He spends years in Brazil and comes back still fazed and horrified by pufti in Malta
I hear that in Malta they're still discussing homos on TV
The Times, Letters to the Editor – Monday, 22nd March 2010
Cheap and sensational programme
Fr Lawrence Gauci, Mġarr
On March 12, I had the opportunity to watch the programme called Xarabank. It was the first time I had done so as I lived for years in Brazil and only recently came to live in Malta.
It was a very disgusting and sensational programme dealing with homosexuality.
I remembered a similar programme that was being aired on TV in my adopted country Brazil. It used to be directed by Carlos Massa nicknamed Ratinho (small rat). Everybody used to describe this programme as “sensacionalismo puro e barato” – pure and cheap sensationalism.
The Minister of Communication censored it saying that it misled the public, especially the poor classes.
Well, this happened in Brazil where every type of TV programme is permitted in a laissez faire society.
I wonder how this type of cheap and obnoxious programme is produced in Christian and civilised Malta.
38 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
‘Christian and civilised Malta’? Jew wahda jew l-ohra, habib! Mela m’ghallmuwk duttrina lilek?
Jaqq. Is-soltu Maltin li telqu minn Malta u hasbuha baqghet il-presepju li hallew warajhom.
You mean ‘pseudo’ presepju!
Ma nafx, imma qisu Joseph Carmel Chetcuti. Gie lura Malta jghidilna li nghixu f’pajjiz li ma jittollerax il-gays. Fl-2010. Meta ghandek gay bars fejn trid, u meta l-gays tant mhemmx diskriminazzjoni kontrihom li mhemmx ghalfejn jillimitaw ruhhom ghall-gay bars. Il-Father u l-gay, two sides of the same blinkered coin.
Il-frazi “Christian Malta” tghid kollox.
@HP Baxxter. Mhemmx diskriminazzjoni Malta kontra l-gays? Fejn tghix? Hemm gay bars kullimkien f’Malta? Fejn?
Is that Fr Lawrence? Yum!
You have to do something for a living while in Brazil, you know.
“I wonder how this type of cheap and obnoxious programme is produced in Christian and civilised Malta.”
I’m sure Where’s Everybody will be more than happy to oblige.
Tghallem hafna il-Brazil il-father!
Ghalfejn baqa jarah dan ic-cheap and obnoxious programme? Imissu qaliblu.
What was the Reverend doing in Brazil for all those years?
Maybe Fr Gauci was annoyed that on the Brazilian Xarabank they probably also discussed child abuse by priests. Surely these things should not be aired in public. It’s too sensational and cheap.
Kumment superjuri.
Being smarmy are we?
Have a look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHURRKaRPhY
It’s probably the programme Fr Gauci was referring to.
I like the erm ornaments on this guy…
‘I wonder how this type of cheap and obnoxious programme is produced in Christian and civilised Malta.’
as opposed to what, uncivilised Brazil?
I think Fr Gauci should go back to his ‘adopted country’.
Perhaps instead of commenting and condemning any form of sexuality amongst consenting adults, Father Lawrence and the rest of the Catholic Church, should take a stand against their pedophile colleagues.
I suppose if certain of his colleagues had ever been free to express their sexuality, they would never have closed themselves up in a convent in the first place and more importantly would not have resorted to defiling children.
Regarding “Christianity”, they seem to forget the “Christ” in that word. I don’t recall any passage in the Bible where Christ directly condemned homosexuality or any other form of sexuality, for that matter.
But I clearly remember what he said about this perversion which is so rampant in the Church: “It would be better for a man to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea than to cause a child to sin”.
[Daphne – Cause a child to sin? The sin is all on the part of the adult. This is a mistaken translation – the real meaning is something along the lines of ‘causing scandal to’ or ‘being a snare to’.]
“Regarding “Christianity”, they seem to forget the “Christ” in that word. I don’t recall any passage in the Bible where Christ directly condemned homosexuality or any other form of sexuality, for that matter.”
Balls. Whenever Jesus encountered sexuality – even in the antisocial forms of prostitution and adultery – he defended it against the wrath of the Pharisees. Despised, ridiculed, scorned, and condemned to the gutter of pornography, sex takes on the sinister visage of its persecutors. Prudes are ugly and impute their own ugliness to love, but when they spit on it, they spit on themselves. Loved and celebrated in those we love, the flesh is as radiant as that of Jesus on Mount Tabor.
May I refer you to this other site… http://www.truthsetsfree.net/study.html
I suggest you read it before drowning yourself in your high prose.
@Allan Gatt
So you agree – Christ never condemned sexuality did he? I wouldn’t go as far as saying he actually “defended sexuality”, even because at the time the outlook on sexuality was totally different to ours, which has been totally warped by the Church’s condemnation of anything to do with sex.
Christ badly lost his temper at the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, at their judgmental attitude, while all they cared about was selling their wares on the temple doorstep. Two thousand years have passed and nothing much has changed has it? I actually think if Christ had to meet some of his new disciples and his Vatican “representatives” he’d go bananas!
And when he said that the Kingdom of Heaven will belong to, among others, eunuchs?
I invite you to hold your horses.
You will recall that in the Gospels, Jesus was not defending prostitution or adultery. He was defending the person not the act! In fact, when the crowd disperses he the adulteress they were going to stone, to sin no more. The adultery itself is plainly condemned; the adulteress is forgiven.
However, your point is very subtle. For this I give you credit. There are minority views in the Christian tradition which hold that Jesus did not admonish “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” but “He who has never committed THIS sin cast the first stone.” Still, despite the subtlety, it is clear that Jesus was condemning irresponsible sexual attitudes.
Interestingly, even atheists and non-Christians who have sound values take the same position, be it to avoid STDs or to achieve some other worthwhile social end. In other words, reason and faith concur on this point.
Sexual activity should be reined in, harnessed by a sense of responsibility.
The English version of the Bible says “sins” the American says “stumbles”. The Italian version is the most to the point, it says “scandalises”.
” cheap and obnoxious” describes last week’s letter by the Pope to bishops, in which he blamed child abuse by priests on “secularism of our society and corruption of priests by atheists”. Ara x’ghandu x’jaqsam!
So according to the Pope, atheists are responsible for the Catholic Church’s debauchery towards children. Is this the man we are welcoming to Malta?
Come, I’d rather have the pope than Ghaddafi.
Mela kif nghidu bil-Malti, il-“father” hmar mar, u mija gie.
dont insult people. if he’s a donkey you’re a mule.
I love the banter, although I doubt it was intentional…
Il-‘father’ went to a developing world country. What do you expect from him – progress and enlightenment?
I was going to say ‘third world’ but that is not politically correct now. Please read ‘developing country’.
http://gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2010/03/pedophile-priests.html
Whatever makes you sleep at night Steve…
Oh my god, I can’t believe I am reading this. A letter from a sanctimonious ex-Maltese missionary to a third world country.
Did you know that many of these missionaries go to these poor countries to sexually exploit women and children?
When you are hungry you would do anything to fill your stomach, including ‘befriending a friendly’ white priest.
I have been to Brazil and other Latin American countries and Africa, and I have first hand knowledge of this.
First hand knowledge?
Did you exploit or were you exploited?
(Hope neither.)
Dear Daphne, You should have written that the man in picture IS NOT FR. GAUCI whom I know. From the comments it looks like you have (intentionally?) given the impression that in fact it is Fr. Gauci.
[Daphne – You’re joking, right?]
Oh my God, this is really a case of ROTFL, while drinking my capuccino and eating my cornetto at my desk! I sure hope that “Victor” was just being ironic.
Why do these priests in general, of whom so many are gay, pretend to show their disgust because of such programmes? The public should show more disgust towards those who have not done anything but harm to society through child abuse.
Because they want you to think they are straight! It’s just a ploy. Sadly they are fooling no one except themselves. I mean why would a good Catholic heterosexual man discard marriage which they say is a sacrament to spend time with other men? In many of the friaries and convents it is more likely to come up against St Paul smoking a cigar than a heterosexual friar.