Expulsion and Conscience: The Canberra Baptist Church, same-sex marriage, and the limits of religious association in Australian Law

The recent expulsion of Canberra Baptist Church from the NSW/ACT Baptist Association is a striking example of the ongoing tension between religious freedom, civil rights, and the evolving landscape of faith communities in Australia. This decision, made in May 2025 after nearly a century of affiliation, came as a direct response to the church’s public support for same-sex marriage and its refusal to adopt the Association’s conservative doctrinal stance. The story has resonated far beyond the Baptist world, raising important questions about the legal boundaries of religious association, the rights of faith communities to self-govern, and the protection of individual conscience within religious bodies.

At the heart of this controversy is the Association’s constitutional amendment, which now defines marriage as a lifelong union between one man and one woman, ordained by God. Churches and ministers who do not support this view face disaffiliation and loss of accreditation. Canberra Baptist Church, in its submission and public statements, has argued that such a requirement is contrary to the Baptist tradition of freedom of conscience and the autonomy of the local church. They point out that Baptists have historically resisted centralised authority, instead valuing the right of each congregation to discern God’s will in their own context. For Canberra Baptist, the Good News of Jesus is for all people without qualification, and their community includes both those who hold traditional views of marriage and those who affirm same-sex relationships. Their approach is founded  in a deep commitment to welcome, inclusion, and the belief that people of faith can, after prayerful study, reach different conclusions on complex issues.

The legal issues raised by this expulsion are complex. Australian law generally recognises the right of religious organisations to determine their own membership and doctrinal standards. The High Court has acknowledged an implied freedom of religion, but this does not mean religious bodies are immune from all forms of legal regulation. The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but it also provides exemptions for religious bodies in certain contexts. The scope of these exemptions is often contested, especially when the actions of a religious association affect employment, service provision, or the rights of individuals within the church. In the Canberra Baptist case, the expulsion is primarily an internal matter of association, but if it leads to the removal of accredited ministers or impacts employment, there could be grounds for legal challenge under anti-discrimination law.

Courts in Australia are generally reluctant to intervene in the internal affairs of religious bodies unless there is a breach of contract, trust, or statutory duty. However, the principle of procedural fairness may apply if the Association’s own rules require a fair process for expulsion. The Canberra Baptist Church’s experience echoes international developments, such as the expulsion of inclusive churches from US Baptist conventions and the UK’s Pemberton v Inwood case, where courts have upheld the right of religious bodies to enforce doctrinal discipline, provided it is consistent with their rules and the law.

What makes the Canberra Baptist case particularly significant is its emphasis on the Baptist principles of local church autonomy and freedom of conscience. The church’s submission is a thoughtful critique of the Association’s process, highlighting the lack of genuine biblical discussion and the dangers of imposing uniformity on issues where Christians have historically disagreed. They argue that the Association’s position on marriage fails to acknowledge the diversity of biblical texts and practices, ignores different ways of interpreting scripture for today’s Australia, and is inadequate in extending care and compassion to people in their congregations and communities. The church also warns that such a narrow focus on one issue risks weakening the mission of the church and stunting its ability to reach future generations.

This story is not just about one church or one denomination. It is part of a larger conversation about the role of religion in a diverse society, and about how faith communities can remain true to their core beliefs while also responding to changing social norms. The Canberra Baptist Church’s expulsion challenges all religious bodies to reflect on how they balance tradition and inclusion, authority and conscience, unity and diversity. It also raises important legal questions about the limits of religious freedom, the reach of anti-discrimination law, and the responsibilities of faith communities in a modern democracy.

The debate within the NSW/ACT Baptist community, as highlighted by Adjunct Professor Thorwald Lorenzen, is a microcosm of the broader struggle facing many faith traditions in Australia today.  These themes are explored in greater depth in my book, Faithfulness in Service: The Evolution of Anglican Doctrine and Civil Rights in Australia. There, I examine how similar tensions have played out within the Anglican Church of Australia, particularly in relation to the Faithfulness in Service code of conduct. The Anglican experience, like that of the Baptists, reveals how questions of doctrine, governance, and civil rights are not merely abstract debates but have real consequences for individuals and communities. My research highlights how legal cases, constitutional frameworks, and evolving social values intersect with the lived experience of faith, and how churches are increasingly called to navigate the delicate balance between upholding tradition and embracing justice and inclusion.

The Canberra Baptist Church’s story is a timely reminder that the struggle for justice, dignity, and inclusion is ongoing. It calls on all of us, whether inside or outside the church, to engage in open and respectful dialogue, to recognise the inherent dignity of every individual, and to ensure that our laws and institutions reflect both the principles of justice and the realities of a changing world. As I argue in my book, the future of faith communities in Australia will depend on their willingness to listen, to learn, and to find new ways of being faithful, ways that honour both their deepest convictions and the diversity of the society in which they serve.