The Mdina Monastery Affair: The Shift News Pursues Leads First Raised by This Site

The team at The Shift News picked up a clue in an article published on this site about the Benedictine Monastery of Mdina and decided to investigate further. This site had already questioned an article published in the Times of Malta, which appeared to be designed to present the local Curia and Archbishop Charles Scicluna in a favourable light, following the Holy See’s decision to suppress the monastery in Mdina. The suppression was reportedly based on allegations that the last remaining member of the community had entered into irregular or illegal business dealings.

This site expressly argued that the manner in which the Holy See intervened suggested a lack of confidence in the Archbishop of Malta. Under normal circumstances, when a monastery is suppressed, the property and its administration are transferred to the diocesan Curia of the territory in which the monastery is located. In this case, however, the Vatican chose a different course of action. Instead of entrusting the property to the Maltese Curia, it transferred its administration to the Abbot of the Benedictine Order in Rome. This decision was taken on the premise that this was a Benedictine monastery. However, as this site argued, this monastery was run by female nuns. Thus, its administration should have been entrusted to female members of this order. However, the decision alone that its administration was not entrusted to the Local Curia is highly unusual and significant.

Shift News then pursued the story further and uncovered additional aspects that would make any archbishop blush. This is the same Archbishop who previously used the house of God to launch an indirect attack against the person behind this site, without mentioning his name, referring to him as a “liar” while preaching ex cathedra during Mass. Such conduct raises serious questions about the proper use of the pulpit and the responsibilities attached to ecclesiastical authority.

The Archbishop’s unofficial media liaison, Steve Mallia, who proudly describes himself as the Archbishop’s “friend”, used the Times of Malta to defend the Archbishop and reinforce his claims against me. It is increasingly evident that Mallia now stands behind the Archbishop as a key figure, not only influencing the Curia’s media operations but also playing a central role in the Church’s administration.

Shift News subsequently published an article exposing what it described as the double standards applied by Archbishop Scicluna. According to this critique, a female abbess entering into a business agreement is treated as grounds for suppression. Yet when the Curia engages in business arrangements, sometimes without public tenders or where contractors are known to be close to the Archbishop, such dealings escape scrutiny. The disparity is striking.

This situation prompted financial adviser Paul Bonello to comment publicly. In a Facebook post, Bonello wrote:

Bonello’s remarks highlight broader concerns about governance, transparency, and accountability within ecclesiastical structures. The issue at stake is not merely the suppression of a monastery but the perception of unequal standards and the apparent reluctance to subject Curial decisions to the same scrutiny imposed on others.

The Holy See’s decision to place the property under the authority of the Benedictine Order in Rome, rather than the Maltese Curia, remains a telling development. It continues to fuel debate about trust, governance, and the proper administration of Church property in Malta.