[Matthew]

Yes, there is only one way to get that number to go up -- by clicking the "Like" button while logged in to a valid Facebook account.

There is no way to "like" multiple times, or fake this in any way. Also, those who view the book just to see what it's about will not necessarily "Like" the book while they're on the site. Not unless they like it, that is!

To give you some idea how hard it is to tank up on "likes": one of my most popular products, Chant Compendium 3 which has sold thousands of copies, has 2 "likes" at the moment.

I have indeed posted a link to the book on many Traditional Catholic-related Facebook groups. But again, someone has to click through AND "like" the book to add to that tally. If they hate the idea, they certainly won't click the Like button.

Last night the total Likes was 230+. So about 60 Likes have come in just today. Wow.

[SeanJohnson]

The paperback version is now also up on my Amazon site here:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0578565889/ref=as_li_tl?imprToken=oLxX5EBIdwSJ6p54OYfddg&slotNum=1&ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0578565889&linkCode=w61&tag=httpwwwchanco-20%20/%3E

[St Ignatius]

Recieved my order yesterday... haven't had much time yet to look through the book in it's entirety. However, the format is excellent!  

I have already handed out several copies, including to one priest... we'll see how it all shakes out. I'm optimistic...

Thanks Sean, (and all those who were/are involved in making this book possible.)

[Matthew]

I got a new shipment of books a few days ago; I now have copies in stock again!

https://www.chantcd.com/index.php/As-We-Are-101-Compromises-Changes-Contradictions-of-an-SSPX

[BarbaraZ]

Hi Sean!

I received my book a few days ago!   Cannot put it down!   I gave a copy to a friend and she is having the same 'problem'!
:)
Much more handy for some of us to have all this info in book form!  Everything is easily referenced for anyone needing more info or to check facts.  

I plan on ordering a few more copies..........praying family members and friends  will take notice.

Thank you, Sean, and all those who encouraged and assisted you with the publication of this much needed work!
Prayers for all !

[Matthew]

The eBook version is now available! Just 9.99, and of course there is no shipping! You also get instant gratification.

Note: You will be downloading an epub or mobi file to your computer or phone. Just select the format you prefer.
It's easy to read epub on your desktop or laptop computer.

You will need to load it onto your reader device (Kindle, etc.) manually.

Downloading to your phone or tablet should be easy; just click the download link. If you ever lose the eBook,  you can download it again by logging in to your ChantCd.com account.

https://www.chantcd.com/index.php/As-We-Are-101-Compromises-Changes-Contradictions-of-an-SSPX-Ebook-Version

[SeanJohnson]

Hello St. Ignatius and BarbaraZ-

Thank you for your kind words, and especially for getting this book into the hands of some who can use it!

Semper Idem,
Sean

[SeanJohnson]

The eBook version is now available! Just 9.99, and of course there is no shipping! You also get instant gratification.

Note: You will be downloading an epub or mobi file to your computer or phone. Just select the format you prefer.
It's easy to read epub on your desktop or laptop computer.

You will need to load it onto your reader device (Kindle, etc.) manually.

Downloading to your phone or tablet should be easy; just click the download link. If you ever lose the eBook,  you can download it again by logging in to your ChantCd.com account.

https://www.chantcd.com/index.php/As-We-Are-101-Compromises-Changes-Contradictions-of-an-SSPX-Ebook-Version

As one of the CI members pointed out to me in private correspondence, the great advantage the eBook has over the paperback, is that all the citations are live (i.e., So many of the sources were various SSPX websites/URLs, and with the eBook, one does not have to manually vacillate from the paperback to typing in the URL on the computer, in order to verify the links/citations).

Of course, this whole project was to emphasize the paperback, in order to reach people who do not frequent the internet and/or CI, but at the same time, recognizing many interested parties DO use the internet, we thought this eBook version might appeal to some of them.

The ultimate would be to purchase BOTH the eBook AND the paperback, in order that one can verify the authenticity of the citations in the paperback by opening the eBook version and clicking the footnote and associated URL/link (at least, for those who are worried about the veracity of citations, anyway).  This still involves going from paperback to computer screen, but at least it saves you the trouble of manually typing in the URL citation.

[SeanJohnson]

For those who have not ordered the book, but are curious, this Amazon.com page shows the Preface, Foreword, Introduction, and Index of Names:

NB: Hmmm...still having trouble posting Amazon hyperlinks.  Just Google "Sean Johnson Book SSPX As We Are?" and you will get there.

Then just click on "Look Inside" 

[Pax Vobis]

Sean, what's the over/under on how long before the new-sspx publishes an article rebutting your book (I doubt they would write a book)?  I'd say 3 months, by end of year.  Just a guess.  I can imagine that "comrade" priests are working feverishly to find the best out-of-context +ABL quotes to chastise your book.  Should be interesting.

[SeanJohnson]

Sean, what's the over/under on how long before the new-sspx publishes an article rebutting your book (I doubt they would write a book)?  I'd say 3 months, by end of year.  Just a guess.  I can imagine that "comrade" priests are working feverishly to find the best out-of-context +ABL quotes to chastise your book.  Should be interesting.

Hi Pax-

Until the other day, when my old buddy (Menzingen shill) made a brief appearance here, I would have guessed they would use the old Roman strategy against Lefebvre: Death by silence.  I thought most likely they would want to send the message that the book is such garbage that there is no point in even addressing it, and let the book quickly slide from consciousness in the era of short-term internet memory loss, as new daily information buried the old.

But the return of the shill from retirement tells me that the arrows have hit the mark, and perhaps a rebuttal will be felt necessary after all?

If that is the case, then I would gather the effort is underway currently.  They will not want to procrastinate and prolong the book’s Internet attention and publicity.  Create a quick resource that can be pointed to in the future as needed, and give it no more mention than that.

On the other hand, neither Fr. Rioult’s “The Impossible Reconciliation” nor Mr. Stephen Fox’s ebook “Is This Operation ѕυιcιdє” received a rebuttal from the SSPX, so...

My guess would be:

25% chance of full length book rebuttal
40% chance of article rebuttal
35% chance of death by silence response

[Mr G]

Fr. Hewko's latest newsletter mentions 101 CCC: https://conta.cc/2omDIyc

Fr. Hewko says : "Where's the exposing of the Fake Resistance promoting New Mass miracles, trad-Ecuмenism, etc.? "

Poor Fr. Hewko, something in him thinks that Bishop Williamson and the other Resistance Priests tell everyone they meet to go to the New Mass. Yet in the real world, not one Priests or Bishop has evet told us to go to the New Mass or Trad-Ecuмenical events, and we have had several Resistance priests come to our little mission. The Hewkonians and Pfifferites make it seem that every Sunday that the Resistance Bishops and Priests preach on the goodness of the New Mass.

[SeanJohnson]

Well, that was more or less as expected.

What was disappointing to me was that, as regards the matter of grace and the new Mass, Fr. Hewko’s argument was limited to a cobbling of quotes (as with his longer sermon posted on that forum yesterday from Massachusetts): 

A litany of quotes, selectively excised from context, and held out in a univocal manner to stand alone as though they were absolute principles.

If this is done in good faith (and I presume it is), then Fr. Hewko clearly does not understand what he is reading.

As I wrote to someone in private correspondence:


“Perhaps my next writing project will be ‘Regarding Certain Errors on Grace and the New Mass.’

It is frustrating to see the totality of Fr. Hewko’s argument whittled down to out of context quote-mining, but absolutely no attempt at theological support: 

Nothing evincing any understanding of ex opere operato vs ex opere operantis; nothing about quoad nos; nothing about obex gratiae; nothing about “insincerity” as an impediment; no distinction between actual and sanctifying grace; no discussion of Trent; no distinction between grace from the Mass, and grace from Communion; no distinction between intrinsic evil in moral acts vs intrinsic evil as a scholastic-philosophical concept; etc, etc.

And if Fr. Hewko has the smoking gun he thinks to have regarding Archbishop Lefebvre APPEARING to say there is no grace passing at the new Mass in his 1972 quote, why can I quote him years later in his famous “cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ” conference acknowledging that grace certainly passes, and that in necessity it is permissible to receive nourishment even from poisoned meat?”

Just some food for thought.

Sigh....

[SeanJohnson]

Archbishop Lefebvre 2 years after the quote cited by Fr. Hewko:

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/lefebvre-on-spiritual-nourishment-(grace)-at-the-novus-ordo-mass/

Is Lefebvre schizophrenic, or did Fr. Hewko not properly understand Lefebvre’s comment from 1972?

[SeanJohnson]

It doesn't appear that Archbishop Lefebvre was schizo at all. In fact, for one who knows and is familiar with his writings, he was consistent up until the day he died about the New Mass. He called it "poison" over and over.

How does this reconcile with Bp. Williamson telling us in 2015 the New Mass can "nourish" our faith? Which is it? Is it poison or nourishment?

Words mean something.

The only real distinction between Bp Fellay and Bp Williamson is that Bp. Fellay tells us (in word or deed) that the whole of the Conciliar Church is acceptable. Bp. Williamson tells us that just the New Mass/it's miracles are acceptable and nourishing. But what is the New Mass but the banner of the Conciliar Church? Recall Archbishop Lefebvre remarks that he was told if he would only say the New Mass all his problems with Rome would go away. The New Mass vs. the canonized Latin Mass is the pivot point of everything.

If Bp. Williamson believed as Archbishop Lefebvre did that the New Mass was poison, he has now had four years of opportunity to clarify his statements. He has not done so. We are left with no choice but to accept that Bp. Williamson too (like Bp. Fellay) has changed.

Hello Hodie-

I likewise believe Archbishop Lefebvre was remarkably consistent.

You, however, despite your affirmation of same above, are logically compelled to believe the opposite (if you are going to hold to Fr. Hewko’s interpretation of Archbishop Lefebvre’s quotes):

-Fr. Hewko alleges in 1972 Archbishop Lefebvre says grace does not pass;

-I supply a quote from 1974 from Archbishop Lefebvre clearly showing grace does pass in certain circuмstances.

-Fr. Hewko proceeds to give several other quotes from the 1970’s (allegedly) showing tgat because the Mass is poison, it can never be attended (and as poison, well-disposed communicants allegedly receive no grace);

-I quote Archbishop Lefebvre in 1980 (with a letter signed and given to Michael Davies in 1981), showing him allowing that Catholics who feel compelled to attend the NOM can still fulfill their Sunday obligation (even if objectively they are not obliged to do so).

How to you explain these apparently contradictory positions of Archbishop Lefebvre; contradictions you are forced to acknowledge, if you believe Fr. Hewko is properly understanding the quotes he is reading?

In truth, the consistency of Archbishop Lefebvre can only be salvaged by recognizing  that the quotes I have cited are concessions of the Archbishop given to those trapped in necessity, while the quotes Fr. Hewko is (mis)using are general -but not absolute- principles.

If such were not the case, you would be obliged to believe that Archbishop Lefebvre’s position WEAKENED between 1972 - 1974, then strengthened again in 1976 (other misquotes by Fr. Hewko in the Massachusetts sermon on your forum), then WEAKENED again in 1980/1, then strengthened again in 1986, etc.