THIRTEENTH WITNESS TO KNOCK VISION ANALYSED

Thirteenth Witness.

Testimony of Margaret Beirne.

I, Margaret Beirne, live near Knock chapel ; I am sister to Mary Beirne, who has seen the vision ; I remember the night of the 21st of August ; I left my own house at half-past seven o'clock, and went to the chapel and locked it ; I came out to return home ; I saw something luminous or bright at the south gable, but it never entered my head that it was [ORIGINAL: "I SAW SOMETHING WHITE AT THE SOUTH GABLE"] necessary to see or inquire what it was; [had it really been luminous she was more likely to have looked.  We tend to look at light sources in strange places but seeing something white is a daily occurrence] I passed by and went home. Shortly after, about eight o'clock, my niece,

Catherine Murray [original has my sister Mary - with a line through it! - anybody making a mistake like that would be assumed to be unreliable - liars after all need good memories - was she one?] [Most of the text so far is not Margaret Beirne's work.  The original handwritten manuscript merely says "Deposition of Maggie Beirne witness to the vision at Knock Chapel Co Mayo.  I went to close the chapel door about 7 1/2 pm.  On my return I saw something white at the south gable, but passed no notice of it at the time.  My sister Mary at about 8 called me"- see above image of the original.  The fraudulent Church went as far as to replace "something white" with "something luminous or bright".  The reason was that the Church wanted people to think the images were bright in daylight.  If the images only seemed to be lit as darkness fell that would imply a projector or light source was being used by a hoaxer] called me out to see the Blessed Virgin and the other saints that were standing at the south gable of the chapel. I went out then, and ran up to see what was to   [ORIGINAL: "I WENT UP AND BEHELD THEN THE BLESSED VIRGIN"] be seen. I there beheld the Blessed Virgin with a bright crown on her head, and St. Joseph to her right, his head inclined a little towards Our Blessed Lady, and St. John the Evangelist to her left, eastward, holding in his left hand a book of the Gospels, and his right hand raised the while, as if in the attitude of preaching to the people who stood before [ORIGINAL: "PREACHING OUT OF THE BOOK"] him at the ditch. The Virgin appeared with hands uplifted as if in prayer, with eyes turned towards heaven, and wearing a lustrous crown. I saw an altar there ; it was surrounded [ORIGINAL: I SAW THERE AN ALTAR.  I DID NOT SEE A LAMB AND A CROSS] with a bright light, nay, with a light at times sparkling, [THIS HIGHLIGHTED PART IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL BUT PERHAPS SHE STILL SAID IT] and so too were the other figures [statues in the original manuscript - ORIGINAL "AS WELL AS ALL THE STATUES"], which were similarly surrounded. 　

[omitted "I did not see a lamb or a cross" - priest taking testimony drew line through this on the original manuscript in order to make it fit testimonies about the apparition of the lamb and the cross far better.]　

[She also said that the bishop figure resembled a statue seen at Lekanvey.  This was put in as an afterthought and squeezed in around the signature.  The priest writing down the testimony didn't want it in.]

[She said about the raining in the original. Somebody added in heavily to make it raining heavily as if it had been left out]. 

OMITTED FROM PUBLISHED TESTIMONY:

IT WAS PITCH DARK AND RAINING HEAVILY AND STILL THERE WAS NOT ONE DROP OF RAIN NEAR THE IMAGES.  THERE WAS A MITRE ON ST JOHN LIKE THE BISHOP WEARS.  I WAS ONLY THERE A QUARTER OF AN HOUR OR SO.  THERE WERE FIVE OTHERS THERE AT THE TIME I SAW IT.  I REMARKED WHISKERS OF A GREY COLOUR ON ST JOSEPH.  ALL THE FIGURES SEEMED DRESSED IN WHITE.  THE BLESSED VIRGIN HAD A WHITE CLOAK ON. 

SQUEEZED IN IN ONE AT THE BOTTOM AROUND THE SIGNATURE LIKE AN AFTERTHOUGHT WAS, "THE REASON I KNEW IT WAS ST JOHN WAS BECAUSE I SAW A STATUE OF HIM AT LECANVEY CHAPEL". 

Why had that to be put in after the testimony was made?  Why did she insist?  It was like she was told not to have it in and she dug her heels in.  It seems that the Church was upset at another testimony appearing to the existence of a statue like John in Lecanvey. 

The Church wanted this removed possibly because it looked bad to say that there were only five at the apparition then.  Also she wasn't too impressed when she only stayed fifteen minutes.  There is no mention of how impressed she was by the vision if at all.  All the figures are said to have seemed to be dressed in white.  Seemed to be dressed is what you might say if the images looked like pictures or statues.  You wouldn't say it of people. 

John was facing away from Mary and Joseph in the direction of the schoolhouse.  The people stood at the ditch which was along the schoolhouse wall.  Again they must have done that because the image went out of focus or was like crap if you stood too close or too far away.