By 
Cardinal Reinhard Marx, who has served as archbishop of Munich and Freising in Germany since 2008, has instructed the priests and full-time pastoral staff in the archdiocese to introduce the controversial handout “Blessing Gives Strength to Love” as the basis of pastoral care.
Priests who do not want to carry out such blessing celebrations for homosexual marriages or remarried divorced people must refer the couples to the dean or other staff.
A letter from the cardinal, which Die Tagespost reported on Monday, indicates that the handout should be “the basis of pastoral care” and beginning in June, various offices within the archdiocese are to offer further training as to the design of the blessing celebrations for all full-time officials in pastoral care.
Marx emphasized that “the blessing is not the celebration of a sacramental marriage.” However, this does not mean that the blessing of a non-sacramental union, which in many cases is already a civil marriage, moves the couple to the margins of the community and the Church.
According to Tagespost, Marx instructed that the “theological meaning” of the text be explained to all those “who still struggle with this blessing.”
The handout “Blessing Gives Strength to Love” is the result of a process that emerged from a vote at the Synodal Way. In March 2023, the fifth synodal meeting adopted the text of the handout with 92% of the votes. The Joint Conference of the German Bishops’ Conference (DBK) and the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK) presented the text of the handout in spring 2025.
In the Church in Germany, the handout is highly controversial. Official recommendations were issued by the dioceses of Limburg, Osnabrück, Rottenburg-Stuttgart, and Trier. However, the Archdiocese of Cologne and the dioceses of Augsburg, Eichstätt, Passau, and Regensburg all rejected the application and referred to Fiducia Supplicans for justification.
According to Fiducia Supplicans, the Vatican declaration on the pastoral meaning of blessings issued by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or CDF) in December 2023, blessings of connections in irregular situations and of homosexual couples are possible — although the CDF claimed the opposite only two years earlier.
Paragraph 31 of the document states that the form of the blessings may not be “ritually determined by the ecclesiastical authorities … so as not to cause confusion with the blessing of the sacrament of marriage.”
According to paragraph 38, one should neither promote the blessing of couples who are in an irregular situation nor provide a ritual for it. Blessings according to No. 39 are expressly excluded “in direct connection with a civil celebration.” Also “the clothes, the gestures, and the words that are the expression for a marriage” are therefore to be refrained from.
Numerous bishops — including entire bishops’ conferences — have rejected the Vatican approval of blessings for same-sex unions. Thus, there is a struggle for direction in the Church between those who adhere to the Church’s traditional teaching on homosexuality and those who consider blessings of same-sex couples to be possible in principle — whether in the form outlined by the Vatican or in the form that is largely common in Germany.
The Catholic Church in the catechism, basing its teaching in sacred Scripture and tradition, distinguishes between homosexual inclinations or tendencies and homosexual acts, calling such acts “intrinsically disordered” and contrary to natural law. “They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved,” the catechism says in No. 2357.
The Church at the same time strictly forbids discrimination against homosexuals, saying they must always be accepted with “respect, compassion, and sensitivity.” Furthermore, the Church calls persons with same-sex attraction to chastity — as all are called to according to their state in life — and to “fulfill God’s will in their lives” (No. 2358).
According to Catholic doctrine, marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman, and their union has a twofold end: “the good of the spouses themselves, and the transmission of life” (No. 2363). The catechism says these two values of marriage may never be separated.
This story was first published by CNA Deutsch, the German-language sister service of EWTN News, and has been translated and adapted by EWTN New English.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
He ought to come out of the closet. It wouldn’t be less shocking than if he conceded that he is a glutton.
There are days I wish Fat Man would have been available prior to April 1945.
Right. He should come out of the closet and enter the pasture if it’s brown crevices he craves.
“The basis of pastoral care,”—a blessing for the Church—will be when She removes the bulls from all her pastoral programs.
He is to feed good food to his flock. Instead, he throws dung-covered stones.
Romans 1:26-27
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
AND SAINT AUGUSTINE
“Those sins which are against nature, like those of the men of Sodom, are in all times and places to be detested and punished. Even if all nations committed such sins, they should all alike be held guilty by God’s law” (Confessions 3.8).
The Church needs to rid herself of sodomite clergy.
It will be interesting to see if Pope Leo does ANYTHING about this. He has thus far not impressed. This Cardinal’s mandate should be roundly condemned, his priests if they have any spine should refuse to cooperate, and the Cardinal must be removed from his office. Unless of course Leo wants to be in charge of another historic church schism. Surely he knows the average Catholic is NOT ok with this. Mocking the Catholic belief in marriage should not be tolerated and surely cannot be approved by church authorities. This is a clear challenge to Leo’s authority. That is, if he has any at this point. He needs to get his act together and assert himself.
Would the pope just excommunicate and depose this heretic, please?
If Leo refuses to excommunicate and depose this heretic, he should be forced to resign. Enough is enough.
Who should be forced to resign? The Pope?
No, you.
We read, above, that several bishops’ conferences rejected the Fiducia Supplicans double-speak about blessing gay couples as “couples.”
Four points and a summary:
FIRST, lest the non-Anglican Catholic Church forgets, these conferences are: all of continental Africa, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Peru, the Netherlands, and parts of Argentina, France and Spain. Hundreds of other leaders of the faith also signed a public declaration.
SECOND, Butt clearly, the German Cardinal Marx is simply upstaging the historic Italian Solieri in his conflict with the Austrian composer Mozart….Why are we reminded of the movie “Amadeus,” with priest-imitation Solieri being wheeled down the hallway of his psychiatric ward? And, pastorally conferring his words of absolution (a “blessing”!) left and right upon “everyone, everyone”!
THIRD, what we have here is either (a) an Arian-Nicaean Moment, this time undermining the binary/complementary nature of Man instead of the Triune Oneness of God; or maybe (b) it’s a Galileo Moment with clericalist Marx sticking with the unnatural Ptolemaic universe while the universe of Nature affirms the down-to-earth meaning of marriage; or maybe (c) it’s only an Intercultural Moment— recalling here the Chinese emperor who, when asked what he would do to save his civilization, responded “I would restore the meaning of words.”
FOURTH, of greater competence and fidelity than Cardinals Fernandez and Marx, Cardinal Muller (the former Prefect for what Pope Francis demoted into the “dicastery” for the Doctrine of the Faith) recently discerned that, in itself, Fiducia Supplicans is “not directly heretical, [but] logically leads to heresy.” https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2024/02/does-fiducia-supplicans-affirm-heresy
SUMMARY: “Leads to heresy”? Like Germania’s Luther, on faith and works, does Marx now lead across the same simple red line? Does his red hat pass the red-face test?
How can we conclude the Cardinal Marx is guilty of heteropraxy? The texts and actions of Franciscus and his entire pontificate allow for these “blessings”.
My concern before the last conclave was that needed corrections would not be forthcoming from the next pontificate. After a radical revolutionary, we all crave a bit of peace. The problem is that the peace we have received is the peace of Leo. If we want the peace of Christ, the Vicar of Christ is going to have to disappoint some folks. May it be Marx, Hollerich, et al.
I would be a fool indeed to hope for corrections to the Franciscus Pontificate in my lifetime. Everything points to corrections coming long after we are all gone from this world. And yet, I am God’s Fool, so here is to hoping! 🍻
In essence this is a moment to “bless” the engaging in or affirmation of sexual acts that regardless of the actor’s desire/inclination / orientation, in all cases, demean the inherent Sanctity and Dignity of the human person, and are physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually harmful and thus this moment to “bless” the engaging in or affirmation of demeaning consensual sexual acts, can only be, in essence, a rejection of the teaching of The Catholic Church, that all persons must be treated with “respect, compassion, and sensitivity”, by acknowledging the inherent Sanctity and Dignity of every beloved son or daughter as a witness to The Love Of Christ. The desire to engage in a demeaning act of any nature, does not change the nature of the demeaning act.
Canon 750 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines. 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.[new]” “Canon 751 of the Code of Canon Law states that schism is “the refusal of submission to the supreme pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.” Canon 1364 stipulates that the penalty for this crime is excommunication “latae sententiae,” i.e., automatically upon the commission of the offense.” Furthermore, “Canon 188 §4 states that among the actions which automatically (ipso facto) cause any cleric to lose his office, even without any declaration on the part of a superior, is that of “defect[ing] publicly from the Catholic faith” (” A fide catholica publice defecerit“).
A Baptized Catholic who would bless sin, the engaging in or affirmation of sexual acts that demean the inherent Sanctity and Dignity of the human person , ipso facto has defected from Christ’s Church.
This cardinal hears and acts on the whispers of Lucifer.
Cardinal Reinhard Marx was appointed Archbishop of Munich-Freising 2007 by then Pope Benedict XVI. Munich- Freising a major archdiocese in the German Church was the See of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger until 1982 [Friedrich Wetter was Archbishop Munich Freising 1982-2007].
There was a looseness of sorts during Benedict’s Munich-Freising tenure [1977-1982], Ratzinger seeming more preoccupied during 1981-82 with matters at the Vatican – understandingly since he was being being considered as John Paul II’s right hand man as prefect of the then actual Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 1981-2005.
It was just prior to Ratzinger’s appointment as CDF prefect that the sordid Fr Peter Hullermann serial child abuser rapist [In December 1977, Hullermann was assigned as a chaplain to St Andreas Church in Essen. In 1979, at a camp retreat, he forced an 11 year old boy to perform oral sex on him].
After his abuse he was transferred to Munich-Freising. In a meeting chaired by Archbishop Ratzinger on January 15, 1980, the archdiocese of Munich and Freising gave formal approval to the transfer and provided Hullermann accommodation in a parish house in Munich while undergoing therapy. Later during Benedict’s papacy this matter was again addressed. Benedict claimed he wasn’t aware – until documents of the 1980 meeting were offered.
Joseph Ratzinger, our beloved Benedict XVI is worthy of understanding and forgiveness. It’s possible the facts of the Hullermann transfer were not detailed – as clergy who were present claimed. Forgetting a meeting at the time of his transfer to Rome is not impossible. What is unforgivable is the absence of remedial action by the German Church to follow up with Hullermann who continued his abuse as a priest for at least another decade. It wasn’t until Der Spiegel broke the case open that remedial action was taken.
This is the major appointment Cardinal Marx inherited.
It can be presumed that Marx became acculturated with the laxity, sordid details of the Hullermann case – a compromised religiosity. Leo XIV has more than a golden opportunity to rectify what has happened to the German Church. He, it may be justly presumed, has a grave obligation.
Just the other day there was an article here and elsewhere listing the incredible achievements of the Bergoglian pontificate. I contributed a comment listing a number of actions I found painfully memorable…¡Hagan lío! deserving of two citations. And surely it was appropriate to do so, because here we have it — ¡Hagan lío! is just one of those “events” you can’t mop up. It’s all over the place, and Cardinal Marx raises it to the top of consciousness yet again.
Pope Leo, stylizing his as the pontificate of continuity, had best determine exactly what he is in continuity with – the Argentinian Jesuit or the perennial Magisterium. Here is an opportunity to “mop it up.” Given his unexplainable retention of certain members of the curia, endorsement of Marian minimalism, a buttoned lip regarding cancelled priests, liturgical abuse and questionable episcopal appointments one can only expect Cardinal Marx to be affirmed quietly in his grievous pastoral malpractice.
I don’t know, man. I mean, it’s only been a year. There’s plenty of time for Pope Leo to address all of these issues – and there are many, sure. I, for one, am grateful that he hasn’t taken to making major sweeping changes within the first year. There are lots of folks involved in these issues and decisions, and the papacy isn’t supposed to rule by mandate per LG. Pope Leo doesn’t shoot from the hip on what he says, and he’s clearly been signaling his desire to honor the papacy and the Church with his pontificate. I think his second year will be revealing; but while he has said that his pontificate is in continuity with Pope Francis’, his choice of living in the Papal Palace, adopting the Pontifical Regalia, and even his actions with respect to disobedience from the SSPX (when his hand was forced) seems to be pointing to a much more predictable and orthodox papacy where it matters most. I think that there are several in the curia (at the DDF specifically) who will be replaced soon, and that Pope Leo was acting intentionally (and prudently) in not turning them all out immediately upon his ascending the Petrine Seat. I could be wrong; but I think we, the Church, have reason to be hopeful. Keep praying with me: I think the Holy Spirit’s got this.
Regarding Pontifical Regalia and other “signs of hope”.
Pope Leo does not hide the fact that he sees himself as a faithful heir of Pope Francis and is determined to continue his course. His allegiance to PF was made clear from the first day of his pontificate while wearing mozzetta. Traditionalists did not pay attention to his words; all they saw was his dress. This was a good symbol of what was to come.
Because of PL’s little “trad. gestures” which he makes periodically, traditionalists refuse to see and hear the obvious, even if it is spoken clearly and publicly (most recently by Cardinal Fernandez; previously by several other important figures of PF’s era who confirmed that PL is dedicated to finish what PF began). Thus, most traditionalists seem to swap Christ for being able to live in the little trad. ghetto, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Vladimir Soloviev in his ‘A Short Story of Antichrist’.
And so, those who are after making the Church into their own image are happy with PL who is faithful to PF’s (and their own) course.
Traditionalists are also happy because PL decorates the PF’s course with “trad. elements”, dressing it up so to speak – just like he did on the balcony. Curiously, they do not see = do not want to see that not only their beloved TLM is getting suppressed = becoming a museum exhibit more and more – God Himself as the Absolute and true measure for everything is being reduced more and more, in the Church and by the Church (kneelers and other aids for acknowledgment God‘s supremacy are being removed; praying down Christian theology/magisterium and fundamental differences between Christianity and other faiths etc.).
PL’s modus operandi is very simple but very effective because it is based on a control via nicety: he gives everyone what they want, no matter who is before him: traditionalist, LGBTQ activist, Muslem, pagan, pro-lifer, pro-abortionist – whoever is before him at that very moment. There is not a single part of that collage which is impossible to downplay or to omit. How it works:
He did not address the LGBTQ activists’ sacrilege in the St Peter’s Basilica. Thus, he did not upset LGBTQ activists – and the world. Soon after he restored the traditional blessing of the lambs on the Feast Day of St Agnes. Thus, he pacified those who were upset with his non-action re: sacrilege and confirmed his traditionalism.
When he was in his forties, he participated in idol-worshiping (Pachamama) together with other Augustinians. He probably did not want to upset the pagans.
A week after that fact became public, he condemned syncretism – in general, without condemning his own actions of syncretism. He wanted to pacify those who were upset by his sight bowing before the idol – and he avoided upsetting Pachamama-worshipers who would be, if he condemned his own actions.
When speaking to Muslims, he avoided mentioning Christ. He did not want to upset their religious feelings – they do not recognize Christ as God.
When addressing Christians, he spoke of the necessity of evangelism. This is expected of the Pope.
When speaking to trads, he waves some trad banners. Then he speaks to liberals, he swears elegance to PF. When he speaks to others, he does something else, his “nicety” keeps everyone happy.
This is, I suppose, his version of “peace”= nicety which he preaches: a collage of mutually exclusive meanings which is only possible to keep from disintegrating via the removal the absolute meaning, Christ. Insert Christ into the above modus and all will fall apart.
So, you are saying Anna that being amenable toward everyone, whatever their predilections camouflages an agenda? Then universal charity in demeanor doesn’t necessarily manifest charity.
The only model that answers the question is, as I believe you’re suggesting, Christ. Christ, who called things as they are, come hell or high water.
Christ cannot denounce Himself because He is truthful, as the Scriptures say. The absolute Good and Truth cannot be untruthful or tainted. Whoever calls himself a Christian, cannot deny Christ = the only and absolute Measure of good; from here follows that a Christian cannot also deny the absolute values made known by/in His Person. Simply put, a Christian should not act contrary to Christ; if he does, he cannot think of it/present it as a virtue. Our Lord was neither “nice” nor he tried to be nice, because being “nice” at the expense of being good (good can appear tough even cruel at times) means a betrayal, of oneself and of others including God. A person who has no absolute values is a traitor by nature.
And a traitor par excellence is the one who believes that “being nice” is more important than being good = upholding the absolute values. Furthermore, such a person is so deluded in his thinking about himself as “a peace maker/mediator/whatever” that he equates an ongoing treachery with peace, the empty shell with a concrete achievement. Typically, such a person thinks he is above the moral law because he is his own moral law which is “more perfect” than God’s. From here follows by the way that he is above Christ or at least His equal. Thus, when such a person reaches a sufficient power in the Church, he becomes a parody of the Person of Our Lord Who is the moral law as well, the Absolute Measure of Good.
Ultimately, it is a fake Self trying to act as a real one. Christ represents the real Self to which all humans must tend: a perfect human psyche in harmony with the will of God the Father, in a union of love with God. On the contrary, a fake Self always thinks of itself as above God – no matter how “pious” its actions are. Such a person is determined to be seen as the most compassionate, the best peacemaker, more whatever – always more than Christ.
So, we have a choice: either we are to become good, deified via a union with Christ, rejecting all that is contrary to Him and this is His true peace via a deep transformation of the psyche – or we are to embrace the empty shell of being “nice”, losing ourselves and Christ in a process of becoming parts of a collage of the mutually exclusive meanings. The first option is to become a whole person = holy; the second option is a fragmentation of the psyche, to the point of its total disintegration. In essence, it is a choice of either being with Christ (attachment and life) or with his fake (abandonment and death). It is, as I state on CWR before, “the last heresy driven purely by a fallen human psyche”.
I think we all need to be patient with this one and pray for our Church. The German Synod has very clearly overstepped the bounds established by the very declaration it’s alleging to implement. As such, we should expect that the DDF will be getting in touch with corrective measures (even if we don’t see it happen openly). I don’t think we have cause to worry here.
So Pope Leo comments: Leo said the Holy See had already made clear to the German bishops that it does not agree with the “formalized blessing of couples,” including homosexual couples or couples in irregular situations, beyond what Pope Francis had permitted.
Invoking Francis’ well-known statement of “Tutti, tutti, tutti,” Leo said: “All are welcome; all are invited. All are invited to follow Jesus, and all are invited to look for conversion in their lives.”
Clear as mud.
Just the other day there was an article here and elsewhere listing the incredible achievements of the Bergoglian pontificate. I contributed a comment listing a number of actions I found painfully memorable…¡Hagan lío! deserving of two citations. And surely it was appropriate to do so, because here we have it — ¡Hagan lío! is just one of those “events” you can’t mop up. It’s all over the place, and Cardinal Marx raises it to the top of consciousness yet again.
Pope Leo, stylizing his as the pontificate of continuity, had best determine exactly what he is in continuity with – the Argentinian Jesuit or the perennial Magisterium. Here is an opportunity to “mop it up.” Given his unexplainable retention of certain members of the curia, endorsement of Marian minimalism, a buttoned lip regarding cancelled priests, liturgical abuse and questionable episcopal appointments one can only expect Cardinal Marx to be affirmed quietly in his grievous pastoral malpractice.
I’m guessing the Catholic subgroups over at Polymarket (if they do exist, and why wouldn’t they?), are betting against Pope Leo doing much.
.
Honestly, I find it funny how joyous folks were, how giddy with happiness and joy to finally have a Pope from the States, who took on some great other great Pope’s name, who is an Augustinian and moved back into the Papal apartments–and somehow thought that all the dubious decisions and directives by the previous Pope would be rectified.
.
New Management, same as the old management.
Admittedly I was foolishly very cautiously optimistic — rather like someone in solitary for twelve years and they hear a door open at the end of the cell block. There were a number of moments when those hopes were dashed, but I kept on hoping. Then, besides keeping him on — Tucho’s “Mater Populi Fidelis” followed a few weeks later with Pope Leo’s enthusiastic endorsement.
Then the absurdities provided in the last few weeks.
What can you expect from a Chicago Democrat?
I have an ongoing bet with a friend as to whether this papacy will be better than the last. The dime still sits on a shelf in my dining room, awaiting a clear resolution.
Americans, it’s time to wake up and stop the denial that Leo is continuing Francis’ agenda. Marx does this because he knows nothing will happen. Leo has just given a token response, that the blessing should not be a formal ritual, which some are celebrating; but they miss the big picture: Leo affirms Fiducia Supplicans and “blessing” of same-sex “couples.” That should be the story, but it isn’t- the problem is still being affirmed, whether it’s an impromptu blessing or a “ritualized” one. One can’t help think this is a deliberate tactic- justifying an evil by playing it against a worse scenario, playing good cop vs. bad cop- Look, the vatican is cracking down against the german bishops, but let’s gloss over that in the process, Leo affirms the basic problem in question. How much do you want to wager that no action will actually be taken against Marx and his plans? In which case we’re being gaslight folks. And it seems a lot of american “conservatives” and “trads” are falling for it. The same thing has been happening for the last 10+ years, especially in germany- the vatican issues a token claim it disapproves of what they’re doing, yet they are still moving full steam ahead, with no actions ever taken against them.
You can be pope Leo will not stop this.
“And in reality, I believe there are much greater, more important issues, such as justice, equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion, that would all take priority before that particular issue.” –Leo
Cardinal Marx knows he is going against Church Doctrine, so my question is why is he doing this? He’s putting Pope Leo in a bad position. Leo cannot really ignore this, so he would be forced to ask for Cardinal Marx’s resignation. Then what?
Marx is doing so because he can. And Leo can ignore what Marx said and is doing; he basically just did with his “don’t agree” comment.
Then better days ahead, Mr William. Please God.
🙏
Sadly, Pope Leo, like Francis, appears more interested in trying to insert himself into American politics, a subjective issue at best, rather than hammering down the issues of long-established sexual morality in the Catholic Church. Now, issues of sexual morality are well within his wheelhouse as Pope and he should have his hands full taking responsibility for it in a myriad of ways. Teachings in this area have been tepid for decades and the shocking level of abortions in the US and around the world is one result of this neglect. If he fails to defend Catholic moral teachings, the result will be like acid dripping upon the church; moral offenses will become normalized, not challenged, and all church teachings will slide downhill.
The World is supposed to take its teachings from the church, not the other way around. “Anything goes” is no way to run a church.
Re JP above (3:05 p.m.) – Yes, I find that response from Leo troubling. I suppose he may be trying to bring down the temperature but still. Time will tell.
Message to Pope Leo XIV:
We understand and accept that sexual morality is not indeed “the only issue of
“morality”. The tragedy is what happening in the world today as a result of the rejection of this issue…..and we need look no further than the slaughter of the unborn.
Pope Prevost has no time to reinforce the perennial Magisterium but so much time to engage in political meddling.
Leo tolerates this heretic and sodomite because he supports the heresy of sodomitical “unions.” It is more clear every single time he speaks that Leo is nothing but Francis 2.0. But the pope-splaining industry of Youtube theologians will continue to lie about this.