CathInfo.com

It seems that novus ordo Fr Sean has created a cottage industry from sɛҳuąƖ addiction and pornography--a never ending source of income. Look into Set Free Global Summit, Integrity Restored, Avila Institue, and Covenant Eyes. His interviews reveal his own sin through graduate school at the JPII Institute in Rome and how psychologists/therapists helped him where priests did not (see The Regular Catholic Guy Show-"Combating the Destructive Impacts of Pornography with Fr. Sean Kilcawley-023).  Surprise, surprise--he is an authority on Theology of the Body and he uses course, vulgar language at times--he's very trendy with the college Theology on Tap crowds.  
     It seems SSPX priests and laity are totally clueless about the evils of novus ordo thinking and agendas.  Clueless or diabolically influenced?  There is a definite difference from the true Roman Catholic priesthood so treasured by Archbishop Lefebvre protected through his Apostolic succession and the presiders of the novus ordo.

The SSPX is not deceived about Fr. Kilcawley:

If it wants in with the conciliar church, it must not only demonstrate to Rome that it can play nice in the sandbox with its former enemies, but even more importantly, “that there no longer be rejection in their hearts.”

So, while +Huonder celebrates Mass for the SSPX faithful in Switzerland, Fr. Kilcawley makes a maiden voyage to introduce (however restrained) a conciliar approach regarding a real modern problem, to SSPXers.

Relentlessly, but ever so subtly, these little conciliar advances turn up the temperature on the boiled frogs (who show every sign of enjoying the hot tub).

Hat-tip to Bishop Fellay (and Fr. Pagliarani), who, learning from Cranmer and Celier, knew just how to orchestrate -patiently, patiently- the reorientation of practically the entire SSPX and its base of faithful.

There are no protests in St. Mary’s (or anywhere else).

The SSPX in late 2019 is 99.5% purified of “dissidents,” and the plan to proceed by stages (today, nearly completed) is now on cruise control.

Thank you for your information--my reply is misplaced.  I remarked to a priest that it couldn't be the foot of Our Lord because it is not perfect and beautiful.  

I remarked to a priest that it couldn't be the foot of Our Lord because it is not perfect and beautiful.  

I would suggest that piety is somewhat misdirected if it asserts that Our Lord's foot was necessarily "perfect and beautiful," presumably with respect to how those terms are regularly used in a normal human context. A beautiful foot is almost invariably a pampered, cosseted foot, and Our Lord used his feet to the limits of His human strength during the years of His public ministry and probably in the preceding years, too. Indeed, it is hard to conceive of them as appearing anything other than bruised and calloused.

The abuse visited upon Our Lord's body by His tormentors during His Passion might in a sense be seen as merely an extreme instance of the travails He had willingly endured beforehand, all for the sake of our redemption.