[hollingsworth]

Ah, so X is Sean Johnson.  Well good.  I have nothing against Sean Johnson, simply noting that his posts are legion.  I never followed his comments that closely in the past, but that certainly doesn't mean that I dismiss them out of hand.
Say, Sean, why don't you send an autographed copy of your new book to Michael Matt?  Matt rues the "circular firing squad" formed by traditional Catholics.  He wants to bring us all together, and wants us to stop undermining one another.  But, for whatever reason, he seems unable to recognize the obvious drift of SSPX towards Rome, and the Church of Bergoglio.  Your book might enlighten him.

[SeanJohnson]

Ah, so X is Sean Johnson.  Well good.  I have nothing against Sean Johnson, simply noting that his posts are legion.  I never followed his comments that closely in the past, but that certainly doesn't mean that I dismiss them out of hand.
Say, Sean, why don't you send an autographed copy of your new book to Michael Matt?  Matt rues the "circular firing squad" formed by traditional Catholics.  He wants to bring us all together, and wants us to stop undermining one another.  But, for whatever reason, he seems unable to recognize the obvious drift of SSPX towards Rome, and the Church of Bergoglio.  Your book might enlighten him.

Hello Hollingsworth-

You raise an interesting point: Who would actually read the book?

I would have no qualms at all about giving a free book to Fr. Hewko (or any Resistance priest who requested one), since I know they would use/read it.

But with regard to Michael Matt, or even SSPX priests, I am not so sure.

The thought did occur to me to give Michael a copy, but I think the moment he came across the entries against tradcuмenism, it would go straight into the garbage (for diametrically opposing his perennial “unite the clans” message).

And as far as SSPX priests are concerned, I can only think of one in America (and none anywhere else) who would read it.

Maybe at some point a rich benefactor will come forward and finance a printing for the priests of all the English-speaking districts, but I’m not holding my breath.

On a related note, someone was asking me how they thought Menzingen will react to this book.

Of course, I have no idea.  Perhaps they will publish their own rebuttal.  That would have the benefit of offering the clergy and faithful a heavy dose of “soma,” but from their perspective, would have the negative effect of broadening publicity for the book.

It would also contradict the positivity of the new branded image (though perhaps anti-Resistance polemicists are the exception to the branding, but in that case they would actually be accentuating the detriments of that campaign by exhibiting a willingness to combat the Resistance, but not modernist Rome).

Given the relatively narrow circle of people the book will appeal to, its relatively small number of copies available, and the absence of any sizable number of priests or faithful likely to be influenced by the book, I don’t expect that to happen, but who knows.

More likely, a letter will go out to the priors to counsel any concerned parties privately and individually, if that.

My money says that the new-SSPX will have learned a great deal from their Roman friends, and will give this book the same treatment Rome used to give the SSPX:

Death by silence, with the underlying presupposition being that its contents are so preposterous that no response is necessary:

Mr. Johnson is a disillusioned dissident whose judgment and perceptions have been skewed by his lack of trust and bitterness, and who has been deceived by dissident priests (and a certain Bishop).

We will see.

[Matthew]

My money says that the new-SSPX will have learned a great deal from their Roman friends, and will give this book the same treatment Rome used to give the SSPX:

Death by silence, with the underlying presupposition being that its contents are so preposterous that no response is necessary:

Mr. Johnson is a disillusioned dissident whose judgment and perceptions have been skewed by his lack of trust and bitterness, and who has been deceived by dissident priests (and a certain Bishop).

This is exactly the attitude I see on various Facebook groups. They just regurgitate anti-Resistance talking points they've heard from their SSPX priests. It doesn't matter how outlandish their assertions are.

One man described your book as a catalog of conspiracy theories.
How is docuмented evidence a theory about anything, conspiracy or otherwise? It's not even opinion!

But this is the level at which some SSPX dupes are living at. Zero rationality, with mindless trust, passivity, and emotion. It's how they're dealing with cognitive dissonance.

[SeanJohnson]

One man described your book as a catalog of conspiracy theories.
How is docuмented evidence a theory about anything, conspiracy or otherwise?

Hello Matthew-

That is perhaps the most frustrating (and insoluble) problem, since it pertains to disposition.

If I demonstrate various changes or contradictions in policy and/or principle compared to those of Archbishop Lefebvre  (eg., In the matter of the now greatly reduced time for making perpetual engagements), the initial reflex of many is not to suspend judgment and investigate, but to deny, or failing that, to make an ad hominem response.

I saw one comment on one of the Facebook pages (I don’t have an account) suggest that even if the entire contents of the book were true, that is no reason to write a book about it (!).

In other words, this person is simply irked that a book running contrary to the narrative she has accepted uncritically is contradicting her, and she wants it gone.

This again brings us back to the problem of disposition.

[homeschoolmom]

Mr. Johnson is a disillusioned dissident whose judgment and perceptions have been skewed by his lack of trust and bitterness, and who has been deceived by dissident priests (and a certain Bishop).

This comes to mind frequently. When speaking of Campos the comments were that most in the pews noticed no difference but the perceptive ones saw the subtle changes. January 2003 Superior General's Letter

"So little by little the will to fight grows weaker and finally one gets used to the situation. In Campos itself, everything positively traditional is being maintained, for sure, so the people see nothing different, except that the more perceptive amongst them notice the priests’ tendency to speak respectfully and more often of recent statements and events coming out of Rome, while yesterday’s warnings and today’s deviations are left out. The great danger here is that in the end one gets used to the situation as it is, and no longer tries to remedy it. For our part we have no intention of launching out until we are certain that Rome means to maintain Tradition. We need signs that they have converted."

Against Campos it was good to notice these things. When the SSPX is in the hot seat, it's a different story.