One of Francis’ closest advisors…

Salacious and Sacrilegious: ‘Cardinal’ Reinhard Marx Opens Archdiocesan Museum Exhibit ‘Damned Lust’

Some people just cannot wait to go to hell.

One of them appears to be ‘Cardinal’ Reinhard Marx (b. 1953), the notorious perversion-promoting apostate who is currently in charge of the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising, Germany. His theological scorecard speaks a clear language, and it’s not Catholicism.

For example, “His Eminence” holds that there is nothing wrong with sodomy, and that Jesus Christ never meant to proclaim a divine doctrine. He admires his namesake Karl, the founder of Communism, and likes to consecrate and use absurd “altars” (and also churches, including this one). That he should be in favor of blessings for homo couples and Novus Ordo communion for Protestants, goes without saying.

Furthermore, Mr. Marx has gone on record saying that God’s existence is merely possible and that (speaking of possibilities) it is impossible for man to offend or insult God. It is no wonder, then, that he also denies the dogmas of hell and purgatory.

With such stellar credentials, it is no surprise he has been successful in the Vatican II Church. In 1996, it was ‘Pope’ John Paul II’s glorious idea to make him an auxiliary “bishop” for the diocese of Paderborn, and in 2002 he became ordinary in Trier. Five years later, ‘Pope’ Benedict XVI rewarded him by making him “Archbishop” of Munich. In 2010, the same false pope elevated Marx to the status of “cardinal”. In 2013, the newly-elected ‘Pope’ Francis appointed him one of his closest advisors by making him one of the few members of his “Council of Cardinals”. From 2014-2020, the obese German served as the head of his national bishops’ conference.

So, what’s Marx up to now? Read on.

We are in the middle of Lent, the Church’s annual season of penance. It is a time to turn away from sin, make reparation, grow in virtue, and practice mortification. What better way to distract from this somber season than to open a frivolous art display that entices people to sin, lest they might actually remember the dolorous Passion of their Redeemer and be brought to repentance?

This is where ‘Cardinal’ Marx comes in. At his initiative and under his patronage, the archdiocesan museum in Freising has opened a provocative, lewd art exhibit on the topic of the (real or imagined) tension between religion (especially Christianity) and sexuality. It is entitled “Damned Lust! Church. Body. Art.” (Here we might note that lust is one of the seven capital sins.) The works displayed are divided into eight different categories, or themes, spanning a total time period of over 2000 years.

The official advertising posters communicate enough of the “flavor” of this unsavory exhibition:

According to an interview with Dr. Christoph Kürzeder, the director of the museum, posted on the archdiocesan web site, there are roughly 150 objects to be gazed at, from eight different countries. They “tell from different perspectives how religion, especially Christianity, views man in his corporeality and thus also as a sexual being.”

Asked about who or what occasioned this exhibit, the director reveals that the impetus did not come from the outside but from within: “Cardinal Reinhard Marx and the former Vicar General of the Munich Archdiocese, Peter Beer, strongly encouraged us” to put such a “discourse about the body” on display. The point, he says, is to make use of art to explain “why people have suffered, and still suffer today, under a sexual moral doctrine that often challenges them excessively.”

We will not go into details as to the objects displayed, some of which are downright pornographic and sacrilegious. At a time when easy printing was not yet available, and long before the invention of photography, painters and sculptors apparently used the means at their disposal to create lascivious content, often within the context of religion and under the pretext of art.

Suffice it to say that some of what’s on display at the museum in Freising right now deliberately dishonors God, the saints, and sacred doctrine, making a mockery of holy purity. There is even a sculpture of the pagan god Pan with a goat. Some of the objects are obvious in their lewdness, others are ambiguous; whereas still others are not objectionable at all and depict holy things. The fact that all of these works were made hundreds of years ago is hardly a justification — mortal sin reaches back to Adam and Eve.

Of course the official diocesan museum web site offers information about this exhibit and shows some of the offensive and provocative images, for which reason we decline to provide a link. Two hardcover books accompanying the exposition are also available, both in the museum and for purchase online. One consists of various essays, the other is a catalog of the items displayed.

The secular press, of course, is pleased with this deliberately provocative exhibit, identifying it as “courageous”, “hefty”, and “challenging”, among other things. Not surprisingly, news reports are filled with the usual misunderstandings, stereotypes, and lies about the Catholic Faith and sexuality, and the Novus Ordo media aren’t helping.

The site, which is officially operated under the auspices of the German Bishops’ Conference, acknowledges: “More than 60 years ago, this exhibit would presumably have caused a scandal, and could definitely not have been held in an ecclesiastical establishment.” But then it goes on to condemn St. Augustine, claiming that it is mostly “his fault” that the Church “condemned all that is bodily” and values “only the pure and the virginal above all” — as if purity were strictly a matter of virginity and the Church looked upon sexuality as evil. Such audacious lies! In fact, the Catholic Church does not permit the view that the body is evil, nor that sexuality is. Such is taught by Manichæism, which the Church has long condemned as heresy.

The Catholic position is really not terribly difficult to explain or understand: Sexuality as such is good — it was created by God as an integral part of human nature. However, ever since the fall of Adam and Eve, human nature has been wounded by original sin. Although the stain of original sin is removed through baptism, which regenerates the soul in grace and gives it supernatural life, the consequences of original sin for human nature remain, especially what is called concupiscence, which is the natural inclination to sin. Thus all our natural appetites and inclinations have become disordered — they no longer simply obey reason, and we either desire what we ought not, or we desire too much of what we ought.

However, there is a remedy for concupiscence, and it was taught to us by our Blessed Lord Himself: “If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me” (Mk 8:34b); “And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me” (Mt 10:38).

Concupiscence is repaired through works of penance and mortification, made supernaturally efficacious by God’s grace:

But I chastise my body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.

(1 Corinthians 9:27)

And lest the greatness of the revelations should exalt me, there was given me a sting of my flesh, an angel of Satan, to buffet me. For which thing thrice I besought the Lord, that it might depart from me. And he said to me: My grace is sufficient for thee; for power is made perfect in infirmity. Gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me.

(2 Corinthians 12:7-9)

This is the “unpopular” part of the Gospel modern man doesn’t like to hear about. Self-denial is unpleasant — it is much more fun to be told not to judge than to be told to mortify one’s disordered inclinations.

However, there is no other way — only the way of the Cross leads to Heaven: “…the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent bear it away” (Mt 11:12). Fr. Edward Leen has explained it masterfully in his work, Why the Cross? (1938). It is once again in print, available here.

With regard to the sexual appetite, God gave us two commandments, and our Blessed Lord taught us their true meaning when He explained that they do not concern themselves merely with outward acts but also with internal thoughts and desires willingly consented to:

Thou shalt not kill. Neither shalt thou commit adultery. And thou shalt not steal. Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife: nor his house, nor his field, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.

(Deuteronomy 5:17-21)

You have heard that it was said to them of old: Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart. And if thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee. For it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell.

(Matthew 5:27-29)

In this manner, our Lord Jesus made clear that mortal sin is such a great evil for the soul that the body must be brought into subjection to avoid committing it, no matter the cost: “For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?” (Mk 8:36). That is why we must avoid not only sin itself but also the occasions of sin, and guarding our eyes is the first step in that regard.

Marx’s exhibit in the diocesan museum encourages souls to do the very opposite: look. In fact, in his foreword to the printed catalog, he writes that he hopes this display will “open people’s eyes”. No doubt it will, but in a way he will wish it hadn’t when he has to appear before the Judgment Seat of God.

Although the married state with its attendant rights and privileges is in itself perfectly legitimate and has, in fact, been raised by our Blessed Lord to the status of a sacrament, nevertheless some are called to a higher state still, one that voluntarily renounces the physical pleasures permitted to the married. That is the state of perfect chastity, perpetual celibacy for the sake of the kingdom of God.

All of these ideas are anchored in the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles:

All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.

(Matthew 19:11-12)

About virgins, I have no command from the Lord; but I give you my opinion, as one who is, under the Lord’s mercy, a true counsellor. This, then, I hold to be the best counsel in such times of stress, that this is the best condition for man to be in. Art thou yoked to a wife? Then, do not go about to free thyself. Art thou free of wedlock? Then do not go about to find a wife. Not that thou dost commit sin if thou marriest; nor, if she marries, has the virgin committed sin. It is only that those who do so will meet with outward distress. But I leave you your freedom. Only, brethren, I would say this; the time is drawing to an end; nothing remains, but for those who have wives to behave as though they had none; those who weep must forget their tears, and those who rejoice their rejoicing, and those who buy must renounce possession; and those who take advantage of what the world offers must not take full advantage of it; the fashion of this world is soon to pass away. And I would have you free from concern. He who is unmarried is concerned with God’s claim, asking how he is to please God; whereas the married man is concerned with the world’s claim, asking how he is to please his wife; and thus he is at issue with himself. So a woman who is free of wedlock, or a virgin, is concerned with the Lord’s claim, intent on holiness, bodily and spiritual; whereas the married woman is concerned with the world’s claim, asking how she is to please her husband. I am thinking of your own interest when I say this. It is not that I would hold you in a leash; I am thinking of what is suitable for you, and how you may best attend on the Lord without distraction. And if anyone considers that he is behaving unsuitably towards the girl who is in his charge, on the ground that she is now past her prime, and there is no way of avoiding it, why, let him please himself; there is nothing sinful in it; let her marry. Whereas, if a man remains fixed in his resolution, and makes up his mind to keep the girl who is in his charge unwed, although there is no necessity for it, and he is free to choose for himself, such a man is well advised. Thus, a man is well advised to give his ward in marriage, and still better advised not to give her in marriage. As for a wife, she is yoked to her husband as long as he lives; if her husband is dead, she is free to marry anyone she will, so long as she marries in the Lord. But more blessed is she, if she remains as she is, in my judgement; and I, too, claim to have the Spirit of God.

(1 Corinthians 7:25-40; Knox translation)

That virginity is superior to the married state, is a dogma proclaimed by the Council of Trent: “If anyone says that the married state is to be preferred to the state of virginity or celibacy, and that it is not better and happier to remain in virginity or celibacy than to be united in matrimony: let him be anathema” (Session XXIV, Canon 10; Denz. 980).

The generative faculties of the human body were made for no other primary reason than procreation: “…male and female he created them. And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it…” (Gen 1:27-28).

Procreation being the primary purpose of the marital act, any secondary purposes must be subordinated to that primary end. This does not mean that spouses must have the explicit intent to have (more) children each time, but it does mean that that intent can never be deliberately frustrated by them.

It is utterly ludicrous and defamatory, therefore, for anyone to say that the Catholic Church tries to deny man’s corporeality, specifically his sexuality. On the contrary, the Church, following her Divine Lord and Head, values it so much that she condemns anything and everything that contradicts the purpose for which God made it, anything that seeks to divorce it from its noble and holy purpose, thereby disfiguring and distorting it into something other than what God designed it to be.

With his infernal exhibit, “Cardinal” Marx is showing his contempt for all these crucial supernatural truths, and he is deliberately leading others into sin in this regard, not only sins against chastity but against God, the saints, and the Church.

In his address opening the scandalous display on Mar. 4, 2023, “His Eminence” referred to the divinely-revealed teaching on human sexuality as “a Catholic trauma” and asserted that the Catholic magisterium has overstepped its boundaries by treating of questions that, so he believes, are basically none of its business. Now that is music to the ears of contemporary man — and woman!

The great papal encyclical on Christian marriage is Casti Connubii of Pope Pius XI, issued on Dec. 31, 1930. Back then already, the Holy Father shot down the sophistry of “Cardinal” Marx when he said:

They are greatly deceived who having underestimated or neglected these means which rise above nature, think that they can induce men by the use and discovery of the natural sciences, such as those of biology, the science of heredity, and the like, to curb their carnal desires. We do not say this in order to belittle those natural means which are not dishonest; for God is the Author of nature as well as of grace, and He has disposed the good things of both orders for the beneficial use of men. The faithful, therefore, can and ought to be assisted also by natural means. But they are mistaken who think that these means are able to establish chastity in the nuptial union, or that they are more effective than supernatural grace.

This conformity of wedlock and moral conduct with the divine laws respective of marriage, without which its effective restoration cannot be brought about, supposes, however, that all can discern readily, with real certainty, and without any accompanying error, what those laws are. But everyone can see to how many fallacies an avenue would be opened up and how many errors would become mixed with the truth, if it were left solely to the light of reason of each to find it out, or if it were to be discovered by the private interpretation of the truth which is revealed. And if this is applicable to many other truths of the moral order, we must all the more pay attention to those things, which appertain to marriage where the inordinate desire for pleasure can attack frail human nature and easily deceive it and lead it astray; this is all the more true of the observance of the divine law, which demands sometimes hard and repeated sacrifices, for which, as experience points out, a weak man can find so many excuses for avoiding the fulfillment of the divine law.

On this account, in order that no falsification or corruption of the divine law but a true genuine knowledge of it may enlighten the minds of men and guide their conduct, it is necessary that a filial and humble obedience towards the Church should be combined with devotedness to God and the desire of submitting to Him. For Christ Himself made the Church the teacher of truth in those things also which concern the right regulation of moral conduct, even though some knowledge of the same is not beyond human reason. For just as God, in the case of the natural truths of religion and morals, added revelation to the light of reason so that what is right and true, “in the present state also of the human race may be known readily with real certainty without any admixture of error” [Vatican I, Session III, Chapter 2], so for the same purpose he has constituted the Church the guardian and the teacher of the whole of the truth concerning religion and moral conduct; to her therefore should the faithful show obedience and subject their minds and hearts so as to be kept unharmed and free from error and moral corruption, and so that they shall not deprive themselves of that assistance given by God with such liberal bounty, they ought to show this due obedience not only when the Church defines something with solemn judgment, but also, in proper proportion, when by the constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, opinions are prescribed and condemned as dangerous or distorted.

Wherefore, let the faithful also be on their guard against the overrated independence of private judgment and that false autonomy of human reason. For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty. Quite to the contrary, a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Casti Connubii, nn. 101-104; underlining added.)

The Catholic Church teaches the truth of God, who, as the Creator of human nature has every right to require man to use it in accordance with His Law. The divine decree is not subject to review or revision by a Renaissance painter, by an overweight Modernist, or by an Argentinian antipope.

Speaking of the latter, Francis’ own attitude to all of this is clear: “The least serious sins are the sins of the flesh”, he once told Dominique Wolton. That alone should make any serious Catholic shudder.

By the way: To ensure as many people as possible will have a chance to gaze upon this sacrilegious porn, the diocesan museum exhibit will be open until May 29, 2023.

St. Paul warned:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects, envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.

(Galatians 5:19-21)

Let us pray, make sacrifices, and offer reparation to God, lest so many more souls will end up damned for lust.

Title image source: (screenshot)
License: fair use

Share this content now:

No Comments

Be the first to start a conversation

Leave a Reply

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