Exposing Corruption and Spiritual Abuse: Fraud and Deceptive Conduct by the Sydney Diocese at St Paul’s Bankstown

Spiritual Bullying & Brainwashing at St Paul’s: The AHRC & ICAC Must Act – More Damning Evidence Emerges

This is our fifth story in this series exposing recent observations from the 'Friends SaintPauls' YouTube channel, which have brought alarming new details to light. The unfolding situation at St Paul's Anglican Church in Bankstown reveals a deeply concerning pattern of spiritual manipulation, potential legal breaches, and coercive tactics employed by church leaders. As the Anglican Diocese of Sydney moves forward with its redevelopment plans, significant ethical and human rights issues are becoming increasingly apparent. It is imperative that ICAC & The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) conduct a thorough investigation to ensure accountability and justice. The evidence continues to mount, demanding an end to the silence.

A Church Under Siege: The History

St Paul’s Anglican Church has been a vital spiritual and community hub in Bankstown for decades. Now, it faces demolition to make way for a commercial redevelopment project championed by the Diocese. The Diocese argues this redevelopment is necessary for financial sustainability and mission renewal, claiming the current building is underutilized and outdated.

However, these claims ring hollow against the backdrop of fierce opposition from parishioners who cherish the church’s historical, spiritual, and cultural significance. More troublingly, transcripts of sermons and announcements reveal that church ministers have employed manipulative tactics to coerce parishioners into supporting the Diocese’s plans, undermining trust and community cohesion.

Coercion in the Pews: The Ministers’ Own Words, Unfiltered

Rev Kitty Wang (June 29, 2023):

"God should be in charge of this church... If St Paul’s is heritage listed, the church will be forced to hand over its sovereignty to the government... You are all Christians; you should trust and obey in God... Do you wish God in charge of this church or the government in charge of this church? If you support God in charge of this church, please sign this heritage petition to vote against the heritage order... If you have already signed this petition, you are telling council you want God in charge not council (government)... What you must do now is not let the church become a heritage building. That way we can have complete sovereignty as our church belongs to God and not belongs to this secular world... Whether the church will be rebuilt or not this is not your business. It is the archbishops and ministers business, it should not be your concern... For this reason you don’t have to worry about it."

Rev John Bartik:

"We’re working towards a new future. We’re working towards a full redevelopment... our plans can get completely derailed by what’s called a heritage order... now is the time where we need to fight by simply adding your name to this petition and say we the parishioners are happy for this building because we believe it’s just a shell. The church is the people and we oppose a heritage order so that either us or the church of the future has freedom to knock it down and build a new better one if we so wish."

"Please Lord, preserve this building as a place that is free. That we can do what we wish with it. So that future generations would be served in the best possible way, not in a way that is preserved only the memory of the efforts of a few."

Lay leader reading during Rev. Wang's service following discussion about the heritage order:

"Our father we ask you to bless our two ministers they are both good shepherds and God sent... Lord we ask you to give our ministers wisdom because he is guided by the Holy Spirit everything he does is God’s will, if Satan dares to challenge Lord you will tie down their hands and feet, let God’s will be fulfilled and victory be declared." Click here to watch all the videos.

These statements are not mere appeals to faith; they are calculated attempts to manipulate parishioners through fear, guilt, and exploitation of their religious beliefs. The message is clear: to be a “good Christian,” one must blindly support the Diocese’s redevelopment plans and oppose heritage protections, regardless of personal convictions or concerns. This is spiritual blackmail, and it has no place in a free and just society.

“Faithfulness in Service”: A Code Trampled

The Anglican Church of Australia’s Faithfulness in Service code is designed to guide clergy conduct with integrity, respect, and pastoral care. It emphasises:

• Respect for parishioners’ dignity and autonomy.
• Avoidance of abuse of power or spiritual authority.
• Honesty, transparency, and accountability.
• Commitment to pastoral responsibility without coercion or manipulation.

The ministers’ conduct at St Paul’s flagrantly violates these principles by:

• Abusing Power: Using spiritual authority to pressure and intimidate parishioners.
• Breaching Trust: Misleading parishioners about heritage listing consequences and redevelopment plans.
• Spiritual Abuse: Threatening and manipulating parishioners under the guise of divine will.
• Lack of Transparency: Withholding full and accurate information, relying instead on fear-mongering rhetoric.

This goes far beyond a simple difference of opinion; it represents a serious violation of ethical standards and a profound betrayal of the sacred trust entrusted to these ministers. As someone who recently authored Faithfulness in Service: The Evolution of Anglican Doctrine and Civil Rights in Australia, I am deeply troubled by these developments. A formal complaint has now been lodged with the Professional Standards Commission regarding the conduct of the clergy involved in this matter.

Legal and Human Rights Violations: A Multitude of Breaches

The ministers’ statements and the Diocese’s actions raise serious legal and human rights concerns:

• Breach of Trust and Fiduciary Duty: The Diocese and ministers have a legal obligation to act in the best interests of the congregation and uphold the trust’s purpose. Pushing redevelopment against congregational wishes and trust terms risks legal challenge.
• Undue Influence and Coercion: The ministers’ framing of opposition as opposition to God’s will may constitute undue influence, invalidating any purported consent to redevelopment.
• Misleading and Deceptive Conduct: False or exaggerated claims about heritage listing and government control may breach consumer protection laws if commercial aspects are involved.
• Criminal Fraud: Knowingly making false or misleading statements to induce support for redevelopment could amount to fraud under the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). The relevant sections are potentially 134.1 (obtaining property by deception), 135.1 (obtaining a financial advantage by deception), and 135.2 (causing a financial loss by deception).
• Human Rights Violations: The ministers’ conduct infringes on parishioners’ freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief, as protected under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 and Article 18 of the ICCPR. They coerced parishioners to conform to a specific religious-political stance, undermining their freedom to hold and express their own beliefs. Additionally, parishioners opposing the redevelopment or supporting heritage listing may have been unfairly marginalised or pressured, constituting discrimination under the AHRC Act and Australian anti-discrimination laws. The ministers’ use of spiritual authority to pressure and intimidate parishioners amounts to spiritual bullying, creating a hostile environment that violates the right to a safe and respectful community.
• Potential Fraud and Uttering in Petition Solicitation: A critical and as yet underemphasised issue is the manner in which signatures and support for anti-heritage petitions have been solicited by church leaders. If parishioners or community members were induced to sign petitions or express support for redevelopment based on false, misleading, or deceptive statements—such as claims that heritage listing would “hand the church over to the government” or that opposing redevelopment was “opposing God’s will”—then the validity of those signatures is fundamentally compromised. Should such petitions or lists of signatures be submitted to the council as evidence of genuine community support, knowing that they were obtained by misrepresentation or fraud, this may constitute the criminal offence of uttering (see Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s. 253), as well as fraud (s. 192E). Uttering involves knowingly presenting a false document with intent to influence or deceive a third party—in this case, the council. Furthermore, if the council’s decision to refuse heritage listing or approve demolition was influenced by such tainted evidence, this could be a strong ground for judicial review on the basis of misleading or fraudulent material being relied upon in the decision-making process. The courts have consistently held that decisions based on false or misleading information are liable to be set aside for procedural unfairness, bad faith, or error of law.

The Legal Weight of the Consecration Deed

A 1968 consecration deed by the Archbishop of Sydney formally dedicated the St Paul’s building “to God and Divine Worship” and declared it consecrated “for ever hereafter.” This deed creates a binding trust that the property be used solely for Anglican worship. 

The ministers' statements, particularly those encouraging parishioners to disregard the heritage listing and support redevelopment, may also be interpreted as an attempt to induce a breach of contract. The 1968 consecration deed by the Archbishop of Sydney formally dedicated St Paul’s building 'to God and Divine Worship' and declared it consecrated 'for ever hereafter,' creating a binding trust that the property be used solely for Anglican worship. By urging parishioners to support actions that could lead to the demolition or repurposing of the church, the ministers are encouraging a violation of this deed and trust, thereby weakening the legal protections afforded to the church and its congregation. This adds another layer of legal complexity to the already fraught situation.

Any attempt to demolish or repurpose the building risks breaching this deed and the trust, strengthening parishioners’ legal position to seek injunctions or court orders to preserve the church.

The Judgment That Speaks to This Crisis

The 1995 Queensland Supreme Court judgment in Re Corporation of the Synod of the Diocese of Brisbane underscores that church property trusts must be used for the religious worship and spiritual purposes of the congregation for the time being. Trustees cannot unilaterally alter the trust’s purpose or dispose of property unless it is impossible to fulfil the original intent.

The ministers’ coercive statements and push for redevelopment, despite opposition, conflict with these legal principles. Courts would likely scrutinize whether the Diocese respects the congregation’s rights and the trust’s terms, potentially invalidating any redevelopment plans imposed without genuine consent.

Time for Accountability: The AHRC & ICAC Must Act Now

The AHRC has a clear mandate to investigate human rights violations, including those related to freedom of religion and protection from spiritual abuse. The ministers’ conduct at St Paul’s appears to violate the Faithfulness in Service code and fundamental human rights.

The Anglican Diocese of Sydney must:

• Immediately suspend the ministers pending investigation.
• Conduct an independent review of pastoral practices to prevent future abuses.
• Reaffirm commitment to ethical ministry and transparency.
• Discontinue the demolition application DA-438/2025 for St Paul's Church at 459 Chapel Rd, Bankstown, NSW, 2200.

What now?

The parishioners of St Paul’s Bankstown deserve justice, respect, and leaders who uphold their rights and dignity. The Diocese’s current path threatens not only a historic church building but the very soul of the community it serves.

We cannot stand by while vulnerable individuals are subjected to spiritual bullying and manipulation cloaked in religious rhetoric. The AHRC must act decisively to protect human rights and restore integrity to the church’s ministry. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to." — Matthew 23:13.

The time for silence has ended—action is now in motion. Today, the editor has seen a brief to legal counsel, and the local action group is actively seeking legal advice on next steps. The Good News Blog has already received two non-committal acknowledgments from the Diocese: one from the Archbishop’s office indicating the matter has been referred to Sydney Anglican Property, and another from their Senior Manager, Strategy and Development, noting our concerns and stating that the consent authority will consider these issues during the development assessment process. In addition, we have just received a response from Joanne El-amiouni, a Town Planner at Canterbury-Bankstown Council, acknowledging receipt of our concerns and confirming that our submission has been included as part of the development application assessment. The community remains vigilant and determined to pursue every possible avenue to safeguard St Paul’s.

Watch the Videos for Yourself! The Absolutely Disgraceful Conduct Unveiled!

Back to Top