I found Father Marc Andre Camilleri’s impassionate apologia for the cafeteria plans on Christ the King Basilica more than convincing. To be honest, I did not need any convincing, and I found the whole ruckus to be quite an annoying waste of time.

The Times journalist interviewing the Kappillan seemed to be acutely aware of the need to further exaggerate the mountain that had been made out of this particularly insignificant molehill.

I have no particular opinion on the idea of cafés or restauration points within monumental, historical or simply religious buildings. Still, the Kappillan’s arguments were a sound reply to the intense criticism that had been directed at his plan. That is where my interest really lies.

I was intrigued by the rapidity with which everyone and his brother turned judge and jury of this particular permit application, subjecting it to an extreme level of scrutiny. Suddenly, we had experts in scripture citation combined with an army of amateur satirists competing for the best sketch on the matter.

God’s Café became everybody’s business to the point that, as I pointed out earlier, the Kappillan had to provide a public explanation. Which is fine. But, and there is a but, of course.

On the same day this news was burning across the papers, we also read of a Parliamentary Question by Nationalist MP Albert Buttigieg. He wanted to know which restaurants have been granted encroachment rights on public land – particularly in the Gzira and Sliema seafront.

If we had plans for the encroachment, the reasoning went, then we would know what is public land and what is encroached.

Lands Minister Zrinzo Azzopardi replied in all his wisdom that the Lands Authority is not authorised to publish the details of private operators.

Let that sink in. Information about the granting of rights on public land cannot be published. The Lands Authority needs authorisation to do so. Which begs the question: Who needs to authorise the authority?

This is not the first time either that private operators are protected by ministers with concessions shrouded in secrecy.

This Shift report earlier this month documented how (Tourism) Minister Clayton Bartolo stonewalled questions concerning concessions related to the occupation of public land in Comino by insisting that such information was “commercially sensitive”.

What weight does the general public give to that kind of reply? Is there any fragment of the outrage expressed when the news was out that coffee would be served above a church parvis?

Pavements along our promenades are full of obstructions. The streets of our capital are a free-for-all for tables and chairs. Permits and sanctions for monstrosities are the norm. The aftershock of corrupt authorities is being felt daily.

What does our Prime Minister say? Well, he took an early feel of the pulsating anger of the baying crowd (before the Kappillan’s sensible defence was out) and, in his traditional smirk, suggested that the Paola church withdraw its plans.

Oh, the cheek. Oh, the gall. A champion of misinformation and distraction, he jumps at the opportunity to turn the church into the new evil and danger.

The Kappillan said that he is sure God would not be offended by the café on the roof. The biggest danger is that we become a people who take offence at the wrong time and the wrong place, failing to set high standards for those in whose hands we have entrusted our public land.

“The late fishermen were all going one way, down the harbour; the early stone-masons were going another, up to the heights where rich men were always building and poor men were always propping up poor houses. Lawyers were hurrying to catch an early tide of profitable envy and malice; shop-keepers were slamming back their barred doors, and rolling down the bamboo curtains which softly replaced them. Priests, crossing a slit of sunshine in a narrow street, passed businessmen who predictably kept to the shadows.” – from The Kappillan of Malta by Nicholas Montserrat.