THE Pope gathered American cardinals at the Vatican this week to tell them abuse of children is an appalling sin and will not be tolerated in the Church. Strong words.

But can anyone imagine any other group of professionals with easy access to young children, such as doctors or teachers, still needing the fact that paedophilia is wrong spelled out to them in 2002.

The fact is the Catholic Church has badly let children down. Repeatedly, in countries as far apart as Germany, Australia, Britain, Poland, Mexico and Ireland, church leaders have protected paedophile priests at the expense of child victims.

In the latest scandal, a known paedophile priest was shuffled from parish to parish in Boston, despite a string of complaints against him. The Church in America was also found to have paid hundreds of boys abused and raped by priests, settlements of up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in return for signing gagging clauses.

Now Catholic campaigners in the States are calling for an end to celibacy in the priesthood as a way of tackling the problem. But this just reveals the continuing confusion in the Church about the nature of the problem. People do not turn into child abusers because they are sexually frustrated. Most paedophiles are married men with children of their own. The reason that, statistically, there have been more convicted paedophiles from the priesthood than the general population is that abusers are drawn to careers which put them in the position of authority with free access to children.

Sadly, in a world where priestly robes inspire deference and awe, such a manipulative adult's behaviour can easily go unquestioned, leaving impressionable young children particularly vulnerable.

These abusers may be in the minority, but with each fresh scandal, the moral authority of the Catholic Church is eroded further. It can no longer rely on the sort of unconditional, wholehearted respect and devotion it has inspired in its followers for so long. And for the sake of those vulnerable young children, that can surely only be a good thing.

I HAVE always been a big fan of Mo Mowlam and her bold, refreshing approach to politics. That's what makes it so disheartening to read her self-pitying, whingeing autobiography in which she moans about being so badly treated by Blair and his allies. I can't buy her arrogant assumption she was ousted because she was "too popular". Blair needs all the popular ministers he can get, particularly in Northern Ireland where, frankly, he needs anyone or anything which works. Mo suffered from the haughty delusion she could pick and choose any job in the cabinet, while admitting to taking part in underhand discussions about unseating Blair. What a shame she can't find a better way to earn some money now.

THANK you, thank you, thank you Ulrika and Sven, for revealing football can be interesting after all. So much more fascinating than boring discussions about the off-side rule.