Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1503554
OPINION 10 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 12 JULY 2023 PEOPLE like Gordon John Man- che should really consider them- selves 'lucky', not to be living in precisely the sort of theocracy they seem to admire so much: you know, where 'the Law of Re- ligion' also doubles up as the 'Law of the Land'... and where 'to con- tradict religious orthodoxy' – in any shape, manner, or form – is to be instantly branded a 'heretic'. In fact: Manche is incredibly lucky to have been born at almost any time in human history, af- ter around the late 18th century (when games such as 'football', 'rugby' and 'cricket' slowly started to replace 'torturing heretics to death', as the number one spec- tator sport throughout most of Christendom.) Consider, for a moment, the interview he gave to The Times last week: which ended with his (oh-so-modest!) claim that, "It's not me. Don't say I'm saying this. It's not Gordon, it's God. It's Jesus Christ. I am Jesus Christ's par- rot..." Erm... YIKES! I shudder to even imagine the reaction, had that interview been published – not in 2023: where Manche enjoys the protection of the same 'fun- damental right to freedom of ex- pression', that he himself is trying to undermine for others... ... but in, say, 1600: when a cer- tain Giordano Bruno was publicly burnt at the stake, at Rome's Cam- po dei Fiori, merely for having declared... well, a whole bunch of things, really. Including (to para- phrase a few of the more famous charges brought against him): 1) That 'the universe expands in all directions, and is filled with in- numerable different planets and stars' [!]; 2) That the Church was wrong about its doctrine of the Holy Trinity (among other deviations from official Church teaching), and; 3) That Gods are actually creat- ed in Man's image, and not vice versa (complete with an argu- ment to the effect that: 'If croco- diles had the same intelligence as human beings, they would prob- ably worship a Crocodile God'...) Now: I am aware that there is some debate, to this day, about which of those three 'blasphe- mous' views actually got Giordano Bruno convicted, in the end. The current academic consensus, I believe, favours a combination of 'Options 2 and 3' (i.e., Bruno was executed more for 'contradicting the Church's theological dogmas', than for 'propounding cosmolog- ical views that were at least 400 years ahead of his time'). Either way, however: Giordano Bruno's heresy still falls far, far short, of the 'blasphemous' claims made by Gordon John Manche in that interview. After all, Bruno never claimed to be a 'walking, talking, human embodiment of... God Almighty Himself, no less!' (I mean: for Christ's sake! Literally, this time!) And I could say the same for most of the 'heretics and/or mar- tyrs' who were likewise tortured to death, on similar grounds, at various points in history. When, in 1314, Jacques de Molay be- came the last of the Order of the Knights Templar to be immolat- ed in an 'auto da fe': it was because of accusations that his Order had 'reverted to pagan idolatry'; and for adopting suspiciously 'Ma- sonic-like' initiation rites... That, in a nutshell, was the sort of thing that would get you 'tor- tured to death', throughout most of the Middle Ages. And as you can see: those historical heresies simply pale into insignificance, compared to the one which Gor- don John Manche so glibly com- mitted last Sunday... when he ac- tually arrogated unto himself, the direct authority to (quite literally) 'speak on Jesus Christ's behalf.' Indeed, the last person who had the audacity to make such a claim – and who was likewise eventual- ly executed for it, too – was argu- ably... Why, none other than Jesus Christ himself: who famously started his entire mission, by pro- claiming – at the end of his first (and last) Scripture reading, in a Nazareth synagogue – that his own presence there had 'fulfilled' a certain Prophecy of Isaiah (spe- cifically, the one that spoke of 'the coming of a Messiah'...) And guess what? It didn't work out too well for Jesus at the time, either. We are told that: "All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove him [Jesus] out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way." [Luke 4: 28-30] See what I mean? In those by- gone eras, people didn't take too kindly to individuals who just suddenly 'popped up out of no- where': only to announce that they themselves were henceforth to be regarded as 'official mouthpieces' for the One True God: you know, the 'Supreme Deity', to whom all earthly powers owe their eternal allegiance, loyalty, and unques- tioning obedience: now, and for ever and ever, Amen....' Don't ask me why: but that sort of thing got the official religious authorities of the time, all kind of... 'jumpy', if you know what I mean. It was for this reason that they crucified Jesus Christ, 2,000 years ago; and it was for a whole lot less, that people like Giordano Bruno– and countless other 'her- etics' – were subsequently burnt at the stake (or otherwise grue- somely dispatched), in his name. And yet, today - in Year of Our Lord 2023 – someone like Gor- don John Manche can freely come along, and so casually utter a handful of words that would have been instantly considered 'blasphemous', until only a couple of centuries ago (while he himself would most likely have ended up 'hung, drawn and quartered'); and... Nothing. No lynch-mobs; no 'Trial by the Inquisition'; no 'con- fession extracted under torture'... and no 'public execution for her- esy', either. Strange, huh? It's almost as though – from the late 18th cen- tury, onwards – Christians the world over started to belatedly understand, at least one small part of Jesus Christ's overall mes- sage. Namely, the part that goes something like: > "Love thy neighbour as thy- self" (Matthew 22:39) > "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us" {Matthew 6:12) > "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which de- spitefully use you, and persecute you" (Matthew 5:43–44) And lastly (in chronological or- der, anyway): > 'Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do.' [Luke 23:24] All of which, by the way, raises another charge of 'blasphemy' that can conceivably be levelled at Gordon John Manche: only this time, not against 'God Al- mighty'... but against 'Logic', and 'Common Sense'. Look at this way: if Manche re- ally is correct, all along – and Je- sus Christ really DID choose him, specifically, to be his own official mouthpiece (or his 'parrot', as Manche puts it) – then... erm... ... sorry, but can anyone out there explain why these two in- dividuals - Gordon John Manche, and Jesus Christ - happen to be saying things that not only 'fail to match up', on any logical level... but which also flatly contradict each other, at every turn? Starting with the argument that Manche was actually defend- ing, when he declared that: 'It's not Gordon saying this; it's Jesus Christ'. Specifically, he was re- ferring to his own personal view, that 'homosexuality' constitutes some kind of 'aberration', which – by an entirely unsurprising co- incidence - God himself happens to find just as 'abhorrent', as he does... Hmm. Yes, well that kind of 'fig- ures', doesn't it?... given that Gor- don John Manche evidently sees no difference whatsoever, be- tween his own private opinions, and those of The Supreme Crea- tor of the Universe (a fact which - in and of itself - already consti- tutes 'blasphemy', right there.) The much bigger problem, however, is that: nowhere, in the entire New Testament, does Je- sus Christ ever utter even a single word of condemnation – indeed, there is not even a single, solitary mention, of any kind whatsoever – aimed at either 'homosexuality', in general; or 'homosexuals', in particular. Naturally, this doesn't automat- ically prove that Jesus Christ him- self somehow condoned homo- sexuality', in his own day. It is, in fact, highly unlikely that he would have: given that Christ tended to agree with orthodox Judaism, on most other 'sexual proclivities' ('fornication', 'adultery', and so on - and yes; I imagine that would al- most certainly have included 'sess fil-patata', too...) But still. Jesus Christ never ac- tually mentioned 'sess fil-patata', in as many words; still less did he ever condemn homosexuality as an 'aberration'. So if he himself was so unboth- ered about it, so as to not even allude to the phenomenon, in any tangible way... then why the bleeding heck does the same 'homosexuality' bother Jesus Christ's flipping 'parrot' so much, that it seems almost incapable of squawking about practically any- thing else? And that's not the only contra- diction, by the way. What was it again, that Jesus Christ consist- ently told us he expected all his followers do, whenever they are 'reviled, spat upon, and persecut- ed in [His] name'? I stand to be corrected, of course... but last I looked, it wasn't exactly : 'Report every last motherf****ing one of them to the police, and make them PAY!!" No, it was more along the lines of: 'Forgive, and forget'; 'Turn the other cheek'; 'Love Thy Enemy'. You know, that sort of thing... But, oh well. All it really means, ultimately, is that Gordon John manche isn't exactly doing a very brilliant job, in his self-pro- claimed role as 'Jesus Christ's par- rot'. So... well, maybe Jesus should just consider getting himself a new one, that's all (and preferably, one that actually quotes what he himself said, this time... instead of just 'projecting its own prejudic- es', onto Jesus Christ himself.) Just a thought... Maybe Jesus should just get himself another 'parrot'... Raphael Vassallo