麻豆社

Good morning, this week a judge in Brazil slapped a ban on a controversial Netflix show called The First Temptation of Christ. The film, a satire on religion, depicts Jesus going home for his 30th birthday - accompanied, it seems, by a boyfriend. Over two million people signed a petition calling for First Temptation to be banned and the production company was attacked with Molotov cocktails.

If you're not religious, it can be hard to understand how a satire can evoke such an angry response. Pope Francis once offered a psychological explanation during a discussion about attacks on the Prophet Muhammad. He compared the Prophet to a parent - commenting that if someone insulted Francis' own mother, that person might expect a punch.

Francis was not suggesting violence. His point was that to religious people, figures such as Muhammad and Jesus are not only historically real but someone with whom they have a personal relationship, just like a parent. When someone ridicules that figure, a reaction is inevitable.

But how should the state referee hurt feelings? On Thursday, the Brazilian Supreme Court overturned the ban, arguing in effect that the role of the state isn't to pick sides but to guarantee liberty for all. A filmmaker is free to satirise a religion; the religion is free to defend itself. The judge added: 鈥淚t is not to be assumed that a humorous satire has the magic power to undermine the values of the Christian faith."

It certainly won't undermine my faith which I am certain is strong enough to withstand parody in a movie that, until some Brazilians tried to ban it, I would never have even heard of. My view is that if you believe something - be it religious or political or anything else - it's your responsibility to educate yourself and arm yourself with the best arguments to defend it.

Don't get me wrong: I do feel an instinctive anger at attacks on my God. But I also expect them, I'm ready for them and I think it's important to keep perspective. Whenever I'm asked what I think about some ruthless parody of a fictional Jesus, I always say: "Well, they did an awful lot worse to the real thing."

The Christian messiah was a slandered, victimised messiah - nailed to the cross by his persecutors - and his followers were more than just insulted. According to tradition, the apostle Bartholomew was skinned alive.

Christianity since its inception has been subjected to the most rigorous interrogation and most damning satire - yet it has survived this long, I believe, because Jesus' self-sacrifice cuts through the noise. For me, the crucifixion answers all critics.

Show less