The use of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper painting for an advert promoting burgers and pizzas has provoked reactions that exposed, in more ways than one, a fundamental weakness in the country’s religious belief and practice.
Admittedly, such advertising may be found to be offensive or in bad taste by some people. Many others, however, shrug and see it all a part of life. While it is a religious image that was used, it is hard to call it mocking and, if it were, it is da Vinci’s art piece, rather than Jesus, that was the target.
When the Moviment Patrijotti Maltin came into the scene, the whole event took a new twist. Suddenly, the talk turned to the recent decriminalisation of the vilification of religion and the party’s leadership thought that, where the law failed, they needed to take matters into their own hands. They peeled off the image of Christ from the advert. Party secretary Henry Battistino said he had been motivated by “righteous anger and a Christian conscience”.
Naturally, it is difficult to speak of the Patrijotti without reference to their staunch anti-Muslim stand. They see them as a threat to the Maltese way of life and, at one protest even distributed pork sandwiches. Ironically, the offence the party took over the use of the image of Jesus echoes Islamic intolerance of the depiction of the Prophet Mohammed, which has led to tragedies like the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris.
The Patrijotti are not alone. Nationalist MP Ivan Bartolo said in Parliament the advert had hurt people. He too saw it as the result of the lifting of the law on religious vilification. But was this really vilification?
Freedom of expression gives people the right to offend others but this could never have been the intention of the owner of New York Best, who put up the 12-metre billboard. He wants to sell his burgers and pizzas and, clearly in an effort to see the case closed as soon as possible, has removed the billboard and will not press for prosecution. Nevertheless, his legal rights must be respected even if one should be sensitive to people’s feelings.
The Patrijotti come across as good intentioned but not exactly tolerant.
The sad thing is that religion is often looked upon, and practised, with immense superficiality as epitomised by the near-idolatrous antics witnessed in local village feasts.
When religion is reduced to image and to outward manifestations alone, through loud fireworks and rowdy band marches to celebrate saints like they were epic heroes, it is no wonder that controversies over the New York Best advert arise.
Meanwhile, is the name of Jesus not vandalised every day by the loud blasphemy one hears when walking down a street? That is surely more offensive to Church faithful than an advert showing Jesus eating pizza.
The amorality that has crept into the country, under the guise of liberalism, is often an assault on all that Jesus stands for. Greed, the destruction of the natural environment, political cronyism and corruption all become acceptable if religion is practised superficially.
Yes, the Patrijotti does right when it defends the Catholic faith but this was certainly the wrong way to go about it. A mere image of Jesus is not likeness to His words.