It was reported that Fr Victor Paul Farrugia asked whether Malta would really welcome St Paul the way our ancestors did in AD60.

This is a loaded question as there is no comparison between theshipwreck of St Paul and the unending influx, mainly of irregularimmigrants. St Paul and all theothers had no intention of staying on the island, in fact all the 276 on board left at the first opportunity withinthree months.

But as in every other situation, this story has two sides. St Paul and all the others were both welcomed and catered for. Publius, from his own resources, during the height of winter, provided at least 2,500 meals.

During the ensuing three months, the Maltese, a small community, had provided another 75,000 meals. The Acts are very clear that even on their departure, the Maltese had provided all that was necessary for the voyage to Syracuse.

In relation to the above, what is the present situation? For an untold number of years, the very Maltese who commemorate this historic shipwreck have censored and eliminated any reference to the service provided by Publius and the other inhabitants of the islands. Four verses are continuously being left out (28:7-10) for some odd reason, perhaps to satisfy some form of spiteful vengeance.

I have been writing to the Archbishop, providing him with studies and research, which seem to be falling on deaf ears.

Could this divisiveness be one of the reasons why the Maltese do not trust ‘unwelcome’ visitors, when having offered unconditional hospitality, their humane actions are sidetracked as a small bigoted group object to the mention of certain facts and names?