BISHOP PAT BUCKLEY

Dear Bishop Konderla,

In light of further information I have received since posting my blog article of (January 25, 2022), I have some additional and legitimate questions about the relationship between Silverstream Priory, a community of diocesan right subject to the jurisdiction of Bishop Thomas Deenihan, Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath and the Diocese of Tulsa.

According to the website, Charity Navigator, within your canonical territory there exists an entity called “The Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle Foundation” (IRS EIN number 46-3574386), headquartered in the small town of Mounds, Oklahoma. The Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle Foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization, and donations to same are tax-deductible.

An internet search reveals that Mounds, in Creek County, Oklahoma, is located just south of the City of Tulsa; the address given on online charity websites is “20315 S HIGHWAY 75, Mounds OK 74047-4908”. Is this town located within the geographical boundaries of your diocese?

The Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle Foundation exists according to its self-description on the Form 990: “TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR SILVERSTREAM PRIORY AND THE BENEDICTINE MONKS OF STAMULLEN, COUNTY MEATH, IRELAND”.

The aforesaid website gives this charitable entity an overall finance and accountability score of 85/100, which is “passing”. The missing fifteen (15) points are deducted due to the following negative issues: lack of a conflict of interest policy, lack of a document retention and destruction policy, and lack of a whistleblower policy. Moreover, last tax return filed with the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) was all the way back in 2019; it would appear, therefore, that the Foundation is rather behind in making reports of its financial activities to the American government.

Bishop Konderla, I hasten to add that I have no background in accounting, however, utilising and relying upon basic arithmetic it would appear from even the most cursory review of the accounts that are freely available on-line that the The Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle Foundation has funnelled a total of US$ 1,239,693 to Silverstream Priory in Ireland.

According to its 2019 tax return, the officers of the Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle Foundation are as follows:

DANIEL PICKETT (PRESIDENT)
GREG STICE (CHAIRMAN)
ROBIN PUDEWA (SECRETARY)
ANDREW PUDEWA (DIRECTOR)
TRACY LOPER (DIRECTOR)

The first two names, Bishop Konderla, are most certainly known to you. The President of the Foundation, Mr. Daniel Pickett, is a permanent Deacon of the Diocese of Tulsa, currently assigned by you to the Church of St. John Before the Latin Gate in Bartlesville. The Chairman of the Foundation, Mr. Greg Stice, is also a permanent Deacon of the Diocese of Tulsa, currently assigned by you to the Church of the Sacred Heart in Sapulpa with additional responsibilities within the “Office of Deacon Formation”.

Do you find it appropriate, Bishop Konderla, for two (2) permanent deacons of the Diocese of Tulsa to be so inextricably linked with the financing of a religious community in Ireland that has been mired in sexual and financial scandal?

May I remind you that a former priest of the Diocese of Tulsa, Dom Mark Kirby has been credibly accused of sexual and financial misconduct in the Republic of Ireland. Dom Kirby was subject to an investigation by the Irish Police Force for over a year and the force considered the allegations to be sufficiently serious to refer the matter to the Irish State Prosecutor, the Director of Public Prosecutions.

At the time of this writing, I have been unable to ascertain the reasons why Dom Kirby was not prosecuted. However, it is not unreasonable to speculate that it may-be attributable to the known ill-health of Dom Kirby. But, I emphasise that the fact it was investigated for so long would appear that the allegations made against Dom Kirby were sufficiently credible. It is noteworthy that Dom Kirby is telling benefactors that he is a priest in good standing, however, there was no reference to that reality on the website of the Diocese of Meath. And, the on-going silence of Bishop Deenihan about Dom Kirby’s canonical standing is troubling and surprising.

By the present, I wish to make it unequivocally clear that I am not suggesting there is any misconduct or wrong-doing on the part of the two (2) deacons named within the present. I would respectfully suggest they may-be guilty of naïveté in their devotion to Dom Kirby, a man who purportedly hears our Blessed Lord speaking to him from the Tabernacle. In fact, he has published a whole book to what he has “heard” from our Lord.

In any event, it would behove the Diocese of Tulsa to investigate this matter, because I am minded to bring this matter to the Revenue Commissioners of Ireland to ask them to conduct an independent audit of this financial connection. I am sure you would welcome a transparent and independent investigation into this arrangement. It may well be the case that everything is above board, however, in light of what is known about Silverstream Priory and Kirby’s nefarious past; one cannot be too careful.

Of course, I would not be so presumptuous to give any bishop directions about how to run his diocese. Nonetheless, it would be perhaps prudent for the Diocese of Tulsa to insist that the two permanent deacons mentioned to resign from the running of the entity and for them to have no further involvement with Silverstream Priory, and to be warned in writing of canonical penalties for non-compliance.

Bishop Konderla, I can assure you there is more scandal to come from Dom Kirby’s past, and I am sure that in light of my previous correspondence – the Diocese of Tulsa may wish to minimise its exposure to the collateral damage that is coming down the road.

With an assurance of ongoing prayerful best wishes,

• Pat Buckley

Cc

Bishop Thomas Deenihan.

Yesterday, the Cistercians commemorated the Feast of their Founders: St. Robert of Molesme, St. Alberic, and St. Stephen Harding; the latter being an Englishman who is reputed to have been born in Dorset.

In light of the indefatigable (and at times exhausting efforts) of this blog a scandal festering at the heart of the Cistercians — the duplicitous life of Dom Richard Purcell is no longer occult.

And, having being exposed, Dom Purcell, finally did the decent thing by presenting his resignation as the Abbot of Mount Melleray Abbey, which providentially was accepted by the Abbot General, Dom Eamon Fitzgerald, OCSO with the consent of his council.

The history of monasticism shows periods of great fervour and followed by periods of decline.

This is nothing new. But, there have always been men and women who have generously responded to the call of the Lord to follow the monastic life. And, this will continue well in the future when we are all dead and buried, however, it is not unreasonable to presume that in the future monastic communities will be smaller; but hopefully there will be more authentic.

And, for the avoidance of any and all doubt the synchronistic expression of monasticism to be found at Silverstream Priory is not an example of what I am referring to in this blog

Another perennial theme within monasticism has been sexual misconduct within monasteries.

But, this is not exclusive to the Roman Catholic expression of monasticism; it is also an issue within Orthodox monasticism. The monastic tradition within Buddhism has also seen its share of sexual misconduct and financial scandals.

However, these scandals tend to be covered-up and do not attract media coverage. This is not surprising due to the nature of sin, and the reality of the human condition. Monasticism only makes sense when it is informed by an eschatological reality. Otherwise, it is an exercise in futility.

Today, the Cistercians invite everyone to be spiritually united with them in prayer.

The Cistercians are rightly praying for an increase in vocations and the renewal of their way of life.

They have composed a beautiful prayer that expresses this profound sentiment. I invite all the readers of my blog to prayerfully offer it for the renewal of the Cistercians across the globe; for the successful consolidation of the Irish Cistercian houses at Mount Melleray Abbey, and for the renewal of monasticism more generally in the Church. Mount Melleray Abbey is a place very close to my heart. It was a place I visited when I was a seminarian in Waterford; it remains a place that is very close to my heart.

I also spent a lot of time as a seminarian and young priest in Mellifont Abbey at Collon in Louth.

Authentic Cistercians everywhere have my esteem and respect.

Ref: Dom Mark Kirby, OSB, formally a priest of the Diocese of Tulsa; now a priest of the Diocese of Meath.

​

Dear Bishop Konderla,​

​

I am in receipt of the letter dated January 21, 2022 from Señor González, the erstwhile vicar general of the Diocese of Tulsa, to which I now hasten to reply. In fact, the reply from the Diocese of Tulsa stands in the stark contrast to the on-going silence from the Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath, a certain Thomas Deenihan to the known matter of Dom Mark Kirby’s misconduct within his diocese.

And, these evidence-based allegations pertaining to Dom Mark Kirby were repeatedly brought to the attention of Tom Deenihan. But, by virtue of his failure to apply the dictates of Canon Law, Tom Deenihan, is now dragging the Diocese of Tulsa into this saga. However, that does not excuse the misconduct of Dom Mark Kirby, while a priest of the Diocese of Tulsa and further misconduct as a priest of the Diocese of Meath.

It is noteworthy that Señor González that holds a MDiv from St. Meinrad School of Theology in Indiana; a STL (Sacred Theology Licentiate) and STD (Sacred Theology Doctorate) in Spiritual Theology from the Pontifical Institute of Spirituality “Teresianum”.[1] But, it is salutary to highlight that Señor González does not hold a pontifical degree in Canon Law. Unfortunately, the letter from Señor González begets more questions than answers, and, these further questions are set out, hereinafter.​

​

In his letter of reply it is conspicuous and I would submit unconscionable that Señor González does not answer any of the reasonable or proportionate questions that I posed within my initial correspondence with the Diocese of Tulsa. Moreover, I now wish to put you, Bishop Konderla, some additional questions, and I trust you will be forthcoming with answers. And, by the present, I respectfully suggest that it is wholly incorrect for Señor González to state that “there is no present canonical concern that involves the Diocese of Tulsa”.​

​

Did your predecessor in office, Bishop Edward James Slattery, by a Decree, erect the Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle, in accordance with Canon 312 within the Diocese of Tulsa with the view that the experimental institute (in the future) gaining the status of a monastery of Diocesan Right? Did Bishop Slattery sign a Decree to this effect on August 4, 2009? Does the Diocese of Tulsa now formally deny that this monastery was canonically erected within the diocese by the aforesaid Bishop Slattery?​

​

For the avoidance of doubt, I am satisfied that: a) the Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle was canonically erected by Bishop Edward James Slattery; b) the said “monastery” was located within the Diocese of Tulsa, and, c) at the time Dom Mark Kirby was subject to the canonical jurisdiction of your predecessor, the said Bishop Edward James Slattery, by virtue of Dom Mark Kirby’s incardination as a priest of the diocese.​

​

In my possession is irrefutable evidence that establishes that Dom Mark Kirby OSB, was incardinated as a priest of the Diocese of Tulsa. Does the Diocese of Tulsa formally deny that Dom Mark Kirby was incardinated as a priest within the aforesaid diocese?​

​

I have knowledge of sexual misconduct involving Dom Mark Kirby involving a former aspirant to the religious life within the so-called Monastery of Our Lady of the Cenacle. This so-called “monastery” was physically located within the canonical territory of the Diocese of Tulsa.​

​

As previously stated, I have knowledge of sexual misconduct that took place in the abovesaid monastery. Moreover, these allegations are personally known (as I stated in my first correspondence to this diocese) to a Benedictine religious superior; they are further known to a monsignor who is Washington DC-based. Hence, I am not repeating unfounded allegations. Thus, I would respectfully submit that the actions of Dom Mark Kirby should be a source of legitimate concern for this Diocese of Tulsa and by extension the Irish-based, Diocese of Meath.​

​

Therefore, one does not need to be an attorney to recognise that the Diocese of Tulsa is vicariously liable for the actions of its clergy. And, it is important I bring to your attention that the allegations that are known to me and time-barred by the twelve (12) year statutory bar in the state of Oklahoma.​

​

It is salutary to highlight that these allegations/disputed acts took place before Dom Mark Kirby became incardinated as a priest of the Diocese of Meath during the episcopal tenure of Bishop Michael Smith. Presumably, Bishop Edward James Slattery gave Dom Mark Kirby a letter of good standing to permit him become incardinated as a priest of the Diocese of Meath; because, according to my sources (three (3) priests within the Diocese of Meath, its then Ordinary, Bishop Smith, did not incardinate Dom Kirby into his diocese, ad experimentum. ​

​

I have been contacted by a former religious confrere of Dom Kirby, who suggested to me that Dom Mark Kirby was removed by a Decree of the Holy See and incardinated into the Diocese of Tulsa with the expressed approbation of Bishop Edward James Slattery. Is this true? If you are not willing to answer the question, I am content to write to the Abbot General of the Cistercians of the Common Observance, Dom Mauro-Giuseppe Lepori, O.Cist, to ascertain the reason(s) why Dom Kirby left the Cistercians!​

​

To be clear, I am asserting that I have credible knowledge of sexual misconduct perpetrated by Dom Mark Kirby during his time as the religious superior of heat experimental foundation that were subject to the immediate jurisdiction of the then Bishop of Tulsa, Edmund Slattery.​

​

Bishop Konderla, in light of the fact that Señor González sent me a letter that in effect a supercilious and dismissive reply that did not answer any of the substantive and legitimate questions that were posed in my initial correspondence — it is difficult to take seriously his observation that the “Roman Catholic Diocese of Tulsa & Eastern Oklahoma take seriously all allegations of abuse and stands ready to work with competent civil and canonical authorities to address any issue”. Did you personally review and approve the letter of reply? And, was the text of the letter approved by Tom Deenihan, Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath?

​

It is unfortunate that the Diocese of Tulsa has been dragged into this shambles, however, this can be attributed to the lamentable and demonstrable failures of Tom Deenihan. In his capacity as the office-holder of Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath; he has consistently and contumaciously failed to undertake his pastoral responsibilities. May I respectfully apprise you that Tom Deenihan appointed a Trappist Abbot to conduct a visitation of Silverstream Priory, the then Dom Richard Purcell, OCSO. The said Dom Purcell was known to be a frequent visitor to gay houses of ill-repute in a manner not dissimilar to the now disgraced Monsignor Jeffrey Burrill; hence, he was the “ideal” candidate to “investigate” Dom Kirby, because birds of a feather flock together.

​

If the Diocese of Tulsa is serious about these allegations of sexual misconduct that I can substantiate; you, Bishop Konderla will provide written answers to my previous questions. Then, the potential complainant can take credence that his complaint will be taken seriously by the Diocese of Tulsa. It is not guaranteed he will come forward, however, the defensive and supercilious reply from Señor González was certainly not positive or encouraging. ​

​

Because, I believe transparency is good for the church I will place this letter on my blog. However, as I have previously stated I am known to be a man of my word and, if you request, I will keep your reply confidential.​

​

In any event, the scandal that is Silverstream Priory is not going to ameliorate by the inaction of Mr. Deenihan, and I would suggest that it would behove both of you to have a constructive conversation; because the longer Dom Kirby is permitted to masquerade as a priest in good standing; he will continue to be a source of scandal and derision for the Irish Church.​

​

With an assurance of heart-felt prayers, I remain​

​

Sincerely yours in Christ,​

​

+ Pat Buckley.​

​

Cc:​

​

His Excellency, Archbishop Christophe Pierre, Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America.​

​

His Excellency, Archbishop, Jude Okolo, Apostolic Nuncio to the Republic of Ireland.​

​

Thomas Deenihan, Ordinary of the Diocese of Meath.

---

[1] http://biblioteca.teresianum.net/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=159289 Accessed: January 25, 2022.

​

The above painting was painted for MARK KIRBY of Silverstream by his long time artist friend TERRY NELSON.

Terry Nelson is also the author of blogs called Abbey Roads and Up Your Street.

He has done a second painting of St Sebastian which, to my mind is more homoerotic.

I am not a prude and I personally have no objection to erotic art. But it should be on display sensitively. David Hockney is such an artist. Terry Nelson is a good artist.

But not in MONASTRIES.

OTHER NELSON PAINTINGS

A Meath priest has told me that Mark Kirby wanted to hang the first St Sebastian in Silverstream Monastery but was persuaded not to by the whistle blower, Dom Benedict Andersen.

Apparently, Dom Andersen told Mark Kirby that the painting was “inappropriate”.

Terry Nelson blogged recently celebrating the fact that the Gardai and Charity Commissioners were not taking any action against Kirby.

Kirby himself is writing to international friends claiming “total exoneration”.

This is not accurate.

Fr Benedict never accused Kirby of sexual assault.

He accused him of sexual harassment and grooming.

What is a fact is that Kirby has a long standing and international reputation for homoerotic behaviour.

Such a man is absolutely unsuitable to be living in a monastery with young men aged 20 to 35.

To Tom Deenihan’s great shame, he is leaving Kirby in situ and perpetuating this grave scandal.

It will all end very badly.

THE GLENSTAL MONASTERY PICTURES

FROM OUR RESIDENT ARTIST

The above is interesting – the bishop, with the help of the priest’s family, questioning the priest’s physical and mental health.

The reference to his liver is them suggesting the priest has an alcohol or substance abuse problem.

All meant to undermine the priest and his credibility.

Those of us who have stood up to the RCC and its bishops have always been attacked at the level of our physical and mental health.

And the RCC has attempted to use family members against us.

Auld Desmond Connell invited my Mum in for tea on her own.

She told him she would only join him if I was with here.

She may have left school at 14 but she was more than able for auld Connell.

These RC gangsters are ruthless.

I hope the priest is ok and if he’s not I hope he has friends to support him.

FROM WEE SCOTLAND

Hi Pat,

A few of us gathered Saturday to watch the Big Jim Docherty funeral online.​

The Liturgy was beautiful thanks to the Jesuit choir. Plenty of Latin.​

The Jesuit preached very well as you’d expect from a Jesuit.

The former priest also spoke very well in his eulogy; some of us studied with him – a lovely man who is very talented and a terrible loss to the priesthood. During the eulogy amongst other things we found the following points very interesting: 1) he spoke of ‘The Angry Years’ that big Jim went through; 2) he spoke of Big Jim finally ‘accepting himself’ & 3) he spoke about big Jim walking about Glasgow with his message bag containing amongst other things the latest fragrance! All of these would back up the theme of our obituary to you about Big Jim. It just sounded like an LGBT closet man being eulogized.

The Daisy Chain were out in force:​

• Mgr Bradley presided but can’t stand, breath and preach at the same time and is too obese to give out Communion;
• his MC was the teacher and meal attender Mr Mark McGuire.
• another Daisy Chain Host, Canon Anthony Gallagher, presided over the Final Commendation.

An alternative Purvey was held at a restaurant frequented by Big Jim close by to the church. Only the daisy chain members were present, it was all very camp and tearful. They reminisced about Big Jim and absolutely tore you to ribbons. They’re frightened of you & the damage the blog has done to their reputations etc.

FATHER MARTIN MC ALINDEN

This letter, to my mind comes from an angry cleric.

I think that the writer is on the the gay active priests who get very angry when this Blog gets near one of them or their friends.

He should have sent me his excoriating letter.

He tells me that Fr Mc Alinden was 100 times the priest I am.

Is that not for God to judge?

And he tells me I will only be a better priest if I take his advice.

He calls my £ 50 donation to the hospice “miserable”.

I’m sure the hospice would love many more £ 50 donations.

Of course this priests is above all else A COWARD.

He did not have the balls to put his mame to his letter.

He could not even come out and defend his dead friend openly.

I always put my name to EVERYTHING I write or say.

CHATHOLIC CHAPLAINCY QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY BELFAST.

Our writer is expressing how they felt when the attended the Catholic Chaplaincy at QUB.

I have never been in the building.

But in many parishes and chaplaincies the PP or the chaplain regards it as THEIR territory.

And they do not like to be questioned.

Also, many of these men surround themselves with a clique of head nodders.

It’s an oft repeated dynamic of human organisations.

Fr McGrattan was well liked in St Patrick’s Parish in Belfast when he was there.

He has since been sent for further studies.

The air in St Brigids Parish is quite “rarified” with parishioners being doctors lawyers etc.

Text of Irish Examiner article on 18 Jan 2022 by Eoghan Dalton 

Controversy has flared in the Diocese of Waterford over the departure of a popular priest.

Richard Geoghegan tweeted on Sunday night that he had been “officially dismissed by Rome” and claimed his “Bishop was happy to dispense” with him.

The Bishop of Waterford and Lismore has pushed back on this, contending that Mr Geoghegan has left the priesthood “of his own accord”.

Mr Geoghegan was a longtime priest in south Tipperary, covering Carrick-on-Suir and other parts, and is the brother of former Mayor of Waterford, Fine Gael councillor Damien Geoghegan.

He came under fire in 2017 by an international right-wing Catholic publication following an appearance in an RTÉ programme hosted by hotelier Francis Brennan, where he performed in drag as singer Shirley Bassey.

He tweeted: “I entered seminary in 1987 at the age of 19. I was ordained in 1993 at the age of 25. On 7/1/22 I was officially dismissed by Rome. On Friday 14/01/22 my Bishop was happy to dispense me.”

Mr Goeghegan added: “I’m a good man. And he talks about the shortage of vocations.”

The crisis facing the Church due to a lack of priests has been referenced in the past by both Pope Francis and Bishop of Waterford and Lismore Alphonsus Cullinan.

However Bishop Cullinan told the Irish Examiner that Mr Geoghegan had sought to leave the priesthood of his own accord.

“Richard Geoghegan petitioned Pope Francis for laicisation from the priesthood on 31st March 2021,” Bishop Cullinan said.

“At the meeting last March, Richard attended the diocesan offices, in the company of a chosen colleague, to sign the request to the Holy Father for laicisation.

“On 15th December 2021, Pope Francis granted Richard Geoghegan’s petition, meaning that he is no longer a priest.

“I wish to acknowledge and thank Richard for his pastoral ministry over the years and wish him well for his future.”

Local councillor David Dunne said it was known there have been disagreements between Mr Geoghegan and the Church hierarchy.

“Fr Richard has my one hundred percent support. He’s one of the nicest men and is extremely well liked in Carrick,” Mr Dunne said.

“It’s people like him who will make the Church relevant and who are needed by the Church — not the other way around.”

Tributes were paid on social media to Mr Geoghegan for his work as a priest, with two saying he had been “treated abysmally” in recent years.

Some of his 3,400-strong social media following were surprised to learn he was a man of the cloth, and instead knew him for his tweeting on Waterford matters, musicals and events of the day.

Parishioner Nicola Long told him: “You were, and still are, and will continue to be a wonderful person. You are part of practically every family in Carrick, for being an amazing person in good times and in sorrowful times.”

STATEMENT OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CATHOLIC PRIESTS.

ACP Statement, Thurs 20 January 2022:

Last October, the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP) issued a statement in relation to complaints we received about the way some bishops are treating – even it might be said bullying – some of their priests. We noted that this is generally not the case with most Irish bishops. We pointed out that, for over a decade now, the ACP has seen its role as supporting the rights of priests to fair and just treatment.

So it was with dismay and sadness that we read the news that Richard Geoghegan of the diocese of Waterford and Lismore has left the priesthood. As the ACP supported Richard’s quest for fairness, it is imperative that we add some facts, as we know them, in response to the recent statement from Bishop Alphonsus Cullinan of Waterford and Lismore.

In 2020, the Association was contacted by a priest from the diocese of Waterford and Lismore as he felt a priest of the diocese – Richard Geoghegan – was being “pushed out of priesthood” – even though there was no allegation or official complaint against him. One of the ACP Leadership team met with Richard and, with Richard’s agreement, accompanied him to a meeting with his bishop.

During the meeting, Richard expressed his wish to remain a priest of the diocese. Bishop Cullinan responded that he knew that Richard did not want that. The Bishop added that he felt it best for Richard if he left the priesthood. In response, Richard said that he never felt supported by the bishop since he came into the diocese.

In reply, the Bishop outlined all the reasons why he felt Richard should leave – including a mental health crisis that Richard had experienced. Sometime after the meeting, when Richard obtained the minutes, he discovered they were completely distorted and only included some of what the bishop had said and nothing of what Richard or the ACP member had said.

During 2021, Bishop Cullinan withdrew Richard’s ‘celebret’ – a card that acknowledges a priest is in good standing with his bishop – which meant that Richard could no longer say Mass publicly or officiate as a priest. Richard was not informed of this nor did any formal process take place to alert him to it. He was then asked to leave the house provided for him by the diocese. Because he felt unsupported and ‘not wanted’ by Bishop Cullinan, Richard reluctantly signed the laicisation papers.

The ACP believes that Bishop Cullinan’s treatment of Fr Richard Geoghegan fell well below the ‘pastoral care’ a bishop as ‘a shepherd’ is expected to exercise in relation to his priest, a standard of respect, support and care that is enshrined in the law of the Catholic Church and which priests have a right to enjoy. Richard Geoghegan’s reluctant signing of his laicisation papers after 28 years of service to the diocese of Waterford and Lismore has left him at 54 years of age, without an income, accommodation and dependant on a derisory financial settlement.

The ACP contends that Fr Richard Geoghegan’s treatment is inappropriate, unreasonable and unacceptable.

ACP WEBSITE

“I SENT THIS EMAIL TO DAMIEN ON WLR FM

Hi Damien,

I’m a former parishioner of Fr. Richard Geoghegan’s in Carrick on Suir. I am utterly heartbroken to hear the latest news about him and how shabbily he has been treated.
I’d like to share a couple of examples of what a good man he is.
Back in 2012, my husband’s 16 year-old nephew died by suicide, my mother-in-law was an elderly, devout, holy, Catholic lady, everyone was worried as to how she could be told the devastating news (keeping in mind, suicide was considered sinful) – Fr. Richard took it upon himself to go to Bridget and explain to her in words only he could say – from his heart – as a human, he comforted her and prayed with her and she was forever grateful to him for guiding the whole family through what was undoubtedly the most devastating time. He has been an amazing friend, confidant, and shoulder to cry on to our extended family. We will never forget his kindness.
He treated every parishioner the same, be they rich or poor, he could chat with the smallest child as easily as he could to the richest farmer.
Ask anyone in the parish what it was like at Christmas Eve “midnight” Mass when we heard Fr. Richard was to say Mass…. People would start arriving from 7pm for 8pm Mass!! There would be as many standing outside as sitting inside. He always said a few words to the attending children about the imminent arrival of Santa Claus, rarely was there a boisterous child in the Church when Fr. Richard said Mass – on the odd occasion that there was, in his own calm humourous way, he would say God was listening to their chatter and enjoying it too… Young and old alike would listen to every word he would say during a sermon, he spoke from the heart, made Mass interesting, understandable…
The bottom line is Fr. Richard is the epitome of a “true Christian” – not “just a priest”…. He is an immense loss to our parish, our religion, our community and the Catholic Church.
Fr. Richard wears his heart on his sleeve, he is gregarious, funny, witty, kind-hearted, understanding, nonjudgmental and above all – a beautiful soul…. He has more Christianity in his small finger than a lot of people who claim to be practicing Catholics…
I am very proud to be considered his friend,
Yours,
Annie”

FATHER RICHARD – HOLIDAY PERFORMANCE

PAT SAYS

I was literally shocked the first time I saw the video of Richard dressing up and singing.

And, God forgive me, I enjoyed him being Phonsie’s problem.

Some people say he is lovely, a wonderful priest and a nice person.

Others say he is haughty a life long trouble maker and taking the piss.

He seems to had mental problems?

Now, he and Phonsie are at war and the ACP are backing Richard.

It’s a pity he is dealing with Phonsie. Phonsie has no sense of humour and I can’t imagine that his people skills are great

We need the while truth.

Then we can decide the rights and wrongs.

This Blog was able to definitively confirm yesterday that Fr Martin Mc Alinden died of Gastro Oesophageal cancer and not of the illness speculated on the Blog on the 14th of this month.

The Blog was misled by a clerical colleague of Fr Martin’s and obviously not for good reasons.

A death certificate indicates what cased a person’s death – not all their illnesses

For instance, if I have Parkinsons Disease, high blood pressure bit die of a heart attack my death certificate will say Cardiac arrest.

I know the Blog caused some anger and some upset and we are sorry.

The original Blog has been permanently deleted.

As a sign of our good will in this matter we have made a donation to the hospice which cared For Fr Martin at the end of his life.

This Blog will always withdraw, clarify and apologise for anything it gets wrong.

POPE BENEDICT COVERED UP FOR CLERICAL SEXUAL ABUSERS WHEN HE WAS ARCHBISHOP OF MUNICH.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.rte.ie/amp/1274748/&ved=2ahUKEwizy-O1vsD1AhXO26QKHU4yByUQr_oDKAB6BAhvEAE&usg=AOvVaw28Kc5SLkMLaaIIgOpyBMze

PAT SAYS

In the past the vast majority of RC bishops would have covered up any abuse or any other matter that they thought would bring their Church into disrepute.

The so called reputation of the Church was Priority Number One.

This led to a lot of pain and suffering especially on the part of various kinds of victims.

It’s now clear that JOSEPH RATZINGER was one of those cover uppers.

Putting the Church first got him ordained, made a bishop an archbishop and a cardinal and eventually pope.

You do not get these positions without selling your soul to the company.

Ratzinger had to resign as pope because of the filth in the Vatican he presided over.

SUBMITTED BY A PRIEST BLOG READER.

Dear Bishop Pat,

Thank you for giving notice of the death and funeral arrangements from James Donnelly, someone whom it was my privilege to meet.

James was a gentleman and in fact the true “wee saint” (to recall how Cahal Daly was eulogised on his death). I hadn’t more than a cursory meeting with both men (the photograph you published shows the men in the Cortile San Damaso after their audience with Pope John Paul II) but his gentleness and goodness left a deep impression.

I can’t say the same for my several encounters with Cahal Daly. He was a pompous and vain little man, who underneath the supposed academic brilliance, was very insecure and perhaps even ashamed of his relatively modest background.

A nasty piece of work too, if slighted or crossed – as you well know. This fact was well known by his episcopal colleagues, and garnered in quite a few of them sympathy for you and how you had been so badly treated by him. 

Your post has set me thinking. Thinking about relationships and the need that all of us, whoever we may be, need to “matter”. To matter to someone.

I have no doubt that Cahal Daly “mattered” a great deal to James Donnelly, for without his intervention in his youth what future at all would he have had with such difficult beginnings? I don’t know, perhaps he would have had a life of considerable success? I doubt it.

Daly, for all his failings, was transformative in James’s life and without him things would have probably turned out very different and he may well have ended his days far from the comfort and security in which he lived and died. 

What’s also interesting to me is that James “mattered” a very great deal to Cahal Daly. I have never heard anyone say that theirs was anything other than an entirely chaste and would be very surprised to learn that they shared a bed, let alone enjoyed a sexually intimate relationship (Daly remined me of a dried-up prune, who wouldn’t have known what an erection was if it hit him in the gob!)

However, there is no doubt that James provided Daly with the intimacy and affective relationship that all of us, be we popes, cardinals, bishops, priests, lay folk, need and some crave. Without mattering to someone, many of us turn to drink, drugs, meaningless sexual encounters with strangers. Well, you know the situation all too well as evidenced on your necessary blog.

I have spent a life time in the company of “the hierarchy” and observing them at close quarters, and have seen it time and again. We all need someone who loves and cares for us in a way that no other one does. This is the basic human need that is attempted to be trained out in seminary (at least when I was in seminary) and yet the human heart makes itself known. Without it we are condemned to a life diminished, left with failure and disappointment, however many titles or acclaim we have.

For those who have reached the higher echelons of the Church these needs are met by such safe persons as a “James” or “Carmel”. Often ignored in public, and treated abruptly and rudely by their bosses – perhaps to allay suspicion – in private they are the ones who sit night after night, in the intimacy of the sitting room, watching television, with supper on a tray, discussing the day. They in fact the “other half” who matters. Pius XII and Sister Pasqulina, John XXIII and Loris Capovilla, Paul VI and John Magee… these are the ones who have kept these men sane in the darkest reaches of their years, and who have been holding them as they died.

How beautiful to be held in the arms of someone you love as you breath your last.

So I am glad that James had Cahal Daly, and even more glad that Cahal Daly had James. We all need to matter to someone, and perhaps, just perhaps, the one and only thing that got Cahal Daly into heaven, was that first act of kindness shown to a young orphan – whatever Daly’s initial and subsequent motivation.

James was the better man in the relationship.

May he be at peace and now enjoying a large glass of Paddy Power with Cackle B!

A Sympathetic Insider

James could not have written the above without help.

PAT SAYS

I think James is much more likely to be having that glass of Powers with Tomas O’Fiaich – who Daly referred to as an “intellectual lightweight”.

YESTERDAY’S BRIDAL TRAIN

A man taken from an orphanage by Cardinal Cahal Daly who lived all his life with the cardinal has died in Belfast.

James Donnelly, an orphan in Nazareth House, Belfast, who used to serve Mass for Cahal Daly every morning, was taken from the orphanage by Cahal Daly and brought to live in Longford when Daly became bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnoise.

Daly told James not to tell the nuns where he was going or who he was going with!

James then lived with and a servant to Daly from 1967 to 2009 – a period of 42 years in Longford, Belfast, Armagh and finally Belfast.

James himself told me that he was paid £ 50 per month or £600 a year for a six day week.

He was allowed a day off every Thursday if it suited Dsly.

Daly always referred to him as his “valet”. His duties included helping Daly to dress, polishing Daly’s shoes and treating the leather headband of Daly’s mitres with Johnsons Baby Oil.

DEATH NOTICE

MY INVOLVEMENT WITH JAMES DONNELLY

One day I got a telephone call from a middle-aged Protestant lady who lived in Belfast. She told me she had a Catholic neighbour in the flat adjoining hers who was very depressed as how he had been treated by the Church. She asked to visit her and James for a meal.

That is what I did and that is how I got to know James.

James referred to Cahal Days as: “My man”.

He showed me aound his flat and showed me a lot of religious objects that were gifts from “My man”.

He was unhappy that after Daly’s death he was being supported by a Trust Daly had set up for him. His contact with the Trust was the PP of St Brigid’s Parish on Belfast Malone Road – Fr Edwars O’Donnell. James said was somewhat afraid of O’Donnell who treated him like a headmaster treated a child.

THE DALYS

James was taken to Daly family occasions. He liked a drink but at the Daly occasions he was not allowed to drink. He was given Shloer while others had wine etc.

He also sat at a distant part of the table, according to him.

James did like a drink. What other luxury had he?

Afterwards I often brought him for a meal and a few drinks and left him home safely.

When Daly died James did start to visit some of the gay establishments in Belfast and made some friends there whose company he enjoyed.

All of this would have been a no no for the Dalys.

When he lived with Daly Longford and when he got his Thursday off he would cycle from Longford to Galway and visit Bishop Eamon Casey for lunch – 79 miles each way ! He told me Casey gave him a large whiskey for his return journey.

He must have been extremely fit at the time to undertake such a journey.

CONCLUSION

I do not know if Cahal Daly’s relationship with poor James ever veered into the genital.

What is clear is that Daly took unto himself a very vulnerable and uneducated orphan and turned him into his life long slave.

I am quite convinced that Daly was a repressed homosexual and used James to fill an ugly gap in his own psychosexual circus.

James did not enter this relationship equally, knowledgeably, freely and with proper consent.

He was almost kidnapped from his orphanage by a man full of egotistical guile and submitted to a life of physical, emotional and monetary slavery.

Daly represented himself as James’ saviour while giving him the victoriana title of valet.

A LETTER I SENT TO DALY IN 2008.

May James Donnelly now experience the love, freedom and respect that he was deprived of by a man whom I accused many years ago of “being strong with the weak and weak with the strong”.