THIRD WITNESS TO KNOCK VISION ANALYSED

Third Witness.

Testimony of Mary Beirne, aged about 26 years.

I live in the village of Knock, to the east side of the chapel Mary M'Loughlin came on the evening of the 21st of August to my house at about half-past seven o'clock ; she remained some little time ; I came back with her as she was returning homewards ; it was either eight o'clock or a quarter to eight at the time. It was still bright ; I had never heard from Miss  [THE ORIGINAL SAYS; "IT WAS ABOUT 8 O CLOCK AND DUSK." The text in green is a complete fabrication.  The Church wanted people to think the vision was visible in broad daylight.  It wanted to stop people suspecting that somebody was using a projector that would be needed in the dark.  The Sullivan version of her testimony gives the time as 8.15 - see page 117, The Apparition at Knock, The Ecumenical Dimension]  M'Loughlin about the vision which she had seen just before that. The first I learned of it was on coming at the time just named from my mother's house in company with Miss Mary M'Loughlin, and at the distance of three hundred yards or so from the church, I beheld, all at once, standing out from the gable, and rather to the west of it, three figures which, on more attentive inspection, appeared to be that of the Blessed Virgin, of St. Joseph, and St. John. [ORIGINAL: I SAW 3 FIGURES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE GABLE".  THE ON IS SIGNIFICANT.  SEE HOW THE PUBLISHED VERSION HAS THEN FIGURES STANDING OUT FROM THE WALL.  THE ON WOULD SUGGEST A PROJECTOR WAS BEING USED TO MAKE PICTURES ON THE WALL].  That of the Blessed Virgin was life-size, the others apparently either not so big or not so high as her figure ; they stood a little distance out from the gable wall, and, as well as I could judge, a foot and a half or two feet from the ground. The [THE ORIGINAL SAYS "THE STATUE OF THE BVM - SEE LINE 7 OF THE FIRST PART OF THE IMAGE OF HER DEPOSITION] Virgin stood erect, with eyes raised to heaven, her hands elevated to the shoulders or a little higher, the palms inclined slightly towards the shoulders or bosom ; she wore a large cloak of a white colour, hanging in full folds and somewhat loosely around her shoulders and fastened to the neck ; she wore a crown on the head- rather a large crown — and it appeared to me somewhat yellower than the dress or robes worn by Our Blessed Lady.  In the figure of St. Joseph the head was slightly bent, and inclined towards the Blessed Virgin, as if paying her respect;  it represented the saint as somewhat aged, with gray whiskers and grayish hair. The third figure appeared to be that of St, John the Evangelist ; I do not know, only thought so, except the fact that at one time I saw a statue at the chapel of Lekanvey, near Westport, County Mayo, very much resembling the figure which stood now before me in group with St, Joseph and Our Blessed Lady, which I beheld on this occasion. He held the Book of Gospels, or the Mass Book, open in his left hand, white he stood slightly turned on the left side towards the altar that was over a little from him. [ORIGINAL SAYS, "I NEVER SAW FIGURES OR STATUES LIKE THEM" - THIS WAS OMITTED AS IT OBVIOUSLY CONTRADICTS HER CLAIM THAT SHE SAW A STATUE OF JOHN LIKE THE ONE IN THE VISION - READ ON TO SEE WHAT SHE CLAIMED] I must remark that the statue which I had formerly seen at Lekanvey chapel had no mitre on its head, while the figure which I now beheld had one — not a high mitre, but a short-set kind of one. The statue at Lekanvey had a book in the left hand, and the fingers of the right hand raised. The figure before me on this present occasion of which I am speaking had a book in the left hand, as I have stated, and the index finger and the middle finger of the right hand raised, as if he were speaking, and impressing some point forcibly on an audience. It was this coincidence of figure and pose that made me surmise, for it is only an opinion, that the third figure was that of St. John, the beloved disciple of our Lord. But I am not in any way sure what saint or character the figure represented, I said, as I now expressed, that it was St. John the Evangelist, and then all the others present said the same — said what I stated. The altar was under the window, which is the gable, and a little to the west near the centre, or a little beyond it. Towards this altar St. John — as I shall call the figure — was looking, while he stood at the Gospel side of the said altar, with his right arm inclined at an angle outwardly, towards the Blessed Virgin [Some witnesses thought John was in preaching mode. So John was preaching to the Lamb on the altar about Mary!  No wonder she has central place in the arrangement!  If John was blessing then he was blessing the Lamb!  A mistake was made then by whoever rigged this vision.  It is too much of a coincidence that the vision matches the Mariolatry of the Archdeacon who can be suspected of having arranged the hoax vision], The altar appeared to me to be like the altars in use in the Catholic Church — large and full-sized. It had no linens, no candles, nor any special ornamentations ; it was only a plain altar. [ORIGINAL MERELY SAYS, "I SAW A PLAIN ALTAR"]  Above the altar, and resting on it, was a Lamb, standing with the face towards St. John, thus fronting the western sky. I saw no cross nor crucifix. On the body of the Lamb, and around it, I saw golden stars, or small brilliant lights, glittering like jets or glass balls, reflecting the light of some luminous body [ORIGINAL: SAYS OF THE STATUES, "THERE WAS A BRILLIANT LIGHT AROUND THEM"  AND "I DID NOT REMARK ANY VIOLET LIGHT."  "THE LIGHT WAS A BRIGHT KIND OF LIGHT" - she was not sure how bright it was!  She was exaggerating about the light being brilliant.  Somebody must have seen a violet light so she has to challenge that].

I remained from a quarter past eight to half-past nine o'clock. At the time it was raining.  [STRANGELY OMITTED FROM PUBLISHED ACCOUNTS: "THERE WAS NO RAIN ON THE GRASS OR WALL."  NOTE: Mary told The Weekly News the following year that she had tried to touch the apparition and felt nothing. ]  I think the statement about the rain must have been left out as the locals all knew it was a lie.  I think the mention of the rain in Trench's fabricated account is down to bad editing.

She never had to sign this testimony.  Is it valid then?  The testimony shows signs that it was a conversation more than a testimony.  She mentions that the figures were all white.   Then she says they had fleshly white faces.  Then it was yellowy white faces.  Why all that repetition and variation?

"On the body of the Lamb, and around it, I saw golden stars, or small brilliant lights, glittering like jets or glass balls, reflecting the light of some luminous body".  She states that the lamb looked like light was been shone on it.  Now if you shine light on something, people cannot really tell if the light is coming from it or shone on it.  She says there was something at the gable, a luminous thing, that was shining the light.  There we have it.  Those who found that a mirror might have been attached to the gable and used to reflect the images from a magic lantern have their evidence here!

 

BELOW IS TO VERIFY THAT SHE CALLED THE IMAGES STATUES.  "I SAW AN ALTAR.  ST JOHN WAS TURNED TO THE ALTAR.   THE COLOUR OF THE STATUES AND THE ALTAR WAS WHITE.  I SAW ONLY A PLAIN ALTAR".

The incredible picture below on her testimony is supposed to be a doodle.  It is in fact an incomplete picture of the rain coming down straight.  No wonder the gable was quite dry.  The grass is the grass at the gable which is pressed down as if somebody had been tampering with the place at the gable where the images appeared. 

 

 

THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE FACT THAT SHE FIRST THOUGHT THE IMAGES WERE CARVINGS

THE NUN OF KENMARE WROTE
The two Marys remained for sometime lost in awe and wonder, for they soon perceived that what they beheld was not, as they at first supposed, mere
earthly carvings, but that it was, indeed, a heavenly vision.
 
The first apparition was seen on the night or evening of the 21st August, 1879, the eve of the octave of the Assumption.  The apparition was first seen by two women, both" Marys," and so little were they prepared to see anything supernatural, and so "real" did the vision appear, that both thought at first they were looking at some statues which they supposed had been brought down from Dublin by the good priest for his Church. It was no statue fashioned by human hands they saw, but a vision from Heaven itself. 

Mary McLoughlin is an elderly woman, and housekeeper to Archdeacon Cavanagh, the parish priest. On this evening, Thursday, August 21st, she passed from the priest's house to the house of a Mrs. Byrne, a widow, who lives in the little village of Knock. As Mary McLoughlin passed the gable of the chapel, she observed some figures and a white light about them. She thought this strange, but appears to have had so little idea of anything extraordinary that she went on at once to Mrs. Byrne's house, and concluded that these figures were statues which the priest had got for his church.

Mary Byrne returned with Mary McLoughlin, and as they passed the gable of the chapel the two women saw the apparition. It was still bright daylight, but a light brighter than that of any earthly light shone on the wall of that humble sanctuary.

At first, Mary Byrne also thought she was looking at statues which had been got for the church. But in a few moments both women were undeceived, and they knew that. God had granted them the amazing favour' of being the first to behold heavenly vision. Both of these women saw the same vision, and both gave the same description of what they saw.