COMPLIANCE

At 10:30pm, on the evening of 4 February 2021, the Victorian state government’s Legislative Council passed the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Bill 2021.

To quote the then-Premier Daniel Andrews, the Bill will ensure that "cruel and bigoted practices that seek to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity will be stamped out across Victoria."

The Bill (PDF) can be found here: Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Bill 2021.

Excerpts:

Part 1—Preliminary
Division 1—General
1 Purposes
The main purposes of this Act are—
   (a) to denounce and prohibit change or suppression practices ...

3 Objects of this Act
(1) The objects of this Act are—
   (a) to eliminate so far as possible the occurrence of change or suppression practices in Victoria ...

(2) In enacting this Act, it is the intention of the Parliament—
   (a) to denounce and give statutory recognition to the serious harm caused by change or suppression practices; and
   (b) to affirm that a person's sexual orientation or gender identity is not broken and in need of fixing; and
   (c) to affirm that no sexual orientation or gender identity constitutes a disorder, disease, illness, deficiency or shortcoming; and
   (d) to affirm that change or suppression practices are deceptive and harmful both to the person subject to the change or suppression practices and to the community as a whole. ...

5 Meaning of change or suppression practice
(1) In this Act, a change or suppression practice means a practice or conduct directed towards a person, whether with or without the person's consent—
   (a) on the basis of the person's sexual orientation or gender identity; and
   (b) for the purpose of—
      (i) changing or suppressing the sexual orientation or gender identity of the person; or
      (ii) inducing the person to change or suppress their sexual orientation or gender identity.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a practice or conduct is not a change or suppression practice if it—
   (a) is supportive of or affirms a person's gender identity or sexual orientation ... for the purpose of
      (i) assisting a person who is undergoing a gender transition; or
      (ii) assisting a person who is considering undergoing a gender transition; or
      (iii) assisting a person to express their gender identity...

(3) For the purposes of subsection
(1) a practice includes, but is not limited to the following—
   (a) providing a psychiatry or psychotherapy consultation, treatment or therapy, or any other similar consultation, treatment or therapy;
   (b) carrying out a religious practice, including but not limited to, a prayer based practice, a deliverance practice or an exorcism;
   (c) giving a person a referral for the purposes of a change or suppression practice being directed towards the person...

-----------------------------

On 16 February 2021, Victoria's then-governor the Honourable Linda Dessau AC, gave the Bill her royal assent.

The Bill came into effect on 16 February 2022.

In Victoria today, anyone found trying to suppress or change another person’s sexuality or gender identity will face a fine of up to $10,000 and/or a prison term of up to 10 years if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that their actions caused serious “serious injury” as defined by section 15 of the Crimes Act 1958: i.e. “an injury [to physical or mental health] (including the cumulative effect of more than one injury) that endangers life; or is substantial or protracted.”

In my role as a religious liberty analyst and advocate, I analysed the Bill on my Religious Liberty Monitoring blog:

see: Victoria, Australia: The Church of LGBTQ+’s War Against “Apostasy”
by Elizabeth Kendal, for Religious Liberty Monitoring, 26 Jan 2021

and: Australia: Victoria’s ‘Anti-Conversion’ Law Passes in Upper House 
by Elizabeth Kendal, for Religious Liberty Monitoring, 21 Feb 2021

Anyone requiring further explanation about the Act can find all the information they might need on the website of the Victorian state government's Equal Opportunity Human Rights Commission at: About the Act , which includes government-supplied guidelines For people of faith, professionals and other communities.

excerpts:

"...A person’s sexual orientation and gender identity do not need to be fixed; they are not broken."

"Change or suppression practices are not supported by medical research. There is no evidence that sexual orientation or gender identity can be changed or suppressed. Not only do these practices not work, but they are also deeply harmful."

What is Allowed...

to sum up in two words: affirmation and assistance

Some religious people have found comfort in the following lines:

"Examples of activities that would not be prohibited include:

• a religious leader delivering a sermon which expresses a general statement of belief
• explaining a religious view of relationships."

HOWEVER, these lines -- which read almost like exemptions -- are immediately followed by what reads like an ominous warning:

"These two activities may be considered a change and suppression practice if they are directed at a person for the purpose of changing or suppressing their sexual orientation or gender identity."

I would suggest that, with the threat of being accused hanging over their necks like a sword of Damocles, religious leaders and church members will likely radically self-censor - probably to the point of silence (which, of course, is the intention) - so as to "stay safe".

Now that the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act is in force, the key question for the Church in Victoria must be: to whom will we submit -- the state government OR the Lord Jesus Christ?

Who is the Head of the Church -- Christ or the government? Is Romans 13:1-5 absolute or conditional? Should we lie because the government demands that we lie? Or do we commit to obeying God and speaking truth despite the risk? Surely (to quote Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn) we should, at the very least, commit to “a personal nonparticipation in lies!”

What is the Church to do when the government overreaches, going beyond its divine mandate and sphere to dictate to the Church, medical professionals, and parents, what they must believe and teach, and how they may serve, practice, protect or enact care?

I believe that, with its Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act, the Victorian State Government has indeed overreached and is now violating the fundamental religious, professional and parental rights of Victorians.

Consequently, I maintain that this is an illegitimate law; one we need not obey! Indeed, it is a law the Church must resist.

I am not proposing that we respond with loud protests or belligerence, just that we follow the model of Daniel. When an overreaching King Darius ruled that no-one should pray to or petition anyone but the king for the next 30 days, Daniel “prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously” (Daniel 6:10).

Now that the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act is in force, churches need to be praying for divine protection against predatory complainants and vexatious complaints. God is fully able to protect us!

However, if in his providence he does not, we should follow the model of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego who, when called before a furious, overreaching and threatening king, to account for their faithful disobedience, declared: “O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. ¹⁷ If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. ¹⁸ But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.” (Daniel 3:16-18).

The Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act essentially enforces mandatory affirmation of radical gender ideology with NO exemptions for people of faith, medical professionals, or even parents. It must be noted, it is overwhelmingly the case that children presenting with gender dysphoria usually have multiple psychiatric comorbidities. Many have already been diagnosed with autism, anxiety or depression; some have been sexually abused; many have suffered long-term bullying; some have intellectual disabilities. These children are among the most vulnerable children in society. The Church should be protecting and helping these vulnerable children, not affirming them on a path to experimental and profoundly damaging hormonal intervention, chemical castration and irreversible gender surgery.

The Church in Victoria (or Australia for that matter) has not faced this situation before.

Every Christian denomination, religious community, medical professional and parent will have to decide how to respond to this draconian law.

I guarantee it will not be the last -- other anti-free-speech laws are already on the table!

With this in mind, I would like to recommend the following book:

“FAITHFUL DISOBEDIENCE” by Wangi Yi and Others
Writings on Church and State from a Chinese House Church Movement.
Editors: Hannah Nation and J.D.Tseng
Published by IVP Academic, Drovers Grove, IL, USA
© 2022, Center for House Church Theology fro Urban China

excerpts:

from the Introduction, by Hannah Nation
"...the Chinese house churches are the living inheritors of the Western churches’ older theological debates, and they are poised to be the next frontier of church-state theology.” (page 13)

Wang Yi writes (chapter 6): [In the early 1950s] “After the government issued three threats, other church leaders felt that a storm was coming. They lost hope in the word in which they believed and also the sovereignty of God in history. They came to believe that if they did not compromise, the church would be thoroughly ruined. Because of their small faith, thinking that they were suffering for Christ, the accepted co-dependency on politics.” (p70)

… “Many others [church leaders] just followed the trend out of fear.” (p70)

“When the godless totalitarians came, the Christian missionary effort that took root in China over a period of 150 years became like strands of grain in the field, turning frail and falling in the twinkling of an eye.” (p73)

“The value of the Communist Party is to inform all intellectuals of one thing, that is, that their knowledge and convictions are not sufficient to sustain their character before the dictator. Their backbones can be easily broken." (p73)

Wang Yi writes (Chapter 13): "I have seen many Chinese churches die in spirit as a result of their lack of preparation. ...What spiritual benefit does the current church-state conflict bring to the church and to Christians? How is this conflict God's way to shepherd us?
1) The possibility of persecution is a test to see if, out of our fear of death, we choose to become slaves...
2) Our fears show us the deep-rooted servility living in our hearts. The church-state conflict is a test revealing the slavish residue living in our bodies.
4) The church-state conflict can help us determine whether the obedience we display as we live in Chinese society flows from a slavish submission to authority, or out of a God-loving perseverance; this conflict helps us see whether we are yielding to powerful authority or are showing courage as sheep among wolves. No matter what our reaction, once fear has spread, any reaction based on fear is not one driven by love.
13) ...Conflict between church and state puts an end to any false state of peace and instead reveals the universal truth of continual, ongoing spiritual warfare. In this war, the real hindrance is not the world or the government, but the power of sin and fear in a Christian's life.
14) Every church-state conflict is a moment for God to cleanse his church. ... 'Freedom is for wide distribution; tension is for selection.' (quote from house church father, Yang Anxi.)

Wang Yi writes (chapter 14): The Lord has given us too much, but we have given him too little, because the gospel has not completely removed our worship of kings, for you will worship whomever you fear. Well, let us boldly admit that we are afraid of the Communist Party. Believers are afraid of losing their public offices; pastors are afraid of losing their churches; men are afraid of not being able to make money; women are afraid of being fined for having children. Who is most afraid of the church being persecuted? Not the believers, because when the church is persecuted, they can simply switch to another one. It is the pastors and church leaders who fear persecution of the church most, because once the church is persecuted, they could lose their jobs. And to start all over again is difficult. ... So sadly, in the Chinese church today, it is not the believers but the pastors who are most afraid of the Communist Party. (p187)

----------------------------------

This article, by legal academic Dr Ben Saunders, is both insightful and challenging.

Governance as a Problem
Risk Aversion, Compliance and the Church: Some Practical Suggestions
by Dr Ben Saunders, for Australian Presbyterian, Friday 9 Aug 2024

While Dr Saunders does not specifically address the issue of Victoria's Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act, he does address the threat posed to Gospel ministry by a confused, unprepared and overly compliant Church.

excerpts:

(2) Institutional tails and the ministry dogs

The institutional tail should not wag the ministry dog. The institutional church is merely trellis for the vine of gospel ministry. …

Too often the interests of the institutional church are placed above the gospel. … Gospel ministry and the flourishing of congregations are too often subordinated to legal risk and the priorities of the institutional church.

(4) Rethink our attitude to risk

The existence of risk is not, in and of itself, a reason not to do something. In short, the church needs a more nuanced approach to risk.

(5) The nature of church power

The church needs to stop mandating compliance with (a particular interpretation of) civil law. …

Theologically, church officers have no power whatsoever to enforce compliance with (a particular interpretation of) legal requirements. Attempting to do so borders on an abuse of church power.

(6) Cultivate a posture of disobedience

My final proposal will be controversial. It is that the church today needs to start cultivating a posture of disobedience to civil law.

… It needs to remember the limits to the power of civil governments. Of course, we should not needlessly pick fights. But the time is coming, and now is, when civil law will stifle the gospel.

Compliance is not an absolute good. The increase in government law – and more pointedly, the way in which the church responds to those laws – is squeezing the church into a particular mould. This is a mould of legalism and bureaucracy where the interests of the institutional church routinely predominate over ministry imperatives. And where gospel ministry is at risk of being crushed under the collective weight of well-intentioned rules, interpreted in the most risk-averse manner possible, and mandated across entire denominations.

-----------------------------

BIBLICAL MANDATE

Is the Biblical mandate -- "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities" -- absolute or conditional?

"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. ² Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. ³ For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, ⁴ for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. ⁵ Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience." (Romans 13:1-5 ESV)

1) Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament.

excerpts

"Paul calls on believers to 'submit' to governing authorities rather than to 'obey' them; and Paul's choice of words may be important to our interpretation and application of Paul's exhortation. To submit is to recognize one's subordinate place in a hierarchy, to acknowledge as a general rule that certain people or institutions have 'authority' over us. In addition to governing authorities (cf. also Tit. 3:1), Paul urges Christians to submit to their spiritual leaders (1 Cor. 16:16) and to 'one another' (Eph. 5:21); and he calls Christian slaves to submit to their masters (Tit.2:9), Christian prophets to submit to other prophets (1 Cor. 14:32), and Christian wives to submit to their husbands (1 Cor. 14:34 [?]; Eph. 5:24; Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5). It is this general posture toward government that Paul demands here of Christians. And such a posture will usually demand that we obey what the governing authorities tell us to do. But perhaps our submission to government is compatible with disobedience to government in certain exceptional circumstances. For heading the hierarchy of relations in which Christians find themselves is God; and all subordinate 'submission' must always be measured in relationship to our all-embracing submission to him." (page 797)

"Paul demands a 'submission' to government: not strict and universal obedience. 'Submission,' as we pointed out in the exegesis on v.1, denotes a recognition of the place that God has given government in the ordering of the world. The Christian submits to government by acknowledging this divinely ordained status of government and its consequent right to demand the believer's allegiance. In most cases, then, Christian submission to government will involve obeying what government tells the Christian to do. But government does not have absolute rights over the the believer, for government, like every human institution, is subordinate to God himself. The ultimate claim of God, who stands at the peak of the hierarchy of relationships in which the Christian is placed, is always assumed. This means, then, that Christians may continue to 'submit' to a particular government (acknowledging their subordination to it generally) even as they, in obedience to a 'higher' authority, refuse to do, in a given instance, what that government requires." (page 809)

2) R.C. Sproul, The Righteous Shall Live By Faith, ROMANS, St Andrew's Expositional Commentary.

excerpts

"We are called to submit to authorities at every stage of life, During our youth we are under the authority of our parents. While in school we are under the authority of our teachers and principal. After obtaining a driving license we are under the authority of the police department as they patrol the highways. All of our lives we are under the authority of state and federal government."

"... Christians are called to be extraordinary models of civil obedience ..."

"Conflict occurs when the civil magistrate commands or forbids something that conflicts with the commandments of God. In such cases, not only may you disobey the civil magistrate, but you must disobey." (from chapter 50, "Church and State", Romans 13:1-3)

3) Daniel M. Doriani, ROMANS, Reformed Expository Commentary

excerpts

"In a nation that knows Scripture, corrupt leaders can quote Romans 13 to justify their cruelty or oppression, claiming, 'God himself established my rule and our system, so you must submit.' ...

"But that is not the whole truth about government -- and a fragment of the truth can be more deceptive than a lie. We add, therefore, than an unjust or corrupt political system can be God's punishment, as he lets people go in their sin (Rom. 1:24) ... [And] while submission to authority is the norm, no human authority is absolute. When God's law and human commands clash, the apostles declare, 'We must obey God rather than men' (Acts 5:29). Thus, 'if the state commands what God forbids, or forbids what God commands,' it is our duty to 'disobey the state so we can obey God'." [quoting John Stott, Romans: God's Good News for the World, The Bible Speaks Today]

4) R.Kent Hughes, ROMANS: Righteousness From Heaven, Preaching the Word.

excerpts

"'Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's' (Matthew 22:20,21) . With this single sentence our Lord established the validity of human government, while at the same time setting its limits." ...

"'Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities' (v1) 'Everyone' is emphatic: very believer. So strong is the thought that verse 2 concludes, 'Consequently, he who rebels against the authorities is resisting God!. Taken by itself, without any other Scriptural illumination, that statement can be wrongly interpreted to teach blind devotion to the state regardless of what it commands."

Hughes gives three areas in which a Christian should resist authority.
A Christian should resist:
1) "if he is asked to violate a command of God" ... "The command of God always take precedence over the command of government. There are no exceptions."
2) "when asked to do an immoral act" ... "Christians must never think it is okay to commit immoral or unethical acts simply because the state has requested it."
3) if they are required to "go against their Christian conscience in order to obey the government." ... "Believers must never sin against their conscience."
(from chapter 26, "Heaven's Citizens and Human Government", Romans 13:1-7)

5) Stuart Olyott, "The Gospel as it Really Is: Romans Simply Explained", Welwyn Commentaries (Evangelical Press)

excerpts

"The state is not an absolute authority, but a delegated one, and the One who gives it its authority is God Himself. ... When the state commands something displeasing to Him who it its authority, then it has overstepped the mark, and is demanding more than it is entitled to do. In such circumstances it is obviously not to be obeyed; indeed, resistance to such ungoldly demands is a Christian duty.

We must render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's (Mark 12:17). When Caesar oversteps the mark, we must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29). This is what Peter and John had to do in Acts 4:19, as did many others before them (see Dan. 3 and 6), and as many others have done during the history of the church." ...

"At the time when [Paul] was writing, the state was generally being very beneficent to those who proclaimed the gospel. Systematic persecution of Christians by the state had not yet begun." [NB (E.Kendal) - Roman officials took Paul into custody, and subsequently had him transferred, for his own protection (Acts 21 and 23). Then, when Festus wanted to hand him over to the Jews, Paul appealed to Caesar, for his own protection (Acts 25).] "It is not surprising therefore that Paul does not deal with the subject of when the state is to be resisted." ...

"We must be perfectly clear about the limit of the mandate given to those in authority. ... When they ... are acting within their mandate then we are obliged to comply. But should they demand what God, in His Word, forbids, then we are not bound to obey them. We cannot obey a delegated authority when He who is Absolute Authority decrees otherwise." ...

"Where honest people are found to be living in fear of the authorities, it is obvious that those authorities must have overstepped their divine mandate."  (from pages 119-125, "The Christian and the State.")

In April 2023, the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne (ADOM) updated its Code of Conduct for Child Safety and Wellbeing.

Allegedly, a legal firm was commissioned to make detailed recommendations to ensure the Code would comply with all state laws. Those recommendations were then adopted by Archbishop in Council.

Code of Conduct for Child Safety and Wellbeing (updated 2023)

One article in particular sent my alarm bells ringing:

Unacceptable Behaviours (pages 6-8)

6.2   All people covered by this Code must not:
(y) engage in any conduct to change or suppress a child’s gender identity or sexual orientation;

Article 9.       Related Legislation
Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021

-----------------

The Code of Conduct essentially obliges all paid and volunteer workers in the ADOM to submit to / comply with / obey the state government's Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act.

Signing the Code is a mandatory requirement to engage in ministry of any kind. This applies to those in paid ministry and to members who volunteer their service in music, welcoming, tech, maintenance and hospitality (etc)! Only those who sign the Code can represent their church at synod: i.e. can vote on legislation!

Those who don't sign must be stood down from all their ministries.

For paid clergy, the stakes are very high indeed!

It is deeply concerning that when the ADOM released the amended Code of Conduct it did so without a letter of explanation.

It is becoming apparent that many church pastors and members have signed the amended Code essentially on trust / in good faith, without understanding the meaning, purpose and implications of Article 6.2 (y).

Nowhere is this likely to be more the case than among African, Asian and Middle Eastern ethnic congregations -- congregations known to be deeply conservative.

ETHNIC CONGREGATIONS

Comprised largely of refugees for whom English is a second or third language -- e.g. Christians who have fled war in Burma/Myanmar or Islamic jihad in Sudan or totalitarianism in Vietnam or Islamic persecution in Pakistan or violent Hindu nationalism in India or Islamic expansion in Nigeria or suffocating repression in China (etc. etc.) -- ethnic congregations will understandably be focused more on survival and healing than on the complexities of Victorian legislation and the ideological machinations of Spring Street.

I would imagine there is not a single African, Asian and Middle Eastern paid or volunteer worker in the ADOM who would sign-up to Article 6.2y if they actually understood what it was requiring of them. I think most, if not all, would be aghast to know that the ADOM has had them sign-up/promise to affirm and assist children identifying as same-sex attracted or transgender. Even if they believe the issue/situation is unlikely to arise in their ethnic congregation, I think they would be mortified to learn that the ADOM is advancing the unBiblical, sexually progressive ideology of Vanity Fair.

To not explain the what and why of the amendments seems, to me, to be either: 1) wickedly underhanded, 2) embarrassingly incompetent, OR 3) unforgivably naive.

My personal position is that Article 6.2 (y) should be removed and replaced with a non-controversial, non-ideological and non-divisive statement such as: All people covered by this Code must not . . . (y) abuse, assault, bully, harass, marginalise, intimidate or terrorise ANY child for ANY reason: not race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, economic or social status, or any other characteristic, protected or otherwise.

Failure to do this can only result in conflict and division.
Lord have mercy!

 

On Wednesday 9 October 2024, Mrs Morag Zwartz presented a petition before the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Victoria (PCV).

The primary aims of the petition were to illuminate, educate and embolden Presbyterians as the denomination - like all denominations here in Victoria - attempts to plot a path forward with regards to the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act.

What follows here is the full text of her speech, which was (according to various sources) very well received.

---------------------

Petition Speech
by Mrs Morag Zwartz
for the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of Victoria (PCV)
date: Wednesday 9 October 2024

A few words from Moses, and from Psalm 119:

Love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him, for the Lord is your life.

Oh how I love your law, I meditate on it all day long. Your commands make me wiser than my enemies… I will speak of your statutes before kings, and will not be put to shame, for I delight in your commandments because I love them.

This law - the Dan Andrews [Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition] law, opposes God‘s law and sets itself up in direct opposition to God.

Denying the truth of his good creation, it flagrantly dishonours God and scoffs at his word. It threatens and enslaves his people and defies the reality of the created human body - the good and beautiful, perfect pinnacle of God's creation.

What is more, it overturns the foundational premise of language and meaning and truth. Not surprisingly, it stands atop the lofty but highly shaky platform of these ideologies: Marxism, humanism, atheism, Gnosticism, feminism, queer theory, and gender critical theory, each providing its own potent strand of poison, and coming at us straight from the father of lies.

Did God really make male and female, perfect asymmetrical beings, in order that they might become one flesh, and bear a reflection of the transcendent bride and bridegroom? Or was he omitting some critical variations on male/female chromosomes for them to be discovered centuries later?

Biology and anatomy have become slaves of a depraved ideology that re-interprets sex as something separate from gender, and asserts that this gender is non-binary, uncertain, fluid, and assigned at birth rather than revealed at birth. You can be whomever you chose, as a sexual being, on any given day.

Preschool aged children are being told this in cute picture books, and schools everywhere are ensuring that sex education refutes the traditional belief that gender accords with chromosomes. Paediatrician Dr John Whitehall says our academics assert we need to institutionalise the teaching of gender fluidity at all levels of education. All children should be made aware there is no binary difference between boys and girls, and that change is possible.

So now, we must believe there are 58 (and counting) gender terms - agender, bigender, trigender, demigender, demifluid, demiflux, pangender and so on.

And we are to believe that a significant number of people are not really male or female and may be either, or neither, or both, or fluctuating, or fluid. Many of the gender ideologues insist that we all exist on a gender spectrum, somewhere between male and female.

You need to know that none of this is accidental. It's not chance, nor the natural progression of culture, or of science-enabled discoveries. No, there were not always multi genders out there waiting to be discovered.

What we are witnessing is a perverse and unrestrained ideology conjured up and promoted by highly influential philosophers, feminists, critical theorists, certain academics, Marxists and activists. The shift we are being jolted by is planned, intentional, contrived, and pushed by people with an agenda - and they are far from coy about acknowledging this agenda.

I have spent recent months reading and listening to many of these people as well as their critics. Much of what I learnt is too appalling or offensive to describe in public - but I am going to give you an idea.

Two brief examples of what is upstream from this Dan Andrews law: arguably the philosopher with the most profound influence in the culture of post-modernism - in which we all live - is French intellectual Michel Foucault. Foucault is now known to have been sexually abusing young boys in Tunisia where he was a teacher, was sexually promiscuous, advocating the normalisation of the gay sub-culture, sodomy and pederasty, and no age of consent at all. He died of Aids in 1984.

Second example, John Money (I’ll spare you his near contemporary Alfred Kinsey – I doubt any of us has the stomach for that – but note, we all live in the filthy swamp of his depraved sex experiments). Money was a psychologist and sexologist, with a PhD from Harvard, professor at Johns Hopkins University for many years and claimed to be the world's leading sexologist of the late 20th century. He is considered to be the founder of gender theory and the trans movement. He is mostly referenced for his research on human sexual behaviour and gender, being the first to seriously posit that a child is not born with a fixed biological sex - he is a blank slate at birth and his sex is determined by his rearing - malleable, a social construct in other words. You may know of his bizarre and catastrophic experiment on twin boys to prove his theory about gender, which ended with both men taking their lives.

After a botched circumcision on one twin Money set out to prove that he could be raised successfully as a girl. (What could go wrong?) The rest of the story is horrific and cruel beyond words, one twin describing the clinic visits over the years as torturous and abusive. Money allegedly forced the boys into depraved sexual acts to test his theories. The experimental subject found out the truth about himself at age 14, and tried to revert to being a male. He spent his entire life traumatised and deeply depressed, ending it by gunshot when he was 38 years old. Child psychiatrist Dr Miriam Grossman has described Money as an arrogant psychopath, a degenerate and disturbed man.

But here's the thing. In the 1970s and 80s Money was ubiquitous and famous - highly sought after for television appearances and magazine and newspaper interviews, constantly being quoted across the media, and always pleading for sexual liberation. What wasn't mentioned was that he himself was a sexual experimenter, believed in paedophilia and incest, lived a libertine lifestyle, and when forced, described himself as bisexual.

You won't believe it when I tell you that Money maintained (he died in 2007) that his experiment was a success - and what's more his case study's results have been used to justify thousands of sex realignment surgeries and gender affirming interventions since then.

I wish there was time to tell you more about the genesis of this craziness and about the ideologues with agendas to destroy the family, the historical record, the educational system, the very culture we inhabit and the faith we live by. Many of the most ardent voices issuing warnings are not Christians but doctors and journalists and academics. I urge you, seek out these brilliant, honest, brave people who are exposing the evil of gender theory and queer theory. (I have footnotes at the end if you would like a copy of this address.)

All expose the darkness of woke and progressive ideology, and the gender revolution. You see, in this twisted paradigm to state that a new born baby was a girl, let's say, would be to assert power over one who is powerless and to impose on her the rigidity of western, patriarchal sexual dominance. SHE must decide her gender, in her own time. The only model of care permitted everywhere, is gender affirming care. If a child expresses doubt or anxiety or a wish to be the boy or girl they are not, doctors and gender clinics immediately affirm this notion and set up a plan of treatment involving puberty blockers, followed by cross-sex hormones, followed often by surgery. (By the way, puberty blockers are not just arresting sexual development, they are retarding critical brain development and ensuring sterility.) Tens of thousands of young people are submitting to physical mutilation and thousands are trying to revert back to their original body. Most end up with ongoing pain, infertility, dysfunction, sterility, and physical and emotional trauma, all of which Dr Grossman describes as a man-made catastrophe.

The last time mental illness was treated with surgery was the notorious fad for lobotomies – a gigantic blot on the medical profession’s record. Tens of thousands of people were lobotomised, and surprise, surprise, this barbaric procedure won a Nobel Prize. The Eugenics Movement also comes to mind – remember many thousands of people were forcibly sterilised in the mid twentieth century. These two share an ugly truth with the current medical trend in chopping off healthy breasts and penises - widespread approval and complicity from the medical establishment. Seriously, you could not fathom the state of many of these young bodies when the chemicals and knives have finished with them.

I know you are concerned and compassionate, and may genuinely believe there are people with a congenital problem that makes them feel they cannot function properly. But the reality is this: every single person - and this includes the infinitesimally small number of people born with ambiguous genitalia - has reproductive organs that produce either large gametes or small gametes, either ova or sperm, which means that the reproductive organs of the human body are indeed binary.

But the scaffolding has been laid. Ideology has replaced the science of biology and anatomy, and truth and reality have been scuttled. It may help you - it does me - to grasp this warped paradigm of gender ideology (in fact post-modernism in general) if you abandon all words and concepts of a stable nature. Predictability, steadiness, certainty, reliability, historicity, visibility, truth, clarity. Put them in a basket and throw it out the window. You are left with the post-modern take on bodies: uncertain, unfixed, fluid, unreliable, unknowable, and chaotic. Confusion and chaos are the dominant drivers here, and the dominant outcome also.

Yes, this is happening here in Victoria, as in the UK and Canada and New Zealand, and Europe and the US and South America. You might know that the Rainbow Libraries Tool kit was sent to all 290 libraries in Victoria a few weeks ago. It advised staff not to assume gender pronouns for primary aged children. It says "it is important to recognise that especially for young people, identity and sexuality can shift or evolve over time". It says to leave room for them to express a change in their identity and prompt them if they still go by the same pronouns. "Checking in casually ‘do you still prefer he/him pronouns?’ can let a young person know that you are safe, accepting and flexible… and so is the library."

Will it surprise you when, shortly, even more adolescents turn up in doctors clinics with gender confusion and anxiety?

Of course, redefinition and euphemism abound in this murky world. What was once gender disorder has been renamed gender dysphoria. Self-care is actually self-harm. Gender affirming care is really biology denying care. Being inclusive is code for excluding people like us. Being your authentic self is really being your created self. Top surgery is really breast amputation. (As Dr Grossman wrote her book Lost in Trans Nation: A Child Psychiatrist’s Guide out of the Madness, last year there were 45,375 girls seeking Go Fund Me donations for this surgery.) Nullo or Eunuch means genital nullification – the removal of all external genitalia. But you can have a penis and a vagina if you wish – it’s about custom-made genitals. (No, I’m not making this up.) Bullying - you've noticed how this word has been weaponised against all who might possibly have a problem with gender lies and fabricated bodies - bullying could be just saying to your classmate "but yesterday you were a BOY!" To be safe, to feel safe, is really to be left alone to your delusion. Same sex attraction? Well, that’s homosexuality. Minor attracted person or intergenerational sex – they’re pederasty or paedophilia.

Yes, they’ve worn us down. They’ve smothered us with their ideology and frightened us with slurs of bigot, extreme right wing, transphobic, homophobic, hateful and more. Here we are, accommodating and buying into their language and thought reform, the ideology that pervades everything from this act to drag queen story hour and the ubiquitous diversity equity and inclusion requirements. By the way, can we afford to build a third toilet in all our churches?

We’ve coped by bowing to government edicts that have no place in our churches. Worse, we’ve bought the lie of collective guilt and will forever more, for example, spend time and money on reminding our people not to harm children, as if all that government training and retraining is restraining a potential tidal wave of child abuse in the Presbyterian Church! Really?

We also bought the lie that we must close churches and segregate congregations or we might all die of a virus! We bought their panic meal and joined in with the death count obsession. We covered up and segregated and separated and isolated and ostracised and rejected and we said “Thank God” and rolled up our sleeves. And we reminded the world once again, that we are Just-Like-Them. Fearful, willingly believing lies and propaganda, doing what wicked governments ask of us in order to NOT be ridiculed.

So, if, as one of our ministers wrote in The Gospel Coalition, love for our neighbours would have us support and try to enforce government initiatives we may object to, does this mean love and government compliance would also require us to condone and even support, indirectly, these radical, untested, and dangerous sex change treatments which will ensure young people are life-long medical and mental health patients?

We must not join in with this dismantling of truth and reality. We must hold the line of truth even though that line has been shifting under our feet – to our shame – for decades.

From my enquiries into other denominations I have learnt that there are only two responses to this Dan Andrews change or suppression law:

One, they have hastened to lawyers for advice and intend to find a way to comply. Or, secondly, they plan to ignore the law and carry on as before, hoping to stay below the radar.

I insist that the biblical, the godly, the honourable response is to openly declare our resistance.

We must stop turning our backs to the enemy, in defensive mode. We must desist from being good little winsome-ites. Our posture must be bold, fearless, unshaken. How can we look the enemy in the eye when we have our backs to them?

The world no longer cares what we think, but here is a rare opportunity to be heard, if only we will speak, and not run! Here is our chance to be light! To illuminate the darkness of the death culture we inhabit, and rescue such as would grasp at that light, to offer an alternative for those thousands of young people gripped by fears and phobias and confusion and depression. If we don’t protect them, who will? Certainly not the government.

Besides, here is a shocking truth: we DO believe in change and suppression! Change and suppression are at the heart of Christian repentance, conversion, change, and rebirth. They go hand in hand with restraint, denial, and obedience to God. We cannot and must not deny this.

Here are four reasons why we must not only decide to, but declare publicly, that we will not abide by this law:

1)   The state is entitled to a presumption of compliance on our part. Historically, this has been our position. It would be dishonest of us to be less than open and transparent about our intention.

2)   It would be cowardly of us to go quietly about our business, waiting, heads down, fearful, and self-censoring. I am told this is already happening.

3)  Church people – and ministers – need to know our stance. Not to go searching for it in desperation. All need to be confident that the church is behind them, not fearing being picked off one by one and left to suffer persecution alone. There is courage in a united front, a strong, biblical stand emboldens all, to preach and teach with impunity.

4)  This reason is the most important, and critical if we are to take ourselves seriously as those who love and obey God and wish to make him known. Two words: outrage and indignation.

How DARE Dan Andrews and the state dictate to us how to conduct ourselves as followers of the one true God?

How DARE they pervert his word and deny his creative brilliance?

How DARE they inveigle their way between us and our God, the almighty sovereign one?

We must say “how DARE they?” with young Jonathan as he charged off with only his armour bearer to defend God’s honour before the Philistines.

We must say “how DARE he?” with young David as he rushed off to teach Goliath a lesson about the one true God.

We must say “how DARE they?” with Phineas as he grabbed his spear to deal a death blow to Baal worship in the midst of God’s people. (And what a commendation from God! “He was as zealous as I am for my honour”!)

James sounds fired up too, when he says “You adulterous people! Don’t you know that friendship with the world is enmity toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”

King Hezekiah may have been weeping as he spread out that terrifying letter from Sennacherib and prayed: “Oh Lord God of Israel….. Give ear Oh Lord and hear, open your eyes Oh Lord and see, listen to the words Sennacherib has sent to insult the living God…..” He begs for deliverance, “so that all kingdoms on earth may know that you alone, Oh Lord, are God.”

And, in the end, so it is for us. This is about God and his honour, and his glory, and how we must make him known.

We would do well to adopt the exquisite concern for God’s honour shown by the Syrian army general Naaman, when, after his glorious healing from leprosy at the hand of Elisha, he pleaded an exemption for his necessary entering of the temple of Rimmon with his master the king, on his return home.

I don’t want to give anyone the impression that I will ever pay heed to any god other than the God of Israel until the day I die, was the sentiment expressed – and acknowledged – by Elisha. No compromise! No hint of compromise! God and God alone!

We must share this vigilance and zeal to uphold the name of God in our churches and in the public square.

And such vigilance would require a resounding NO to this wicked Change or Suppression law.

----------

Books and titles referenced: Dr Miriam Grossman - her book Lost in Trans Nation: A child psychiatrist's guide out of the madness (this makes absolutely harrowing reading); Gabriele Kuby, The Global Sexual Revolution: Destruction of Freedom in the name of Freedom (this is a German perspective); Helen Joyce, TRANS: When ideology meets Reality (this is a British perspective); Abigail Shrier, Irreversible Damage: the transgender craze seducing our daugters; James Lindsey, The Marxification of Education; Logan Lancing, The Queering of the American Child; Alex Newman, Indoctrinating our Children to Death; Carl Trueman, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self.