Michael King ordinatiin day January 2016


Daragh McDonagh

A priest has been placed on indefinite leave by his diocese after posting videos on social media that featured innuendo and joked about playing songs like ‘Highway to Hell’ at a funeral Mass.

In a statement to be read to parishioners in Gort, Co Galway, this weekend, Bishop Brendan Kelly refers to “upsetting information” regarding 44-year-old curate Fr Michael King.

Bishop Brendan Kelly

He confirms the priest is “on indefinite leave from all duties” and will be absent from the parish “for the foreseeable future”.

“I fully understand that you feel hurt and let down at this time,” adds Bishop Kelly.

The move follows the publication of a number of videos by Fr King on the social media platform TikTok, in which he appears topless and alludes to sex and alcohol.

In one TikTok post, the curate excitedly declares it’s “thirsty Thursday” and “half past pub time” before saying “Glug, glug, glug, glug, glug… beer. Nice.” 

 Fr King laughs and lip-syncs in another video captioned “Me in charge of a funeral playlist”, which features clips of songs such as Queen’s Another One Bites the Dust, the BeeGee’s Staying Alive, and the dance hit You’ll Never See Me Again.

He also featured on a post by another TikTok user, in which he tells her: “Pineapple does not go on pizza, bitch, and carrots do not go into cakes, okay?” 

 Fr King, who is from Renmore in Galway, was ordained in 2016 and had been a curate for the parish of Gort in the south of the county before being placed on indefinite leave.

Last August, he was also appointed as administrator of Kilbeacanty/Peterswell parish and priest-in-charge in Beagh.

Prior to becoming a priest, Fr King had worked as a barman in a number of nightclubs in Galway City and was an amateur actor, featuring in a number of theatre productions.

In his message to parishioners this weekend, bishop of Galway, Kilmacduagh and Kilfenora Brendan Kelly will say: “Many of you have become aware over the past few days of upsetting information concerning Fr Michael King.

“I wish to advise you that, from Monday last, Fr King is on indefinite leave from all duties and will be absent from the parish for the foreseeable future.” 

Michael King



I am Xxxxxx from the USA. In February of this year, I met Father Michael King on a social media chat platform called Wakie. This is a social media place for adults wanting to make friends and more. We communicated on this site from February to April of this year.

At the beginning I did not know he was a priest. I am not a Catholic. Initially my friendship with Father King was just that – friendship. It developed into more and Father King indicated that he wanted more than friendship and that he wanted an online sexual relationship. He asked me to download Skype so that we could have face to face conversations. During these sessions we engaged in mutual masturbation.

Father King told me that he was leaving the priesthood and coming to the USA for us to be together as a couple.

Before communicating on Skype I asked Michael for a picture of himself and he told me that he was a priest and that if I wanted to see him to go to his parish website and watch him celebrating Mass. I did this. One of the ceremonies I watched was at Easter when he celebrated a ceremony that meant him going from station to station in his church.

Michael told he that he was addicted to cocaine and alcohol and he often used cocaine during our face to face meetings on Skype. He generally rang me very late at night for him when he had returned from the pub. Sometimes he brought other men back from the pub with him and they drank and played darts until 4 am.

He told me that he had met a female parishioner in the pub, that they got on well and that after that the parishioner turned up at his presbytery door and they had sex. He said that this had come to light and that his superiors gave him “a slap on the wrist”.

Michael also joined the Transgender / Transexual group on Wakie and I came to believe that he was bisexual or had other sexual issues.

He told me that he has been a drug user since he was a teenager and stopped using for a short while after joining the seminary but slipped back into drug use.

He seems to have no problem accessing cocaine where he lives?

During our Skype chats he also told me that he had been sexually abused by a male relative and when he spoke about this, he became very emotional and cried bitterly.

Michael has indeed hurt me – but I am not a scorned woman. I am a mature woman with a lot of experience of the ups and downs of life, and I only want two things:

That Michael King be prevented from hurting unsuspecting or vulnerable women or men.

That Michael gets and accepts help with his cocaine and drug addictions and psychological problems.



My God! Just when we thought we had heard it all about priestly carry on.

Just FIVE YEARS ORDAINED and into drugs, rock and roll and social media.

It must be asked: “Who recommended him for ordination”?

Is this another product of Maynooth albeit this one is heterosexual?

He should have stayed as a barman in the nightclub.

Currently, newly ordained priests ate a massive mortgage on the Church and laity.




The Claudy bombing occurred on 31 July 1972, when three car bombs exploded mid-morning, two on Main Street and one on Church Street in Claudy in County LondonderryNorthern Ireland. The attack killed nine civilians, injured thirty and became known as “Bloody Monday”.

Those who planted the bombs had attempted to send a warning before the explosions took place. The warning was delayed, however, because the telephones were out of order due to an earlier bomb attack. The Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) issued an immediate denial of responsibility, and later stated that “an internal court of inquiry” had found that its local unit did not carry out the attack. On the thirtieth anniversary of the boming, there was a review of the case and in December 2002 it was revealed that the IRA had been responsible for the bomb explosions.


A priest suspected of being an IRA leader and masterminding a bombing atrocity was allowed to escape arrest thanks to a secret deal between police, ministers and the Roman Catholic Church, a report revealed yesterday.

Father James Chesney was the ‘prime suspect’ after nine people, including an eight-year-old girl, were killed and 30 injured when three car bombs exploded in the quiet Northern Ireland village of Claudy in July 1972.

Detectives wanted to arrest the Catholic priest, who was believed to be the commander of an active IRA terrorist unit, but the move was blocked by an Assistant Chief Constable concerned about the consequences of such a controversial arrest during one of the most bloody periods of the Troubles.


Many horrible things happened during The Troubles.

Claudy was a very bad one.

And it was made so much worse by the fact that a priest was involved in the bombing.

How any priest or any Christian could plant a bomb and destroy men, women and children is beyond me.

The victims that are still living need help with getting justice.

They particularly need help with finding out Father Chesney’s involvement with Republican paramilitaries was.

They also need to find out if the RCC knew about Father Chesneys.

Can anyone help?


There are plenty of people in the South Derry Brigade IRA area and elsewhere who have information about the Claudy bombing – they are just not minded to offer it up.

Why should they when church and state, voters and G.A.A. are jointly engaged in normalizing and even glorifying murder and IRA murderers?

They say it’s time to “move on” and to put Human Rights and Human Wrongs away – Truth may also be put away.

This is the foundation on which we are to build our shared future – on an agreed cover up…”



I was very fortunate growing up by having experienced the ministry and example of some very good priests.

In my childhood parish in Ballygall, Dublin we had Canon Pierce, Fr Joe Collins and Fr Michael Lambe.

Fr Collins

They celebrated Mass prayerfully, the visited every home on the parish and were available 24/7 to anyone in need.

Canon Pierce and Fr Collins were my priestly exemplars.

We also, as a family, had visits from the saintly Jesuit priest, Fr John Hyde SJ.

Fr Hyde

Priests then were true servants of the people.

They were not looking for anything for themselves. They were not narcissists.

Todays younger priests seem to be into their appearance, their vestments, their socialising and themselves in general.

They do not seem to want to do the boring task of going from home to home to let the parishioners see they care.

They want their days off, their priest buddies holidays etc.

The modern priest seems to ask “What can the church and peopke do for me” instead of “What can I do for the church and the people”.

Their priesthood is THEIR POSSESSION.


The world’s current RC seminaries are hotbeds of active and extreme homosexuality involving professors and seminarians.

The religious orders are full of active homosexualuals.

And these new latin Mass societies are full of active homosexuals, turned on by lace, ritual and living with other men.


The pope and bishops know all about this and are doing nothing about it.

Many cardinals, archbishops and bishops are sexually compromised.

It would also mean sacking most current seminarians and challenging the very many sexually active priests.


Ban sexually active men from seminaries if they do not commit to celibacy.

Expel all seminarians misbehaving sexually and in other ways.

Expel seminarians who bully other seminarians.

Dismiss sexually active priests.

Let the Vatican impose stringent visitations of religious orders.

Immedially disband all these recently set up Latin Mass groups of priests and others who obviously reject the Vatican II vision of church.

Let them go off and form other churches and societies if they wish.

All of this will lead to a more authentic church and priesthood.

The RCC has become a circus and the priesthood is now full of “clowns” of every hue.

Good priests in Ireland are now as scare as the corncrake.



GERARD QUIRKE has announced that he is leaving Tuam after three years to join a Latin Mass outfit!

He was only ordained for Tuam in 2018.

This time last year, Tuam was celebrating his 30th birthday with him and praising him as their youngest priest.

Now he is leaving them.



The FSSP consists of priests and seminarians who intend to pursue the goal of Christian perfection according to a specific charism, which is to offer the Mass and other sacraments according to the Roman Rite as it existed before the liturgical reforms that followed the Second Vatican Council. Thus, the fraternity uses the Roman Missal, the Roman Breviary, the Pontifical (Pontificale Romanum), and the Roman Ritual in use in 1962, the last editions before the revisions that followed the Council.

The 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum had authorized use of the 1962 Roman Missal by all Latin Rite priests as an extraordinary form of the Roman Rite without limit when celebrating Mass “without a congregation”.  Its use for Mass with a congregation was allowed with the permission of the priest in charge of a church for stable groups attached to this earlier form of the Roman Rite, provided that the priest using it was “qualified to do so and not juridically impeded” (as for instance by suspension). That was abrogated by the 2021 motu proprio Traditionis custodes that emphasized deference towards the Missal of Pope St. Paul VI and added restrictions to which clergy could perform the Roman Rite according to the pre-Vatican II form. 

Following from its charism, the fraternity’s mission is twofold: to sanctify each priest through the exercise of his priestly function, and to deploy these priests to parishes. As such, they are to celebrate the sacraments, catechise, preach retreats, organize pilgrimages, and generally provide a full sacramental and cultural life for lay Catholics who are likewise drawn to the rituals of the 1962 missal. In order to help complete its mission, the fraternity has built its own seminaries with the goal of forming men to serve the fraternity.


The society was founded in 1988 under the leadership of 12 priests who were formerly members of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), another traditionalist organization, but were unwilling to remain part of it following the Écône consecrations, which resulted in its bishops being excommunicated by the Holy See.

Headquartered in Switzerland, the society maintains two international seminaries: the International Seminary of St. Peter in WigratzbadOpfenbachBavaria, Germany, and Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Denton, Nebraska, United States. The society is officially recognized by the Holy See and its priests celebrate the Tridentine Mass in locations in 124 worldwide dioceses.


These Latin Mass societies should be totally and immediately suppressed by Francis and the Vatican.

Their foundation and continuation is a direct attack on Vatican II and the intentions of the council fathers as regards the celebration of the Mass in the vernacular.

Benedict XVI and others tolerated these latin dinosaurs when they should have been resisted and now they have a firm hold and are running another church alongside the Vatican II church.

Furthermore, they are taking vocations away from dioceses and parishes.

I’m surprised Michael Neary is allowing Quirke to abandon the diocese he was ordained for to join up with these bunch of nutcases.

What about the Tuam money soent on his training?

He should gave been forced to do at least 10 years of service in Tuam before indulging in this fantasy.

Were I his bishop I would have given him a firm NO and told him to serve Tuam or apply for laicization.

The priesthood is primarily one of pastoral service.

Not a way of indulging liturgical fantasies.




Hi Pat

I hope you are well. I have been trying to do some investigative work on the Christening of Conor McGregors baby Rian in the Sistine Chapel last week.

I am presuming given his Dublin roots, it may have been arranged by an Irish ordinary or Irish priest.

A man who has disgraced Irish sport by numerous thuggery misbehaviour is given the reward of a Sistine Chapel Baptism.

I am also working under the bias that he is not a regular mass goer and uses his public persona in which to rank higher than anybody else.

What Irish priest or Bishop would allow somebody who sees himself the greatest among the greatest be given the privileged position of standing at the baptismal font of the Sistine Chapel.

The Baptism featured in numerous tabloid rags with photos taken within the Chapel despite there being strict no photo protocol in place to preserve the uniqueness of the architecture.
Of course, McGregor couldn’t even leave his boxing gloves at home as he apparently became embralled in an “alleged” violent altercation with a DJ in Rome.

A pure thug…

Please don’t disclose my name. But I would be interested to see what info is out there.



People have been saying that McGregor’s baby was baptised in the Sistine Chapel.

But one of my Roman clerical Vatican contacts sent me the following:

The child was NOT baptised in the Sistine Chapel. That is a unique privilege granted by the Holy Father usually to the children of the staff of the Holy See and the children of diplomats and their staff that are accredited to the Holy See.

However, the child was baptised in St. Peter’s Basilica”.

So much for all the staged pictures in the Sistine Chapel !!!


At the after party the failing boxer punched tge famous Itakian DJ  Facchinetti.

I have no idea who arranged the Vatican baptisms for McGregor.

We may be able to find out.

The fact that the whole thing ended in violence is both predictable and regrettable.

But in the RCC its money and fame that counts.

The Vatican has always open to being bought.

As a priest friend of mine says:

“She opens her legs for the highest bidder” 😪


Legal Tsunami May be Headed for Vatican Prosecutors in ‘Trial of the Century’

October 15, 2021 by Peter Complicit Clergy

Somewhere out in the ocean right now, a small buoy is measuring wave direction and speed, along with barometric pressure and water temperature, feeding that data back to observatories. Even small upticks or downticks may signal the first stirrings of what could become a devastating storm.

You don’t need special equipment, however, to detect warning signs right now of a legal tsunami that may be heading for the prosecution in the Vatican’s “trial of the century,” which pivots on a $400 million London real estate deal gone wrong, and, for the first time ever, features a cardinal in the dock.

On Wednesday, the penal section of the Italian Supreme Court dismissed an arrest order that had been issued at the request of Vatican prosecutors for Gianluigi Torzi, a London-based Italian financier who’s a principal defendant in the Vatican trial. Though we don’t yet have the text of the ruling, in effect the Supreme Court found the evidence submitted by the Vatican insufficient to sustain a charge.

The decision follows a similar ruling by a British judge in March, who also threw out a Vatican request for Torzi to be arrested, citing what the judge called “appalling” misrepresentations and omissions in the evidence submitted by the Vatican’s Promoter of Justice.


I think the Vatican is trying to blame all kinds of people for the corruption in the Church.

But the truth is that the buck stops with Francis and the cardinals who run the Vatican.

When you are the chief and deputy chiefs of an organisation your scalp is the one that should be sacrificed when things go wrong.

The truth is that the Vatican should never have been state in the first place. It was a gift from the tyrant Mussolini in return for church support.

The Vatican is a rogue state when it comes to sexual abuse, financial corruption and cooperation with groups like the Mafia.

Italy should cancel the 1929 concordat and make the Vatican answerable to Italian, European and International law.






The tragic and senseless murder of the MP for Southend West, Sir David Amess, in what appears to be a terrorist-related attack is truly shocking. The late politician was a devout Roman Catholic, who was murdered while holding a surgery for his constituents at Belfairs Methodist Church in Leigh-on-Sea.

One MP has described the level of abuse hurled at MPs and their parliamentary aides as an “epidemic”. In what could be described as a portent of his own death, Sir David Amess, wrote recently that an attack on a politician “could happen to any of us”. This is not surprising when you read that a former parliamentary adviser who worked for Yvette Cooper, MP, says she received around 50 death threats each week. In a response to his killing, the UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, MP, has ordered an urgent review of the security of MPs.

On June 11, 2002, a man armed with two rifles entered Conception Abbey, a Benedictine monastery in Missouri killing two monks and seriously injuring two others before killing himself.

Following the publication of “The Murphy Report” in 2009 into clerical misconduct of the Archdiocese of Dublin, just after “The Ryan Report” priests reported that they had been subject to verbal harassment/intimidation in public and some reported they had been spat upon.

In America, following similar public scandals, priests also reported similar levels of public harassment. And, some Orthodox clergy have been confused for Roman Catholic clergy and were the subject of harassment and abuse from members of the public who enraged at Roman Catholic clergy.

In an article in the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year, following revelations of further clerical scandals that in Canada “four Catholic churches and an Anglican church were burned to the ground, the first churches to be set ablaze or vandalized to begin a summer of such desecration. Suspicious fires then broke out across the country. In all, at least 56 churches have been set aflame or vandalized, according to the True North Centre, which is mapping attacks on churches”.

On October 11, The Los Angeles Times, reported that a charge located on the edge of Chinatown in LA was defaced with “with anti-colonial slogans on Monday in an act of vandalism that police are investigating as a hate crime”. And, this seems to be continuation of similar acts of vandalism of churches in California.

So for today’s blog, I am asking priests and religious who read this blog to comment on their own personal safety.

Have they ever been physically assaulted?

Have they been injured and/or received an injury that was so severe it required immediate medical attention including hospitalisation?

Have they ever been threatened with violence?

Was the threat of violence a one-off occasion and/or part of an on-going campaign of harassment/intimidation?

Do priests/religious need to have self-defence training?

Should a priest/religious carry a can of pepper spray for their personal safety?

Is it conceivable that a person who is so enraged by the historical failings of the church could contemplate murdering a priest in revenge, and act accordingly?

Are these realities that are contemplated by clergy/religious on a daily basis?

Should all presbyteries have CCTV installed to ensure both the security of the property and the safety of clergy and those who work/volunteer within the parish?

Our readers of the blog aware of any initiatives that have “ecclesiastical approval” that have at their core the health and safety and personal security of priests/religious?

I would be interested to read additional comments and observations that I have not included in the blog, because this is a wide-ranging and complex issue.


I have been verbally attacked on the streets of Dublin.

I have been spat upon and struck on one or two occasions by drunks at a Traveller wedding.

When I came to Larne in 1984 two gunmen came to shoot me at my home. Thankfully I was out.

The following day the police arrived with bulletproof glass and a Walthar automatic pistol.

Thankfully I have never had to use it.

With all the abuse and corruption I think that there is an increased danger to priests.

Thats why many of them dont wear clerical collars.




I am not a fan of Archbishop Roche, who will probably be made a cardinal by Pope Francis at the next consistory. As the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, when he gives a lecture about the liturgy, we should reflect and engage with what he has to say even if we vehemently disagree. When he was the Ordinary of the Diocese of Leeds, he displayed a sustained hostility to the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) that was unacceptable. As a diocesan bishop, Roche (who is very personable one-to-one) did not show pastoral solicitude; nor, did he exercise ecclesiastical discretion. 

I take a pragmatic view about the TLM, if people wish to attend this form of the liturgy, let them, because, they are not doing any harm. However, they cannot be permitted to create a church within a church; their deficient ecclesiology cannot be given institutional credence. But, is also the case that people attend the TLM because they are in dismay at the state of the church, e.g., ex-Cardinal McCarrick and the never-ending tsunami of scandals involving sexual and financial misconduct.

A great number of (but not all) people who are diehard supporters of the TLM are driven by the misguided nostalgia to “recreate” a perfect church that has never existed. These people would do well to remember there has never been a golden age of the church.  They seem to forget that Liturgy is a participation in the salvific work of Christ. The celebration of the Eucharist as per the pre-Vatican II Missal has become a spectacle for those who wish to fetishise liturgical vestments on websites such as:

It is also begetting the dangerous groupthink that priests who celebrate the TLM are beyond reproach and they can do no wrong. Church Militant, which is becoming increasingly Trumpian have eloquently shown that the evil of priests sexually abusing children is also an entrenched problem within the SSPX. 

Increasingly, I have found this observation to be true where you have priests wearing lace in the church in the morning — you have the same priests wearing leather in the evening at chemsex parties. 

The TLM will not “save” the church. It will not lead to an influx of vocations. Its supporters would do well to bear in mind that there are twenty-three Eastern Churches sui iuris in full communion with Rome that have distinct but equally legitimate liturgical traditions, ie, the Alexandrian, Armenian, Byzantine, East Syriac, and West Syriac Rites. Also, these churches have their own problems. And, they have corrupt and abusive clergy.

Those who take a traditional/conservative worldview about liturgy are rightly concerned with the unacceptable and erroneous view that Vatican II gave clerics a licence to recreate the church and by extension the liturgy in their own image and likeness. The unsympathetic modifications to churches and cathedrals were often misguided, ill-conceived, and driven by petty ecclesiastical politics. A point acknowledged by Cardinal Ratzinger when he was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.


It is important that we differentiate between Tradition and Traditionalists when it comes to liturgy. The two bishops that are heroes for traditionalists are Cardinal Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider. The former seems to becoming a conspiracy theorist and the latter is concerned by what he considers of the evil of taking communion in the hand. 


Liturgical disputes are as old as the church itself. Nothing ever changes, and the sooner we accept that and make peace with ecclesiastical reality the better. 


When I was ordained in 1976 I started celebrating and loving the Paul VI Mass.


It is the Mass I still use and I have never used Benedict’s missal.

I like all 4 eucharistic prayers.

II and III are useful as not being too long.

I love IV as it lays out the history of God’s dealings with man.

I agree with our correspondent today that the Latin Mass on its own if fine. But it is not fine when it becomes a rallying point for the right-wingers.

I have NEVER celebrated Mass in Latin and would need a lot of tutoring to do so.



Dear Abbot Brendan,

I am, of course, aware, that hearing from me is not a development that you will welcome. Nonetheless, it should not come as a surprise due to your lamentable, negligent, and wholly unacceptable oversight of the monastic visitation of Silverstream Priory in 2020. 

Recently, I have received some fresh information about Silverstream Priory. And, that information has been confirmed by a number of priests within the Diocese of Meath. Yesterday, I sent an e-mail asking a number of pointed questions to Bishop Thomas Deenihan about the presence of a Fr. Richard Abourjaily at Silverstream Priory.

It is clear that Fr. Richard Abourjaily was resident in Silverstream Priory doing what he liked with impunity with the explicit approbation of Dom Mark Kirby, OSB, and possibly with the tacit approval of the then Bishop of Meath, Michael Smith.

Because, I believe transparency is good for the church, I published my list of questions to Bishop Deenihan on my blog. I enclose a link to the blog posting for your kind consideration:

Of course, if you are in a position to provide any answers to the questions asked of Bishop Deenihan, I would be most grateful. But, I suspect that might-be naïve on my part, however, one can always hope.

In any event, the catalyst for the present e-mail is a comment posited in the form of a question and an observation that was posted on my blog at 1.18 p.m. this afternoon in response to the above list of questions to Bishop Deenihan.

It is worth highlighting the question in full: “Was the Abourjaily matter brought up to Deenihan’s visitation? If so, it makes the visitation’s initial confirming of Dom Kirby as prior even more shocking”.

As you know, I will publish this e-mail on my blog, however, for the benefit of my readers, I will clarify what is meant by “Deenihan’s visitation”; it is the Apostolic Visitation ordered by Bishop Thomas Deenihan, the Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath in response to allegations he received from an individual whom we now know to be Dom Benedict Andersen, OSB, a monk and priest of Silverstream Priory. The visitation was conducted by you, Abbot Brendan Coffey, OSB; the frequent visitor to the gay sauna in Dublin known as The Boilerhouse, Dom Richard Purcell, OCSO, and Monsignor Gearóid Dullea, the former executive secretary to the Irish Episcopal Conference. Hence, there was sensibly a cornucopia of monastic/ecclesiastical experience to call upon. 

As so many documents pertaining to the visitation have been leaked you should have no problem in answering any of the following questions. 

Therefore, Abbot Brendan, are you in a position to confirm whether the presence of Fr. Richard Abourjaily was raised during the Apostolic Visitation of Silverstream Priory?

Are you able to answer if Fr. Richard Abourjaily was permitted to reside within Silverstream Priory with the ecclesiastical approbation of the Diocese of Meath? 

With the benefit of hindsight complemented by your considerable experience as the Abbot of Glenstal and as a monastic troubleshooter, e.g., Ampleforth Abbey, do you consider the presence of Fr. Richard Abourjaily to have been a blessing or a curse for Silverstream Priory? I would be grateful for a considered reply to this important question.

I am told by Meath-based priests that Dom Purcell was appointed to be one of the visitators due to his purported expertise in financial matters. We were apprised in a report published by the National Catholic Reporter [hereinafter, NCR] that the three visitators stated that they are “very concerned about your [Silverstream Priory’s] current financial situation and the economic viability of the monastery”. Thus, can we infer that a proper financial audit of the community was undertaken? If not; why not?

What was your involvement (if any) in the financial audit of the community? It is my understanding that none of the people involved in the visitation hold professional qualifications in financial management/accounting. Why did you not suggest that a forensic audit of the accounts by a specialist firm be commissioned by the Diocese of Meath? Do you now consider that to have been a mistake made by the visitators?

It is, however, interesting that in the NCR article NO reference was made, in the visitators’ report to the allegations of sexual misconduct that had been levelled against Dom Mark Kirby. We learned after the completion of the visitation [September 2020] from Martin Long, Director of the Catholic Communications Office of the Irish Bishops’ Conference that Dom Mark “Kirby remains a priest in good standing and is currently on sick leave in Dublin and has resigned his post as superior”.

Thus, as the safeguarding co-ordinator for the Congregation of the Annunciation, I ask you the following question: were the allegations of sexual misconduct made against Dom Kirby not investigated during the visitation?

Was Mr. Martin Long at that time mistaken in stating that Dom Kirby was a priest in good standing or was Mr. Long being a well-paid deceiver?

We know that accusations of sexual misconduct were levelled against Dom Mark Kirby. We know that you were actively involved in the covering-up of same. Hence, do you consider that your position as the Abbot of Glenstal Abbey is untenable? Would you adopt a similar modus operandi if a similar complaint was made against a monk/priest of Glenstal Abbey? For the avoidance of doubt that is cover-up and sweep the accusation under the carpet and make it go away…

Because of your egregious handling of an allegation of sexual misconduct, do you consider that your position as the safeguarding Co-ordinator for the Congregation of the Annunciation is untenable?

Have you considered submitting your resignation as the safeguarding co-ordinator to the Abbot President of the Congregation of the Annunciation, Fr. Maksymilian R. Nawara, OSB? If not; why not?

Do you accept the charge that you have no credibility from an ecclesiastical and/or secular perspective when it comes to safeguarding?

Do you further accept that you bring “monastic safeguarding” into disrepute and your actions/initiatives within Glenstal Abbey and its school along with the wider Congregation of the Annunciation cannot be accorded any credibility?

Can the parents of students who are pupils in Glenstal Abbey School have any confidence in the safeguarding procedures in the school as a result of your active participation in the exoneration/cover-up of allegations of serious sexual misconduct in Silverstream Priory?

Would you be happy for me to send a copy of this e-mail to Mr. Seán Ó Foghlú, Secretary-General of the Irish Department of Education, asking him to bring these safeguarding concerns to the personal attention of the Minister for Education, Ms. Norma Foley? For the sake of convenience, you might wish to refer Glenstal Abbey School and your oversight of same to Mr. Foghlú. His e-mail address is:

You exercised the delegated authority of the Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath, Bishop Deenihan, and acted as the Superior of Silverstream Priory for a period of time. Thus, if Silverstream Priory is suppressed by a Decree of the Holy See, and some members of the community wish to remain Benedictines in Ireland, would you be receptive to receiving monks from Silverstream Priory into the community at Glenstal Abbey? If not, why not? If you resign, and when the new Abbot of Glenstal is elected, would you recommend any members of the Silverstream community to the new Ordinary of Glenstal Abbey? 

With prayerful best wishes,

+ Pat Buckley


Abbot President, Congregation for the Annunciation, Fr. Maksymilian R. Nawara, OSB.

His Lordship, the Bishop of Meath, the Most Rev’d Dr. Thomas Deenihan, PhD, (Hull).



My dear Tom,

Unfortunately, I find myself in the position where I have to bring the on-going scandal that is Silverstream Priory to your immediate attention.

As you are probably aware, in my blog posting dated October 13, 2021, I posed (via e-mail) a series of questions to the father of one of the simply professed monks of Silverstream Priory, Dr. Kwasniewski. At the time of this writing, Dr. Kwasniewski has not replied to same. In my missive to Dr. Kwasniewski, I made reference to an ex-priest of the Archdiocese of Sydney, Fr. Richard Abourjaily.

The said Fr. Abourjaily made life extremely difficult for Cardinal Pell for reasons that do not need to be elucidated within the present. 

In light of this blog posting, I have been contacted by a third priest from the Diocese of Meath. Obviously, I assured this priest total discretion, because he was concerned about retaliation because Silverstream Priory and my on-going blogging about same is very contentious and sensitive matter within the Diocese of Meath. 

The good priest confirmed to me that Fr. Richard Abourjaily was physically present at Silverstream Priory. He confirms that Fr. Abourjaily was frequently seen on the grounds of Silverstream Priory wearing the traditional soutane; he further confirmed that he had seen Fr. Abourjaily in the choir stalls of Silverstream Priory during the celebration of the Divine Office on several occasions.

I am apprised that Fr. Abourjaily was approached by people who were visiting the Priory when he was out and about to hear confessions, which he did without any hesitation. I am also told by my informant that Fr. Abourjaily was appointed to be the “monasticll cook” by then Prior, Dom Mark Kirby. 


It has been confirmed to me that Fr. Abourjaily did celebrate the Conventual Mass at Silverstream Priory on several occasions. Let me be clear, I am stating that Fr. Abourjaily publicly celebrated Mass in the oratory chapel at Silverstream Priory, attended by the monks and members of the public with the explicit permission of Dom Mark Kirby. A Laytown-based woman has confirmed that she attended a Mass at Silverstream celebrated by Fr. Abourjaily. She clearly remembers his Australian accent. She also remarked she was surprised that it was not a monk celebrating the Mass. She was very clear on this point.

However, I now e-mail with the following questions that you will have to ascertain from your predecessor, Bishop Michael Smith.

It is my understanding from the Meath-based priest that Fr. Abourjaily was prohibited from representing himself as a priest under any circumstances while present in the Diocese of Meath. He did NOT have permission to celebrate the Eucharist publicly; he definitely did not have faculties to hear confessions, because he was in a lot of trouble with his then Ordinary, the Archbishop of Sydney. Is this true?

Was Fr. Abourjaily canonically present in the Diocese of Meath with the explicit written permission of his Ordinary, the Archbishop of Sydney, Anthony Fisher, OP?

Was Fr. Abourjaily given written permission to reside at Silverstream Priory by your predecessor, Bishop Michael Smith?

Was Fr. Abourjaily, given faculties to celebrate the Eucharist publicly, and to hear confessions by your predecessor, Bishop Michael Smith?

If, Fr. Abourjaily, did not have permission to canonically reside at Silverstream Priory and did not have faculties to say Mass and/or hear confessions, from the Diocese of Meath — did Dom Mark Kirby have jurisdiction to grant Fr. Abourjaily the requisite permissions? I am not a canonist, however, I am apprised that because Silverstream Priory is under the jurisdiction of the Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath, such permission could only be granted by then Bishop Michael Smith. Is my understanding correct?

Was the fact that Fr. Abourjaily was saying Mass and hearing confessions brought to the attention of the Diocese of Meath? If so, was a Decree rendered by Bishop Michael Smith (at that time) prohibiting Fr. Abourjaily exercising priestly ministry in the Diocese of Meath?

Did the Diocese of Meath have any communication from the Archdiocese of Sydney about Fr. Abourjaily?

Did the Archdiocese of Sydney provide financial assistance to either Silverstream Priory and/or the Diocese of Meath or both to support the then Fr. Abourjaily?

Is there any correspondence pertaining to Fr. Abourjaily in the archives of the Diocese of Meath? If so, are you, (Bishop Deenihan) willing to make it public in an act of transparency?

Of course, I realise, that you are not a fan of mine, however, I am a fair-minded and reasonable individual, so I recognise that the scandal and saga that is Silverstream Priory is not of your creation. You inherited the mess of your predecessor, however, I think it is reasonable to assert that you have made a bad situation worse by failing to address the issues at hand, namely that Silverstream Priory is the misguided vanity project of an individual who purports to be a mystic. However, the misguided mystic has led a life of debauchery that is completely at variance with the normative Christian vocation.

If you had hoped that the visitation (conducted by a Cistercian abbot mired in scandal and a compromised Benedictine abbot who has been complicit absolving Dom Mark Kirby’s known misconduct) would ameliorate the situation – you are very much mistaken. 

Bishop Tom, would you accept that Silverstream Priory is hopelessly and irredeemably compromised?

Would you accept that the best way forward is for the Priory to be suppressed by a Decree of the Holy See?

Would you also accept that those who are constituent members of the community should be offered assistance to transfer to credible institutes of religious/monastic life, and those who wish to return to secular life should be afforded financial assistance to make that a reality?

Are you in a position to confirm what will happen to the lands that constitute the Priory should the institute be suppressed by the Holy See?

Do you plan to sell the grounds and use the proceeds of the sale for evangelisation within your canonical territory?

With an assurance of heartfelt prayers and requesting an occasional remembrance in your most powerful prayers, I remain sincerely yours in Christ; 

Your brother bishop,

+ Pat Buckley