Irish Catholic comment on Christina

Vatican to tackle alleged visions

People who claim they have seen the Virgin Mary will be forced to remain silent about the apparitions until a team of psychologists and theologians have fully investigated their claims under new Vatican guidelines aimed at stamping out false claims of miracles.

The new guidelines, approved by Pope Benedict XVI, may have grave implications for alleged visionaries such as Christina Gallagher and her controversial Achill House of Prayer.

Apparition

According to the directive, anyone who claims to have seen an apparition will only be believed as long as they remain silent and do not court publicity over their claims. If they refuse to obey, this will be taken as a sign that their claims are false.

Ms Gallagher has consistently refused to integrate her work into the local Church. An ongoing investigation into Ms Gallagher’s claim that she receives visions of the Virgin Mary has found no evidence. Local Archbishop, Michael Neary, has consistently pointed out that the Achill organisation has no Church backing and insisted that Ms Gallagher’s work does not enjoy his confidence.

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/d5/content/vatican-tackle-alleged-visions

Gallagher’s Achill `cult’ making millions

Michael Kelly

Christina Gallagher’s controversial House of Prayer in Achill Island continues to make vast profits amid ongoing allegations of fraud and cult-like activity while Church leaders stress that the house has no official Church approval.

Figures obtained by The Irish Catholic indicate that so far this year, the alleged visionary has made €339,283 in donations from members of the public. The same accounts indicate that the House of Prayer pulled in almost €700,000 in less than two years from the sale of religious objects which they purchased for €300,000, giving them a staggering 130 per cent mark up on these objects.

The alleged visionary came under scrutiny by the Gardaí earlier this year after dozens of her former followers complained to the Revenue Commissioners and the Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) over alleged fraudulent activity. The Irish Catholic has learned that substantial sums of cash have now been returned to the disgruntled former followers, some of whom have referred to the House of Prayer as a ‘cult’. However, the cash was only returned on the condition that the parties sign a confidentiality agreement preventing them from releasing details of the deal.

The balance sheet shows that combined profits for the House of Prayer stand at almost two million euro. However, profits may take a substantial hit if the Revenue Commissioners go ahead with their plan to tax the profits after the controversial group lost its charitable status.

The House of Prayer is now appealing the decision of the Revenue Commissioners; however, if the decision is not overturned, Ms Gallagher will face a tax liability in the region of €125,000 before interest and penalties.

House of Prayer making millions

Meanwhile, Cardinal Seán Brady is continuing discussions with Ms Gallagher’s Spiritual Director Fr Gerard McGinnity over his involvement with Achill.

Fr McGinnity, a priest of the Armagh Archdiocese, has staunchly defended his involvement in the controversial movement despite allegations that he played a key role in seeking huge donations from pensioners to build so-called ‘chain’ houses of prayer that never materialised.

A source close to Cardinal Brady told The Irish Catholic ”the delicate negotiations with Fr McGinnity are ongoing”. He indicated that the cardinal would not be in a position to comment on the negotiations or their eventual outcome at this point.

Earlier this year, Archbishop Michael Neary, in whose Tuam Archdiocese the house operates, expressed his frustration that attempts to integrate the House of Prayer into the life of the local parish had failed despite his best efforts. The House of Prayer at Achill, he said, has ”no Church approval whatever”. He also added that the work of the House of Prayer does ”not enjoy the confidence of the Diocesan authorities.”

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/d5/content/gallaghers-achill-cult-making-millions

‘Foreigners’ will cause war – Christina Gallagher

Michael Kelly

”Nests of foreigners” will lead to the outbreak of war in the United States, according to the controversial alleged visionary Christina Gallagher.

Ms Gallagher, who has rejected a plea from Pope Benedict XVI to remain silent, has begun posting messages allegedly from the Mother of God on her website.

The site also claims that Ms Gallagher foresaw many tragic world events including the terrorist attack on the twin towers and the collapse of the global stock market.

In the latest alleged ‘vision’, Ms Gallagher claims that: ”Civil war will break out in the United States and many will fight and kill each other. Nests of foreigners have already been placed in the US.

”The events in the US will also filter throughout Europe and then throughout the world. A great suppression will come about,” she alleges. Ms Gallagher claims she received the vision from the Mother of God on March 29.

Ms Gallagher has consistently refused to reconcile her activity with the Church. Archbishop Michael Neary has ordered that no sacraments be celebrated at her Achill Island base.

Dr Neary has insisted that the House of Prayer at Achill has ”no Church approval whatever”. He also added that the work of the House of Prayer does ”not enjoy the confidence of the Diocesan authorities.”

The Pope has also issued new guidelines insisting that alleged visionaries keep quiet and seek the guidance of the Church. Ms Gallagher has so far refused the Pope’s request.

The alleged visionary came under scrutiny by the Gardaí last year after dozens of her former followers complained to the Revenue Commissioners and the Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) over alleged fraudulent activity.

In her latest message, Ms Gallagher also claims that ”many, including Church authorities will go willingly in union with the anti-Christ because of the control he wields.” The only way for people to be saved, Ms Gallagher insists, is to take refuge in her controversial movement.

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/d5/content/foreigners-will-cause-war-christina-gallagher

I see it as a cult’ – donor

Michael Kelly meets a woman who believes she was brainwashed by the controversial visionary Christina Gallagher

‘They made us sign a confidentiality clause, never to speak to anyone about it,” the woman tells me as we sit together before a roaring log fire in her isolated home in rural Ireland. It’s the only room in the home with heating. After giving more than €100,000 to Christina Gallagher, the controversial woman who claims to receive visions, repairing the antiquated heating system has to wait.

Clearly shaken by her experiences, Mary, not her real name, recounts a tale of being enthralled by the events at Achill Island from her first visit there. ”It was so beautiful, the prayer, the preaching, the traditional form of Catholicism, we were getting something there that wasn’t in the parishes.” Many of the Achill House of Prayer devotees are there searching for the Catholicism of their childhood, ”a Catholicism all but gone in your average parish,” Mary insists.

”When we heard that Christina needed this money to continue her work, I thought ‘we have to help’.” Mary recalls that her husband was more reticent. ”He was always much more suspicious than me, but, in the end he handed over the money too, I suppose in a way to make me happy.”

Mary’s dealings with the House of Prayer have brought her considerable pain. ”It’s a wonder my husband and I have not separated, this has put such a tremendous pressure on us and our relationship, to think that we parted with all that money.” Mary has received much of the money back, but spent tens of thousands of Euro in legal fees trying to get her money back. ”Eventually they did give us the money back, but, only when we served them with a High Court writ. They made us sign a confidentiality clause, never to speak to anyone about it, but I don’t care, I just want the House of Prayer exposed for what it is.”

How could an evidently intelligent woman part with so much money in such strange circumstances? ”Looking back now, I can tell you I think we were brainwashed, we fell for all of it, we fell for the mysticism, we fell for the alleged messages, everything, and every time money was needed, we were there like fools.”

Mary’s suspicion that all was not well at the House of Prayer was fuelled by what she describes as Christina Gallagher’s ”extravagant” lifestyle. ”We know that there was a lot of money being spent, people were saying about Christina’s lovely homes and possessions, I began to get suspicious, but, every time, there was always someone there with a ready answer: ‘poor Christina is suffering so much, poor Christina needs our help, poor Christina is being attacked by Our Lady’s enemies’.

”In the end it was all too much, we got out, I could see that all was not well, it’s only now that we’re out of it that I can see it like a cult. I think we were being brainwashed into thinking that Christina is a messenger from heaven, if you ever disputed this you were accused of being an ‘enemy of Our Lady’. I now know that this is false, I’m only so disappointed with myself that it took so long for me to realise that I was been taken for a ride,” Mary says.

If you have been affected by any of the issues raised by this article, or by the alleged happenings at the Achill House of Prayer please contact the author in the strictist confidence at michael@irishcatho lic.ie or via mail to:

The Irish Catholic, The Irish Farm Centre, Bluebell, Dublin 12

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/d5/content/i-see-it-cult-donor

Review of the Year: April

Following numerous revelations about alleged practices around the Achill House of Prayer, the Revenue Commissioners and An Garda begin separate investigations into the house, established by self-proclaimed visionary, Christina Gallagher. Questions had been raised by a former devotee of Achill about the source of Ms Gallagher’s apparent wealth.

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/d5/content/review-year-april

About these ads

104 Responses

  1. In the article entitled ‘Vatican to tackle alleged apparitions’ it is stated that new guidelines from the Vatican on alleged visions could have grave implications for Christine Gallagher’s alleged apparitions. I think this is incorrect for three reasons:

    1. Christine Gallagher’s alleged apparitions have no approval whatsoever from the church. There isn’t a lower rung of disapproval she could be moved to in the wake of the new guidelines. Astrologers, tarot card readers and psychics similarly receive no approval from the church – the church does not move to openly persecuting them no matter how absurd their claims.

    2. In a democratic, constitutional Republic there will always be restrictions on what actions the church can take against a private individual operating a private shrine ( as indeed there should be). The church is not in a position to move against Christine’s private initatives.

    3. I have no confidence Christine will pay any attention to any new guidelines, decrees or judgements from any church authority about her alleged apparitions.

  2. In the article entitled ‘Vatican to tackle alleged apparitions’ it is stated that new guidelines from the Vatican on alleged visions could have grave implications for Christine Gallagher’s alleged apparitions. I think this is incorrect for three reasons:

    While your points are completely correct, you are missing an important component to this situation. Many of the people who are getting duped often don’t realise that Christina has no approval from the church. While these guidelines may not allow the church to take any direct action, they may nevertheless provide a platform from which to publicise that Christina has no approval (and may even be a means to publicise disapproval).

    The reluctance of the church to publicly speak out against Christina has been one of the reasons her con has worked so successfully. Her target audience are good church going folk after all and, to be perfectly frank about it, they were failed by their church’s silence on this matter. If these new guidelines help cast off that silence then it could spell disaster for Christina’s operation here in Ireland.

    As for her US outfit…well…that is a different story.

  3. Firstly, apologies for spelling Christina ‘Christine’.

    I accept the validity of your point of view, but would still note:

    1. The article was first published in January this year in the Irish Catholic. It is not clear to me the guidelines have had the effect you suggest.

    2. Card-carrying followers of pseudo-visionaries such as Christina tend to subscribe to a world vision based upon the church being controlled by the anti-Christ and/or freemasons. A strong condemnation by the church of Christina would only be grist to this particular mill.

    3. The bishops(in my view) are only responsible for giving leadership to Catholics playing with a full deck. If the bishop states publicly that a movement enjoys no confidence or support from the church, is he really to blame if someone interprets that as giving the nod and the wink to the movement?

    I tend to think the bishops have generally acquitted themselves well as regards the House of Prayer. It was commendable they withstood the public campaign to have Fr McGinnity given a position of prominence in the church following the revelations about Maynooth.
    I would fault them for leaving Fr McGinnity in the position of Parish Priest. I think he should be removed, and it should be publicly declared that the move is punitive due to his involvement in the House of Prayer.

  4. Your comments are on the mark. I would add that the reluctance to clearly and comprehensively state that Christina is a fraud may be the real issue here. Having talked to some people as recently as February who were unclear on the churches view regarding Christina would seem to indicate that either the churches message isn’t clear enough or isn’t being delivered loudly enough.

    The McGinnity situation you mention is further evidence that the church isn’t taking a sufficiently proactive role on this.

  5. I would advise you to check your sources, firstly, the Vatican has issued no such statement regarding visionaries which has been clarified by the Vatican itself, indeed, Spirit Daily clarifed the point shortly after publishing its material.
    Secondly, as a professional young person in my chosen career, I have gained so much from the House of Prayer, Christina Gallagher and Fr. Gerard McGinnity. I have certainly found the House of Prayer has had an impact on my life, one of which that has helped me to come closer to my God, the Catholic faith and to know and love Jesus and His Holy Mother.

    It is quite clear that the prayers in the House of Prayer are all the prayers of the Catholic Church.

    I cannot understand why such prolonged hysteria. The DPP has already cleared the House of Prayer. personally, I believe that somebody must be paying the few individuals to keep this going, as it un heard of before. It is rubbish, no reasonable person I know would purchase the tabloid that appearantly run the stories.
    I had the joy of attending the House of Prayer recently and it appears to be recieveing bigger crowds than ever, from speaking to people there, it appears than in trying to destroy the place, people who had never heard of it before, are coming to see for themselves and are very impressed by what they have found there!!!!!!!!
    Louise

  6. On the theology of visions :

    Saint John of the Cross (doctor of the church) discusses those called to union with God in this life. Those fortunate enough to be so-called must journey through what he calls the night of the spirit. This is the warning John gives these souls:

    “One cannot be liberated from the devil without fleeing from all revelations, visions, and supernatural communications.
    God is rightly angered with anyone who admits them, for he sees the rashness of exposing oneself to this danger, presumption, curiosity, and pride, to the root and foundation of vainglory, to contempt for the things of God, and to the beginnings of the numerous evils into which many fall. ……In this way God permits the devil to blind and delude many who merit this by their sins and audacities. The devil is able and successful to the extent that others believe what he says and consider him a good spirit. So firm is their belief that it is impossible for anyone who tries to persuade them of the diabolic origin.”

    The Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book 2, Chapter 22, verses 11-12.

  7. Visions already stand in God with or without an investigation and a command to stay silent or you will not be believed denies God. He made the vision. It speaks silent or not. It condemns those who deny it’s voice silent or not. He will not be kept silent or wait for the approval of a man religious or not. He does not give orders to be told to be quiet or wait until someone beneath Him says it’s OK. From before the time the vision is given they are living for it or against, in approval or not. It is approved before the mouth of a man says it is. Challenge Him and be destroyed. Amen.

  8. Challenge Him and be destroyed.

    Yes. Be sure to make the cheque out to ‘Christina Gallagher’. Otherwise god will be displeased.

  9. St. Teresa of Jesus and St. John of the Cross were responsible for reforming the Carmelite Order. St. Teresa of Jesus experienced various forms of extraordinary phenomena including visions, locutions, levitation, mystical marriage and transverberation of her heart which is commemorated by the Discalced Carmelites on August 26. John of the Cross while imprisoned by the Calced Carmelites was assisted by Our Lady in escaping from his prison. On August 16, 1578, he heard Our Lady speak to him interiorly assuring him of her help and guiding him to safety. Neither of these two Doctors of the Church were against mystical phenomena. John of the Cross did not refuse Our Lady’s help nor did he dismiss the interior voice as demonic. Nor did he denounce St. Teresa of Jesus or her extraordinary gifts. Nor did the extraordinary gifts hinder St. Teresa of Jesus from reaching the heights of perfection. The gifts are not the problem – it’s how you use them that determines whether they help or hinder the recipient from growing spiritually. What John of the Cross emphasizes is that we should not desire nor seek after visions, locutions, etc., nor should we be attached to them as we are supposed to love the God of all consolation and not the consolations of God!

  10. May I suggest that this thread is introduced into one of our forums not to stifle debate but to give it a more appropriate outlet for those who wish to
    go deeper into whether Christina manifests genuine gifts, or is a counterfeit.
    Dialogue Ireland now has some forums:

    http://www.dialogueireland.org/forum

  11. I find this a much easier forum to post on. On discerning whether or not Christina manifests genuine gifts the following guidelines are useful:
    “By their fruits you shall know them.” Genuine mystical phenomena is always accompanied by three practices, according to St. Teresa of Jesus: love of neighbor, detachment and humility. In addition, Teresa and John believe that as regards mystical graces one’s whole task consists in accepting the cross of dryness with courage, humility and the freedom of spirit that comes from detachment even from spiritual consolation. Special graces should lead the recipient to grow in love of God and in the case of Marian apparitions – love of Our Lady. God grants these supernatural gifts for the usefulness of the Church and her children. Furthermore, these gifts such as the gift of healing when coming from God will only be used by the recipient when prompted to do so by God. The person will only use these gifts for the glory of God. God is not inclined to reveal himself through miracles, and when He works them, it is in order to lead others to faith or to increase His glory. Those who claim Christina is a fraud have never been able to give any evidence whatsoever to prove their point. Furthermore, when confronted with the testimonies of people who have received spiritual conversions and physical healings
    through their association with Christina and the House of Prayer, her detractors continue to profess disbelief in the face of the evidence. Some even claim that Satan is responsible for this. Since when does Satan encourage people to reconcile with God? As Jesus said: “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him.” “Satan will not cast out Satan, as a House divided against itself cannot stand.”

  12. John of the Cross wrote an opinion on the spirit of a nun claiming visions much like Christinas. (It is on page 730-731 of the Complete Works of St John of the Cross; translated by Kieran Kavanaugh). I believe the opinion throws much light on how to evaluate Christina’s claims:

    In the affective manner with which this soul proceeds there appear to be five defects manifesting a lack of good spirit.

    First, it seems she bears within herself a great fondness for possessing things, whereas the good spirit is always very detached in its appetites.

    Second, she is too secure in her spirit and has little fear of being inwardly mistaken. Where this fear is absent, the spirit of God is never present to preserve the soul from harm, as the Wise Man says [Prv. 15:27].

    Third, it seems she has the desire to persuade others that her experiences are good and manifold. Persons of a genuine spirit do not desire to do this, but, on the contrary, desire that their experiences be considered of little value and despised, and this they do themselves.

    Fourth- and this is the main fault – the effects of humility are not manifest in her attitude. When favors are genuine, as she says here that hers are, they are ordinarily never communicated to a soul without first undoing and annihilating it in the inner abasement of humility. ………..

    Fifth, her style and language don’t seem to come from the spirit she claims, for the good spirit itself teaches a simpler style one without the affectation or exaggeration she uses. And all this about what she said to God and God said to her seems to be nonsense.

    I would advise that they should not command or allow her to write anything about this, and her confessor should not show willingness to hear of it, other than to hold it in little esteem and contradict it. Let them try her in the practice of sheer virtue, especially in self-contempt, humility, and obedience; and by the sound of the metal when tapped the quality of soul caused by so many favours will show itself. And the tests must be good ones, for there is no devil that will not suffer something for his honor.

  13. The nun in reference had the support of many of the so-called “learned men” of the day, while St. Teresa of Jesus was viewed with suspicion by many of the same “learned men” and she was even put under the scrutiny of the Inquisition. Christina finds herself in the same situation today, as most of the “learned men” seem incapable of recognizing her for the true prophet that she is. Fortunately, Christina is under the capable direction of the Rev. Dr. Gerard McGinnity who is a well-respected and orthodox priest. As regards Christina’s mystical gifts:
    she is a visionary, mystic and stigmatist who possesses charismatic gifts of knowledge of souls, especially of priests and of counseling them. On occasion, her stigmata has emitted a pleasant fragrance. This does not happen in the case of a fraudulent stigmatist. If the devil is the source you would get the smell of sulfur or some other vile odor. She has the gift of prophecy and bilocation. The Host has turned to flesh in her mouth. She has been known to sing in Latin, Greek and other languages. She has the gift of Mystical marriage and received a ring from Jesus. This is a symbol of mystical espousal as she is united to Jesus in love and suffering. Christina is a victim soul and one who has been showered with many gifts which attest to the importance of her mission. It seems obvious to me, that Christina is in the realm of Teresa of Jesus rather than the nun you referenced.

  14. I do not intend to have a never ending, to and froing conversation on this topic, so I am going to make this my final comment.

    I note you made no effort to apply John of the Cross’ criteria in the discernment posted, to Christina. If you did, there would be a clear and unambiguous result.

    The fact that ‘learned men’ were impressed with the nun and aren’t with Christina is a trite connection – grasping at straws.

    All the criteria you mentioned are ones John of the Cross dismissed as useless for telling the good spirit from the bad one. Why not simply apply the criteria John actually proposed?

    I read two books on Christina some years ago, and practically all the quotes attributed to her betrayed a suffocating spiritual pride. Since then her messages have become stranger and stranger.

    I have some idea from what you write how you got into the mess you are in. I sympathise, but my view is unchanged : it is a mess.

  15. Simply posting John of the Cross observations on this fake mystic is totally irrelevant to Christina Gallagher. I have read the statement by Archbishop Neary and nowhere in there does he use any of the language in John of the Cross criteria of the nun to describe Christina Gallagher. Nor does he accuse Christina of being a fraudulent mystic or of perpetrating a “fraud.” The word “fraud” is not found anywhere in his statement. Charges have been leveled against the House of Prayer which amounted to nothing. Yet, Christina’s detractors persist in using that word “fraud” and cannot when challenged present evidence to back up their claim. My point about the “learned men”, is that throughout the history of the Church, true mystics and saints have been persecuted by so-called “learned men” only to be later vindicated as being authentic. St. Teresa of Jesus, Padre Pio, St. Faustina whose Diary was put on the Index of Forbidden Books, only to be later removed by Pope John Paul II, who also canonized her, and Joan of Arc, who was burned at the stake because “learned men” believed her to be a “fraud.” I submit that history is repeating itself again with Christina Gallagher, and she also will one day be recognized for the great mystic and prophet she is.

  16. Yet, Christina’s detractors persist in using that word “fraud” and cannot when challenged present evidence to back up their claim.

    So those elderly folks who tell of being terrorised into handing over money are lying? Just be sure to make your cheque out to Christian with a C. Not a K because genuine visionaries don’t like that.

  17. This is the same corny worn out response that is sprinkled throughout the forum. The supposed “expose” about Christina and the House of Prayer has turned out to be nothing but a lot of hot air, and the promised demise of the HOP has failed to materialize. And, guess what? The HOP is going to survive everything thrown its way and will be around for a long, long, long time.

  18. Keep digging– Christina and the Junior dean are reading it at least. Martin Joseph really summed it up. He actually did his STL on that subject.
    You want to keep fouling the footpath for a bit more. We are liberal in our ways so keep digging, but don’t fall in that hole whatever you do.

  19. This is the same corny worn out response that is sprinkled throughout the forum.

    Of course it is. And precisely because it cuts straight to the heart of the issue.

    The issue is about cold hard cash, and the HOP using people’s Christian faith against them to terrorise and humiliate them into forking over the euros. Claiming to be a visionary or a prophet or an emissary of god is somehow taken by people as sufficient pretext to forgive what amounts to straight up emotional blackmail.

    It really is quite simple – you cannot hope to theologically to defend the disgusting act of extracting of cash via causing emotional upset. Unless, of course, you are seriously suggesting that god requires Christiana to make shed loads of cash and have those mansions. Because visionaries must have cash and mansions to be a visionary.

  20. You are not doing a good job in trying to win me over to your side. You might consider learning from Christina and Fr. McGinnity. I truly admire their humility and graciousness despite the media circus and the angry mob atmosphere directed at them ( “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.”) Those who have been fortunate enough to meet them have experienced the peace and love emanating from their persons. No wonder the House of Prayer continues to attract people of goodwill.

  21. I truly admire their humility and graciousness despite the media circus and the angry mob atmosphere directed at them ( “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.”)

    I do find it difficult to admire and/or hold respect for any person or persons who will callously blackmail people using their own Christian faith against them for the sole purpose of making cash. It is truly humble to and gracious to have bleed people dry via theologically charged psychological abuse. But, it seems, that can be rationalised away, or outright ignored in your case, if one is deemed to be a visionary.

    Perhaps a brief account from some of the defrauded would help make it more difficult for you to divorce your support from the consequences of the HOM fraud:

    But Betty and Michael Morrissey said yesterday they felt “betrayed” by McGinnity’s lies. And they said they were hugely disappointed the cardinal had not banned the priest from preaching at the House of Prayer.

    “If the Church had acted sooner, we and many others would still have our money in our pockets,” said Mrs Morrissey. And she revealed for the first time how they got sucked into giving ever and ever bigger donations to the House of Prayer after she started going there on bus trips in 1995.

    “Fr McGinnity started telling the crowd one Saturday that money was urgently needed for an extension to the House which had opened two years earlier and which was too small,” Mrs Morrissey recalls. “He said Our Lady had told Christina she wanted it as a retreat for priests. They needed £250,000 at that time.”

    The Morrisseys ended up giving £21,000 in several instalments but began to worry where their money had gone when the extension wasn’t built for many more years. In 2004, McGinnity rang Mr Morrissey to arrange a meeting and asked him for more money to help buy a new home for Gallagher because she had financial problems and couldn’t afford the big house she was living in.

    The big-hearted builder agreed to give €40,000. When the priest asked him to sign the cheque to himself, he didn’t think anything of it because “I trusted him completely”.

    Since then the Morrisseys have learnt that Gallagher still owns the big house she “couldn’t afford” to keep – and several more, including the fabulous mansion in the celebrity millionaire’s row estate of Abbington in Malahide, Co Dublin.

    The following year the couple were invited to another meeting with McGinnity outside Mullingar along with other major donors. A House of Prayer official started reading out apocalyptic messages that Our Lady had allegedly given Gallagher which terrified many of the elderly in the crowd.

    “To say the messages were threatening would be a huge understatement. If we had money and property and didn’t answer this call we were going to suffer,” said Mrs Morrissey. “We would suffer in this world and we would suffer eternal damnation in the next if we did not contribute to this worthy project to save millions of souls.”

    Amazingly, McGinnity never revealed what the project was except to say it was so secret that if word got out it would be blocked. The Morrisseys found themselves pledging €100,000 which they couldn’t possibly afford. In all, €1.8 million was pledged at the meeting after a lot of mental bullying by the priest.

    The Morrisseys and the others at the Mullingar meeting were told to sign their cheques to a John Rooney. “This is the most amazing thing – we were so brainwashed or hypnotised that nobody asked who this John Rooney was.”

    The pensioners were horrified when they discovered from the Sunday World that Rooney was, in fact, the man who owns the luxury €4 million mansion where Gallagher lives in Malahide – and he bought it around the time they were writing cheques to him for €1.8 million.

    “We were in this mind frame of foreboding for the future and feeling very insecure, feeling that we really had to give the money. Wherever we got it from we had to give it. “We were terrified coming out of that meeting, totally drained. We kept wondering why we were put under such pressure. The whole thing was orchestrated psychologically. The couple eventually decided they couldn’t possibly raise €100,000. But they were still pressured into giving €50,000, with one of the staff members actually filling in Mr Morrissey’s cheque which he signed. The couple are currently taking legal advice.

    “How stupid can you be? But we were terrified by these messages of doom and eternal damnation. The older you get, the more you worry about the next life,” said
    Mrs Morrissey. “We think it is the greatest fraud preying on people’s beliefs.”

    Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth you say? I missed the part where it specifies that this doesn’t apply to visionaries who go on the scaremongering for god to get a couple of mansions in should they not want to wait that long.

  22. No wonder the House of Prayer continues to attract people of goodwill.

    There is a lot of truth to this. And if you really think about it this sentiment is truly frightening. The most gracious and blessed with goodwill in our society are so open to being fleeced here.

  23. themadhair, why have you not posted any of the HOP’s responses to the allegations you continue to repeat over and over again? In the interest of fair and objective debate you should present both sides. For those interested in objectivity read the statements below.

    Moderator Edit
    We have removed material from this post which was copied verbatim from elsewhere. Those wishing to view those materials may find them on the following webpages:

    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com

    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com/Fundraising.html

  24. Here is another link to additional statements from the supporters of Our Lady Queen of Peace House of Prayer, which are relevant to the ongoing debate on this forum.

    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com/tabloids.html

  25. You will notice we already had this web site present since the fourth of July. You received the direct testimony of affected people.
    We are not the Sunday World. All we do is act as an archive, for as you know they do not have a web site holding their articles.
    You post your articles, we do not post them on our site as you have your own web site.
    Also it is not relevant to this issue. Just answer the questions posed by Betty and Michael Morrissey.

    Submitted on 2009/07/04 at 6:00pm

    Dear dialogueireland, I am most intrigued that my post has elicited such a response! I heartily suggest you peruse the following website, which does a great job in addressing some of the issues in the articles posted on your blog. The information should help clear up any unjustified misgivings regarding these two faithful Catholics. Have a wonderful day.

    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com/

  26. dialogueireland, considering this forum has been posting articles on the HOP way before July 4, 2009, why did it take so long for any of their links to appear on this forum? The statements of the HOP are relevant to the articles you post on your forum, as they should be afforded the courtesy of presenting their side of the story. What’s not relevant is you trying to badger the visitors to your forum. That is certainly not how a professional behaves.

  27. themadhair, why have you not posted any of the HOP’s responses to the allegations you continue to repeat over and over again?

    Because I am making a judgment call that terrorising folks via their Christian faith is wrong in every circumstance? Are you telling that there are instances where scaring the bejeepers out of folks to get cash by threatening them with damnation is a permissible pastime? Do go on. I’d be interested in the feats of mental and theological gymnastics required for such a defence.

    Fair and objective is to look at what is actually happening. Two pieces of evidence stand out for me above all others:

    Firstly – When people come forward to tell their stories of being fleeced for thousands of euro, and can present the relevant bank statements and check stubs as support, I find them very credible. Please tell me why these people, including the elderly couple quoted in my last post, would have handed over thousands of euro solely to defame the HOP? I would be extraordinarily interested to hear your rationalisation for this.

    Secondly – Why has money garnered by the HOP been spent on expensive luxurious property? Cheques made out to John Rooney who owns the €4 million pound property Christina resides. Again, I would love to hear you rationalisation for this.

    These are things you wouldn’t even dare touch because they are damning. Instead you will throw up the ideals of fairness and objectivity while engaging in neither. Sometimes an objective look at the available evidence and victim testimony reveals that one side is true over the other.

    The statements of the HOP are relevant to the articles you post on your forum, as they should be afforded the courtesy of presenting their side of the story.

    Given that the statements of the HOP do not involve either an apology nor an undertaking to return the large sums of money it has defrauded then, frankly, I don’t care. The ‘defence’ offered by the HOP actually angers me deeply. To dismiss these allegations as mere ‘gutter press’ in the way the HOP does is to do a most offensive disservice to the victims whose own words and experiences gave those allegations credence. Actual people, just like the Morrissey’s in the extract above, have come forward to put their names to their claims. But that is the point though isn’t it? It is much hard to dismiss real people with real stories as ‘gutter press’.

    What’s not relevant is you trying to badger the visitors to your forum. That is certainly not how a professional behaves.

    What is disgusting and vile is to attempt to defend the actions of the HOP in relation to its parishioners. A person’s faith should never be used as leverage to extract money, and any reasonable person should recognise this. To deflect and distract from this discussion by ignoring or brushing aside such damning victim testimony is repulsive and offensive in the extreme. This is not how a person with a conscience and a valuing of human decency behaves.

  28. themadhair, here are some facts: the Archdiocese of Tuam has found no evidence to convict either Christina Gallagher or the HOP of misdeeds. In fact, if you read the statement from the Archdiocese it acknowledges that no evidence whatsoever has been submitted to question her integrity, etc. The DPP has come to the same conclusion. Attempts were made to have Fr. McGinnity stopped from associating with the HOP. These have also ended in failure. Why on earth would I ignore all of this?????????????

    These facts speak volumes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  29. The DPP has come to the same conclusion.

    Please tell which law in our fine land renders the practice of theological extortion illegal? You sell someone a product that doesn’t match up and you can be prosecuted. You take money off people under the guise of religion and you can’t be touched legally. Doesn’t make it any less disgusting though.

    Also – why not drop the charade and follow up with you insinuation here. Call the Morrisseys, and the victims just like them telling the same story, what you are accusing them of.

    Also – you did not, in any way, touch the two pieces of evidence I expressly laid out previously. As I opined then, you wouldn’t touch it. It is harder when you have to deal with real people with real stories.

  30. dialogueireland, I have just noticed you removed a previous posting I made leaving only the link. This despite the fact that there are other lengthy articles allowed, bashing Christina Gallagher, the HOP and its supporters all over this forum. In addition, you have threatened to ban my participation in this forum.

    This is a sure sign of one who is trapped in a “fog of theology.” and under the influence of a particularly virulent form of “magical mystification” resulting in an inability to handle the truth! And I am absolutely certain this sorry state of affairs cannot be blamed on any association with the HOP.

  31. Don’t take the troll bait…….

  32. themadhair, may I correct you? It’s not “don’t take the troll bait”; it’s “Don’t be troll bait” I fight for what is right with all my might.

  33. You make comments, we make posts. What is it about making comments you do not understand?
    Please post to your hearts content on your web site.
    Do not black mail us with emotional waffle. Any further attempts to post will be totally removed.
    You have blatantly avoided the issues. Also we have a link to your post, people just have to click on it
    if they are interested.
    Good night

  34. dialogueireland, does your deck of cards only have jokers? Do you like your waffle plain or with syrup? I am not important enough like you to have my own website. As the Irish would say: au revoir, sayounara, chao.

    P.S. (Is this a comment or a post?)

  35. P.S. (Is this a comment or a post?)

    That would be a comment that is distracting from Christina extracting the cash from the theologically vulnerable.

    It is a comment that has not explained why purchasing luxurious properties with the cash defrauded from others under the guise of religion is a permissible practice.

    It is a comment that deals with stories like the Morrissey’s by pretending they do not exist.

    As I said previously:
    A person’s faith should never be used as leverage to extract money, and any reasonable person should recognise this. To deflect and distract from this discussion by ignoring or brushing aside such damning victim testimony is repulsive and offensive in the extreme. This is not how a person with a conscience and a valuing of human decency behaves.

    I’ll even throw you a bone Trini. The problem isn’t one of theology and I really couldn’t care less whether Christina is or isn’t a genuine emissary of god. The problem is whether it is acceptable to use religion as a means of obtaining cash by threatening people with hellfire and using their own faith against them.

    As far as issues of this type go this situation really is remarkable in its simplicity, and yet callous in its reality. In the 13 posts you have made here Trini not once have you come within an asses roar of the problem (i.e. the fleecing of folks for cash using religion). Being honest, I don’t expect you will ever address this because it is straight up indefensible. The concept that Christina being a genuine visionary lends absolutely no justification or defence whatsoever to the theological extortion of the public for cash is lost on you.

  36. themadhair, neither the civil nor the ecclesiastical authorities have accused Christina of extortion period. Why are you unwilling to accept this fact? As the wise old sage would say:

    “DAMNANT QUOD NON INTELLIGUNT”!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Sincerely, Trini

  37. I note you avoided the questions I posed earlier where I asked which law governs the use of religion for extortion.

    I note you have not addressed why people are coming forward to tell their stories of being extorted via their religion for huge sums of money.

    I note that you have not addressed the purchasing of luxury properties with the money that was extracted from people by threatening them with eternal damnation.

    I note that you are avoiding confronting first hand victim testimony like the Morrissey’s above.

    Please continue to avoid the issue. I wouldn’t want you to feel guilty for supporting an organisation that defrauds people in such a vile manner.

  38. themadhair, many of the questions you pose to me were adequately addressed in the post you deleted from the comment section. There is no need for repetition here. As for addressing your second question: I cannot make a judgement on a person’s motivation, for who can see into the hearts of men? Rest assured, I have no qualms whatsoever in supporting Christina, Fr. McGinnity and the HOP.

  39. many of the questions you pose to me were adequately addressed in the post you deleted from the comment section.

    Maybe I’m a little slow here, but how is testimony from victims like the Morrissey’s, who were taken for the tune of €50,000, adequately addressed by labelling the medium delivering those testimonies as ”gutter press”?

    How is the purchasing of expensive luxury properties with money extorted from victims adequately addressed by insinuating the reporter presenting those facts is a sufferer of ”memory lapses”?

    How is the financial exploitation detailed by victims, and presented with their own comments and cheque stubs as evidence, adequately addressed by decreeing the articles publishing such as ”presenting a mixture of misrepresentation, falsehoods and half-truths as facts.”?

    Maybe I am a bit slow, but in order to “adequately address” my questions it is necessary to at least reference them in some capacity. To “adequately address” those questions you would need to have first understood them contextually, and either falsified their premises or demonstrated with argumentation that they were unfounded. Again, maybe this is me being slow, but decreeing to have “adequately answered” those questions while simultaneously failing to demonstrate that you even have a basic comprehension of the content and context of those questions makes little sense to me.

    There is no need for repetition here.

    I asked for answers to very specific direct questions that cut to the heart of the matter, namely the defrauding of people for cash via their religious beliefs. Copy&pasting material does not do that, particularly when that material does not even come close to addressing the critical facts of this situation, namely the threatening of eternal damnation to acquire cash as detailed by victims who were subjected to it.

    I cannot make a judgement on a person’s motivation, for who can see into the hearts of men?

    I am not asking you to make a judgement on a person’s motivations, I am asking you to make a judgement on a person’s actions. Is the eliciting and exploitation of theologically inspired guilt, manifested by using a person’s religious faith against them, for the purposes of extorting large quantities of cash a permissible practice in your eyes? I don’t give a flying monkeys why the HOP is doing this, I only care about the fact that it is happening.

    Rest assured, I have no qualms whatsoever in supporting Christina, Fr. McGinnity and the HOP.

    Maybe you can cope by avoiding or ignoring the disenfranchised in all this. It is clear from your comments that you have not, and apparently will not, confront the real issues here. I understand that it is easy to label/dismiss any article or accusation when you freely and willingly ignore the faces behind them.

    Here is one of those faces:

    His name is Michael Morrissey. He has come forward and put his name to his claims. Go on, have a good look at him. You are supporting the very people who fleeced this man through crass primitive theological threats to get his cash. You have numerous posts on this thread now, and not once have you had the decency to even acknowledge that people like Michael even exist. Ignorance can be bliss.

  40. themadhair, it is true that people who become involved with apparitions can become as you say disenfranchised, which is why St. John of the Cross warns about seeking after extraordinary phenomena such as apparitions. As a wise Carmelite priest explained to me: “The primary purpose of Marian apparitions are for the sake of helping us ultimately to grow in love or our devotion to Our Lady. If we become attached to the rind of the message, or seek more messages than God desires to give us, or misuse them in any way, we leave ourselves open to deception.” I wish only the best for those who feel disenfranchised. May God grant them peace and healing of heart.

  41. I wish only the best for those who feel disenfranchised. May God grant them peace and healing of heart.

    If you truly wished the best for those who had their own religion and personal beliefs cruelly and malevolently used against them to deprive them of their cash then you would not be supporting an organisation that committed, and continues to commit, those very actions.

    Maybe it is just me, but when a situation like this is so crystal clear in its wrongs (specifically people being guilted and exploited for cash through their religious beliefs) I utterly fail to understand how people such as yourself can hope to simply sidestep those wrongs with a puff of irrelevant theology. Unless you are expressly prepared to endorse a theology that permits the use of religion for the emotional rapage of people for their cash, and I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that this is not the case, then I fail to see why you would ever consider such platitudes as either meaningful or relevant. Would you have the guts to look a victim in the eye and tell your feelings to them? I very much doubt you would.

    To put it another way, there are likely no other circumstances where you would ever permit the use of personal belief to psychologically terrorise people out of their cash – so why permit it in this circumstance?

  42. I am quite surprised to see a reference to the theology of John of the Cross from a defender of Christina and the House of Prayer.

    Since I am just emerging from a prolonged period of post graduate study of John, I am happy to explain that what John taught and stood for belies everything which underpins the House of Prayer menagerie.

    I already quoted at length John’s warning to those advanced in the spiritual life to flee supernatural communications.

    I quoted five criteria John used to test the spirit of someone claiming experiences such as Christina’s. The application of these five to Christina would give a clear and unambiguous result. Trini resolutely refused to do this, instead quoting a range of extraordinary phenomena associated with Christina. Strange then that the next day Trini should quote John’s warning about extraordinary phenomena in defence of her position.

    Trini might like to consider John’s warning about superstitious beliefs than some places might be better than others to pray in: this undermines the whole theological rationale for the houses of prayer.

    She might like to consider John’s warning to anyone who has the ‘gift’ of reading souls never to use it, since the devil will aways meddle in it.

    She might like to consider John’s counsel to beginners in the spiritual life to seek the worst, rather than the best, for themselves in temporal matters.

    She might like to consider John’s emphasis on friends of Christ being called to share whoe-heartedly in His suffering for the redemtion of the world. This makes a mockery of the book opened in 1999 in the House of Prayer, enabling those who sign to escape the ‘great chastisement’. If there is to be a great chastisement, the only calling for Christians is to suffer it in the world for the world. Any thought of an elect group escaping the suffering involves a whole new religion: it cannot be reconciled with Christianity.

    There is no fundamental aspect of John’s theology which can be reconciled with the House of Prayer.

    When she calls for healing for those from whom large sums of money have been coerced, is she calling for the money to be given back to them?

  43. Martin Joseph, St. John of the Cross makes a clear distinction between genuine and false mystical phenomena. You believe Christina is not genuine. Please explain how the many testimonies of spiritual conversions are attributable to the devil. Is the devil now engaged in the business of winning souls back to God? How about the testimonies from priests who claim Christina’s gift of reading their souls has benefited them in their ministry? Are they delusional? What about the many physical healings, some of which Cardinal Brady has said are of the caliber used to canonize a saint? Is this also the handiwork of el diablo? I mentioned in a previous post about her stigmata exuding a pleasant fragrance? Does the devil wear perfume to disguise his foul odor?
    “Satan will not cast out Satan, as a House divided against itself cannot stand.”

  44. Why do people miss that even assuming Christiana visionary skills were genuine in no way renders the religious and psychological mindscrewing of folks out of their cash any less vile?

  45. I am going to make this my final comment.

    The statement that John of the Cross made a clear distinction between genuine and false mysticism is trite. Everyone is bound to do this.

    The more interesting question is how did he go about making the distinction? We have an example of the criteria he used in a case similar to Christinas (which I quoted at length in an earlier post). It is a mistake to think he knew in advance that the nun in question wasn’t genuine : he applied the criteria to establish whether the nun was genuine. They weren’t rods to beat a fake mystic – they were the litmus test to ascertain whether she was genuine.

    You seem to have a deep-rooted resistance to applying these criteria to Christina ; I suspect because you know in your heart the result.

    The wild and unsubstantiable claims you make are belied by the fact that the Archbishop of Tuam found no evidence of suprernatural phenomena in relation to Christina.

    I note once again you make no effort to address the substance of John’s theology which, as I said before, belie everything that underpins the whole House of Prayer menagerie.

    Finally, your belief that the devil couldn’t produce a perfumed smell is risible.

    I don’t doubt you will reply by heading off on any number of tangents. I will just finish by inviting any genuine truth seeker to carefully read my 4 posts and reflect on them.

  46. Martin Joseph, the Archdiocese of Tuam did not have any evidence to justify labeling Christina a fake, like John of the Cross believed the nun to be, in the case you keep invoking – plain and simple. Some people are unhappy with the Archbishop’s statement. I have no problem with it and find it odd that others would perceive it to be a condemnation.

  47. non constat de supernaturalitate, neither approves nor prohibits a reported apparition.

    constat de non supernaturalitate, concludes that the reported revelations are not of supernatural origin, and thereby prohibits any public devotion or distribution of the alleged message.

    If any reported message conveys a substantial doctrinal or moral error against Church teaching, the reported revelations are deemed to be false.

    The statement from the Archdiocese of Tuam falls squarely into the first category. There is no charge of either doctrinal or moral error. Hence, the apparitions cannot be labeled as false.

  48. Fiat lux ! Just answer the question put to you by themadhair: Here is one of those faces:

    http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7352/michaeljxa.jpg

    “His name is Michael Morrissey. He has come forward and put his name to his claims. Go on, have a good look at him. You are supporting the very people who fleeced this man through crass primitive theological threats to get his cash. You have numerous posts on this thread now, and not once have you had the decency to even acknowledge that people like Michael even exist. Ignorance can be bliss.” Until Michael McCrory came out of the theological fog this type non constat de supernaturalitate waffle with honey was diversionary, now we just follow the money trail and the public testimony of witnesses. A bit like genuine Catholics who have the public teaching of the apostles handed down by the Church, why seek him here and there in stumps of wood, or spaced out visionaries. The purpose of visions is not to make Mary clearer. She must decrease and he must increase. Do what ever he tells you. Marian devotion is directed to Christ, other wise it is idolatry. As St Paul says the Jews seek signs and the Greeks wisdom, we preach Christ crucified. If anyone preaches another gospel let them be accursed.
    Private revelation which gets diverted from its true function is a distraction to true faith and is like a flat beer.

  49. Will you be happy madhair when God’s response to all this does not include a mansion for you even if Christina is chastised. Will it be sufficient for you that His decision was not quite as much about money as your arguments have been. The heart is more than money and she is really poor indeed if she curses herself to live without love, and God’s wrath in the end will be far greater than now. I don’t want to live for a fake. What’s more is not what’s less. May God curse the woman who messes with that. Even the Mother Mary as merciful as she is will not let justice go unanswered. She is too much to live for to let love go unanswered. May God curses the person who messes with this heart. Amen.

  50. @ Antonio Flores Jr. Peter
    I’m finding it difficult to follow what you are trying to say. Can you try re-phrasing what you wrote to make it more understandable?

    Sometimes issues are simpler than others try to make them out to be. This is a situation where multiple people have told the same story of being religiously threatened for their cash. Why do you not have a problem with this?

  51. The problem of a false prophet is more in the fact that they are misrepresenting God’s goodness than that they take money. A God who is angrier about money than He is about the wickedness in someones heart has no place in my heart. The bible speaks a lot about how money is nothing compared to goodness, and just as no mansion will ever make Christina truly happy never will it make someone who loses it truly sad. True sadness comes from loss much greater about things more important, and even then with the sadness God preserves His true devotees in peace because of goodness. Not anything other than love.
    Someone had invited me to a house of prayer and I’ve been looking up subjects on the computer lately about prophets and confraternities and I’ve run across a few of the Catholic discussion pages. So I looked up Christina to find out more and this is one of the pages that I came to. I have no problem with people being mad because of someones abuse, but it is the abuse of things more important than money that really makes me mad. There is nothing to live for more than true love and her consequences as a liar will be more than the cost of several life savings. In fact more than any money or anything physical in all of creation. Also the people who have given money are not totally innocent. It can only be because they were not doing the right thing in giving it or they were. They have responsibility for their own lives, not her, or the Pope. None of them go to heaven or hell for them. People going to a healer when there is no need is not following the scriptures. Yes the bible says peope have different gifts, but does not say ask and you won’t recieve. It says the opposite. I decided to write because of what I read about the Pope at the beginning. If someone has an actual vision and does talk about it He does not cancel out the authority of it because He wishes to be cautious. If I speak the truth but he told you not to believe me, HE IS THE LIAR. POPE OR NOT. He has no authority to change the truth. He does not control hearts or live my life for me. He lives with me. Why even bother to say that he will examine or declare anything true or not in stead of just saying there is no true vision. Must be because he’s tiptoeing like the pharisee who were forced to answer without answering. I talk and he makes no decision over whether my speech is true or not, he just has to live with it. Amen

  52. “Until Michael McCrory came out of the theological fog this type non constat de supernaturalitate waffle with honey was diversionary, now we just follow the money trail and the public testimony of witnesses. A bit like genuine Catholics who have the public teaching of the apostles handed down by the Church, why seek him here and there in stumps of wood, or spaced out visionaries. The purpose of visions is not to make Mary clearer. She must decrease and he must increase. Do what ever he tells you. Marian devotion is directed to Christ, other wise it is idolatry. As St Paul says the Jews seek signs and the Greeks wisdom, we preach Christ crucified. If anyone preaches another gospel let them be accursed.
    Private revelation which gets diverted from its true function is a distraction to true faith and is like a flat beer.”

    dialogueireland,

    1.How is it that a Roman Catholic theologian could be so dismissive of the Roman Catholic Church’s criteria for assessing private revelation?

    2. As regards Marian apparitions, the Roman Catholic Church acknowledges the active participation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the life of the Church throughout salvation history, beginning with the Annunciation. The late Pope John Paul II’s motto was: “Totus Tuus”: “all yours” a reference to the entrustment of his life and ministry to the Virgin Mary.

    3. Here’s a link to the Vatican webpage with a theological commentary on Private Revelation.

    http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000626_message-fatima_en.html

    4. Regarding the money trail, my question is this:
    What information do you have that the civil and ecclesiastical authorities weren’t privy to? Don’t they read the newspapers? Neither have accused Christina of any wrongdoing.

  53. I still cannot understand what you are trying to tell me Antonio.

    The reason I am commenting on this forum is because the HOP is defrauding people, using their personal beliefs against them in order to terrorise them into handing over huge quantities of money. I do not care what those people believe, nor do I care about their motivations or aspirations.

    People are being cruelly hurt by this organisation. For me the entire aspect of theology is an unnecessary complication for a situation that is quite simple – people are being callously exploited. Past that the choice of what people believe is a personal one that does not concern me.

    Also – use paragraphs. Break up your text to make it easier to follow.

  54. Antonio,
    Congratulations on your correct discernment that Christina is a false prophet.
    I am interested to know what helped you to this conclusion?
    Did you follow this discussion?
    Did any particular entries help?
    I ask because as a Catholic theologian, specialising in Spiritualty, I have outlined compelling reasons why Christina is not genuine. It proved impossible to get her defenders to even acknowledge these arguments, much less reflect on them. I am left with the nagging question: Are there people reading who are being helped discern or am I wasting my time?
    I am interested in your feedback.
    God Bless

  55. Martin Joseph, Welcome back….thought you had deserted this discussion again. As a Catholic theologian you must be familiar with the following guidelines:

    1. non constat de supernaturalitate, neither approves nor prohibits a reported apparition.

    2. constat de non supernaturalitate, concludes that the reported revelations are not of supernatural origin, and thereby prohibits any public devotion or distribution of the alleged message.

    As one of the defenders you are referring to in your post, my question to you is:

    If Chistina is a false prophet – Why haven’t the apparitions been labeled as false? Why has there been no prohibition of the distribution of the messages? Why has the House of Prayer has not been condemned? Why is Christina’s spiritual director allowed to be openly associated with the the House of Prayer? Why hasn’t his superior, the Primate of Ireland, Cardinal Brady clipped his wings? What criteria are you using to condemn Christina that the Archdiocese of Tuam and Cardinal Brady are unaware of ?

  56. I intend to contact the Archbishops’ houses in Tuam and Armagh on Monday week to draw their attention to the fact that supporters of the House of Prayer are trading, in a public forum, on the fact that distribution of the messages is allowed and that Fr McGinnity is allowed publicly associate with Christina as evidence that they are tacitly supporting the House of Prayer.

  57. Martin Joseph, although this is repetitive:

    A. constat de non supernaturalitate, concludes that the reported revelations are not of supernatural origin, and thereby prohibits any public devotion or distribution of the alleged message.

    B. If any reported message conveys a substantial doctrinal or moral error against Church teaching, the reported revelations are deemed to be false.

    C. Here’s an excerpt from the Archdiocese of Tuam statement:

    “I have had submitted to me no evidence which would give cause for questioning the integrity, good will, sincerity of spiritual devotion or orthodoxy of faith either of Mrs. Christina Gallagher or of her collaborators in the work termed ‘The House of Prayer’ at Achill. ”

    Awaiting the outcome of your endeavors………….

  58. The latest statement from the archdiocese in its entirety:

    Moderator edit.
    The statement quoted is found in its entirety at the bottom of this webpage:

    http://www.tuamarchdiocese.org/hseofprayer.htm

  59. dialogueireland, isn’t this section reserved for comments only? Have the rules suddenly changed? May I now re-post in its entirety the posts you deleted ??? Trini

  60. In summary the ‘House of Prayer’ has no Church approval and the work does not enjoy the confidence of the diocesan authorities.

    Seems pretty unambiguous.

  61. themadhair, the Archdiocese of Tuam has not condemned the House of Prayer, Christina Gallagher or the apparitions. And the statement from the Archdiocese does not contain the following decree:

    constat de non supernaturalitate, which concludes that the reported revelations are not of supernatural origin, and thereby prohibits any public devotion or distribution of the alleged message.

    And it is an undisputed fact that none of the resulting penalties have been imposed. If the apparitions are false, the Archdiocese would not hesitate to say so. Are you suggesting that the apparitions are false and the Archdiocese is unaware of this fact?

  62. Maybe you can translate the following extract for me Trini since it apparently doesn’t mean what it literally says:

    In summary the ‘House of Prayer’ has no Church approval and the work does not enjoy the confidence of the diocesan authorities.

    It may be my inclination to accept those words at face value that is the problem. It could be my fault for assuming that the words actually mean what they say. Maybe I am in error for assuming that ‘no’ means something other than ‘no’. Perhaps it is my preference to interpret sentences in a coherent manner that is allowing me to miss the deep underlying message in what, at least initially, appeared to be a clear concise statement.

    If the above comes across as testy then you must understand why. You are essentially asking me to divorce the extract from its actual meaning.

    As I said previously I simply do not care whether Christina is, or isn’t, genuine. Scamming people through their religion isn’t something I take lightly. And I don’t understand how you can so easily ignore the very real hurt the HOP is inflicting on people who turned to it for spiritual guidance.

    How about this man whose story was in today’s paper?:

    A MAN who claims he was left in agony for three days in a room with no medical help after smashing his knee has filed a lawsuit against the controversial House of Prayer.
    Lawyers for Anthony Tierney lodged a personal injuries claim in the High Court on August 19 and are currently serving papers on the Achill Island prayer centre run by fake visionary Christina Gallagher.
    The Sunday World revealed in June last year how Tierney fell off a ladder while cleaning windows at the House of Prayer, where he was a volunteer at the time.
    The 63-year-old granddad said he was treated “like a dog” after the incident.
    “They put my life in danger. There is no love or compassion there,” he stormed.
    “They locked me away in a room and ignored my calls for a doctor. I was in agony.”
    Tierney, whose leg has never fully recovered, said Christina Gallagher just wanted him to go back to his native England after the horrific accident.

    content snipped

    “My accident shows how hateful Gallagher really is,” Tierney said last year. “Everyone is frightened to death of her. It has gone away from being anything religious. It is a sect.”

  63. A belief that is well placed cannot be used against itself. Those who try to abuse it will only bring about their own destruction. People who have been hurt in this it is sad to say have either been people who were throwing away their money knowingly, and willingly, or people who cannot be abused by what they themselves have done. Basically these people have either hurt themselves willingly because they do not live right, or they are people who have a reason that is in blessing and they still feel good about what they have done even if she did take their money for her own purposes. Of course I’m not saying that people should feel good about evil, but true goodness is not destroyed. Christina is holding money infected with true love, faith, and goodness if people of goodness have given it. Money that truly has a good purpose, like a vision that is truly from God, will not be used for anything but His will. He cannot be abused by evil. It’s like she’s holding a bomb that is already going off continually and has unlimited power. If He wishes to really make it explode there will be nothing left. Theology also really is only something to talk about or relevant at all because it really exist’s. It is not something for intellectuals or some crazy technical discussion or at all not relevant. It is as simple as anyone saying something is wrong and being right. You don’t have to use theology to beat around the bush,you can go out into the street and beat a bush or talk unecessarily using any type of words. The punishment for wrongdoing does not come from speaking it comes from actual goodness. The true explosive device is the most pure. The one infected with the most love. Every smile of love that she recieves from anyone anywhere, true love, condemns what wrong there is. Even the smallest amount of love anywhere in the world will crumble her organization. Justice exists even while the wicked smile in your face. They are the losers. Amen.

  64. “In summary the ‘House of Prayer’ has no Church approval and the work does not enjoy the confidence of the diocesan authorities.”

    themadhair, the excerpt above indicates that the Archdiocese has not given its approval nor has it condemned the apparitions. It falls squarely under the guideline of: non constat de supernaturalitate – which neither approves nor prohibits a reported apparition.

    As regards the article you mention: How can anyone come to any conclusion when the case hasn’t been decided in a court?

  65. the excerpt above indicates that the Archdiocese has not given its approval nor has it condemned the apparitions.

    Try telling me the meaning for that passage without filtering it through your reading glasses.

    As regards the article you mention: How can anyone come to any conclusion when the case hasn’t been decided in a court?

    Why do you not have the guts to call that man, and the others just like him with stories on the same theme, liars? How many comments have you made where you still will not directly accept those people even exist?

    Put it this way – if that man goes to court and wins would it have any effect whatsoever on your stance regarding the HOP? If any of the HOP victims successfully sued (although they face the problem that mind control isn’t an aspect of Irish law which renders things difficult) would it alter your attitude one iota?

    You have to admit that the answer would be no. Because in those situations you would be doing the exact same thing you are doing now – de-personifying those people to make it easier for you to rationalise them away.

  66. Antonio Flores Jr wrote as follows,

    Basically these people have either hurt themselves willingly because they do not live right, or they are people who have a reason that is in blessing and they still feel good about what they have done even if she did take their money for her own purposes. Of course I’m not saying that people should feel good about evil, but true goodness is not destroyed.

    I find this rationalisation of undue influence and manipulation expressed in semi platonic terms sickening in the extreme. You can’t come out and call it what it is, extortion and greed sugar coated by a creeping Jesus.
    So when a woman is raped it is her fault, when I am held up by a robber I brought it on myself by my lack of moral character. What planet are you living on?
    Get real and stop giving us verbal abuse on top of rationalisations of evil. The greater good is not some idealised spirituality, but getting those good people their money back, and counselling for the abuse they have endured.

  67. themadhair,

    1. I am merely providing the Church’s guidelines – you can interpret them however you choose.

    2. As far as the newspaper articles you reference:
    As you should know, neither the civil nor ecclestiastical authorities have found Christina or the House of Prayer guilty of wrongdoing. If you have a problem with this, you should address your concerns to them. I am merely a breath of fresh air attempting to clear up the fog and misconceptions concerning Christina and the HOP.

  68. I am merely providing the Church’s guidelines – you can interpret them however you choose.

    Actually I was simply pointing out the lack of ambiguity of a specific passage, and raised the question of why you seem unable to read it as written.

    I am merely a breath of fresh air attempting to clear up the fog and misconceptions concerning Christina and the HOP.

    Baloney. I have quoted, at length, from the stories of two of the victims of the HOP. Both describe the HOP in extremely unflattering terms – but both reinforce the criticism that the HOP is using the personal beliefs of its adherents to frighten money out of them. How exactly are you “attempting to clear up the fog and misconceptions” by pretending those stories, and the victims behind them, do not exist?

    You do realise that by ignoring these people, who have been cruelly exploited for their cash through their religion, you are ensuring that future victims will be hurt in the same way? Why do you appear to have a difficulty in confronting what these people have gone through?

  69. You cannot exclude the fact that those people have the results that they have because of what they did. They gave money. What happened with the money that they gave? How did what happened happen? They gave money. The person who tells them they had no choice when there was a choice ignores the fact that their are consequences for their actions. The kind who will say that it’s all unfair when things do not go their way. If they go give money over and over again to the same kind of person it will get taken again. Why are they giving their money. What are these people telling them for them to give up all of their money. If Chistina is false then it’s not God’s fault when somebody does something wrong. It’s either wrong that they gave the money or not. What would He tell them? It’s OK, you didn’t do anything wrong? Or would He tell them that they shouldn’t have given their money and to, next time use it more wisely. If He’s happy with what they did then they have brought Him nothing but pleasure, and they will only be blessed, if not then they will have negative results as punishment for giving their money, no matter how much you or they cry. I have lived for the greater good and you better be cleaner than me if you want to call me idealistic. Otherwise your self-righteous attitude has just gotten you into trouble. Have you read what you people have been writing. A lot of it though based on fact has a complete lack of goodness in it. No power, no authority, I would’n’t be suprised if God wishes to smack your discussion off the face of the earth. What a ridiculous joke the church is if this is how good people get things done. By faith and good works you will be saved, not by bickering. Also as says the Lord’s prophet by waiting and calm. Does it mean you don’t have a mouth? No, but every out of the way word that you blast off of your fingers or tongue or think in your own head will be done away with. When I began writing on here the only thing I spoke was the truth about the popes error in saying something true can’t be believed if it was spoken about. He is wrong if what you have said is true whether or not Christina is a fraud. He’s proven wrong every second of everyday since that decision was made about silence, with or without a vision. You insulted me first when all I did was call a liar a liar. If you’re insulted by the truth which I wrote from the begining then it was because of your own hot heads that wanted to fight more than actually face the truth. How much good has your wasting of time produced. I’ve been living for you since I was a child and you reject me. My heart in pain but still carrying on alone, without true help because most people, even in the church, don’t live good anymore. Even without your help. The whole conversation is about justice and have I been shown any by those supposedly fighting for it. What sad salvation. Which of you thinks that they can produce more, than the help that I have offered. The fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. What you have called a fool has been your downfall. How do you help me? You don’t. Amen.

  70. If only the world was that simple Antonio. Even the most honest and good person can be conned – especially when they believe they have had a spiritual experience.

  71. themadhair, on August 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pm Said:

    “Baloney. I have quoted, at length, from the stories of two of the victims of the HOP. Both describe the HOP in extremely unflattering terms – but both reinforce the criticism that the HOP is using the personal beliefs of its adherents to frighten money out of them. How exactly are you “attempting to clear up the fog and misconceptions” by pretending those stories, and the victims behind them, do not exist? You do realise that by ignoring these people, who have been cruelly exploited for their cash through their religion, you are ensuring that future victims will be hurt in the same way? Why do you appear to have a difficulty in confronting what these people have gone through?”

    themadhair, with all due respect, your concerns in this matter should be addressed to the Archdiocese of Tuam. I am not a representative of the Archdiocese. You are flattering me by attributing so much importance to me. Are you suggesting that the Archdiocese of Tuam is insensitive to the perceived plight of these people who supposedly had their money “frightened out of them”?

  72. True goodness is not conned. There is a failing on their part to recognize truth that they should have and could have. Or their true purpose was good but not dependent on Christina being authentic. They chose to follow something they should not have or they were following what they should have. If they have chosen to listen to something that is not of God then they are still held accountable by Him. He is mad at them for not paying proper attention to Him. He does not make it impossible for people. They had no reason to believe something that was false was fake. He did not tell them to believe it. On the contrary they know enough to say that they should not have given that money or that they should have. There is no claiming ignorance or God has no place. No one can claim innocence or guilt who is not worthy of it. If someone can’t actually claim innocence then they can’t claim Christina guilty. That is not theological or dodging around the issue. The person who really condemns her for what she is will be someone who takes responsibility for their own actions. Otherwise even if she is tried in court and convicted it will be by fools who have not actually stated anything more than a theory about her. Even if it is a judge, and even if it is true that she is evil. Real punishment will come though, from the real truth which does not accept judgments without it’s actual authority. Also no, when someone is really good they will point there finger at her in a condemning way and simply state what is the truth . That she is evil, even when she’s in the height of her trickery, and that without any apparent evidence other than the fact that she is. It’s just that much of the time God uses people who are unacceptable in societies eyes to even be taken seriously. With God though, everyone is taken seriously. When His justice comes there will be no one who can say they had not been treated justly by Him. He makes sure people know what they are doing and He will not accept that someone was not given what they needed of intelligence or awareness. He has no right to judge or condemn if He has nothing to judge.

  73. For someone who believes that we are wasting our time it is strange that you keep on referring to God and writing meandering comments which have no bearing on the topic, when we are talking about people who thought they were hearing God when they were being mentally manipulated. I assume living in Virginia you have got lost in the Luray caves Peter?
    Just to be sure your job is to try using God words to divert us from seeing through Christina?
    We have about 95% of space left so you keep trailing your Texan friend with irrelevant comments.

  74. themadhair, with all due respect, your concerns in this matter should be addressed to the Archdiocese of Tuam.

    Why? People are being cruelly defrauded by an organisation that the Archdiocese has no authority over. Why should my concerns be addressed to anyone other than the people who are potential victims (which includes yourself) here? Remember that Christina “does not enjoy the confidence of the church”.

    Also – you are still not confronting the victims. To be blunt, I have no stomach for theology when such flagrant profiteering of peoples personal beliefs is ongoing.

  75. Thanks Mad hair- here is some more practical help for those still struggling in this group
    http://www.refocus.org/postcult.html

  76. themadhair, on August 31st, 2009 at 10:32 pm Said:

    “Why? People are being cruelly defrauded by an organisation that the Archdiocese has no authority over. Why should my concerns be addressed to anyone other than the people who are potential victims (which includes yourself) here? Remember that Christina “does not enjoy the confidence of the church”.

    themadhair,

    1. I love being associated with the House of Prayer, and have experienced only graces and blessings since I was lucky enough to meet the wonderful people who are part of that organization.

    2. Christina and Fr. McGinnity enjoy my full confidence.

    3. Next time I visit the House of Prayer I will pray for the unbelievers that the scales will fall from their eyes.

    Sincerely, Trini

  77. dialogueireland, on August 31st, 2009 at 10:47 pm Said:

    “Thanks Mad hair- here is some more practical help for those still struggling in this group”

    http://www.refocus.org/postcult.html

    dialogueireland, I have a question you may be qualified to answer: Can a forum fall into the realm of a cult? Trini

  78. themadhair, on August 31st, 2009 at 10:32 pm Said:

    “Also – you are still not confronting the victims. To be blunt, I have no stomach for theology when such flagrant profiteering of peoples personal beliefs is ongoing.”

    themadhair, here are some verses from the Holy Bible:

    “It is more blessed to give than to receive.”

    “Give, and it will be given to you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For the measure you give will be the measure you get back.” And finally:

    “GOD LOVES A CHEERFUL GIVER.”

  79. Certainly yes, it can develop in any group, movement, an office, a bank and within churches. See the example of the Legionaries of Christ on our web site.
    Also look at the thesis on the Magnificat Meal Movement and read the Ch 2 on cult definition. Look at the cultism section and the variety referred to.
    Also a country and its leader can become cult like. see North Korea, Adolf Hitler.
    It is clear that your total submission to the H of P has left you without resources to evaluate clear, evidence of abuse.
    You are so brainwashed that you can’t even respond to the Mad Hair’s evidence. You not only walk past it, but actually are so under the influence of your Messiah figures you can’t see it.
    The king is in his altogether … is naked as the day that he was born!
    1. I love being associated with the House of Prayer, and have experienced only graces and blessings since I was lucky enough to meet the wonderful people who are part of that organization. 2. Christina and Fr. McGinnity enjoy my full confidence. 3. Next time I visit the House of Prayer I will pray for the unbelievers that the scales will fall from their eyes.
    The cries of the victim you do not hear, you are like the SS guards at Auschwitz you are so controlled by Nazi ideology they will glady turn on the gas.
    You will pray for us unbelievers next time= I will go back to be further conditioned so that black is white.

  80. He also loves the victims of abuse. May I refer you to the fate of two early Christians who messed with God.
    Remember Lot’s wife!
    Also Ananias and Sapphira Acts 5:1-11.

  81. dialogueireland, your commentary is truly disengaged from reality. Remember, the subject matter is the House of Prayer, not the Third Reich. Perhaps this dilemma stems from a misunderstanding of the nature of a cult. The following link will clear up any misconceptions concerning the House of Prayer.

    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com/cult.html

  82. No just read the latest story from the Sunday world to understand how Christina reacts when she sees human suffering:
    “She stared at the floor as
    if in a trance and suddenly
    left the room. She didn’t
    even ask how I was,”

    You asked for opinion on whether forums can become cult like. You get an answer ignore researching as you live in America
    so have hardly had time to sleep. Now as your contribution to the discussion reintroduce the web site which is the official line. Hardly independent is it. Many people have asked us to close
    down this discussion, but we want you to go on and on ignoring the cries of those who your movement is violating. Please go on we will let people make up their own minds. You have clearly not the ability to deal with pain.
    o

  83. dialogueireland, on September 1st, 2009 at 2:46 pm Said:

    ” Many people have asked us to close
    down this discussion, but we want you to go on and on”

    dialogueireland, you claim there are individuals who want you to close down this thread? Are they too cowardly to join the debate?

    COWARDS DIE A THOUSAND DEATHS, THE VALIANT DIES BUT ONCE.

    To those who close their ears to the truth:

    VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT; VERITAS VOS LIBERABIT

  84. No they are not cowardly, just bored of your inability to actually reply and keep to what is asked of you.
    Statements like, “COWARDS DIE A THOUSAND DEATHS, THE VALIANT DIES BUT ONCE.

    To those who close their ears to the truth:

    VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT; VERITAS VOS LIBERABIT”
    suggest someone not in touch with their feelings or reality.

  85. dialogueireland, on September 1st, 2009 at 4:03 pm Said:

    “No they are not cowardly, just bored of your inability to actually reply and keep to what is asked of you.”

    dialogueireland, if they are so bored, why do they continue reading my supposedly boring comments? Are they gluttons for punishment?

  86. dialogueireland, on September 1st, 2009 at 4:03 pm Said:

    “Statements like, “COWARDS DIE A THOUSAND DEATHS, THE VALIANT DIES BUT ONCE.

    To those who close their ears to the truth:

    VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT; VERITAS VOS LIBERABIT”
    suggest someone not in touch with their feelings or reality.”

    dialogueireland, Congratulations. You are finally beginning to see the light ……that’s exactly my point. It is encouraging to realize that my comments are bearing good fruit.!

  87. If the answers to my prayers have only been in the end the same as your thinking that I am irrelevant, then God is a fool.

  88. Though I do not believe so, rather that it is you who are out of line.

  89. 3. Next time I visit the House of Prayer I will pray for the unbelievers that the scales will fall from their eyes.

    Interesting.

    So when people like Michael Morrissey, who attended the HOP in good faith and handed over tens of thousands of euro after Christina and co. played the “hellfire” card, tell their story what does Trini do?

    Does she have the decency to even acknowledge this man and his experiences? No.

    Does she have the guts to confront and challenge this man’s story or the claims he is making? No.

    Does she have the courage of her convictions to even for a moment entertain whether this man even exists? No.

    She will pray for the unbelievers to help remove the scales from their eyes. And while she prays even more people will be put through what Michael has described. It seems not having scales on one’s eyes means that one doesn’t see very much.

  90. themadhair, here’s another sentence to add to your monologue:

    She will spend her time reading the Bible rather than stories in tabloid newspapers. Trini

  91. More likely in nightclubs- watch this space for an update on that story.
    A thousand days is like a day for the Lord

  92. dialogueireland, on September 2nd, 2009 at 5:53 pm Said:

    “More likely in nightclub”

    dialogueireland….oh my… such a childish comment from one who claims to be an intellectual…..shame on you.

  93. No you do not need to be an intellectual to know what a nightclub is.
    Last time I was in one in Cork 40 years ago we had to buy a bottle of Blue Nun

  94. She will spend her time reading the Bible rather than stories in tabloid newspapers.

    That sounds like a great way to ignore the stories from people like Michael Morrissey. You remember Michael Morrissey? Decent chap, got threatened with eternal damnation and terrorised to the point where he and his wife handed over tens of thousands of euro? That chap whose story you and miss Gallagher pretend doesn’t exist by burying your noses in your bibles.

  95. dialogueireland, on September 2nd, 2009 at 7:25 pm Said:

    “No you do not need to be an intellectual to know what a nightclub is.

    Last time I was in one in Cork 40 years ago we had to buy a bottle of Blue Nun”

    dialogueireland, and the hangover seems to be still in effect after all those years.

  96. It’s very sad to see people taking advantage of others search for religion to make a profit from it.
    I’m not all for the Vatican law that if you have a vision you have to be silent about it, but sometimes. like in this case, it’s necessary in order to protect the public of charlatans.

  97. it is a pity to see so many people still believe in christina gallagher no matter what they are told she is a conwoman who make a fortune by her lies and has predicted nothing

  98. it seems very easy to fool the irish people when it comes to religion they seem to believe anybody when somebody claims to see visions and then ask for money a lot of irish are stupid enough to give the money . christina gallagher is laughing all the way the way to the bank i wouldn’t give her a cent

  99. how ever you are,.god bless you,.to me you are so correct,.i hope and prey one day this woman should br bought to justus,.theys so called big boys involved in this,.as you know the c/church is curroped in the past,they wont ammite,to do with money thay are all the same,they take from the poor to make themself rich,.that not god work,.my message from b/vergin dont give up,.get every one to take back they money,from this ruthless woman,.we want to get hur alive before she get to hell,.i want this over turned ,for the innocent people to take action god bless you my e/mail feel free to perly

  100. the comment a above giving mary maughan,is not correct name that just a password my real name is sister mariea convent ireland

  101. oh dear…..oh dear….oh dear….what are we going to do?

  102. This is something that must have deep theological reasons…it happened to everybody, even mr garde and Mr McCrory and all the contributors to this site…
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    mary D
    moderation. Use of abusive language.

  103. The last two posts are irrelevant and irreverant.
    They have been added to bring the previous posts into disrepute, so should be removed.

  104. Aye , you’re right son…xxxxx….Mary D
    moderation. Use of abusive language.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 664 other followers

%d bloggers like this: