Please follow this link first and read the news about the (of course) anonymous Argentine theologian saying that what is wrong is wrong even if the Evil Clown says it’s right.
After that, let us reflect on the sorry state of the Church after 60 years of V II.
- The need to even state that a Catholic is not allowed to follow a teaching that does not correspond to the perennial teaching of the Church is depressing. I do not blame the theologian. I blame the Argentinian (and all other V II) priests who have practiced Papolatry all these years.
- Just as depressing is the fact that the theologian feels the need to clarify that it is absolutely false to think that “they must now endorse the Buenos Aires approach under pain of heresy”. Apparently, some people think that being a heretic, nowadays, is not endorsing heresy.
- Francis’ Amoris Laetitia statements are called “novel teaching”. Would you call 2+2=5 a “novel teaching?” I would call it rubbish, not novel teaching. Francis spreads and defends heresy and it is time that theologians, anonymous or otherwise, start calling an evil clown an evil clown
Lack of clarity leads to confusion. To say to a confused (and very ignorant, and sorely in need of instruction) Catholic that Francis is proposing a “novel teaching” is very dangerous, because it gives to heresy the dignity of teaching.
Let our yea be yea. let us heresy by its proper name. Enough with walking on eggshells.
The Age of Confusion will only end when clarity of speaking take its place.
I am now imagining what would happen if the Evil Clown were to, say, officially declare Consubstantiation the official truth of the church, with “no other interpretation”. Say, with a letter to a Protestant leader published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
Some would say that this is a publicly stated private opinion, and therefore does not really matter.
Others would state that Francis must be somewhat right, because there must be something that has been divinely revealed to Francis alone.
Some more still would say that Francis does not want to undermine the doctrine about Transubstatiation, but merely offer a pastoral interpretation of it.
Some others would say that the Sweet Peter on Earth is being badly advised by “the wolves”, profiting from his kindness of heart. He, himself, must be free of blame.
More still would say that the Pope was, really, talking off the cuff, though due to his advanced age he forgot to let us know.
We would be treated to “ten things to know and share”, at the end of which we would discover that everything is fine but the Pope should work on his syntaxis.
All the above would, obviously, call themselves “Conservatives”.
Cardinal Burke would give interview #327, stating that the end must be very, very near now; and doing, as always, nothing.
In these difficult days, I see around me two ways in which some bloggers and commenters try to escape reality.
1) They say that Francis is not the Pope. Wrong. Francis is the Pope because the entire Church, the entire Church hierarchy and the entire planet see him as the Pope. He is not even challenged. Not even by the one (Benedict) who according to some is the real and only Pope. The surreal consequence of this is the decision that the one the entire world sees as Pope should not be it, whilst the one some of them say is the only Pope says that he is merely a retired emeritus, and Francis is in charge. A challenge to a throne without even a challenger simply does not exist; it is fantasy, not fact.
Reality matters. However sad and unprecedented this situation is, we face it without thinking that we can decide who is, or isn't, Pope.
2) They downplay Francis' heretical acts and statement, because they are ready to bend over backwards and produce themselves in the most bizarre contortions in order to avoid stating another facts staring at us in the face: that we have a heretical Pope.
Reality, again, matters. The discussion whether Francis is in formal or material heresy is, if you ask me, less important than the agreement on the fact that should be universally acknowledged: that this Pope fosters error and must now – by the bishops and cardinals – be forced to recant it or deposed.
If Francis' heresy is formal, then he has factually made himself unworthy of and factually resigned his office together with his membership of the Church; but this renounciation would still have to be declared in order to depose him, and until that moment he would still be the holder of the office. In the same way, if a POTUS is found in the act of committing a multiple murder he certainly deserves impeachment, but he is still in office until the impeachment is voted, declared and made operative.
If, on the contrary, Francis' heresy is material, then the preliminary stage would be a last offer to recant his error, albeit such a possibility could be offered, in theory, also to a formal heretic.
The situation is, if you ask me, as clear as the sun, because it appears in front of our eyes with all the evidence of hard facts: a heretic seats on the throne of Peter. Still a heretic, and still sitting, with no challenger in sight. This has happened in the past, will happen in the future, is very sad, and has probably never happened with such virulence (even Honorius could have been weakly defended; Francis is indefensible) in the entire history of the Church. Still, here we are, confronted with facts, not our fanciful and very Protestant interpretation of them.
A heretic seats on the throne of Peter, and we were never given assurance that this would not be the case. His heretical energy and hate for the Church is unprecedented, but do is the rebellion of Vatican II. The most astonishing betrayal of proper theology and abandonment of proper governance must perforce lead to the most astonishing explosion of heresy from the top and abuse from the bottom. This is what V II looked like from the very start; it merely needed sixty years for the ugly face of heterodoxy to completely emerge.
I am merely a layman. No Pope has ever depended on my opinion to decide whether he is really Pope, and it is perfectly right this way. Do not escape from reality. Use it as you would for everything else. Apply common sense and Church Teaching. The Church will get out of this as she has from all the rest.
After the official proclamation of heresy beyond any reasonable doubt some of the understandably shocked Catholics will now experience, methinks, a certain sense of disorientation. Therefore, it seems to me that it is now necessary to go back in time and search whether something like that has ever happened in the history of the Church, and what happened next.
It seems to me that we are now in a phase of obvious Honorius 2.0 : the Pope was officially a heretic and the Bishops (there were no Cardinals then) simply did nothing for as long as the Pope was in charge, and for some time afterwards.
Did the See become vacant? No.
Did the Church die? No.
Did the world end? No.
The Church, which is Indefectible, survived Honorius, and she will survive Francis, irrespective of how many bishops and cardinals will be sent to hell for the offences done to her.
What happened next? At some point after the death of Honorius, it was decided to right the heresy with the extremely strong move of an Ecumenical Council. Mind, though: as long as he lived, Honorius did not have to retract and I have no knowledge of official resistance of the bishops, or threat to declare Honorius self-deposed (as it was done, though the details are unclear, with Pope Marcellinus) in virtue of the offence committed (“Judge thyself!”, the bishops famously said to Marcellinus).
Yes, we are tested. We are tested by the cowardice and idiocy of the Burkes of the world almost as much as we are tested by the obvious faithlessness and heresy of Francis. But let us put things in the proper context here: just as the faithful in the time of Honorius were not so important that Honorius’ heresy had to mean the end of the church, or of the world, or of whatever is good and holy, we are not so important that this officially heretical pontificate has to mean that the end times are now near.
Instead of waiting for Armageddon (which will come, have no doubt about this, at the appointed time anyway), you had better pray more and reflect that you, and everyone else, is expected to know and follow the manual irrespective of what Francis says.
If the world ends, be prepared. But hey, be prepared anyway, and consider that the world did not end in the time of Honorius.
As I have developed an allergic reaction to meaningless whining and “the end is near” doom saying, I will not publish any comment that does now incite the readers to do (to pray more, to do more penance, to become more active in our sphere of influence) rather than to whinge.
Man up, grab your shield, and go to war.
Yours is not the first generation to experience the seemingly unthinkable.
Gotta admire a Mr Ed Conlon, writing for the EWTN owned CNA.
Mr Conlon has some kind of superpowers. He sees something no one else seem to notice. besides the rubbish about how bad the opponent of TheFrancis are, what is most amusing is Mr Conlon’s assured assertion that the Pope is clearly against communion for divorced and remarried. The entire planet – and four Cardinals – are moaning the state of utter confusion in which this man has – make no mistake: willfully, and only because he is too cowardly to go beyond confusing – plunged the Church, but this does not seem to faze the author in the least. No, what he thinks is happening is that we have an orthodox pope, but the entire planet is mad because the wrong people (people whom, in part, he keeps employing and keeping in position of great responsibility) distort his message.
This must be the greatest Pollyanna effort I have read this year. It is, actually, between tragic and amusing that as we are about to approach the second Christmas of utter chaos there should still be around people who keep flogging this not only dead, but by now abundantly decomposed horse of the “misunderstood Pope”. Not only the letter to the Argentinian bishops is enough to expose the utter rubbish propagated by this article: far more to the point, the refusal of the pope to answer the Dubia (something an orthodox, if not good at words, Pope could and would have done in less time than Usain Bolt needs to run 100 meters) and the disheartening evidence of conflicting practices now spreading all over the Catholic world are more than enough to show what the intentions of this evil Pope are: sabotage Catholicism as much as he can whilst avoiding a frontal, all-out assault to the Church he so evidently hates; something for which he clearly – and by God’s grace – has no spine.
As the hired pens of this disgraceful Pontiff keep embarrassing themselves, thus utterly destroying the reputation of so-called moderate Catholic outlets (I wouldn’t call today’s ETWN conservative by any standard of conservatism), those who have a brain to think and a soul to save keep realising that this Pope is a menace to the faith, and a very personal threat to their own salvation.
Beware of the Pollyannas. At this point, theirs is way more than naivete.
It is disingenuousness in the most serious of matters like the defense of Catholic truth.
The strange story of Father Weinandy could be material for another post. However, what counts here is the letter he wrote to Pope Francis.
This is, very obviously, a through-and-through Vatican II guy, then otherwise he would not work in any capacity for the US Bishops’ Conference. However, this guy is also a Catholic.
His letter (reported entirely in the link, together with the strange story) does nothing else than state the obvious. However, in this disgraceful start of the XXI century a priest who states the obvious is a menace to his own bishops and Pope.
Father Weinandy does not mince words. I will make just a couple of examples with my explanation of what they mean in plain English and below the diplomatic varnish:
To teach with such a seemingly intentional lack of clarity inevitably risks sinning against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth. The Holy Spirit is given to the Church, and particularly to yourself, to dispel error, not to foster it.
Tranlsation: you are being not only heretical, but blasphemous. You spit Christ in the face like the Roma soldiers did, and offend the Holy Trinity.
Yet you seem to censor and even mock those who interpret Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia in accord with Church tradition as Pharisaic stone-throwers who embody a merciless rigorism. This kind of calumny is alien to the nature of the Petrine ministry. Some of your advisors regrettably seem to engage in similar actions. Such behavior gives the impression that your views cannot survive theological scrutiny, and so must be sustained by ad hominem arguments.
Translation: You are exactly the same Christ-hating Pharisee you accuse others to be. You send out your hounds to intimidate those who criticise you. You have no standing, this emperor has no clothes; th eonly strategy that remains open to you is open intimidation and swift reprisal.
Those who devalue the doctrines of the Church separate themselves from Jesus, the author of truth. What they then possess, and can only possess, is an ideology – one that conforms to the world of sin and death.
Translation: You are the enemy of truth, the enemy of the Church, and the enemy of Jesus.
Father Weinandy was made to resign from his position at the USCCB in record time after the letter (sent on 31 July) was made public, thus making the case for much of what he writes in the letter himself. No doubt, other sanctions will follow.
Little by little; one V II theologian at a time; slowly, timidly, something is happening. The constant opposition of real Catholics – whom father Weinandy also mentions – to the present state of things forces the least corrupt of this corrupt system of power to slowly grow a pair and take a stand. We must “keep up the good pressuring” and keep demanding that our supposed shepherd start doing their job already, beginning with cardinal Burke and the other kitten of the litter.
Little by little; one V II theologian at a time, slowly and timidly, something big could, one day and with God’s grace, be in the making.
This long article from the UK-based, proto-communist Guardian is extremely instructive (inasmuch as people who don’t understand anything of Catholicism can be instructive) for Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
The author obviously does not understand anything of Catholicism: the insisted accent on the difference between how the world is and how the world should be according to the Church, as if this were a problem for the Church, is obvious demonstration; the one about it being necessary that Catholics give communion to adulterers to avoid the risk of extinction is so stupid that it must be a bad pun) and has no theological depth at all (it is not true that divorced and “remarried” people already receive communion all over the world; but this is utterly irrelevant: the question is whether anyone who does so, which is very easy to do, commits a very grave sacrilege.
However, even people who have done nothing more than a shallow research of the facts, and can’t write an article without giving us countless examples of ignorance and incompetence understand this: Francis is a heretic by every Catholic standard of the last two thousand years.
In his confused way (fake news abound all over the article, see the already mentioned example) the author sees it as evident that what Francis does is the contrary of what Popes for two thousand years before him have done. That this is supposed to be good does insult the intelligence of the writer (even an atheist should be able to understand that this is not acceptable for Catholicism, and therefore Francis is is simply an unacceptable Pope), but it does not change the facts.
This article, like many other secular interventions in favour of the Evil Clown, indicts Pope Francis even as it supports him. If a magazine called Satanism Today praised Francis in high tones, what would that demonstrate about him?
Look and stun, Catholic world.
A Pope is praised by the Guardian for his battle against Catholicism.
I know, I know… it is a doctrinal requirement that a priest be male, not unmarried; and in fact, married priests (people who have married before ordination) have been common in the Eastern tradition and are, on occasion, found today (say: Mickey Mouse Anglican “priest” who converts to Catholicism and is ordained a real one).
But this is not the point.
The point is that celibacy is so intimately linked to the way Catholics understand the priesthood, that to do away with it would very seriously undermine the way the Catholic Church sees herself all over the West.
There are very valid reasons why a priest should not be married. In general (and your uncle, who is a former Mickey Mouse priest now become a real one, is most certainly the exception) it is safe to say that a celibate priest is free to serve God only, but a married priest has to think of his wife and children. From transfers to martyrdom, and thinking of the cares of daily life alone, a priest is not as free to be exclusively dedicated to his flock, if he has a family under his roof. His son’s flu will be in the way of his flock’s illnesses. His wife will be a constant element in his life decisions; he will not be so free to even choose persecution at the hands of his own bishop, if wife and children are in the picture.
The now widely reported rumours about Francis authorising a sort of generalised married priesthood (perhaps only in certain Countries first, like Brazil and Germany; using the incremental demolition methods so often used in the Age of Madness) would be, whilst not heretical in the way Amoris Laetitia is heretical, a terrible blow to the Church, making her even more similar, from a pure factual point of view, to the Protestant sects we have seen dying all over Europe for many decades now. Francis’ hate for everything that is Catholic does not stop at a frontal attack to the Sacraments. Everything must be sabotaged, deformed, and made unCatholic in a pathetic attempt to rescue a Barque which, if it were not for Her promised Indefectibility, would at this point appear condemned to sink.
Let me say this once again: if we had had real Cardinals and Bishops instead of kitten in the last two years, we would not be at this point now. If Amoris Laetitia had plunged the Church into an extremely hard confrontation between Catholics and heretics, Francis would now think thrice before throwing more petrol on the flames. It is only the utter silence (with the isolated meowing here and there) of our clergy that allows him to go on with his devastation work with the currently enjoyed – bar divine intervention – certainty of impunity.
Make no mistake: this rumoured “married priesthood” would be a bone cancer for the Church. A cancer even worse than an isolated, at some point unavoidably terminated Francis papacy. A cancer sure to spread in years to come, leaving a trail of self-destruction the like of which we have, up to now, barely imagined.
As I sit writing this, I have troubles even to think of a Western diocese in which the majority of priests are married as “Catholic”. It goes against what I always thought of the priesthood since a little child. It is a fundamental facial plastic surgery to the Church as we know it in the West.
We need to pray every day for the death of this Pope and the demise of the toxic legacy of this Pontificate. It won’t get better, and the more our kitten limit themselves to meow, the more these enemies of the Church will feel emboldened.
The “World meeting of Families”, which will be held (if Francis is alive; please pray today that this be not the case) in Dublin in August of next year, is going to be quite the homo-fest.
The intent is very clear and it is being aggressively pushed already now, many months before the main event: to smuggle every kind of perverted fake relationship as “family” in some way or other, with the usual excuse of the “accompanying” (to hell) and such like rubbish.
This will be the greatest homo-push ever perpetrated even by the satanical Francis’ pontificate. Prepare yourself now to read so-called “c”atholic news outlet of the “Aleteia” variety to celebrate the “evolution” in the doctrinal understanding of evil filth, which is just as logical as if the same outlets would celebrate Francis’ new understanding of logic or mathematics.
The homophilic hell-fest must be countered with an extremely aggressive stance from us, those who think that two and two will always be four. I encourage every blogger and every commenter on whatever site or blog to sharpen the tone and call this pope and his minion what they are: atheist, perverted, heretical, Christ-hating scum that must be ridiculed and insulted in every way by the militant laity until other events – outside of our control – get us rid of this unspeakable filth.
Bloggers, commenters, readers, think of this: one day you will die; how will the saying that in front of the greatest onslaught on truth in two thousand years of history you did not want to appear impolite make you look?
What the heart feels the mouth must cry. If the mouth remains oh so polite, is the heart really wounded?
Start the offensive now. Go on blogging, commenting, and praying. Talk about this mess with colleagues and friends. Do not eschew the confrontation, embrace it.
Be a Crusader, raise your voice if needs be, lose friends if needs be!
You will have enough friends in paradise.
One can only be grateful that the Lord, whilst punishing us with this nincompoop, gives us the possibility to understand what an ass he is.
In his umpteenth interview, anticipating the umpteenth book not written by him, Francis allows us to have a glimpse of the life of an idiot when he becomes Pope.
An interview is not a lecture.
Boy, I though a Pope was given the job to do exactly that.
He values “spontaneity” and avoids “rigid formulas”.
Translation: “I don’t know jack of Catholicism and every time I open my mouth I put my foot in it. Therefore, I prefer to call it spontaneity. Not that I care about learning anything of it anyway”
Interviews have “pastoral value”.
Good Lord, if they have to have any value one should take care that they are precisely and correctly formulated, eh, no? This idiot seems to think that if you want to be “pastoral” you have the right to be confused, and confusing. The stupidity of this man is so mind-boggling that it’s a mystery how anyone can still believe he is not an utter idiot, besides being evil.
He never prepares for interviews.
What a lazy, lazy ass. He is the Pope, and he can’t be bothered to be prepared when he wants to speak to his sheep. Let me say it again: what a lazy, lazy ass.
Being misinterpreted is a “pastoral risk” he is “willing to take”.
What arrogance. Can you imagine a Mathematics teacher saying that he prefers to be spontaneous and his pupils getting his wrong is a risk he is willing to take? How more important is Catholicism than Mathematics?
“I have the nerve, but I am also very shy,”
You have the arrogance, but you are also very stupid.
The umpteenth interview of the Evil Clown with Eugenio Scalfari is another scandal not only for the obviously heretical statements allegedly made by Francis (statements which the Evil Clown will not, as happened in the past, deny or recant, thus assuming full responsibility for them) but also for the unbelievably arrogant, and ignorant, language used by Scalfari himself.
It is stupid beyond belief to say that Francis has “abolished” hell, or purgatory, or whatever God has created. Francis cannot change one iota of truth. Christ, the King, will make sure he becomes aware of that. Scalfari, who does not believe in God, is mocking Christian belief in the breath as he propagates Francis’ heresies, and the two seem quite fine with the whole exercise.
Apart from the often mentioned heretical statement of Francis about the non existence of souls in hell (which, let me be clear about this, show that he does not believe in Christ), it is also offensive, in a particularly disgusting way, that this man keeps giving interview to a squalid (if intelligent; way more so than our Ass in Chief) individual who uses them to mock the faith of Christians.
The conclusion of this is obvious: Francis hates Christianity and, not being able to mock it in such direct way as he could, is all too happy to give interviews to people who will express their mockery far better than he ever could.
These two will, unless they repent, have a lot to talk in hell.
There is no day now without some heretical bishop of priest expressing his more or less veiled approval for sacrilege and heresy of all sorts. Beside their lack of faith in God, what surprises me of these people is their lack of foresight.
Things change. The tide could turn pretty fast. Even if the tide turns pretty slowly, every bishop now in his Forties can get in a lot of trouble, risking excommunication and defrocking – and therefore, destitution – in his old age.
Pius XIII will come one day. And when it comes the implacable Internet, which forgets nothing and delete nothing, will be the undoing of countless careerist Judas now competing against each other in sycophancy towards Francis and his powerful collaborators. If you are 85 and atheist (these people clearly all are) you may think there is a high probability that the party will last for at least as long as you breathe. If you are 48, or 54, the matter looks altogether differently.
A bit of knowledge of history and sound thinking should teach these people that, the revolution being so vast, the counterrevolution will – when it unavoidably comes – be just as brutal. When the time comes to restore the dignity and credibility of the Church, the number of bishops and faggy Monsignors to be defrocked will be considered utterly irrelevant. The pendulum always swings the other way with the same energy as it did it in the opposite direction.
Granted: we might all die before things really improve. We might. But how probable is that? Francis' mad course is accelerating the reaction, and all signs indicate he might become more and more unhinged in the future. Many are the risks in relying in an 83 years old guy who is ruining his own faction day in and day out. Ask Ceaucescu how safe he felt in 1987, nay, in the summer of 1989!
When sanity comes it will come more or less fast.
But there can be little doubt that it will fall on these people line a ton of bricks.
Food for thought, heretical bishops and faggy Mobsignors….
The Evil Clown unceasing complains about social inequalities. It might be good to give him a much-needed lesson in basic Christianity.
There is no “equality” in Paradise. Even saints are very different to each other in their degree of saintliness. They consequently enjoy the Beatific Vision in different ways according to the spiritual condition in which they were when they died; a condition that cannot be changed after death. Where the tree falls, there it remains.
Yes, Jorge dear: there are saints who are “more saints” and saints who are “less saints” in Paradise, because God wants it so. God is, as you should know, not “egalitarian” at all.
If, therefore, it is established that infinite goods like the Beatific Vision are given in different measure to different people, how can it be of any real relevance that the infinitely less important – and, sub specie aeternitatis, infinitely unimportant – material goods are allotted to us in extremely different ways?
You would think Francis would know this, and in fact I am entirely sure that he does. The problem is that he does not believe it. Only one who does not believe in heaven and hell, only one who does not believe in God can think that the most important thing in life is to provide for “equality” of any sort. Mind, even an Atheist can disagree with this; but, importantly, no one who believes in God can agree with it.
Francis obsession with inequality is brutal evidence of his complete lack of faith in God, who pushes and decrees inequality in matters if infinite value. Egalitarianism is sheer atheism. Communism is just a variation of it.
This Pope is an enemy of the Faith. He despises it possibly more than Marx and Engels did, then I wonder whether Marx and Engels themselves went around unceasingly berating, insulting, despising pious Chritians or pious Catholics.
This Pope is utter and complete rubbish. He is Satan's Number One Tool (and a tool he certainly is).
It is necessary that every Catholic interested in his salvation considers him pure poison and a daily danger to his and his beloved ones' salvation. The man is, being Pope, worse poison than Marx and Engels.
Inequality is in everything: our looks, our brains, our finances, our graces.
God wants it so.
What a stupid, petty, faithless, communist Pope we have.
A faithless, envious, proto-Communist old man is made Pope.
His papacy becomes a rapid succession of half-heretical statements and wink-wink to the wordly society whose approval he seeks.
After three years, the most astonishing papal document is released. He is the first Pope who refuses to clarify the content of a document he has written himself.
As confusion increases he is, again, the first Pope in 700 years to be officially rebuked by lay scholars for his objective support to heresy. He still does nothing but rant against Catholic in a more and more did ordinate way.
The church hierarchy is silent, in the most astonishing betrayal of Christ since the time of Judas.
This is how history will judge this papacy and these bishops and cardinals.
This papacy is done. Its reputation has imploded like a Central American military junta. It will be remembered as the Banana Republic Pontificate. It does not really matter – in the long term – for how long these buffoons will stay in power. It is now obvious that the Church has started to vomit Vatican II out of Her body, and whilst the process will be long and painful, I have no doubt it will end with a purification from the toxins of Vatican II.
Francis is the vomit of V II finally coming out of the drunken Church of the last 55 years. There is now no way the edifice of Vatican II can survive its bastard offspring. When sanity comes back, everyone will see what has caused all this: the Second Vatican Council and its work of doctrinal and liturgical demolition.
In a way, a disgrace like Francis is useful to help overcome the crisis. At least, this vomit wants out. With John Paul and Benedict the body was poisoned already, but no hope of getting rid of the toxins.
Francis and, perhaps, his successors will ruin V II so thoroughly, so completely, that the return to sanity after this crisis will be the most natural thing in the world. And if you ask me, I prefer having to go through Francis II Cupich, and then sanity, rather than through another dozen Benedicts still demolishing the church in pretty much the same way, but in slow motion, for the next who knows how many years.
Better a morning of vomiting than two weeks of drunkenness. At some point, everything will be vomited out.
Including this vomit of a pope.
After reading The terrifying report published yesterday about the practices of sodomites and their consequences, a simple thought came to my mind.
If I were Pope, I would get the Father Martins of the world – the list is long both inside and outside of the Vatican – and a number of bishops and cardinals around the world (McElroy and Cupich immediately come to mind; I would add Woelki and Marx to the mix, and Kasper too) and have their rectum carefully visited by doctors above suspicion.
It would be a very fast way to expose and uproot great part of the “gay Mafia”.