Code of Conduct update

Dear members of the LCANZ

We are writing to you about the Code of Conduct, circulated earlier this year. We thank those of you who signed this document, and we are also grateful for those who have raised concerns. We are thankful for your engagement and are happy to provide a summary of the feedback.

The next step for the General Church Board and College of Bishops will be to review and revise the Code of Conduct and implementation plan based on the feedback received. The revised document and plan will then be circulated to pastors and members of the LCANZ for further consultation and feedback.

Regardless of whether you have signed the Code of Conduct or not, there is no further action required of you at this time. If you have any questions or issues concerning this matter, please contact codeofconduct@lca.org.au

Thank you for your engagement in this process.

Rev Stephen Schultz | LCANZ Assistant Bishop
on behalf of the Code of Conduct Review Working Group

Feedback

Summary

Feedback received shows strong support for the goal of protecting children and vulnerable people and for maintaining safe and healthy church communities. Most feedback focused not on the purpose of the Code of Conduct itself, but on aspects of its implementation, communication and application.

The main themes raised were:

• implementation
• requirement to sign the Code of Conduct
• theological considerations
• legal, governance and authority questions
• diverse needs and inclusion provisions
• pastoral concerns and impact on volunteers
• practical and administrative matters.

1. Implementation

Many people affirmed the importance of protecting children and vulnerable people and supported the principles of safeguarding. However, some felt the implementation process was too rapid and would have benefited from broader communication, greater explanation and further consultation.

2. Requirement to sign the Code of Conduct

The most common concern related to the requirement to sign the Code of Conduct. For many respondents, the concern was not with the content of the document itself, but with making a signature a mandatory requirement.

3. Theological considerations

Some respondents raised theological questions about parts of the code. These included concerns that aspects of the document may reflect broader societal expectations and perspectives that, in their view, require further consideration in light of biblical and Lutheran teaching.

4. Legal, governance and authority questions

A number of respondents sought clarification regarding the legal basis, governance authority and practical implications of the Code of Conduct. Common questions included:

• What are the legal implications of signing, or choosing not to sign, the Code of Conduct?
• What are the consequences of non-compliance, and what disciplinary processes may apply?
• How does the Code of Conduct relate to insurance requirements and government obligations?

5. Diverse needs and inclusion provisions

The section addressing diverse needs generated a range of feedback. Some respondents suggested broadening the language to more explicitly include all vulnerable people, while others expressed concerns about how certain provisions did not align with their theological understanding.

6. Pastoral concerns and impact on volunteers

Some respondents highlighted potential pastoral impacts, particularly for long-serving volunteers. Concerns were expressed that some volunteers felt uncomfortable with the requirement to sign the document and, in some cases, were considering stepping back from their roles.

7. Practical and administrative matters

Several practical suggestions were offered to improve the accessibility and usability of the Code of Conduct. A commonly raised recommendation was the development of a shorter, simpler and more welcoming version of the document, similar in style to the previous blue brochure.