Clicks11.1K

Edson Glauber: Did We Just Enter The Third Period?

Supernatural Origin” Edson Glauber was a 22-year-old student in Manaus, Brazil, when Our Lady, Our Lord and St. Joseph started appearing to him. Glauber is from Itapiranga where, in January 2010, …More
Supernatural Origin”

Edson Glauber was a 22-year-old student in Manaus, Brazil, when Our Lady, Our Lord and St. Joseph started appearing to him. Glauber is from Itapiranga where, in January 2010, the local Bishop, Monsignor Carillo Gritti, described his apparitions as those of “supernatural origin.”

Events Against the Pope”

On February 28 of this year, Glauber revealed the content of an apparition that, according to him, took place in November 2015. The revelation speaks about three periods of time. The first comprises the seven years after 2005. 2005 was the year when Cardinal Ratzinger was elected pope. According to Glauber, Our Lady labelled the seven following years - the years of Benedict’s pontificate – as “events against the Pope.”

Even the Eucharist and the Priesthood

The second period indicated by Our Lady are the seven years after 2012. Therefore: the years 2013 to 2019. In 2013, Cardinal Bergoglio was elected pope. Our Lady said about those years, that confusion and heresies are being spread against the Faith, the dogmas, and the teachings of the Church. She explained that even the priesthood and the Eucharist would be touched.

Grave Events

The third period are the seven years after 2019. This period is now and comes to an end in 2026. For this time, Glauber speaks about grave events in the Church, shaken foundations, internal divisions, a delirium of many people, a great loss of Faith in the Church followed by the estrangement of many. The faithful will be betrayed, persecuted, silenced and killed throughout the world. Only a third will remain. The Lord will purify His Church and His people through persecution and bloodshed because of their terrible sins.
AJPM
In fact, the loss of Faith comes from Vatican II; therefore this apparition is false.
Kevin
In a speech reported in the 18th September 1996 edition of L'Osservatore Romano, Pope John Paul II stated: "Some members of the People of God are not rooted firmly enough in the Faith, so that the sects, with their deceptive proselytism, mislead them to separate themselves from true communion in Christ. Within the Church community, the multiplication of supposed "apparitions" or "visions" is …More
In a speech reported in the 18th September 1996 edition of L'Osservatore Romano, Pope John Paul II stated: "Some members of the People of God are not rooted firmly enough in the Faith, so that the sects, with their deceptive proselytism, mislead them to separate themselves from true communion in Christ. Within the Church community, the multiplication of supposed "apparitions" or "visions" is sowing confusion and reveals a certain lack of solid basis to the faith and Christian life among her members."
De Profundis
The "Vision" was declared fake news. There are lots more of that, like Brindisi in Italy.
aleteia.org/…/these-apparitio…
Kevin
GLORIA TV: PLEASE NOTE DIOCESAN AND CDF STATEMENT ON EDSON GLAUBER (BELOW)
Kevin
It was claimed that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to Edson Glauber, and was often accompanied by St Joseph. The visions extended from 1994 to at least 2001. Initially these visions were viewed favourably by the local bishop, but after a further investigation the Church officially declared on February 7, 2017, that the apparitions were not authentic. arquidiocesedemanaus.org.br/…/carta-da-prel…More
It was claimed that the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to Edson Glauber, and was often accompanied by St Joseph. The visions extended from 1994 to at least 2001. Initially these visions were viewed favourably by the local bishop, but after a further investigation the Church officially declared on February 7, 2017, that the apparitions were not authentic. arquidiocesedemanaus.org.br/…/carta-da-prelaz… Below is a Google translation of the diocesan/CDF position:

PRELAZIA DE ITACOATIARA

ANNOUNCEMENT

Fr. Graciomar Gama Fernandes, at the mercy of God and of the Apostolic Holy See, Diocesan Administrator of the Prelature of Itacoatiara, in the use of the powers conferred on him by the Code of Canon Law, in view of the official position of the Holy Church, on the events of ITAPIRANGA , with regard to the “SUPPOSED APPARITIONS” of the Virgin Mary, COMMUNICATES:

With a letter dated February 7, 2017, the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE SUPPOSED APPEARANCES AND, THEREFORE, OF THE MESSAGES FOR "HER" SPOKEN.

At the same time as the aforementioned dicastery DETERMINES:

The alleged messages are no longer being disseminated within the Prelature of Itacoatiara;

No mention should be made, in the divine service, celebrated in the sanctuary dedicated to Our Lady Queen of the Rosary and Peace of Itapiranga or anywhere else in the Prelature, about the alleged apparitions and messages that Mr. Edson Glauber would be receiving;

Mr. Edson Glauber and the Association of the Queen of the Rosary and Peace of Itapiranga (ARRPI), ABSTAIN from a greater DISSEMINATION OF THESE MESSAGES;

Regarding the letter of introduction that Monsignor Carillo Gritti gave to Mr. Edson Glauber de Souza, on the alleged apparitions, Bishop Carillo's successor will take all the appropriate decisions.

I also inform you that this communiqué will be sent to each priest in our prelature to be disseminated in the respective parishes and to the Metropolitan Archbishop of Manaus, Dom Sérgio Castriani.

Given and passed in the Curia of the Prelature of Itacoatiara, on the twenty-fourth (24) days of March in the year two thousand and seventeen (2017).
Frà Alexis Bugnolo
A diocesan administrator cannot unapprove an apparition approved by the previous bishop. Nor can any successor unapprove it. The charism belongs only to the first diocesan bishop to make a judgement on it. This is Church practice, tradition and canon law.
Kevin
Fra Alexis
I'm no expert in these matters, but as I understand it from the google translation of the statement, the CDF made the decision. As per the 1996 CDF statement, which I reprint again below, wouldn't that give this announcement some force?

"Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states: The interpretation given by some individuals to a …More
Fra Alexis
I'm no expert in these matters, but as I understand it from the google translation of the statement, the CDF made the decision. As per the 1996 CDF statement, which I reprint again below, wouldn't that give this announcement some force?

"Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states: The interpretation given by some individuals to a decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the "Abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books" and determined that after the relevant censures were lifted, the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals. It should be recalled however, that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, Canon 823#1 of the current code remains in force: "the Pastors of the Church have the ... right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgement". Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgement of the diocesan Bishop, and in particular cases, to the judgement of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith."

It's like the Our Lady of All Nations saga. That was given some degree of approval by the local Ordinary, but then the CDF rowed back on it. I think we can all agree that these things are very confusing!
Holy Cannoli
I can’t keep track of all these visions and apparitions. Are they all true? Are some true? Are none true? 😲

I’ve been to Lourdes at a time when you could go into the water but there are too many others for me to seriously follow. 🤗
Kevin
@Holy Cannoli - see above statement. It appears they are untrue.
Holy Cannoli
Don Reto Nay Your thoughts, per favore.
Don Reto Nay
When it comes to revelations, at the end, neither the CDF nor somebody else decides but reality. It this "revelations" was not made up later it seems to correspond to what actually is happening.
Holy Cannoli
Could there be any motivation other than a desire for the truth that today's CDF would issue their response negating the veracity of the alleged apparition that was approved by bishop Dom Carillo Gritti, Bishop of Itacoatiara which originally granted official Church approval for pilgrimages and public worship to be celebrated in the chapel where the apparitions of the Queen of the Rosary and of …More
Could there be any motivation other than a desire for the truth that today's CDF would issue their response negating the veracity of the alleged apparition that was approved by bishop Dom Carillo Gritti, Bishop of Itacoatiara which originally granted official Church approval for pilgrimages and public worship to be celebrated in the chapel where the apparitions of the Queen of the Rosary and of Peace first took place? 🤨
Holy Cannoli
Might there have been somebody, someplace who didn't like the nature of those apparitions (unflattering to church hierarchy) who then decided to put the kibosh on the whole deal? 😲
Kevin
A very important document was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in November 1996 and placed in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, the official organ of the Holy See. It stated:

"Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states: The interpretation given by some individuals to a decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and …More
A very important document was issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in November 1996 and placed in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, the official organ of the Holy See. It stated:

"Regarding the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, the Congregation states: The interpretation given by some individuals to a decision approved by Paul VI on 14 October 1966 and promulgated on 15 November of that year, in virtue of which writings and messages resulting from alleged revelations could be freely circulated in the Church is absolutely groundless. This decision actually referred to the "Abolition of the Index of Forbidden Books" and determined that after the relevant censures were lifted, the moral obligation still remained of not circulating or reading those writings which endanger faith and morals. It should be recalled however, that with regard to the circulation of texts of alleged private revelations, Canon 823#1 of the current code remains in force: "the Pastors of the Church have the ... right to demand that writings to be published by the Christian faithful which touch upon faith or morals be submitted to their judgement". Alleged supernatural revelations and writings concerning them are submitted in first instance to the judgement of the diocesan Bishop, and in particular cases, to the judgement of the Episcopal Conference and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith."
Kevin
Is there any hard evidence available that these alleged 'three periods of time' apparitions were made known to him in 2015? If not, why weren't they published in 2015, instead of Feb 28th 2020? Alleged 'seers' never usually delay publication of their alleged 'messages'.
Caroline03
Since Vatican II , the Faithful have been encouraged by the Holy See to decide for ourselves whether or not we want to believe if an apparition is worthy of belief. Since when did we practice this independence of thought in Roman Catholicism? How many people are tending to look at Our Lady of Fatima, thumbing our noses, to tell her "This Pope says I don't have to accept your warnings, and if it'…More
Since Vatican II , the Faithful have been encouraged by the Holy See to decide for ourselves whether or not we want to believe if an apparition is worthy of belief. Since when did we practice this independence of thought in Roman Catholicism? How many people are tending to look at Our Lady of Fatima, thumbing our noses, to tell her "This Pope says I don't have to accept your warnings, and if it's all the same to you - I won't!"

lots of us are becoming a law unto ourselves in deciding whether or not we practice obedience to the messages already called "worthy of belief" ie Apparitions shown to have been sent by Our Lord Jesus Christ via Our Lady.

If an apparition such as "Fatima" has been accepted and a Feast Day allotted to it, it is wrong for any member of the Church in the upper levels to encourage us in independence of thought, as we end up blaming Christ when we don't like the Messages. Preferring that they are not true just to stop acting on them is awful!.

In one way, this contempt shown by the Vatican towards the initial request that the third secret be revealed no later than 1960, is appalling. It is actually apostasy against a DIRECT request from God through Our Lady. This apostasy was against an apparition already declared authentic and worthy of belief prior to Vatican II. Additionally, this contempt at the upper levels of the Church has worked it's way down to a huge percentage of the flock, who mirror the Pope's attitude of contempt, and has over time encouraged in the faithful a degree of independence of thought and judgement that a flock of servants of Our Lord should never have! Shouldn't we be servants of Christ, trained to be obedient to His Will. These days, the Pope is going one step further, he appears to directly ridicule the former Doctrines that the Church has always taught, and given great positions to other scary people who do likewise.

Sometimes we know the apparitions to be true to start with because a Bishop has told us so (eg Marie Julie Jahenny - Medically proved to have survived over 30 days being examined in a hospital, eating only one Consecrated Host each day, yet remaining very healthy. So who's going to deny she's likely to be sustained by God?

Now, it goes a stage further, this independence of thought has spread into other aspects of the Church's day to day life. First the Popes disobeyed God, then God permitted that the Popes were no longer obeyed by the Bishops, and the rest of us don't have much respect left for any of them.

....and all because no-one released the 3rd Secret of Fatima and open contempt .

The Vatican's refusal to comply with Christ's request has been a terrible act of apostasy, a direct impertinence, a grave insult to Our Lord and a slap in the face to Our Lady.and really very sorry we are all likely to be who did not heed the known warnings of this false ecumenical church, superimposed over the REAL One. Plenty of evidence that it IS a false church, warnings given us all by Christ through various other Mystics. All of them, Stigmatics and Eucharistic Fasters which they could not be on their own. So, there really is no excuse for none compliance on the behalf of the Clergy, Bishops, Cardinals, or Popes to any of them.

www.communityofhopeinc.org/…/marie julie.html
onepeterfive.com/400-years-ago-o…
sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1846sallette.asp
www.youtube.com/watch
www.youtube.com/watch
archive.fatima.org/essentials/facts/rianjo.asp
archive.fatima.org/essentials/facts/miracle.asp

ourlady3.tripod.com/emmerick.htm
www.youtube.com/watch
Holy Cannoli
There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians

When the Church approves private revelations, she declares …More
There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians

When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them.

Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: "It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)" (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II).
----------------------------------------------------------
To repeat:


When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them.
✍️
Private Revelations
F M Shyanguya
Deposit of Faith (depositum fidei) = Sacred Scripture + Holy Tradition.

Cf CCC > Article 2 of the Creed -
www.vatican.va/…/p1s1c2a2.htm