House of Prayer RTE Prime Time April, 03, 2008

Generally those devoted to Christina see criticism as emanating from the devil. The media is out to get her. The same happened with Debra from the MMM.  See post for Magnificat Meal Movement. We were amazed hearing a priest in Australia calling Debra  a bitch on Liveline in 2003. Also until the media showed Fr McGinnity was not a credible witness his pious form of pseudo spirituality was bought into by those who by passed the solid teaching of the Church, and instead of receiving the Eucharist and hearing the word of God they preferred at great personal sacrifice to get involved at the House of Prayer. A read of Pope Benedict’s book on Jesus would have done them a lot of good and not of cost as much. A very holy monk in Co. Waterford had this to say about him, “He called him a right fruitcake and pridefully pious.” Also “A gullible gobshite.”

LETTERS: A devilishly good actor

The Rev KEVIN HEGARTY

Saturday, 29 June 1996

Sir: I was interested to read in Paul Vallely’s report (25 June) of Fr Gerard McGinnitty’s tortured gymnastics as he celebrated Mass in the House of Prayer on Achill. It seems from the report that many of his followers ascribe his agitation to the frenzied efforts of the devil to upset him. May I set their minds at rest. As a student for the priesthood at Maynooth in the 1970s, when Fr McGinnitty was Dean, my most enduring memory is that he was a reasonably good actor who could never resist the exaggerated gesture.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/the-holy-war-over-a-visionary-in-a-cardigan-1338632.html The Rev KEVIN HEGARTY

Belmullet, Co Mayo

Basically when he was wronged by blowing the whistle on President Michael Ledwith in the ’80’s, he was stuck into a small parish away from the madding crowd. Ledwich renounced Catholicism and joined Ramtha, a New Age Centre in Washington State. http://www.ramtha.com/teachers/miceal_ledwith.asp His revenge was rejection of Catholicism, Fr McGinnity’s response was to move into the world of visions and private revelation instead of the public teaching of the church. One could say it would have been difficult to have remained a small fish in a big pond.

One had the sense that after the apology from the Irish Catholic Church in 2005, he expected to become a bishop or something. Rather than accept the pain of rejection, not any easy option may I add, he decided to become a big fish in Christina’s small pond. In the end he was the bait that caught all the little Catholic fish, especially the Marian fish. Earlier this year we heard she was planning an exit = to be assumed into heaven like Our Lady. We are onto this and are waiting for her next move. The houses in Malahide, Ohio, Newport and Ballina can’t be sold without great losses.

If you have Real Player installed, you should be able to watch it at http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2008/0403/primetime.html

or

28 Responses

  1. Why do people always talk of the “fruits of her work” as anything other than a string of mansions and great personal wealth created from lies and gullible old people?

    Like

  2. Aye, pal, ah zzzzzzzzzzmeself…
    moderation. Use of abusive language.

    Like

  3. It was announced today the death of Fr Ignatius….( the alledged so-called monk of Melleray.

    Can you explain Fr. Ignatius’ connection to this please?

    Like

  4. It was announced today the death of Fr Ignatius….( the alledged so-called monk of Melleray.

    He had denied EVER making any judgmental call other than positive to Christina Gallagher.
    May he rest in peace

    Like

  5. Saigon 1975..rush to get on the helicopter….you lying bastard …you have no idea of what really happened in the Vietnam War. I was there …you little bastard…and I was not rushing for any helicopter, whilst the vulnerable S.Vietnam families and wounded were being evacuated. Why do ass holes like you pretend that you have credentials???
    IF you say you were ther post your military id….or just go —- yourself.

    Like

  6. The reference is to the Director of Dialogue Ireland knowing about the monk in question for 20 years, not Michael McCrory. It was Michael McCrory who went to him as he needed help to see through Christina and her assistant McGinnitty. Hence your worry about, “Who judged that this monk is ‘very holy.’ was with my discernment ? I raise this issue because people often have , in my experience, poor discernment of what holiness is. Oftentimes, what people label holiness is more properly labelled strident orthodoxy, or moral-self righteousness, or exaggerated affectation, or the projection of a grandiose sense of self-importance.” I agree fully. My experience is that he has great discernment. Part of bringing Michael to earth was this monk’s profane comments. It is not that he is crude, but shows that awareness that is needed to see through a right fruitcake and pridefully pious gullible gobshite. Many super spiritual people need to get a reality check.
    As to the legal issues we will just have to disagree on them. Do feel free to call me to discuss them. We do not want to as the mad hare makes clear get diverted from the main issue. Is the House of Prayer to be taken as a genuine spiritual movement or a horrific con trick.
    You make it clear you do not view them as genuine, So let us keep this space free for that debate and have the other discussion by email or phone.

    Like

  7. I would distinguish the interention of the priest on Liveline about Debra from the anonymous quote attributed to ‘a very holy monk’ because
    1. The priest let himself open to judgement in the court of public opinion by his public comments
    2. He left himself open to a libel lawsuit
    3. He left himself open to a complaint to his bishop
    4. He left himself open to an attack in kind
    5. It was possible for keenly interested observers to form an opinion of him, since they knew who he was.

    It is not clear who the ‘he’ is in ‘I have known of his discernment in this area for twenty years’ -if it is Michael McCrory did the twenty year period include the period he became an ardent supporter of the house of prayer? Did he come to think of Christine Gallagher and Fr McGinnity as ‘very holy’ during this period?

    It is probably worth repeating I am not in any sense a supporter or sympathiser with the House of Prayer (and dialogueireland can vouch for this).

    Like

  8. The source of the comment was Michael McCrory who was an ardent supporter of Christina’s.
    When he was trying to discern what was going on he visited Mount Mellory and talked to the
    monk in question. I have known of his discernment in this area for over 20 years.
    It reminded me of the Liveline interview with an Irish priest in regard to Debra in Australia
    which I alluded to in my post. He called her a bitch. I was taken back at the time, but when I was in
    Australia I met the priest concerned, and began to understand how a profane intervention can sometimes
    help to people to face reality.
    I am happy that the comment and the monk are totally authentic

    Like

  9. I do not believe that Christine Gallagher is getting messages from God, or in the mission of the House
    of Prayer, or its fund-raising.
    However, I have concerns about the posting of the derogatory comments about Fr McGinnity by the ‘very holy’ Waterord monk.
    If one intends to make such comments public, they should be attributable.
    If the comments were not to be made public, they should not be on the blog.
    Who judged that this monk is ‘very holy’? I raise this issue because people often have , in my experience,
    poor discernment of what holiness is. Oftentimes, what people label holiness is more properly labelled strident orthodoxy, or moral-self righteousness, or exaggerated affectation, or the projection of a grandiose sense of self-importance .

    Like

  10. I will now translate Cathy’s latest post so everyone can see the true meaning and intent behind it.

    Dear dialogueireland, your last post makes no sense at all.

    Translation: I do not understand humour, and was entirely mistaken in thinking that comments accusing a Dialogue Ireland member of being a CIA operative would be taken seriously.

    I assumed this website was a serious forum;

    Translation: I have absolutely nothing to say on the main issue (namely that Christina Gallagher has defrauded people via their Christian faith) and will continue to avoid it all costs.

    but after reading some of your eccentric comments it’s obvious this isn’t the case.

    Translation: Since I have obviously no intention of debating the central issue, and in fact am only here to detract and divert away from that central issue, I will now attempt to attack anything I can find. Since I have no basis for defending the House of Prayer against the very real concerns people have expressed (and provided documentary evidence for in the form of bank statements in the case of defrauded victims) I will now attempt to attack the credibility of those speaking out against Christina’s fraud. That I have absolutely now grounds whatsoever to base such an attack doesn’t matter – I will find something, anything, to use. I will also attempt to play the victim somewhat here to attempt to garner sympathy. Basically, I will use any and all techniques at my disposal to take the conversation away from the central issue – that of Christina using the Christian faith of others against them for the purposes of accumulating lots of cash.

    Have a wonderful life!

    Translation: Since my attack is already on feeble grounds, I must attempt to portray myself as being extremely courteous. My idea is to set up a juxtaposition with the intent of showing me in a better light than that of those other commenters. If I succeed it may make me seem the victim to viewers of this forums, and may help in my goal of making them miss the central issue – that people have been conned into haemorrhaging cash into Christina’s open arms.

    I wish the same for your sidekick the madhair.

    Translation: I recognise the importance of playing the victim to my strategy. I will now attempt to further emphasise that by highlighting the numerical disparity of the conversation. It does not matter that I have ignored everything they have posted regarding the central issue, it does not matter that I have not once commented on the central issue and it does not matter that virtually every post I’ve made has attempted to decoy from the central issue – if I can successfully play victim and win moral high-ground from the viewers I will have succeeded in my goal of diverting those viewers from the central issue. The central issue of course being the extreme hurt and pain the House of Prayer has inflicted upon its victims as they were ravaged for their cash in a disgusting abuse of their Christian faith.

    Like

  11. Dear dialogueireland, your last post makes no sense at all. I assumed this website was a serious forum; but after reading some of your eccentric comments it’s obvious this isn’t the case. Have a wonderful life! I wish the same for your sidekick the madhair.

    Like

  12. Cathy I will be away for a few days, but hope you will respect the mad hair, as he is my brain,
    when I am not using mine. Saigon 1975. Rush to get on the helicopter.
    To quote the scriptures- “Remember Lot’s wife.” I do work for the CIA, how did you guess?
    Christian Intelligence Agency. Now while you are sitting there in Florida, open a new chilled Tropicana
    carton and put on Beethoven’s fifth symphony. Just listen to the repetition of the main theme, and then meditate on this final
    piece. What about this do you not understand?

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

    THE END

    Like

  13. Repeating myself:

    Is this the tactic of a person with nothing meaningful to add to the discussion, and who is seemingly intent on ignoring the very real concerns people have expressed concerning the House of Prayer? And, in particular, those concerns expressed by former adherents who feel they have been completely and utterly exploited solely for their cash?

    I do recognise your determination to drag this conversation away from the central issue, but I have no intention of allowing it.

    Like

  14. Hello madhair, you state: “Of course not. And it is incredibly silly, if not outright disingenuous, of you to attempt to portray it is such.” You posted that newspaper article as a rebuttal to my comment: “I think it’s unprofessional to make sensational claims about individuals or groups and then fail to back them up with evidence”. – which I stated in response to this claim by dialogueireland: “We have inside information that like the Shah, or other discredited leaders a bolt hole is needed. I assume one that might produce a financial stream.”

    It is apparent you are ignorant of the supposed “inside information” – so why reply to a question you can’t answer?

    Like

  15. Are you suggesting that the newspaper article you posted is the “inside information” in the above quote?

    Of course not. And it is incredibly silly, if not outright disingenuous, of you to attempt to portray it is such.

    Is this the tactic of a person with nothing meaningful to add to the discussion, and who is seemingly intent on ignoring the very real concerns people have expressed concerning the House of Prayer? And, in particular, those concerns expressed by former adherents who feel they have been completely and utterly exploited solely for their cash?

    In case you need reminding of the discussion, this is usually the point where you completely ignore/quote-mine what I have said in order to get away from the real issue – that of Christina defrauding people by using their Christian faith against them.

    Like

  16. Hello themadhair, I was referring to this statement:

    “We have inside information that like the Shah, or other discredited leaders a bolt hole is needed. I assume one that might produce a financial stream.”

    Are you suggesting that the newspaper article you posted is the “inside information” in the above quote?

    Like

  17. The excerpt you reference from the Archdiocese of Tuam’s statement neither adds to nor detracts from the earlier portion I posted.

    Are you being serious? You didn’t see the move from a position of tepid support to one of severing ties? Seriously?

    I think it’s unprofessional to make sensational claims about individuals or groups and then fail to back them up with evidence.

    Are there newspapers where you reside? Have those newspapers carried any of the breaking stories where people conned by Christina have come forward to warn others?

    A sample (which you can download the full article from here – http://www.dialogueireland.org/a2z/privaterev/House%20of%20Prayer%2020080504-10.pdf )

    AN ELDERLY couple have revealed how they were brainwashed into giving a staggering €150,000 to fake visionary Christina Gallagher.

    Michael and Betty Morrissey handed over their life savings during a 10-year period leaving themselves with little to live on. They were put under massive psychological pressure to find the cash, even though they could not afford it.
    Now the couple from Knockanore, Co Waterford, have agreed to go public to stop other pensioners being caught in the same trap.

    They said yesterday they were horrified when they discovered Gallagher – founder of the controversial House of Prayer on Achill Island – was living a life of luxury while collecting huge amounts of cash from elderly followers of her “cause”.

    Michael (79) and Betty (69) stopped going to the House of Prayer a year ago after realising it was “a complete fraud”. But it was only when they read a series of articles in the Sunday World over the last few months that they realised the scale of the deception.

    The final straw for them was when they discovered last week that Gallagher’s main fundraiser, Fr Gerard McGinnity, was denying collecting money from them.
    The priest had relentlessly targeted them and many others for cash so this was “a blatant lie”, they said. Two of their cheques were actually written out to him.

    They were stunned when they heard that McGinnity was telling his parishioners that the cheques – published in the Sunday World last month – were forgeries. They were even more shocked when they learnt the priest lied to his own boss, Cardinal Sean Brady, about his involvement with Christina Gallagher.

    Like

  18. Dear dialogueireland, it matters not one whit whether I am the Cathy on the blog you quoted from; Cathy from Timbuktu; or Cathy who is the third cousin removed from Christina Gallagher. Why is this information relevant? Isn’t this comment section filed under the House of Prayer? I am not the House of Prayer; I am simply a humble supporter of Christina Gallagher and the House of Prayer. Isn’t that good enough. You mentioned the CIA in your last posting, do you perhaps work for them?

    The excerpt you reference from the Archdiocese of Tuam’s statement neither adds to nor detracts from the earlier portion I posted. In fact, if one were to read the entire pronouncement, there is no use of the words “condemned”, “fraudulent”, or “cult” anywhere in the statement.

    I think it’s unprofessional to make sensational claims about individuals or groups and then fail to back them up with evidence. If you’re not prepared to divulge your “inside information” why mention it in the first place? I’m curious, what on earth does a prophet like Christina have in common with the Shah?

    Like

  19. Dear Cathy,

    I did ask you to confirm whether you are the same Cathy on that blog? Would you do me a favour and just answer the question?
    Your quotes from the Tuam web site were from an earlier phase when the Church was not clear. It’s last statement last year ends thus:
    “In summary the ‘House of Prayer’ has no Church approval and the work does not enjoy the confidence of the diocesan authorities.”
    Could we call that a public rather than a private statement.

    Finally you ask me to share our intelligence about Christina’s hideout? Good try. Will it be Omaha beach or Utah beach? D Day approaches.
    Does the CIA tell Osama when it finds where he is?

    Like

  20. Dear dialogueireland, I did read the statement by the Archdiocese of Tuam. The Archbishop stated:

    1. “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.
    2. Further to the above, it appears that there is a great deal in the same work which is wholesome and good and which has been a force for good in the faith, prayer and lives of many people who have, in whatever manner, been associated or otherwise in contact with it.
    3. While recognising the difficulty involved in treating such matters, I find myself obliged to state that no evidence has been presented which might prove beyond reasonable doubt the occurrence of supernatural phenomena of whatever kind in this situation other than that of faith. Mrs. Gallagher and her associates retain, of course, the right to believe and state their belief that such have indeed occurred and continue to occur. The question, as far as competent ecclesiastical authority is concerned, remains open and unproven.”

    That certainly doesn’t sound like a “cult” to me. Apparently the Archdiocese considers her an orthodox Catholic and so do I. As the Bible says: “By their fruits you shall know them”, “a good tree does not yield bad fruit”, “satan will not cast out satan as a house divided against itself cannot stand.” The testimonies of those who have tasted the “good fruit” from their association with the HOP stands on its own. By the grace of God, I am thankfully not included in the following group of people: “there is none so blind as those who cannot see.”

    Your assertion: “I notice you do not respond to my points about the public revelation found in the Church and seem to be totally focussed on private revelation!” – is incorrect. I suggest you read the material on the HOP websites which clearly explain the mission of Christina and the Houses of Prayer. Furthermore, if free independent people choose to associate with the House of Prayer that is their right. What they do with their money is their own concern. Obviously, Christina’s supporters are very happy with the behavior of Christina and Fr. McGinnity, otherwise they wouldn’t be spending huge sums of money on a website that “cost a fortune.”

    Since you are an “expert” and claim: “we have inside information that like the Shah, or other discredited leaders a bolt hole is needed. I assume one that might produce a financial stream” – why not share it with us on your website? Why wait for a debate that may or may not materialize? I hope this is not a case of all clouds but no rain!!!!! Cathy

    Like

  21. Again thanks for your reply- but you did not answer are you the Cathy I copied comments into my earlier reply to you?

    “Thanks for your reply. We will place your web site and that of the House of Prayer on our site.
    Are you the same Cathy I copied and pasted into my reply?”

    Here we go again- I am just….. that word humble– now what aspect are you independent about?
    Can you show any independent evidence to support what is on the web site?
    Also your contact details for the site you gave were the House of Prayer, so we are challenging them to a public debate on their
    views and activities. I believe you are part of the Florida branch, or have I mislocated you? That web site cost a fortune, and though you have nothing to do with it you support it? Who pays for it?

    As a theologian I do not deal in terms of “she has not been found guilty of anything type stuff, rather
    I look at behaviour.” She has paid back money to some people- big deal. What I mean by “the game being up,” is that we have now reached the tipping point with the House of Prayer is not able to use magical mystification to keep people under wraps. So by following the money trail, rather than the theological fog people will see clear sky. We have inside information that like the Shah, or other discredited leaders a bolt hole is needed. I assume one that might produce a financial stream. I suggested you read about the MMM, my thesis was submitted at a recognised Institute of Catholic Theology. Read it and see how Debra and Christina are on the same track.
    I gave a link in my last mail. I notice you do not respond to my points about the public revelation found in the Church and seem to be totally focussed on private revelation!
    I wish you the best and hope you will join the debating team.
    Michael McCrory would be one of our speakers and hopefully we could arrange it in Galway University and have a spokesperson for the Archdiocese also. That would be their decision, but it seems you have not read what they said, They no confidence in Christina’s private thoughts. They are just that her thoughts and have no backing from the Church.

    Like

  22. By the way, I read on a link you provided that no charges were brought against the House of Prayer.

    I hope you two don’t mind if I jump in here. The act of scamming people out of huge amounts of cash by exploiting their Christian faith isn’t actually illegal. If I were to don he visionary cap and were to terrorise elderly couples into forking over their life’s savings it is quite likely that my conduct wouldn’t be in breach of the laws of the land either.

    The reason the law is ambivalent on this is because the claim of providing visions is a completely untestable proposition, and the law cannot take a position on theological truths/untruths as a matter of course.

    In my view this is a failing with the law since it is not the belief structure that is causing harm – it is the wanton extracting of cash from victims. That the law cannot rule on whether such visions are authentic, almost as a matter of legal definition, does not render the cash-mongering any less blatant or any less ruinous to the elderly couples being wronged.

    Like

  23. Dear dialogueireland, I don’t operate either a website or a blog, nor am I an official spokesperson for the House of Prayer. I am just a humble independent voice refuting misinformation regarding the House of Prayer. If you are interested in a debate with the House of Prayer, the contact information is available on the websites you have linked to.
    By the way, I read on a link you provided that no charges were brought against the House of Prayer. Yet, you stated in your reply: “the game is up, it will take time for some people to get strength to say what is really happening.” Can you please expound?”

    Like

  24. Dear Cathy,

    Thanks for your reply. We will place your web site and that of the House of Prayer on our site.
    Are you the same Cathy I copied and pasted into my reply? I notice your web site is trying to defend rather than give
    accurate information. The game is up, it will take time for some people to get strength to say what is really happening. But we have have heard, seen and read the testimonies of those abused which have not been refuted. I would say your view of what a cult is very naive.
    http://www.thevoiceofourladyspilgrims.com/cult.html
    See https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2009/03/09/discussion-around-cults/
    You do not represent an independent voice, but a cheer leader for the House.
    Also you have no real contact details. Dialogue Ireland would love to challenge the House of Prayer to a public debate
    on whether it is a cultist NRM rather than an authentic Christian voice. Could you present some speakers and in the autumn we will
    organise a public debate in regard to your position.
    Also you have no contact details- no address, telephone details etc. All you have is the House of Prayer’s details.
    Anyway you are on board let others reply to you here or when we meet in debate.

    Like

  25. 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/

    Like

  26. Quantum Potes Tantum Aude

    I can’t help thinking that this is one of those times where quantum potes yantum aude is bad advice…..

    Like

  27. Dear Cathy,

    Good to hear from you. Would you be the same Cathy I have copied from some of your replies below?
    Have you ever listened to Beethoven’s 5th Symphony. There is a lot of repetition in order to remind people of the theme.
    By the way the Tabloids in Ireland have really been excellent in dealing with crime, gangs, groups attempting to swindle the public. They do not have web sites so it is very important for the information to be made public. Hence our service.
    By the way the film archive is from our state broadcaster, and the Independent of London is a high quality newspaper.
    Please do not look at the messenger, but deal with the substance of the evidence being presented.
    Also it is not the drivel we present that will destroy the House of Prayer, but the behaviour of Christina and McGinnitty.

    Joined: 03 Jun 2007
    Posts: 423
    Location: Florida, USA

    PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:33 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
    NeedBlestMother, the supposed “expose” on Christina and Fr. McGinnity shouldn’t be taken too seriously. The newspaper in Ireland responsible for the “expose” is a tabloid newspaper. Wink Cathy
    _________________
    Maria Rosa Mystica, pray for our clergy and religious.
    Back to top
    View user’s profile Send private message
    NeedBlestMother

    Joined: 05 Sep 2008
    Posts: 297
    Location: Montreal,Canada

    PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:50 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
    Thank-you Cathy. You just made my day (my evening).

    I’m afraid I’m not up-to-date on my tabloid trash lists (…seems I tend to get my garbage intake at the fast food counter instead).
    God Bless you for posting that. Smile
    _________________
    Quantum Potes Tantum Aude

    Like

  28. How pathetic…… Rehashing old material…… What the detractors of the House of Prayer don’t seem capable of grasping, is that the drivel presented ad nauseam in these hit pieces cannot destroy the House of Prayer. This is an exercise in futility !!!!!!!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

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

%d bloggers like this: