Malcolm X used to find less offensive the explicit racism of the Ku Klux Klan than the implicit racism of whites who in word were supportive of equality and civil rights while in deed displayed a racist frame of mind which, given their heart-on-sleeve egalitarianism, could not be challenged because they themselves did not recognise it for what it was.

The opinion piece ‘The Muslims are coming’ referred to an intolerant sermon delivered by a young member of the clergy. This will be unsurprising to those who are familiar with the latest generation of priests, the spirituality of many of whom stops at vestments, village feasts and anachronistic traditions.Unfortunately, intolerance, islamophobia and racism are not rare among members of the clergy, even though, in most instances, they are implicit, unconscious and hidden behind benign words. This makes them even more intractable.

Given the trite quality of most sermons delivered by local ecclesiastics, my limited forays to Church are restricted to Mass celebrated by four or five friends, two of whom are only occasional visitors to our island.

Yet, as providence would have it, every now and then I am compelled to listen to Mass celebrated by other ecclesiastics.

These occasions frequently serve to evidence the prevalence among most members of the clergy of prejudice regarding people that belong to different religions and/or ethnic minorities. Two examples I witnessed during the past 12 months exemplify this.

Racism and intolerance riddle the thought and behaviour of many local Christians

The first involved a young clergyman delivering a homily on the September 8 feast. The ecclesiastic started with the usual myths regarding our ancestors protecting their faith against evil foreigners who wanted to eradicate it.

Then he proceeded to state that, today, local Christianity faces another challenge from another set of foreigners: immigrants who come from Africa (the existence of other types of immigrants was implicitly ignored). These are posing a challenge to our faith through ‘enculturation’.

Finally, exactly when you would expect the prelate to do a Norman Lowell, he pulled his brakes and claimed that we ought to love these foreigners and be a witness of the teachings of Christ to them - that a good number of African immigrants are Christian is something that this young prelate is probably not aware about.

So our ancestors killed the Ottoman threat and are praised for it; we face a similar threat but should deal with it lovingly. It takes no Aristotle to suspect that there is something fallacious in the conclusion.

The second incident involves a priest who occupies a prominent position at the university. In a homily commemorating the feast of the Assumption, this eminent reverend referred to events in Iraq, simplistically boiling these down to the persecution of Christians. Christians are being persecuted in Iraq and elsewhere; I am very aware of this being a proud subscriber to Aid The Church in Need, an organisation that I suggest to anyone who really has at heart the well-being of Christians around the world. But this is not the whole story.

Apparently, this intellectual prelate does not know that the carnage perpetuated by ISIS does not involve only Christians but also Yazidis, Mandaeans and, surprise, surprise, other Muslims who do not uphold ISIS’s nutty version of Islam. But this was not the major shortcoming of the sermon.

The reverend kept referring to what Muslims are doing to ‘us’ Christians. Then, he noted that the number of Muslims in our midst is growing but added that we should not treat them in the same way they are treating us. We ought to love them.

The argument that may be extrapolated from his platitudes is: 1) this is what Muslims do to Christians; 2) the number of Muslims is increasing; 3) this is what awaits you/your children down the line; 4) therefore, love them.

If this priest really believes the just war theory, which he expounds in one of his books, he should have suggested ‘buy your children a weapon’ since when the Muslim threat inevitably materialises (given that Muslims by nature persecute Christians, if his sermon is to be given any weight) they will be equipped to deal with this menace.

The sad aspect of the two incidents is that the individuals involved probably harboured good intentions regarding Muslims, immigrants and other groups against whom many locals entertain prejudices. The two were probably not aware of the contradictions their thinking involved or that their sermons would reinforce prejudices rather than create an attitude conducive to hospitality and tolerance, as I am sure their (ill-founded, given the premises) conclusions suggest.

The fact that they were not aware of such contradictions exposes the quality of many of the local ordained ministers as well as the type of formation and continuous education that local ecclesiastics are receiving.

Even if Bishop Charles Scicluna slaps the culprit in the Marsascala incident on his wrist (he does not seem intentioned to do more than that), there is much more that needs to be done if the local clergy is to clean up its act and become a sign of contradiction in relation to the racism and intolerance that riddle the thought and behaviour of many local Christians.