report to express his dismay at the Anglican response to Victoria’s ‘anti-conversion’ laws. (Watch this space carefully, NSW.)  He told Bolt, “I’ve been an Anglican pastor in Melbourne for 21 years, but what [the church] did in 2023 is they made it obligatory for every person, every church worker, every volunteer to accept this policy of only affirming. And it means that you can’t, for example, welcome someone at the church door or visit someone on behalf of the church or play the flute in the church band or pray in church publicly unless you have assented and signed a code of conduct requirement that you will only affirm gender and sexuality choices… I think the code of conduct is abusive of children…So I was unable to sign it…I will no longer be…licensed or allowed by the church to practice as a minister in Melbourne.”^[1]

2. The Presbyterian Church of Victoria uncharacteristically drafted a code of conduct that was similarly self-censoring and effectively limiting on ministry (thankfully now revised).   Campbell Markham, who has endured targeted legal action for standing up for biblical marriage, was brutal in his analysis of the initial draft code of conduct:  “The Victorian ‘anti-conversion’ laws are intended, in part, to chill the work of Christian ministers. Its authors may count the PCV Code a success. It is conciliatory to the point of obeisance; cautious to the point of cowardice. It may well hang its own faithful and prosecuted ministers out to dry.”^[2

3. For two years running now, the NSW Assembly of the Presbyterian Church has deliberately not discussed the purely polity issue of whether women can be elders in the church.  The objection has been raised that such discussion might legally impinge on the well-being of some members of the church under the NSW Government’s Work Health and Safety Act.^[3]  “Surely this is a question for the Church to determine, not the State,” says minister David Robertson.  “By requiring that our procedures must first meet the (moving) requirements of the State, we have placed the State above the Church in these matters”.^[4]  This is Erastianism – the state having higher authority than the church in ecclesiastical matters.

It does seem to be a departure from the way the church has proceeded in the past.  Even in 2021, when the anti-conversion laws were first passed, threatening those who prayed or counselled those struggling with gender dysphoria, for one, the general consensus was that we should continue as we had done before (Daniel 6:10) ^[5].  We cannot follow the law where it requires us to abrogate a higher law.  Similarly, the church did not use to shy away from going against cultural norms.  At the height of the 90s, when women’s rights were in their ascendancy, the Presbyterian Church of Victoria (my denomination) determined that they would not have women elders and regularly issued statements countering prevailing narratives.  Their principled and Biblical stance then was one of the things that attracted me to serving in the Presbyterian church.

Before COVID, the evangelical church faced such threats united, but then COVID came through the back door and disrupted the church, and since then, the church has shown little resistance to Government overreach. It seems the effect of the evangelical church’s COVID response has weakened her resolve against the intrusion and confusion of things like radical gender theory, especially if it’s framed as another health issue.  Tim Grant, who co-wrote the book entitled Defending Conscience,^[6] said recently, “The state learnt that it can intrude into ecclesiastical affairs with barely a whimper from ministers and denominations.” Constitutional lawyer Ben Saunders, taking note of this trend, has pointed out that:

“the … Church as a whole has become increasingly legalistic, risk-averse and compliant in recent years…There is growing regulation of aspects of church life and activities by governments across Australia. In every case I am aware of, the instinctive reaction from the …administrators has been to comply – and over and beyond – with those regulations. [Bold mine.] Covid regulation was a clear illustration of this.”^[7]

After COVID, the state was more eager and ready to push; the church was more eager to comply.  It is as if our consciences are seared.

An example of this digression occurred in Victoria during COVID. Almost in tandem, more severe than required, each denomination’s church offices sent out directives to their churches forbidding any kind of rostered or volunteer service for the unvaccinated.  These directives were not even ostensibly for health reasons but seemed purely to bully the unvaccinated into getting the jab. The unvaccinated were legally permitted to go to small ‘vaccine status unspecified’ services if the churches would provide them.  The new church office directives effectively meant that the sound system person could sit at the desk but not operate it, the organist could sit at the organ but not play it and so on. 

I remember it well because I was caught between those who ardently wanted to enforce these official directives and shielding the already knocked-around, vilified unvaccinated members of the church.  Others have quickly forgotten this relatively short period after the lockdowns ended, but here are the directives (observe how each church comes up with essentially the same overextension of the law):

“From this Friday, 15 October, all workers, volunteer or paid, lay and clergy, must have proof of at least a single dose of vaccine, or a firm booking of a first dose by October 22, to do any permitted work outside their homes. This applies throughout Victoria and includes op shop workers, those assisting with essential food relief, vergers, servers, musicians, gardeners, those involved with broadcasting services, conducting and assisting at funerals, weddings and general church services.”

Anglican Diocese of Melbourne

“Unvaccinated workers (paid or volunteer) and those with unknown vaccination status should not work or serve outside of their usual place of residence”.

Baptist Union of Victoria

“Roles which would need to provide proof of vaccination status would likely include the worship leader, cleaner, organist/musician, Covid check-in marshals, those participating in recording/ broadcasting live-streamed services, children’s leader, food bank workers and anyone involved with building maintenance or gardening.”

Uniting Church

“For those feeling anxious about, or opposed to, vaccination you will need to maintain online services and interactions…This sadly means there can be no in-person contact of any kind for any church personnel who are not double-vaccinated”.

Churches of Christ Victoria and Tasmania

“If you have not received at least one approved COVID-19 vaccine dose by 15 October 2021, and have not, by that date, provided us with evidence of having a booking to receive a first dose by 22 October 2021, the Directions provide that you will not be permitted to work (including volunteering/serving) at the church from 15 October 2021…For our volunteers, it could mean that you are not able to serve at the church for the near future.”

Presbyterian Church of Victoria

At that time, those who were unvaccinated were actually banned by their own church hierarchies from even doing the flowers, cleaning the church (even if no one else was present), reading the Bible, playing the piano, operating the sound system and even in some cases participating in morning tea.  The church administrations had leapt to the strictest possible interpretation of the Chief Health Officer’s directives rather than seeking the greatest liberty possible and advocating for their members.  A constitutional lawyer did inform the church office that, “You should also be aware that the [church] approach is much more restrictive than the directions actually require,” but was ignored. 

As a last resort, I finally rang the government Coronavirus hotline and was told that there was no intended restriction on the unvaccinated ministering in the vaccine-unspecified services!  This meant that churches across the board were needlessly segregating who could volunteer in their churches. I managed to get a number of others to inquire similarly, and they got the same response.  Finally, in our denomination at least, the church relented and thus, after a few weeks, segregated ministry along vaccination lines was abandoned.  Sadly, it would continue in most other denominations^[8] until eventually vaccine mandates were themselves removed.  It was a huge psychological blow for the unvaccinated, coming as it did after 262 days of lockdown, as well as for them, exclusion and targeted vilification.  This was especially hurtful, coming from those who were supposed to be their shepherds. 

Capitulation like this has had serious repercussions.  While it might have achieved some perceived short-term benefit, the church’s position, as being on board with the government, severely limited their ability to speak to and address increasing overreach and injustice. Regrettably, the church has been even more reluctant than the government to revisit their behaviour, impact and actions during COVID.^[9] There has been no hint of an apology to those locked out of church and ministry due to complying with and exceeding unjust laws often based on bad science.  Recent emails have surfaced showing that the protracted curfews themselves were not based on health advice^[10], and the vaccines were largely ineffective at preventing transmission.^[11]  Last month, the Australian Human Rights Commission report, titled Collateral Damage^[12], surveyed more than 5,000 Australians and claimed the avoidable “harms” were worsened by the government’s lack of compassion.”  A similar critique could be levelled at the church.  As with historic child abuse, the church will likely have to be eventually dragged to the table by the world. 

It has been encouraging, however, to see attempts to stand against recent government intrusion, as similar laws now come to NSW, which would tell gospel workers how and whom they can pray for and what subjects they can counsel people on.  An open letter responding to the NSW Conversion Practices Ban Act 2024, which is fast gathering signatures from many church leaders, declares, “We will continue to exercise orthodox Christian ministry and discipleship, including counselling and praying with individuals concerning the Christian view of sex, marriage, and gender.^[13]  It is no coincidence that the strongest voices opposing this latest government interference include a good number of those who spoke up during COVID.^[14] 

Presbyterian minister, Campbell Markham, who has been unflinching in the face of attempted government coercion, offers his own suggestion for a new code of conduct, on behalf of the church, in response to government overreach:

We have heard the threats of the … Government. Do not be dismayed! Preach the Word as you vowed to, the whole counsel of God. Correct, rebuke, and encourage! We have your backs. If you are abused we will stand next to you. If you are prosecuted we will pay your fines. If you are imprisoned we will visit you. We will make sure your family is well-cared for. Be strong and courageous! Do not be discouraged or afraid. Call each and every one to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ!^[15]

During COVID, the church was largely indistinguishable from the state or society. My hope is that the church would once again distinguish herself by standing up and out and not merely cede to increasing government overreach.  Proverbs 25:26 rightly says, “Like a muddy spring or a polluted well are the righteous who give way to the wicked.” 

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyvQ8o0CTqI Similarly, Australia’s leading religious persecution researcher and activist, Elizabeth Kendal, a person of prayer, was forced to stand down from her roles at one Melbourne Anglican congregation.  She is no longer allowed to pray freely and openly in accordance with her beliefs and conscience in the church of her choice. This right has been taken away by her Church itself, in submission to an ever-encroaching state.  https://markdurie.com/a-canary-in-the-anglican-coalmine

[2] https://campbellmarkham1970.blogspot.com/2024/05/will-we-respond-to-conversion-laws-on.html?m=1

[3] As I write this, the General Assembly of Australia is meeting to see if they can resolve this impasse.

[4] “Once again, the clear teaching of Scripture that Christ is the head of the Church is being undermined.” https://ap.org.au/2024/07/25/erastianism-in-the-church/

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/18/presbyterian-church-head-says-victorian-ban-on-gay-conversion-practices-should-be-ignored

[6] https://www.amazon.com.au/Defending-Conscience-Baptists-Reminded-Tyranny-ebook/dp/B0B6PJBM93/ref=sr_1_1

[7] “An overly risk-averse approach is very likely to send the message that the church is no different to every other bureaucratic institution that exists…I recently heard an intriguing thought from an American Presbyterian pastor, namely that centralisation in church bureaucracies inevitably leads to liberalism” https://ap.org.au/2024/07/30/managerialism-in-the-church/

[8] I was in discussion with a Seventh Day Adventist pastor who was similarly able to convince his denomination to overturn ministry segregation against the unvaccinated.

[9] https://caldronpool.com/the-silence-is-deafening

[10] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-04-20/melbourne-Covid-curfew-foi-documents-health-advice/105194726

[11] The Lancet would soon confirm what became obvious on the ground, that “the vaccine effect on reducing transmission is minimal.” https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00690-3/fulltext

[12] https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-03/AHRC%20Report%20COVID-19%20Pandemic%20Response%20Final.pdf

[13] https://openwindowsletter.com

[14] And there are evangelical leaders who largely defended the government during COVID, who are once again finding new and novel ways to go along with the government.

[15] https://campbellmarkham1970.blogspot.com/2024/05/will-we-respond-to-conversion-laws-on.html?m=1