Dialogue Ireland publishes Statements about Achill House of Prayer

Archdiocese of Tuam

wall_for_masthead-copy

Serving Catholics in the west of Ireland

Statements about Achill House

of Prayer

http://tuamarchdiocese.org/2008/03/statements-about-achill-house-of-prayer/

It is the intention of DI to write a commentary on each of the three Statements issued by Archbishop Neary. The first was written in 1997, the next in 1998 and the last one was in 2008. It is clear that there is an evolution from the first to the last one in 2008.

Having studied the Magnificat Meal Movement I am familiar with the issues surrounding visionaries, and those like Christina who have managed to give the impression they are in fact in line with Catholic teaching when in fact the exact reverse is the case.

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/anniversary-of-ma-thesis-on-mmm/

The situation  is complicated by the fact that a genuine and much maligned priest Gerard McGinnity is so under her influence, he has managed to confuse Catholics who now believe she is totally at one with her bishop and the magisterium of the Catholic Church.

In 2009 Jim Gallagher published his book, The Immaculate Deception which thoroughly exposes the House of Prayer as having no genuine Catholic foundation and is in fact a Marian scam ably abetted by a priest in good standing with the Archdiocese of Armagh.

House_of_Prayer_Florida250

We will show that the Archdiocese of Tuam has not moved now for 6 years to go beyond saying they do not recognise this House of Prayer to moving to condemning and finally excommunicating Christiana for her refusal to accept the discipline of her Bishop, for teaching that are apocalyptic and fear rending. That she is using fear to collect funds from vulnerable people to live a lifestyle totally at variance with that of a genuine Catholic visionary.

Abingdon CG1

We will also show that Gerard McGinnity is in breach of his duties as a Parish Priest of Knockbridge in the Archdiocese of Armagh and he is entering the Tuam Archdiocese against the express wishes of the Archbishop of Tuam.

Knockbridge Church

He is not only assisting this scam but we have direct evidence of him collecting cheques and funds from vulnerable people who believe their eternal life depends on said contributions.

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/let-us-draw-you-a-picture-of-the-house-of-prayer/

The Cardinal, Sean Brady is about to move on and retire but has for over 15 years refused to discipline his priest for his support of what is an unrecognised entity. He has also abused the Archbishop of Tuam by not intervening and by his inaction added to the despair of many family members who have sought his support due to the loss of their family members who seem to be under undue influence. The loss of family relationships is appalling and will be a legacy his retirement will not relieve.

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/house-of-prayer-rte-prime-time-may-2008/

We will of course, be open to comments which take a contrary view. Also we welcome from those who might have expertise in Canon Law.

This has gone on now for nearly 21 years and the time for just saying how terrible it is over.

March 1, 2008
Filed under Press Statements, Statements – House of Prayer, Achill

Public Statement of the Archbishop of Tuam, Most Rev. Dr. Michael Neary, with regard to the claims and works of Mrs. Christina Gallagher and the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill, Co. Mayo. In June of 1996 I constituted a Special Committee of Enquiry for the purpose of carrying out an investigation into the claims and work of Mrs. Christina Gallagher, resident at the ‘House of Prayer, Achill Sound, Achill, Co. Mayo in this archdiocese.  The Committee, composed of two priests and a religious sister, has recently submitted its report.  In the light of this report, and after due reflection and consultation, I wish to make the observations and announce the provisions listed below.

Observations

  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.
  4. My chief concern at this point is that the work termed ‘The House of Prayer’ be integrated into the life of Achill parish, of this Archdiocese and of the Church in general in a more stable and ordered manner than has heretofore been the case.  I am also concerned that it should be helped to adhere more closely to the original understanding, which obtained with both my predecessor, Archbishop Cassidy, and Mrs. Gallagher, of what it would in fact be and strive to achieve.  To these ends I am to make certain provisions, summarised below, in its regard.

Provisions

  1. By Agreement with Mrs. Christina Gallagher and her associates, the work termed ‘The House of Prayer’, located in premises of the same name at Achill Sound, Achill, Co. Mayo, is to take the form of a Private Association of the Christian Faithful.  Such associations consist of persons who freely choose to collaborate in a particular kind of apostolate or in pursuit generally of some end related to the Church’s mission in the world. They exist and operate in conformity with canon law which expressly envisions and provides for them.
  2. This new Private Association will be erected in a lawful manner and will, in continuing conformity with canon law, draw up governing statutes and submit them to me as diocesan bishop for approval.
  3. The same statutes will include, as in canonically required, a clear and unambiguous statement of the ends which the Association intends to pursue and the means to be employed towards these ends.  Chief among the statutory ends, in the case of the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill, will be the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, the recitation of the Rosary and the provision and proper maintenance of a place of spiritual retreat for priests.  These ends are those originally agreed upon by my predecessor, Archbishop Cassidy, and Mrs. Gallagher and I observe that the clarity of this agreement may have become somewhat obscured during the intervening years.
  4. As is required by canon law, the new Association will be subject to my authority as diocesan bishop in all matters concerning the administration and disposition of funds either donated or left in bequests to it for pious causes.  Furthermore, although such associations are normally free to administer their other goods and property as they see fit, subject to their statutes, it remains my duty to ensure that all such goods and property owned by such an association in my diocese are used for the statutory ends of the Association.  In order to ensure that everyone involved is allowed to discharge their proper duties in these matters the Association will be required to consult regularly with diocesan authorities and to submit accounts.
  5. The chapel which is located on the premises occupied by the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill Sound is to be formally designated and established as a Private Chapel in the sense of this term as it is understood in canon law.  As such, it may only be used for the celebration of Mass and other sacred celebrations subject to my permission and supervision in my capacity as diocesan bishop.  The Parish Priest of Achill will, ex officio, be Chaplain and the curate in Achill Sound will, by virtue of his appointment, be Assistant Chaplain.  These two priests along will have faculties to preach and hear confessions in this chapel.  Furthermore, no priest, other than these two, may celebrate the Mass in the Chapel without permission from me.
  6. Should the Association as such require a spiritual advisor, as distinct from the chaplain and assistant chaplain whose duties do not necessarily include such a service, its members are perfectly entitled by canon law to choose any priest from among those legitimately exercising ministry in the archdiocese, subject to my confirming such an appointment.
  7. The Association, finally, will have as its headquarters the premises presently occupied by the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill Sound.  The work of the Association will be carried on at this location and at no other within the territory of the Archdiocese.  The same will be noted and confirmed in the statutes of the Association and will be strictly adhered to.

I earnestly hope that the work of Mrs. Gallagher and her associates in the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill will benefit from its new form and standing within this diocese.  While the Church is obliged to exercise the greatest caution in approving such works it cannot ignore the possibilities presented by the dynamism which has characterised this particular one so far.  I believe that it shows genuine potential for growth and for making a valuable contribution to the life of the Church.  In this regard I look forward to working closely with the members of the new Association as they integrate their dedicated approach with that of the parish of Achill and of the Archdiocese of Tuam in general.

Signed: __________________
+Michael Neary
Archbishop of Tuam.

Dated: 16th December, 1997.

Statement of Most Rev. Michael Neary, Archbishop of Tuam,
Regarding the public announcement by Mrs. Christina Gallagher that she intends closing the
House of Prayer at Achill

I learned today, with considerable surprise, that Mrs. Christina Gallagher has decided to close the House of Prayer at Achill.  This information was transmitted to my office by the local radio station to which Mrs. Gallagher had already made a statement of her intention.  In the course of various statements made by Mrs. Gallagher on radio throughout the day, and in the course of the ensuing public discussion, a number of points have been made which I feel bound to address in an equally public manner.

I wish to state clearly and emphatically that at no time have I ever instructed Mrs. Gallagher, either verbally or in writing, to take this step.  On the contrary, I have repeatedly stated, both verbally and in writing, that it was not my intention to close the House of Prayer.  This decision had been made by Mrs. Gallagher and if she has taken advice on the matter it was not requested of me or of my office.

I have had occasion in the past to question, both privately and in conversation and correspondence with Mrs. Gallagher, whether she had indeed been well advised at various stages in her dealings with the Archdiocese.  I repeatedly offered the services of a canon lawyer, in order to make absolutely certain that justice would be served, but this offer was not availed of.  I remain unconvinced that she has ever, in this matter, had the benefit of advice which might be called sound in every relevant sense.
My predecessor, to the record of whose earlier decisions in the matter Mrs. Gallagher has chosen to appeal, officially opened the House of Prayer in 1993.  Dr. Cassidy explicitly and repeatedly stated at that time and afterwards that the House of Prayer was intended to be a place of quiet where the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, the recitation of the Rosary and the provision of a place of retreat for some priests would be the only activities.  Within a fortnight after the opening he found himself obliged to write to Mrs. Gallagher in protest against persistent deviation on the part of the House of Prayer from that original simple vision.  This tendency to stray from the terms of which the Archbishop had permitted the House of Prayer to function was to continue.  Instead of a quiet place of retreat a de facto shrine was coming into being, attracting large crowds of visitors weekly.  In a letter to Mrs. Gallagher of 15th September, 1994, Dr. Cassidy criticised these developments again and refused permission, as requested by Mrs. Gallagher, for an extension of the actual premises.

My own initiatives with regard to the House of Prayer are a matter of public record.  My intention throughout was to facilitate a far greater degree of integration of the House of Prayer into the local church community and to encourage Mrs. Gallagher to proceed cautiously and wisely in the gradual development of her work.  I believed and still believe that the measures which I adopted and the mode of development which I proposed would have guaranteed a future, perhaps a significant one, for Mrs. Gallagher’s work insofar as that work might have been inspired by God and for the good of the church.

The model of existence and operation which I had hoped Mrs. Gallagher would adopt for her work was that of the Private Association of the Christian Faithful, the most basic and flexible model of association presently available in Canon Law.  I was pleasantly surprised when, after months of delay and apparently fruitless correspondence, Mrs. Gallagher contacted me recently to tell me that she had set up such an association, as she had indeed a right to do.  I was surprised further, however, to be informed in the same letter that not my approval but rather that of Rome would be requested for the statutes of the new association since this work was to be “of world-wide scope”.

In my most recent letter to Mrs. Gallagher I was obliged to ask for clarification in the matter of Sunday Masses being allegedly celebrated in the House of Prayer in direct contravention of my express instructions in the matter.  I found myself furthermore obliged to note in the same letter her tendency, persistent throughout my dealings with her, to misunderstand and misinterpret legitimate directives and to consequently misinform her associates and supporters.  I am unsure as to whether this tendency resulted from genuine confusion or not bit I am quite certain of the clarity with which the directives in question were stated.
My letter also contained a request for detailed accounts concerning any monies which might have been willed or otherwise donated for “pious causes” of whatever kind since the House of Prayer had been opened.  This is an area which comes under the jurisdiction of any diocesan bishop but I had not addressed it previously, preferring to wait for the establishment of the Private Association and, with that, a more structured mode of supervision.  It remains a legitimate matter of interest for my office and will be pursued in spite of the decision to close the House of Prayer.

I regret very much that Mrs. Gallagher believes herself to have been put under undue pressure by what I considered, and still consider, to have been sensible and fair measures adopted for the good of all.  In this context I repeat my already stated doubts as to the wisdom and quality generally of the advice she has been receiving.  Whatever the merits of her remarkable claims, and time may eventually clarify this, I had hopes that her work might have been amenable to integration into the life of this diocese.  That it has not proved so amenable can only be a cause for regret, since I believe that good spiritual works of every kind are desperately needed today.  I recognise that many people benefited spiritually from the House of Prayer, however, and I urge them not to be in any way discouraged but rather to hold on to and build on the good they have received.
I wish Mrs. Gallagher well and will pray that she finds happiness and peace.

Signed:_______________
+Michael Neary
Archbishop of Tuam.

Date:    3rd July, 1998.

**************

Archdiocese of Tuam
Re:  Work of Mrs Christina Gallagher at the ‘House of Prayer” at Achill
Statement of Archbishop Neary, February 29th, 2008

The Tuam Diocesan Office has recently received a considerable number of media enquiries regarding this matter.  In 1996 I established a diocesan commission of enquiry to investigate certain claims regarding and emanating from this work.  In 1997, acting on foot of a report from the commission, I issued a lengthy public statement to the effect, in essence, that no evidence of supernatural phenomena had been observed but that the persons involved gave every evidence of good faith.  Arising from that, I proposed a basic canonical structure that would gradually integrate the work of the House into the life of Achill Parish and the Archdiocese.  While this was then attempted by the Archdiocese, I became increasingly perturbed by an apparent absence of enthusiasm on the parts of Mrs Gallagher and her associates.  The relationship deteriorated to the extent that Mrs. Gallagher, in July, 1998, closed the ‘House of Prayer’ at Achill, expressing to the media at the time a sense of having been harshly treated by the Archdiocese.  In order to clarify the issue for the faithful I issued another statement, regretting the development and expressing grave misgivings as to the wisdom with which Mrs Gallagher had been advised and had acted in the matter.

Diocesan efforts to integrate this work ended in July, 1998 when it was closed by Mrs. Gallagher.  Celebration of the sacraments and reservation of the Blessed Sacrament at the ‘House of Prayer’ are not permitted.  Any work carried on since then has been entirely of a private nature and has no Church approval whatever.  Neither, for reasons given above, does such work enjoy the confidence of the Diocesan authorities.  Nothing has been brought to my attention to indicate that I should change from this position in the future.  Over the years since then, the Tuam Diocesan Office has clearly and consistently replied to enquiries in respect of this work, which Mrs. Gallagher recommenced.

I respect the faith and devotion of many people who have been impressed by this work in the past, some of whom have expressed their sadness at my stance. Finally, I wish toremind all Church members that they should not hesitate to enquire, as a matter of course, at local diocesan offices regarding the standing of any work describing itself as Catholic, should they be in doubt.

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

Copies of my public statements are available on www.tuamarchdiocese.org/news.

Signed

onelifeonecalloneresponse _______________

+ MIchael Neary

Archbishop of Tuam

29th of February, 2008

34 Responses

  1. thanks

    Like

  2. Una am I missing something? What is Server on? You said black it says white. Will address the Archbishop’s Statement of 1997 soon. Would welcome your response. Your comments earlier were spot on.

    Like

  3. You couldn’t be more wrong Una. Supernatural phenomena in connection with CG and Our Lady’s HoP has been reported to the Church which has yet to be investigated. If AB Neary does not instigate it, this task will be taken out of his hands. Who has dismissed the statement? no-one as far as I am aware. The statement says the matter remains ‘open and unproven’ so ALL Catholics have the right to go to Our Lady’s HoP, to believe in it and to spread the news about it. The House of Prayer is not in any dispute with the Archbishop. All Catholics have the right to gather in prayer at such a place as Our Lady’s House of Prayer, it is our baptismal right. The House of Prayer is not responsible for comments on a blog. Dialogueireland even disclaims responsibility for comments on this blog. On the otherhand, Una, hateful Catholic bashing is anti-Christ.

    Like

  4. The Commission of Enquiry set up by the Archbishop of Tuam observed no evidence of supernatural phenomena. Dismissing this statement is going against the Catholic Church’s position on Christina Gallagher’s visions. Dismissing a statement by the Catholic Church is anti-Catholic. Refusing invitations to integrate the house of prayer in the Catholic Church is anti-Catholic. Choosing to operate the house of prayer outside the Catholic Church is anti-Catholic. Insulting the Archbishop of Tuam by calling him an abuser is anti-Catholic.

    Like

  5. What’s wrong …………. moved to https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/commenting-policy as it does not address any of the issues raised in the thread. Asks questions and then just glides onto irrelevant chatter

    Like

  6. The Server wrote
    Submitted on 2014/03/24 at 7:53 pm

    On one hand you want to claim that the Archbishop has nothing to do with Our Lady’s House of Prayer, then when it suits you he is ‘responsible for the House of Prayer!

    Perhaps you could cite the evidence for this claim from what I have written?
    Obviously as CG does not submit to the bishop it follows he has no authority over her.
    If CG and GM submitted to the bishop then he would as you put it…. be ‘responsible for the House of Prayer!’ However, as they are not he has no jurisdiction. In summary then, If you are not in communion with your bishop you are not in union with Rome?

    I have explained for you/Justice/Prudence or what ever proxy you use for your sock puppetry.*

    We will be deleting everything after the section above as it is intended to divert. You have already left it in our commenting section, so if anyone wants to catch up with your catch phrases, hate etc they can look at them there.

    *It goes without saying. And yet you are talking to this guy ‘Justice’ as if he is the house of prayer when it is obvious he is not. This site is a joke.

    IP Location: United States United States Atlanta Ramnode Llc
    ASN: United States AS3842 RAMNODE – RamNode LLC (registered Jul 26, 2012) .
    IP Location: United States United States North Kansas City Rui Huang
    ASN: United States AS33387 DATASHACK – DataShack, LC (registered Mar 18, 2011)
    IP Location: United States United States North Kansas City Rui Huang
    ASN: United States AS33387 DATASHACK – DataShack, LC (registered Mar 18, 2011)

    Like

  7. On one hand you want to claim that the Archbishop has nothing to do with Our Lady’s House of Prayer, then when it suits you he is ‘responsible for the House of Prayer!

    DI moderation:
    The rest of this comment can be found in the commenting section. Further sock puppetry will be marked by deletion not just a move to commenting

    Like

  8. Archbishop Neary of the Diocese of Tuam is an abuser.

    Did you say you were a Catholic? You are now defaming the bishop who has responsibility for the HofP?
    I would suggest as a Christian of another confession my view of Archbishop Neary is closer to that of the Catholic Church. So when you say you are a Catholic could you tell us which church you are referring to? If you are not in communion with your bishop you are not in union with Rome?

    He has abused his position in the Church by not instigating the proper investigation

    You are really not getting it or is it a willful refusal to see the truth?
    He proposed a way for the HofP to be integrated into the Diocese but Christina refused to cooperate. She went solo and is now a solo Catholic without support of the Church. She is in great spiritual danger and so is GM as he is supporting a non recognised group without approval from the bishop.
    I disagree with Archbishop Neary but still have respect for him as the bishop. My problem is that he has not gone further to condemn CG to make it clear to Catholics the HofP is outside the pale.
    I believe his failure to move on this 21 year fiasco is hurting people and leading to their abuse.

    and by allowing confusion has opened the door to this sort of abuse of holy work.

    There is no confusion either you submit to the Diocese of Tuam or you do not. You are again confusing those of us who are whistle blowers as being the source of the problem, when the real problem is your disobedience. It is amazing that CG has an attack group on the net to defend her when if she was really holy as you suggest she would first submit to God, her bishop and leave all her wealth behind and concentrate on a life of prayer.

    Like

  9. Archbishop Neary of the Diocese of Tuam is an abuser. He has abused his position in the Church by not instigating the proper investigation and by allowing confusion has opened the door to this sort of abuse of holy work.

    Like

  10. But what happens when the evidence does not stack up and cannot be proven scientifically .do you still continue to deny the tsunami of contrary evidence ?
    There lies the freedom of critical analysis that unshackles us from mental and financial slavery.

    Like

  11. Yes I agree, …..moved to https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/commenting-policy for
    material that is completely off-topic from the post, and has as its function to divert from genuine debate.

    Like

  12. We should call it the House of Prey
    in that it targets and preys upon vulnerable adults
    disillusioned Catholics disenchanted with the current state of the Church post scandals
    unable to come to terms with the implosion of a Catholic denial world of yesteryear. seeing hearing or speaking no evil
    A vacuum in faiths sureties filled by con-artists
    Looking for life’s answers they fall into the hands of Charlatans and a Catholic heresy that the church in other circumstances would strenuously oppose it shows failures at every level by the Church leaving these victims hanging out on a limb both deceived and abandoned to the ultimate shame of the hierarchy .

    Like

  13. Thanks Una it is notable that Pru avoids facing reality being fixated with who is posting rather than what is being posted.

    Like

  14. It’s a contradiction that people who support the house of prayer still consider themselves Catholic while they disregard the statements of the Archbishop of Tuam. The house of prayer has no backing from the Catholic Church, there was no evidence of supernatural phenomena, Christina Gallagher refused to co-operate with the Archdiocese of Tuam and she chose not to allow the activities of the house of prayer be integrated into the Catholic Church.
    This is not hatred of the house of prayer, it is the position of the relevant Catholic Church authority.

    Like

  15. This is deception on many levels dialogueireland and you keep repeating this deception in your anger and hatred against the HoP. Just let me start by clearing up one thing. It is not an abuse for one to say that you are non-Catholic. That is ridiculous. Catholics believe that every individual has the God-given free-will to choose to be Catholic or not, as to accept the Messages given to CG or not. Any Catholic respects another’s right in this regard. The people who believe in Our Lady’s HoP respects your right not to. It does not surprise me though that people would come on here and assess you to be in a poor position to promote proper Catholicism when you and your contributors, who are against the HoP, are NOT Catholic. Your lack of knowledge of how things work for Catholics is demonstrated every time you presume to have knowledge of such.

    Still love you though :)Pru

    Like

  16. The House of Prayer
    wants your Mind and Your Money
    should carry the highest mental /wealth warnings for attendees

    Like

  17. Merely repeating endlessly inaccurate information does not serve your cause:
    https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/dialogue-ireland-publishes-statements-about-achill-house-of-prayer

    The factual position can be read above.

    When Dr Michael Neary came to the office of Archbishop of Tuam, his proposed changes rendered the HoP inoperable, unable to be as Our Lady intended it

    No his proposals made the money making machine inoperable. CG then refused to submit to a very clear invitation to set up a Private Association of the Christian Faithful. Such associations consist of persons who freely choose to collaborate in a particular kind of apostolate or in pursuit generally of some end related to the Church’s mission in the world. They exist and operate in conformity with canon law which expressly envisions and provides for them.
    Our Lady intended it = What CG wanted. she would not serve.

    The people who had paid for the HoP to be put in place implored CG keep it open

    She closed it down!

    The only way to do so, operating as Our Lady intended, was for it to become a private house. And so it did and it complied with the Archbishop’s wishes about the sacraments. Mass and Confessions are not held there, only the Rosary, and other prayers of the Catholic Church.

    Because it was no longer under the patronage of the Archbishop and as you did not want to accept the priests and personnel he suggested, you ceased having anything to do with the Catholic Church and became a Sect. Also Fr McGinnity put his oar in and refused to go home and feed his own flock. End of story.
    So now all you can do there is:
    only the Rosary, and other prayers of the Catholic Church. So the punters on the buses have to stop into Knock and Longford to take mass so they can pretend they are active Catholics. Back in their parishes are they involved? Not all they are a third force thinking the guys in front of them are frauds.Please give me a reference from any parish priest other than GM saying you are involved in supporting the local parish?

    The Archbishop is not in any argument with the HoP.

    Of course as the HofP is not under his authority. He can’t have an argument if you have walked off the pitch. He was the referee but when you went solo he has no role.

    However, the Archbishop failed the people of Ireland and the Church when he didn’t set up the proper ecclesiastical investigation following his receipt of the testimonies of supernatual phenomena in 2000.

    No CG failed him in not submitting her whole outfit to him from the beginning. You have nothing to do with the Catholic Archdiocese of Tuam—period. You are an unrecognised, therefore independent entity without any connection to the bishop therefore no connection to the Pope.
    Please accept you are separated from the ordinary of the Diocese and therefore in conflict with the Catholic Faith. No abuse, saying I am not Catholic is going to change these facts.

    Of course as he does not recognise you and you are not under his jurisdiction because you refuse to accept his authority. Get real. Stop playing more Catholic than the Pope.

    Like

  18. Justice’s comment on Ted Loughman and his sister Katherine wish to be reconciled with their mother is moved here as it relates to this thread

    Submitted on 2014/03/23 at 11:23 pm

    When Dr Michael Neary came to the office of Archbishop of Tuam, his proposed changes rendered the HoP inoperable, unable to be as Our Lady intended it. The people who had paid for the HoP to be put in place implored CG keep it open . The only way to do so, operating as Our Lady intended, was for it to become a private house. And so it did and it complied with the Archbishop’s wishes about the sacraments. Mass and Confessions are not held there, only the Rosary, and other prayers of the Catholic Church. The Archbishop is not in any argument with the HoP.

    However, the Archbishop failed the people of Ireland and the Church when he didn’t set up the proper ecclesiastical investigation following his receipt of the testimonies of supernatual phenomena in 2000.

    Like

  19. You are non-Catholic so why are you on about what Catholics should do in their relationship with Our Lord. You have to be a Catholic to know.

    My faith or lack of faith is not relevant to the facts of the case. 1+1=2 whether you are catholic or Buddhist.

    The only reason why the Catholic Church has not pronounced on the House of Prayer is because the Archbishop of Tuam refuses to open the proper Catholic Church investigation

    The only reason is that Christina refuses to accept the authority of the Archbishop as you also clearly do not. we will go through the statements in due course to examine them.
    Just in case you do not know the only person who can adjudicate on issues of Catholic faith in a diocese is the bishop. When Christina submits he can begin the process. Now it is really about finally condemning CG and moving to excommunication.

    Like

  20. You are non-Catholic so why are you on about what Catholics should do in their relationship with Our Lord. You have to be a Catholic to know.

    The only reason why the Catholic Church has not pronounced on the House of Prayer is because the Archbishop of Tuam refuses to open the proper Catholic Church investigation which would involve, canonist, doctors, theologians and psychologists and all of them interviewing CG herself and all the witnesses. Archbishop Neary did say though, that the matter remains ‘open and unproven’, so happily all Catholics have the right to believe, promote it and support the work of this mission.
    DI Moderation:
    Server is promoting hatred of former members and is claiming that people who leave the HofP are the subject of God’s judgement. We are moving this section to our commenting section.
    https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/commenting-policy
    You need to question the reason for your hatred …..

    Like

  21. The only way for a Catholic to be sure they are under Jesus Christ is for them to submit to their bishop!
    CG refuses to do so. she is a lone ranger and with her tonto is amassing cash like there is no tomorrow.
    Where will we find the next mansion. Born in a manager. For our sakes he who was rich became poor, so CG could become rich!

    Like

  22. Angie
    Some say McGinnity is under her influence and possibly he was when the house first opened, however, I think they both work together to create the ‘holy’ undue influence.

    He is definitely under her influence, but has now become a victim victimiser!

    Like

  23. The house of prayer leader Christina Gallagher has chosen to stay outside the Catholic Church. The house of prayer has no backing from any Catholic Church authority. The diocesan investigation concluded that no supernatural phenomenon occurred. The house of prayer is not a Catholic place.

    Like

  24. And yet you are not able to bring to the table any actual evidence of abuse. And still the testimonies of conversion and return to the living of the Catholic faith rings louder and louder.

    Like

  25. The Church needs to redeem itself by standing up and protesting about the abuse in the House of Prayer no salvation through this deceit and fraud

    Like

  26. To suggest FMG and people who go to the HOP are under some influence is like saying all Catholics are under some influence. Yes, and that influence is the true influence of Jesus Christ. What the House of Prayer does is to advocate that Catholics become better Catholics. Dialogue ireland hates this thought and tries everything to stop this movement at its core, the House of Prayer.

    Like

  27. It’s House of Deceit and the Church is guilty of the Sin of Silence that makes cowards out of them

    Like

  28. It sums it up alright. His interpretation of comments is very peculiar.

    Like

  29. Too true, only those who are deluded see the ‘golden’ suit.

    Like

  30. angie said – “Archbishop Neary had the wool pulled over his eyes..”
    Justice said – “So that makes him a wolf in sheep’s clothing then.”

    I say, well that about sums it up boys.

    :) Pru

    Like

  31. None so blind as those that will not see ( or cannot see through the veil of evil and deceit that descended on that remote christian idyll in the West) “The Emperor has no clothes”

    Like

  32. Denis Robinson

    Well said. So telling also that Gallagher closed ‘the house of prayer’ like you would a business that wasn’t working and then reopened it to do what she had intended from the beginning. I wonder who did the ‘stigmata’ make-up. If that was real blood it would not have sat on her forehead so neatly nor would she have gotten off so lightly considering she proclaims it to be the effect of a crown of thorns. She has some neck!!! Some say McGinnity is under her influence and possibly he was when the house first opened, however, I think they both work together to create the ‘holy’ undue influence.

    Like

  33. It’s very hypocritical that people who consider themselves Catholic are involved with an activity lead by someone who has chosen to not co-operate with the Catholic Church

    Like

  34. It starts off with collusion and cooperation followed by concern as only contempt is shown in return for the Archbishops naivety for allowing them put down deep twisted roots.
    Due to his blindness towards their malign intent to capture vulnerable adults by deception making God fearing good people dependant and leaving them in dread of the future.
    It is the ultimate betrayal of the Christian values of pastoral care of a Shepherd towards his flock you cannot tame a wolf in sheep’s clothing .What makes it most disturbing is the silence of the lambs to the slaughter.
    The Catholic Church must take ultimate responsibility for this mess because it is in it’s name that this fraud was perpetrated.
    God help those who cannot help themselves because as sure as hell neither Church or State seem unwilling to help our neighbours.

    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: