This was published 9 months ago
Thorburn church pastor regrets ‘sloppy analogy’; legal options against Essendon grow
By Anna Patty and Lachlan Abbott
The pastor whose controversial sermon led to Andrew Thorburn’s abrupt resignation as Essendon CEO has repeated his apology for the words he used, while a religious discrimination law expert laid out a dual path for possible legal action against the Bombers.
Thorburn, a former National Australia Bank boss, was appointed Essendon’s CEO on Monday but resigned on Tuesday after criticism of his role as chair of the conservative City on a Hill church, which is part of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne.
Andrew Thorburn quit as the head of the Essendon after a controversial sermon from his church came to light.Credit: Jamie Brown
The church’s founding pastor, Guy Mason, likened abortion to a concentration camp in a sermon that has been on the organisation’s website since 2013. An apology for the language used in the sermon was published on the church’s website on Thursday, but the sermon video retains the reference.
On Friday, Mason again backtracked from the comparison when asked on 3AW if the church’s wording had changed while its views had not.
“Yeah, I mean again, out of context it’s sloppy, the analogy. Yeah it’s unhelpful ... So, I’d use different words. I mean this is a message from 10 years ago so, very likely I’d use different words today,” Mason said.
When asked whether abortion was ever justified, such as in cases of rape, Mason said: “I think where possible we want to be for life.
“There are particular situations and things like that, and they’re very personal and complex matters, but where possible – again as an Anglican Church [that’s] very consistent with other Catholics – we want to be for life.
“And that ‘for life’ means caring for the mothers and walking with them and understanding. And it means walking with and being a voice for the vulnerable.”
Mason also said he wished Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews had been able to learn about his City on a Hill church before he criticised the group for “rampant homophobia” and “bigotry”.
In a separate sermon, another City on a Hill leader said practising homosexuality was a sin.
City on a Hill pastor Guy Mason.
“It would have been nice I think for the premier ... to get to know us before perhaps making labels and statements like that, which can be unhelpful, I think, in a discussion like this,” Mason said.
The pastor added he didn’t “personally feel persecuted” and respected the premier’s right to share what he thinks, but said he worried if faith limited a person’s ability to express themselves.
Australian employment lawyer Mark Fowler said the association of Thorburn’s religious views with those expressed in City on a Hill sermons could offer legal grounds for a religious discrimination claim.
Thorburn could take action for discrimination based on his personal religious views, assuming that they were the basis of his forced resignation, but he could also separately argue that he was discriminated against because of his association with the church.
Fowler, an expert on religious discrimination law, was first to suggest rugby player Israel Folau had legal grounds to sue for religious discrimination after Rugby Australia terminated his contract for his public comments about homosexuals as sinners. He said Thorburn’s personal association as church chairman arguably provided him with separate grounds for claiming discrimination.
Essendon president David Barham said he asked Thorburn to choose between being the Bombers CEO and his chairmanship of the church a day after his appointment on Monday. Thorburn picked the church.
Fowler, an adjunct associate professor at two NSW university law schools, said it was not only unlawful to discriminate against a person because of their religious belief under the Victorian Equal Opportunity Act 2010, but also because of their “personal association” with the church under section 6 of the act.
“It is not a defence to say that Thorburn agreed to step down. An ultimatum from the club to do so (presuming that this is what was issued) would amount to constructive dismissal. A person cannot consent to discrimination against them,” he said.
A potential exception to section 6 of the act is that an employer can argue it was a legitimate occupational requirement of the job for Thorburn to not be associated with a church that preached a particular message.
“There is no exception in the act that would apply, as it cannot be said that the requirements that have been imposed fall within the very strict definition of a ‘genuine occupational requirement’,” Fowler said.
The exception only applies if experience in a particular profession is relevant, he said.
Fowler said provisions within the proposed Commonwealth Religious Discrimination Bill that passed the lower house with bipartisan support in February clarified that, in the context of professional appointments, organisations could not seek to impose a “secular” stance on the extra-work activities of their employees unless such reflected an “essential requirement” of the role.
“Thorburn’s situation accentuates the importance of Labor’s election commitment to legislate a federal protection against religious discrimination,” he said.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.