MSI Press Blog

Charles de Foucauld began as a soldier and explorer, restless and self‑absorbed. He sought adventure, not holiness. But in the silence of the Sahara, surrounded by vast emptiness, he discovered a Presence greater than himself. His conversion began in Paris, when he entered a church simply to mock religion — and found himself kneeling instead. Later, in the desert, that moment deepened into vocation. He chose poverty, solitude, and prayer among the Tuareg people, living not to preach but to love. He wrote, “As soon as I believed that there was a God, I understood that I could do nothing else but live for Him.” Charles de Foucauld’s transformation reminds us that faith is not escape but immersion — the desert becomes communion, and silence becomes love.   post inspired by A Believer-in-Waiting's First Encounters with God  by Elizabeth Mahlou. Book description: It begins with a single, transforming encounter with God—one that reshapes everything. What follows is not a return to o...

  Every traditionally published author eventually opens a royalty statement, sees the numbers, and feels that familiar jolt of disappointment. This is all I earned? After everything I did? Traditional publishing can make authors feel powerless, especially because the reporting is opaque. But you’re not without options. You can’t change the contract, but you can influence the ecosystem around it. Here’s what you can do when your royalties don’t match your expectations. 1. First: Understand What Your Publisher Can and Cannot See This is the part most authors never hear clearly: Publishers who distribute through Ingram cannot see: Sales by retailer Sales by channel Sales by region Amazon‑specific data Library‑specific data Indie bookstore breakdowns Ingram provides only total units sold per ISBN per period. That’s it. No granularity. So when authors ask, “How many copies sold on Amazon?” the publisher literally does not know. What publishers can see: Total units sold (all r...

   Intuitives and Sensors rarely clash over values — they clash over how reality should be described . Sensors trust what’s tangible; Intuitives trust what’s possible. Each believes they’re being clear; each feels the other is being dismissive. Offense arises not from disagreement, but from translation failure . How They Offend Each Other 1. The Intuitive’s Abstraction Intuitives speak in patterns, metaphors, and possibilities. To Sensors, this can sound vague, impractical, or even condescending — as if the Intuitive is floating above real life. When an Intuitive says, “Let’s look at the bigger picture,” the Sensor may hear, “Your details don’t matter.” How it offends: The Sensor feels dismissed, unseen, or undervalued for their realism. The Intuitive feels misunderstood, accused of being unrealistic. 2. The Sensor’s Literalism Sensors speak in facts, examples, and specifics. To Intuitives, this can sound rigid or unimaginative — as if the Sensor is missing the forest for the ...