10/23/25
I just finished yet another full proofreading pass on my book, "The Sacred Carol: Rediscovering the True Authorship of a Christmas Classic." It's simply amazing how you can continue to find errors in each pass. Ideally, I should have another pair of professional eyes on this manuscript, but if I paid for everything in this endeavor, I would have no funds left over, from my donation, for promotions. And I'm going to need them.

When it comes to promotions I had one very crucial decision to make. As I state at the outset in my introductory remarks, this book is at once an exposé and a revelation. Which do I focus on? Because the approach will be totally different--and aside from the fact that I introduce the book with both, I'm afraid that won't do in promotions.

In other words, either I proclaim that I have exposed Charles Dickens as a fraud; or I announce that I have uncovered a spiritual gem hiding in plain sight. And the decision before me is this: the potential sales from Plan A, i.e., the exposé, might be ten times the potential for the revelation of a sacred "Christmas Carol." It started with the naming of the book, itself. ChatGPT-5 had suggested "The Secret Carol," which goes to the former emphasis. I thought carefully on this. I recall seeing sample questions in the SAT which ask, "What is the subject, here?" So, what is the real subject? It's not what Charles Dickens did to Mathew and Abby's novella--that's incidental. Exposing his crime is merely the means to an end. The real subject is what "A Christmas Carol" was before Dickens dumbed it down to make a quick buck.

Therefore, the name of my book will be "The Sacred Carol," not "The Secret Carol." And everything proceeds from that decision. The little video I recently completed, focuses on that theme. My video blog, which that video will introduce, will focus on it. And if I can obtain podcast interviews, to the extent the hosts will let me, I will focus on it, there.

This goes to why the original of "A Christmas Carol" probably never would have become famous, in the first place. It's famous because Dickens turned it into a crowd-pleasing caricature of itself. It was too advanced for the public in 1839, when Mathew and Abby completed it, and it's too advanced for the public, now. It requires a reader who has arrived at the stage where he or she loves God and Truth without requiring the scaffolding of organized religion, but who relies on the authentic Guru, alone.* What percentage of the population is there, would you say? Two percent? The literary agents recognize that this book has very little sales potential, and are turning me down, accordingly. They realize that it will offend just about everybody.

So who, exactly, are these 98%? Regular folks going about their daily lives: Humanists, atheists, materialists of various stripes; and religious people, who nowadays live in a world of their own. There are people in these groups who are exploring outside the boundaries--open-minded Humanists delving into New Age thinking, and religious people open to spiritualism and mysticism (including Eastern mysticism). They may find this book intriguing, especially inasmsuch as I've proved my theory 100%. The Catch-22, of course, is that they would have to read the book for themselves to see that.

So by taking the path of integrity, I have probably lost 98% of potential sales. I have also guaranteed my audience for the future.

Sincerely,

Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.

*In the case of Christians, the authentic Guru would be Jesus. Note there is nothing at all wrong with organized religion at a certain stage; only, one outgrows that stage sooner or later, in one incarnation or another, because it has certain limitations. If you have sat in a church which is on fire with Jesus's direct teaching, only to be brought down to a level of rote boredom when "St." Paul is quoted, or when certain rituals are required to be performed, you have experienced those limitations, yourself.