During his first trip to the United States, Pope Benedict XVI brought a certain closure to the cases of sexual abuse of children by priests. This scandal has shaken the church in the US for more than six years. The lives of hundreds if not thousands were shattered and several parishes and dioceses came to the brink of bankruptcy. The Pope in no uncertain terms expressed his personal shame at what happened. He did more than that. He met some of the victims and prayed with them in a very moving, tearful and therapeutic meeting.

The Pope addressed clerical sex abuse on five occasions, beginning with his encounter with reporters aboard his plane from Rome. He spoke from the heart about the shame, the damage to the church and the suffering of the victims. He also spoke about the church's efforts to make sure perpetrators are out of ministry and to implement better screening of would-be priests.

At one point, he said that when he read the case histories of the victims, he found it hard to imagine how a priest could betray his mission to be an agent of God's love.

Pope Benedict was more direct than Pope John Paul, because as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, he headed the doctrinal congregation, which took over the handling of sex abuse cases in 2001. What Cardinal Ratzinger saw in those files led him to denounce, in early 2005, the "filth" inside the church -- even among its own priests.

The Pope's forthrightness was a consoling and healing moment in the life of the Church in the United States. It is a pity that those involved in a different type of child abuse - physical and mental abuse - in our country have still not found the strength to ask for forgiveness and do amends.

What the Pope did was very important; but he also pointed out to other kind of abuses of children that are common in our culture. He said:

"Children deserve to grow up with a healthy understanding of sexuality and its proper place in human relationships. They should be spared the degrading manifestations and the crude manipulation of sexuality so prevalent today. They have a right to be educated in authentic moral values rooted in the dignity of the human person.

"What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today? ... .. We need to reassess urgently the values underpinning society, so that a sound moral formation can be offered to young people and adults alike."

There are many parents today who use TV and the Internet as baby sitters. They leave their children - even very young ones - unattended in front of the TV sets for hours. The Internet is fantastic, but when children are left alone to their own devices harm can accompany and, perhaps surpass, the benefits of this medium.

It is true that there are several software packages that can filter a lot of offending material but the care and attention that parents can give cannot be surpassed by software.

Generally parents leave children on their own as they have other things to do. In our culture bringing up children has become another chore. What a pity! Parents react strongly to any hint that someone is abusing their children but they are passive when they themselves become guilty of abuse, albeit unwillingly.

Are your children being abused (2)

Last Friday (18/04/08) Xarabank highlighted one of the worst killers among us: drugs. It will continue doing so next Friday. If nothing more urgent happens, next week, I will write about these two programmes and the killer they exposed.

Meanwhile if you and your children (perhaps not those who are too young) have not seen the first episode make an effort to see the second programme. If you have seen it there is no need to prod you to see the second programme. I'm sure you will do just that and have recommended the same action to other parents.

Moreover, next Friday you will have the possibility to donate money to Caritas who are doing sterling work in the area.

Is your heritage being abused?

I think that respect for our heritage is not of the pick and choose type. It is true that our heritage manifests itself in diverse ways. One finds, for example, our natural, historical, folkloristic and linguistic heritage. These are diverse but unified. Our past and present is made up of all these aspects of heritage and other things as well. One cannot say that he or she loves our natural heritage but neglects, ignores or, worse, does not care for our historical heritage. Would someone who ravages our natural environment be considered as a lover of our historical heritage? Same applies to all other permutations possible between the diverse manifestations of our heritage.

For this reason I cannot understand how someone can "champion" our natural and historical heritage but then show lack of respect for or ignores our linguistic heritage. Maltese is our heritage as much as the Valletta fortifications are our heritage.

Unfortunately it is respected by foreigners but not so much respected by many Maltese. Our government had insisted that the EU accept Maltese as one of its official languages. We can write to any EU Commissioner or bureaucrat in Maltese but Maltese civil servants use the English language when writing to other Maltese.

I am also unpleasantly surprised when in official or semi official occasions Maltese persons who champion our heritage address other Maltese persons in English.

I was impressed some weeks ago by a TV interview with the British High Commissioner. He did not even use one English word throughout the whole interview. The respect that this High Commissioner shows for our linguistic heritage should make the Maltese-pick-and choose-defenders of our heritage blush.