Saturday, 27th June 2009
Church's film classifier left after 'common conclusion'
The Church said yesterday the priest who testified in favour of the banned play Stitching left the film classification board after "long cordial discussions" with the Archbishop.
Fr Joe Abela was not fired, a spokesman for the Church insisted, but, following cordial discussions with Archbishop Paul Cremona - who had not read or watched the play - it was decided it would be best if he no longer formed part of the board. When the Church was asked whether this meant that Fr Abela had stepped down voluntarily, the spokesman reiterated this was not what he said and the two sides "arrived at a common conclusion".
When contacted, Fr Abela, who had testified during a court case about the play, declined to comment. When asked when the "long, cordial discussions" had taken place, the Church spokesman said he was "not informed".
The spokesman stressed that Fr Abela was never the chairman of the board, as reported in the media. Fr Abela was one of three priests - the others being Fr Louis Camilleri and Fr Alfred Sacco - within the Church's media centre who had been given the duty of rating films. Their ratings were then printed on the Church's newspaper Il-Ġens and distributed in parishes as moral guidelines. Fr Abela testified last week in a court case about the play Stitching, which has been banned by the state theatre classifiers. He was testifying on his own behalf as a priest who had watched the play. However, he had not informed the Church of his intention to testify.
He said the play should have been classified as 18R to allow mature people to watch it. The play had taught him a lot about the suffering parents went through after losing a child.
The Church publicly distanced itself from those comments and later clarified it was not taking a position in favour or against the ban.
The play, produced by Unifaun Theatre, was banned by the state-appointed Board of Film and Theatre Classification weeks before it was meant to be performed in February. The producers then instituted court proceedings to overturn the decision.
The case continues.
RSS
Comments
@ john fenech
Dear brother, if one remembers correctly the members of the Grand Inquisition made certain to be very responsible 'first and foremost' to their office. How often wrong they were. How innocent people suffered. Lucky we, the barbecuing of Gordano Bruno's is no longer a public treat.
Now, is the 'church film classification' moving from a guidance to a fire and brimstone bull of perdition when the issue is not a matter of dogma but of fashionable values. (Remember the church's list of banned books that went out of fashion back in the late 60's'?) One may be as wrong on the matter just any other person may be right.
Now, surely, in this day and age, one couldn't possibly be implying that Fr Abela shuts up, switches off his conscience, stays put like a nincompoop awaiting his masters' order to pronounce their whims?
I also agree with the Church not to take any stand with regard to Stitching. Again, that is as it should be.
The lit bit of paper (subpoena) should have the details of the case or else the receiver of the summons should ask the bearer for the case details. Failing the witness could access the information from the Minister of Justice Affairs website.
I would have expected that Fr. Abela would express his subjective opinion, which was perforce expected by the play producer! This in effect was contrary to the subjective view expressed by the Secular Censorship Board in February. So what does the truth mean to you?
But that does not negate Fr. Abela responsibility first and foremost to his office. Which in your opinion seems a rather pointless duty?
So, under these conditions, what do you think that Joe Abela should have done?
a) Lie under oath
b) Refuse to testify
c) Tell the truth - which is that personally, he would not have banned the play?
I won't push you off the cliff edge, I'll ask you to jump!
Plummeting church attendences?
Increased distancing of people from all walks of life from this church?
I wonder why...
It is strange to say the least how a producer of a banned play calls a cleric as his witness unless he had previous knowledge of the priest views about the play. If Fr Abela opinion was in contradiction to the state censorship decision, the least the good father should have done was to inform his superiors and his intention to challenge the censorship!
Since he must have been aware that his testimony will be construe as a vote of no confidence in the secular censorship board and compel the Church authorities to take a stand in a no- win situation.
Therefore if Fr. Abela failed to inform his superiors of his intentions, in my opinion he failed in his obligation to his office. On the other hand if the Church authorities were aware prior to the events then they share the responsibility of the inevitable outcome!
I was wrong.
Well done to Fr Joe Abela for not being afraid to speak his own mind instead of reading from the church's video prompter. When (not if) the play gets staged, I hope Fr Joe Abela will be in the audience