Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1185664
14 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 17 NOVEMBER 2019 NEWS AS a historian specialising in the British and post-War period in Malta, I have written extensively on the 1960s and the Church-Labour conflict. However, when Archbishop Charles Scicluna asked for forgiveness for burying Labour stalwarts in unconsecrated ground, I could not be as pretentious as to comment. It is the Labourites who experienced the 1960s who are mostly entitled to react and we should wait for their own reaction be- fore we comment. Scicluna's comments were received by a barrage of commen- tary, most of which was welcoming and most of it superfluous; but some Labour- ites who lived those days did actually welcome his comments. Soon later, the Archbishop, also with reference to the Church-Labour conflict of the 1960s, claimed that "he would give his life to heal the wounds of the past". When Archbishop Joseph Mercieca made his apology it was made condition- al on the basis that both parties would forgive each other. Hardly anyone from Labourites of the 1960s accepted this apology – they simply ignored it. Admittedly, this time round, Scicluna's message seems to have been more wel- comed by those who have lived those times. However, if I would be preten- tious to say or suggest as to how Sci- cluna's comments should be received, I would do an equal disservice if, as a his- torian, I would fail to mention the facts of the historical situation or the fact that many Labourites of the 1960s are still yet to comment (or have refused to do so). As a historian I am very uncertain on what Archbishop Scicluna wants to give his life for. If he has apologised for bury- ing Labour stalwarts like Ġuże Ellul- Mercer in unconsecrated ground, then that was very clear, but it should also be pointed out that this was only a very small part of the wide and systematic war waged by the Church against Labour and Labourites during that time. When in March 1962 Archbishop Michael Gonzi interdicted the Labour executive committee and later on released the in- famous pastoral arguing that Labourites were not good Catholics, a declaration of holy war was made which had divided society even further and pushed it closer into civil strife. The mortal sin was not publicly declared but it was clearly im- plied, and priests applied it effectively in their duties: Labour party members and activists were barred from making full use of the Church's sacramental services and those who voted for Labour 'were going to hell'. Understanding Gonzi's power History has not been just to the La- bourites of those times and the exalted biographies of Michael Gonzi, badly researched and horribly written with hagiographic intent, have obfuscated his persona and his history with lies and pseudo-historiography. Obviously, these hagiographies ignore the historical con- text and significance of his actions which his fans obfuscate with endearing adjec- tives such as "strong" and "steadfast". For to understand Gonzi is to understand what happened during that decade, and that also means to understand the main protagonists – the people who suffered the brunt of the Church's hostility and those who militated in its favour. First of all, we have to understand that wherever you came from, back then, the Church was an integral part of your life, although it had much more influence and power in the rural areas which had remained insular and deeply conserva- tive compared to the harbour area. Los- ing recognition by the Church meant being ostracised from the rest of society: a society where the parish priest had to write your reference letter to be accept- ed for a job, where he consulted you on your sexuality, psychology, even finan- cial affairs, many a times making sure you would well compensate the Church upon your death, and of course… pro- vided you with political direction. The education system was run by cler- ics and their lackeys; parish priests could refer you to the mental health hospital at will! Overcoming this overwhelming social institution took a Labour Party with its 51,000 "soldiers of steel" (suldati tal- Michael Gonzi was an educated thug who wielded his hostile power without any consideration to those he affected. As a historian, I am still to be convinced of Charles Scicluna's intentions MARK CAMILLERI Gonzi took away from the most vulnerable the most important religious element of Christianity: the resilient and spiritual hope that they could one day be saved. Gonzi sent these people to hell If Scicluna intends to heal the wounds of the past, he could do so much better by avoiding hyperbolic statements such as, "I'd give my life to this" and by simply acknowledging history itself Apologies or deceit? Scicluna and the deep wounds of the 1960s' 'interdett'