Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Cardinal Cordes: Cardinal Marx’s Idea of Blessing Homosexual Couples is “Sacrilegious”

A German cardinal is today responding to the recent interview of Cardinal Reinhard Marx in which he opens up to the idea of blessing homosexual couples (and implicitly thus the practice of sodomy). Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes – the former President of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum – has written a commentary on this idea for the Austrian Catholic website kath.net.

“The initiative of Cardinal Marx ignores the clear Revelation of God,” comments Cardinal Cordes, and explains that “the Church is in its pastoral care bound to Holy Scripture and to its interpretation through the Church’s Magisterium.” Here, the German cardinal refers to St. Paul’s Letter to the Romans (1:18-32) as interpreted by the German theologian Heinrich Schlier in his book Der Römerbrief (Freiburg 1977); the Declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (29 December 1975) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (no. 2357), in order “to recognize the binding instruction of the Church.” Cordes adds, saying: “Marx does not even mention that homosexuality always contradicts the Will of God.”

Cardinal Cordes also calls the idea to bless homosexual couples “frighteningly naive.” He says:

Whoever reflects upon this for a moment, discovers the true intention of those concerned. […] In this case, people do not wish to receive God’s assistance for themselves; rather, they aim with their request at the recognition and acceptance of their homosexual way of life and its ecclesial valorization.

The German prelate adds to this analysis his comment: “An ecclesial blessing as a confirmation of a relationship which is contrary to the Will of God? That truly seems sacrilegious.”

For Cardinal Cordes, it is clear that Cardinal Marx “misunderstands here the idea of pastoral care as a form of sentimental acceptance.” He sees a “new version of situation ethics” and comments with the words “Those things that are contrary to God [“Gottwidrigkeiten”] (“intrinsice malum – intrinsically evil”) are always a sin.” With some strong words, Cardinal Cordes concludes his commentary as follows:

Or how about “in individual cases”: more encouragement for the activities of the mafiosi? Accepting pastoral care for doctors who procure abortions? Which churchman is finally so presumptuous to expect more salvation from his confused “compassion” than from listening to God’s Will? Which servant knows it better than his Master? In any case, a statement by St. Augustine shows the cardinal [Marx] his limits: “Love the erring people; but combat with hatred their error! Without pride bask yourself in possessing the truth; fight for it with meekness and goodness!” (St. Augustine in Contra litteras Petiliani, 1,31)

This is not the first time, that Cardinal Cordes has publicly opposed Cardinal Marx. In 2015, he made a sharp rebuke of Cardinal Marx for his brazen claim that the German Catholic Church “is not merely a subsidiary of Rome.” Cordes then resisted such a spirit of independence and warned against an “anti-Roman effect” which could be “destructive” for northern Europe and also destructive for the “unity of the Faith.” Additionally, already in 2016, Cardinal Cordes had come to the rescue of the four dubia cardinals and their loyal defense of the traditional Catholic teaching on marriage. At that time, he had said:

“With an objective tone, the four cardinals have asked for the removal of doubts about the text [Amoris Laetitia]. They were met with a disproportionate protest. I was not able to understand this indignation; I also had doubts that these indignant persons were motivated by a desire to find the truth.

80 thoughts on “Cardinal Cordes: Cardinal Marx’s Idea of Blessing Homosexual Couples is “Sacrilegious””

  1. Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes joins other Hierarchy refuting what is finally stated for what it is, sacrilegious. A most welcome standing up for the faith and heartening counter reform of the toxic errors based as Cordes says on sentiment rather than truth. “Sentimental acceptance” is not pastoral care simply the accommodation of the morally bankrupt. Cardinal Marx had the gall to say a couple of years past that the German church would follow its own path despite Rome. Who was he opposing? Certainly not Pope Francis his enabler. He opposed the Apostolic Tradition as did Martin Luther.

    Reply
    • Pope Francis has plainly envisaged such a doctrinal separation of national churches. See para 32 of Evangelii Gaudium. The enemy has given us fair warning. Adolf Hitler made his bestial plans perfectly clear in Mein Kampf. In both cases most people ignored the plain simple evidence.

      Reply
      • “A juridical status of episcopal conferences which would see them as subjects of specific attributions, including genuine doctrinal authority, has not yet been sufficiently elaborated. Excessive centralization, rather than proving helpful, complicates the Church’s life and her missionary outreach” (Ch 32 Evangelii Gaudium). Yes you’re correct.

        Reply
  2. Seems there are more sacrilegious heretics wearing purple and red than faithful types. Hope I’m wrong, but the ship seems headed straight for the rocks.

    Reply
      • YES! I do believe Don Bosco was absolutely correct. The scary part is what we’re going to have to go through to get there!

        Reply
    • You keep saying this but you are wrong. His contribution may be little and may be late, but while life remains it is not “too late” (see the parable of the vineyard, Matthew 20), and we should never assume that a positive contribution is “too little” (see the widow’s mite, Mark 12, Luke 21). God will amplify the value of contributions from his faithful children and diminish the significance of acts of those opposed to him. The course of history is not determined by merely human actors. You need more faith.

      Reply
      • In a reply to me a day or so ago, Karl declared his belief that “the Catholic Church belongs in hell” Since he’s already condemned the Church, we should expect no better. However, it is obvious that Karl is suffering much pain because of the lamentable condition of Holy Mother Church in this most tumultuous period in salvation history, as indeed we all are. Otherwise we would have no use for One Peter Five. But he needs to understand that it is the Church’s appointed destiny to follow in the footsteps of her Divine Master, ascend her own Calvary and be put to death. And as with Christ before her, this can, and must be made possible only by the seemingly innumerable Judases within her ranks at this time. But we all also know, with unshakable certainty, that after ignominious death comes glorious resurrection. It is our allotted task to play our own part, however small, in expediting that glorious resurrection for the sake of the next generation.

        Reply
  3. I thank God for another Faithful Shepherd! Doesn’t Cardinal Marx has any remorse for abusing his ecclesiastic position and impose his personal sacrilegious views on the priests under his jurisdiction?

    Reply
    • You hit the nail on the head. If you think about it, why would any cleric promote such a thing, knowing that it is forbidden by God, unless he himself were in the exact same situation and trying to rationalize his own ‘disorder’? I truly believe that the Churchmen that promote such are themselves homosexuals. There is really no other logical conclusion that you can come to.

      Reply
      • I wouldn’t call Trump a “pro-life” candidate. At best, he is a candidate who claims to be pro-life. But Clinton is certainly an acolyte of the Moloch worshiping death cult known as Planned Parenthood

        Reply
        • We judge them by their actions, not their past words or loyalties. Fact is, we now have one more sane SCOTUS judge, a president who has welcomed pro-life marchers to DC, and appointments to lower courts and cabinet positions that also mirror a pro-life stance in the White House, among other things. In my book and in the context of the desolation visited on the US primarily by members of the Democrat Party, that makes Trump a pro-life president, the best we’ve had since Reagan left office.

          Reply
          • As President, he has pleasantly surprised him with the strength of his nevertheless recently acquired pro-life convictions. But I (and Archbishop Chaput) were talking about him when he was a candidate and no one was sure where he stood on just about anything or whether he would keep any of his campaign promises

          • I was very disappointed with Archbishop’s Chaput statement on this matter.
            And I am not surprised by President Trump’s pro life initiatives: not one iota.
            Not bragging here, but one could see that there was a desire for goodness, an appreciation of the good.

            For any prelate to give any ” wiggle room” to whom to vote for in this past election is either compromised by the Democrats, or needs to take off his “rosy” glasses or cannot see evil when it is front and center.
            If “she” were president, what President Trump is trying to protect: life and religious freedom, and some resemblance of a nation that needs to bond with its God and homeland: all would be lost on these accounts

            Chaput must remain clear headed. No more wiggling around Father Martin being allowed to address students in his diocese at Villanova. No more moral equivalence to justify tolerating what is specifically
            not good, not of God.

          • It seems the First Lady and the Vice President are having a good effect on him. I hope that includes his rejection of his previously very immoral lifestyle as well. Were you aware that as late as 2000, he described himself as “very pro-choice”? That was the primary reason I was very skeptical of his pro-life credentials in addition to him initially hardly mentioning the issue on the campaign trail. I’m glad that I appear to have been proven wrong.

          • The “Prince” of this World rules the waves, and “old nick” owns all the big boats, it’s just a
            different net to catch different fish. In private they are all in concert together and these worldlings
            crave only power. They are all the same, and it’s extremely naive for a Christian to put any stock in
            their public face and superficial “respect” for good and holy causes.
            They flatter to deceive, beware always.

          • I voted for President Trump but at the time Archbishop Chaput wrote the article, it was fair. His daughter supports PP and so did he until the election. He his lived up to his word–thanks be to God. But let’s not cast aspersions at Chaput for making a reasonable point AT THE TIME.

        • Hmm… Maybe in the past he wasn’t but he sure is now!! Show me where he hasn’t defended life since he’s been inaugurated. In every instance he has….one of the reasons the left despises him.

          Reply
          • You said candidate and were referring to an article written before the election. At that point, no reasonable person had a reason to believe Trump would be anywhere near as pro-life as he has been. Every pro-lifer who voted for him took a gamble and thankfully it has paid off

    • I am very grateful to God that He has provided us with at least SOME faithful Bishops!! There may very well be more than we know.

      Reply
  4. Of course it’s sacrilege. Only a sodomite would suggest such a thing. Only someone personally invested in this issue would even dream of such a thing. Healthy heterosexual males are revolted by such activity.

    In a saner era, any cardinal of the Catholic Church who suggested blessing sodomy would be sent to a monastery for the rest of his life, if not laicized completely.

    Reply
  5. “As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and going after other flesh, were made an example, suffering the punishment of ETERNAL FIRE.” – Jude 1:7 [emphasis added]

    Reply
  6. We are living through the chastisement foretold by Our Lady to the children of Fatima. What is the worst chastisement? Neither wars nor plagues nor famines. Rather, bad shepherds who lead the flock into hell. What we need is the official release of the full contents of the 3rd Secret of Fatima! Pope Benedict has said he is “on his way Home” – recently released in a note and published today, according to CNS. If anyone reading this has his ear, let him know that he might be surprised where he ends up – if he has failed to obey the Lord and Our Lady regarding his sacred duty to release everything he knows regarding the 3rd Secret of Fatima. Ave Maria.

    Reply
    • be careful not to be God, you may find yourself in the wailing and grinding of teeth, do not judge, do not do this publicaly, Jesus and Mary are not please with this to be sure….do not fall for the lion’s prowling’s, please….if you have ears to here and eyes to see, do so! Stop the 3rd secret stuff, it is a ploy of satan….

      Reply
      • Cardinal Ratzinger said the 3rd Secret regards “dangers threatening the Faith and the life of the Christian and therefore of the world”; “the importance of the end times”; and prophecies “announced in Scripture”.

        But in the Vision, published by the Vatican in 2000, we see only a pope being executed outside a ruined city. No words of Our Lady; no explanation of why/when/where/how. No warning about dangers that threaten our Faith. (Or how to AVOID them). Nothing prophetic.

        To be concerned about such things is not a ploy of satan. It is an act of charity for the seven billion people who are in grave need of knowing about this apocalyptic event, and for the salvation of their souls.

        Reply
  7. Saint Francis Xavier died after baptizing 30,000 people.

    Pope Paul VI died after signing 30,000 dispensations from the priesthood.

    Both are Saints of the same Church?

    Reply
    • St Francis Xavier baptized 300,000. I’ve seen the relic of his arm in the Gesù church in Rome.

      One wonderd will they put Paul VI’s arm in a reliquary for veneration, the arm with which he destroyed the Holy Liturgy.

      Please God let not this awful man be declared a saint.

      Reply
    • Provided that Popes John XXIII and JPII are both saints, it logically follows that the Pope who presided over the majority of Vatican II be canonized alongside with the Popes who started and implemented Vatican II – Vatican II is being canonized with the hope that it sticks forever.

      Reply
        • They could drop to their knees, rent their garments and tearfully with sincererly repentant hearts, openly and in public, repudiate their arrogance and all of their behaviors by negating every act they have done which is against traditional Catholicism!!

          But, will such be done?

          Hell no!!

          Why?

          Because there are no Bishops with the “equipment” to openly call for public castigation of the monster, Bergoglio and ALL of those who voted for him to be elected Pope, as well as ALL of those who have supported him!! Sychophants that they are.

          Reply
  8. I am reminded, ref a different commandment, of the legend (perhaps true) that Sicilian mobsters would bring their weapons to church for a blessing. The Church cannot bless a material sin. It encourages others to engage in the same activity, thinking it’s ok. The term sacrilege comes to mind in both cases.

    Reply
  9. “frighteningly naive.” No, it’s Cordes who is naive. Marx is not naive, he’s subversive and trying to turn the church into some progressive institution.

    Reply
  10. February 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — San Diego Bishop Robert McElroy said recently that there is “repugnant” and “corrosive” bigotry toward individuals identifying as LGBT on the part of “a group of people across all religious views.”

    Reply
  11. Seems like a good time and place to post this:
    “A great chastisement will fall on the entire human race; not today as yet, not tomorrow, but in the second half of the twentieth century.
    No longer does order reign anywhere and Satan will reign over the highest places directing the course of events. He (Satan) really will succeed in infiltrating to the top of the Church. Also for the Church a time of Her greatest trials will come. Cardinals will oppose Cardinals; Bishops will oppose Bishops and Satan will march amid their ranks, and in Rome there will be changes. What is rotten will fall, and what will fall will never rise again. The Church will be darkened and the world deranged by terror.
    A great war will break out within the second half of the Twentieth Century, fire and smoke will fall from Heaven, the water of the oceans will become vapors and the foam will rise up flooding and sinking everything, millions and millions of people will die by the hour and the survivors will envy the dead.
    Death will reign everywhere for the errors committed by the foolish and by the partisans of Satan, who, then and only then, will reign over the world. At last, those who will survive all of these events will once more proclaim God and His Glory and serve Him like before, when the world was not as corrupted.”

    Reply
    • “A great war will break out within the second half of the Twentieth Century,….”
      Well that one went the way of the Dodo bird, John. Having said that I do believe we are heading for
      a serious catastrophic event.

      Reply
      • “If my people do not wish to submit themselves, I am forced to let go of my Son’s arm. It is so heavy and weighs me down so much that I can no longer hold it back.” Barry, why don’t you offer up a rosary to thank our Lady for holding back the arm of her Son? I will do the same.

        Reply
          • If God is so merciless to cause death of millions by the hour, then God is a filthy pig who should be reviled and cursed with every breath. Such a divine response is neither just nor merciful. It would be a mockery of love. It would be the response of a dangerously poorly raised child!

            I do not believe this tripe for an instant.

  12. St. Peter Damien writes of what happens to the sodomite: ” Certainly, this vice, which surpasses the savagery of all other vices, is to be compared to no other. For this vice is the death of bodies, the destruction of souls, pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the intellect, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, introduces the diabolical inciter of lust, throws into confusion, and removes the truth completely from the deceived mind. It prepares snares for the one who walks, and for him who falls into the pit, it obstructs the escape. It opens up hell and closes the door of paradise. It makes the citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem into an heir of the Babylonian underworld. From the star of heaven, it produces the kindling of eternal fire. It cuts off a member of the Church and casts him into the voracious conflagration of raging Gehenna.” The Book of Gomorrah Chap. XVII

    Reply
  13. You are spot on about the third secret of Fatima. The 25 lines which Pope John XXIII refused to read in 1960 were discussed by Malachi Martin in his last public interview with Art Bell in 1998. (Available on YouTube). He had personally read the Secret at that time but could not reveal the exact words due to an oath taken by those allowed to read it. A reporter got permission from Father Luigi to release it in 2013 issue of magazine Chiesa Viva after his death, despite his oath, because he felt it had to be known. You can get the whole story about it at http://www.apostulateofourladyofgoodsuccess.com or http://www.padrepioandchiesaviva.com . You will understand why John WWIII didn’t read it even though as Malachi Martin put it, “sure it would have scared a lot of people, but Our Lady said to read it and he had no right to refuse”. You will also understand why the Vatican wants no part of recognizing it as authentic. (Padre’s response to you would have upset Father Luigi Villa’s mentor, Padre Pio very much).

    Reply
    • What exactly was this oath he had to give? Who did he give it to?
      He sought and received a release from “certain aspects” of his Jesuit vows but could not reveal the
      content of his alleged perusal of the 3rd secret? I searched your link and couldn’t find the relevant passage
      that Father Luigi released to a reporter. Can you post it here, thanks.

      Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...