Following the criticism levelled against the Archbishop on his Independence Day homily, I was particularly struck by an argument I read which said that while Christ heavily criticised the religious leaders of his time, presumably on religious matters, he never criticised the political authorities who were the Romans. It was this which prompted me to write this piece for the benefit of those who might also share this misconception.

Although first-century Palestine was under Roman occupation, it was not the Romans who managed the day-to-day running of the State. They appointed a governor who obviously was a pawn of Rome (Herod Antipas during Christ’s lifetime).

However, with no separation between Church and State in Jewish society the priests at the temple in Jerusalem continued not only to officiate over the religious life but also to serve as rulers and judges.

In other words for the ‘Jew in the street’, even under Roman occupation, the priests remained the governing authorities.

Now Christ had harsh words for the Jewish religious leaders of the time but important to us here are some of the issues he raised.

“They crush people with unbearable religious demands and never lift a finger to ease the burden” (Matthew 23:4). “Hypocrites! For you are careful to tithe even the tiniest income from your herb gardens, but you ignore the more important aspects of the law – justice, mercy, and faith” (Matthew 23:23).

“Therefore, I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers of religious law. But you will kill some by crucifixion, and you will flog others with whips in your synagogues, chasing them from city to city” (Matthew 23:34).

“It is written, he said to them, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer, but you are making it a den of robbers’” (Matthew 21:13).

The issues addressed in these quotes include social and legal injustice, murder and stealing from the poor, which are not only concerns of the religious but are concerns of the State – in other words, they are political issues.

So far from avoiding the political arena, Jesus spoke strongly on the political issues that affected the poor and lowly Jews of his time by addressing the ones who through their actions and omissions were causing it – the priests and their cronies.

No religious leader who cares for the welfare of others, particularly the poor and emarginated, can avoid speaking about political issues

Jesus never shied away from addressing political issues or criticising governing authorities. He even called them names: “Go and tell that fox for me…,” he said about Herod the governor (Luke 13:31-35). This was not a compliment as in Rommel’s case; a fox is an unclean animal in the Israelite holiness codes.

So it is amply clear that Christ had no diplomatic inhibitions when addressing political issues and he ignored the Romans in his attacks because to him and to the common Jewish citizen they were not the most preoccupying source of political injustice in Jewish society; that was the domain of the religious leaders who also had political responsibilities.

No religious leader who cares for the welfare of others, particularly the poor and emarginated, can avoid speaking about political issues because most of the world’s injustices are the result of politics. It is regrettably another Maltese immature concept to expect religious leaders to speak only on religious rituals in their homilies.

Such a mentality is probably coming from the fact that since the religious disputes in the 1960s the Church has been relatively silent on political matters and maybe this was the right thing to do at the time. The downside however is that we may have got too used to a silent Church.

In Western societies surveys and electoral turnouts indicate that people have generally lost faith in politicians because they believe that many of them stand to serve their own personal interests.

Theoretically this loss of faith in politicians should also have grown locally considering: the local oil scandal, the kicking out of a Maltese EU commissioner and the recent Panama papers scandal, to mention a few.

Now one of the most effective ways a democratic society can counter bad governance is by having, apart from a strong political opposition, an active civic society – i.e. individuals, groups, NGOs, the press and other institutions that constantly question, scrutinise and put pressure on government.

So to have another voice such as the voice of the Church raising questions on government policy in the interest of citizens and the common good is a victory for citizens in a healthy democracy.

People who cherish democracy and appreciate its fragility should be pleased and encourage it to continue under all administrations.

Alas, reading in all the media so many Maltese citizens vociferously calling out for this independent voice that speaks in our interest and that of our children to shut up tells me that this country may be independent but many of its natives have allowed themselves to be deprived of independent minds.

Gordon Fitz works as a finance manager and served for many years as a public speaker in the lay apostolate.