
The Perpetual
Authority
of the Latin
Mass

What part of
the word
“Forever”
do we no Longer Understand?
REVISITING THE APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTION QUO PRIMUM
(Pope St. Pius V - July 14, 1570)
April 3, 1969: When
“forever”
came to mean only
“399
years”
On
the third day of April 1969 the
temporal concept of
“forever” was
astonishingly and arbitrarily quantified by Pope Paul VI
— much to the perplexity of historians and physicists — as 399 years—
or to be precise, 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days.
On that day Pope Paul tampered with time and eternity
by expurgating or otherwise expunging the ancient Latin rite of
the Mass known as Quo Primum — which unambiguously states
that
“this present Constitution … will be valid henceforth,
now, and forever” — and replacing it, by a tour de force, with
his own Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, otherwise
known as the Novus Ordo, or
“The New Mass.”
This does not mean, of course, that Pope Paul VI
explicitly stated that:
“Henceforth
the word, the concept, and the notion of
“forever ”
—
now
— as of this third day of April 1969 — only means 399
years, 9 months, and 11 days.”
However — and this is vital to understand — it is
the inescapable logical consequence of replacing the Apostolic
Constitution Quo Primum — which unambiguously states that
the Tridentine Mass (as we have come to call it) is, and always
will be, the only valid Mass, incapable of being altered, modified,
or changed in any way by any person whomsoever — “henceforth,
now, and forever”.
Pretty clear, yes?
But this unalterable Mass had, in fact,
been superseded by the Novus Ordo Missae (New
Order Mass) following Vatican II, despite the fact that Quo Primum
was to be in force “forever” and in no way “altered”. What was decreed
to remain both unalterable and forever … was neither,
following Vatican II.
We were left asking ourselves what, in fact, the word
“forever” had suddenly come to mean, together with all the ramifications
of this re-definition of a clearly understood concept. In other
words, if “forever” does not mean “for all time and into eternity”
… what, precisely does it mean?
If what is held to be “forever” is abrogated in its
intension by the introduction of something that re-defines it in
such a way that it is nullified. Why is that? Simply put,
anything “other than” our understanding of the intensionality
of “forever” eo ipso nullifies it, for it must be less
and cannot be greater than “forever” as we had always
understood the concept “forever”— and what is less is already
understood in other temporal terms, in which case the
re-definition of “forever” becomes merely redundant of other
and already existing temporal concepts such as “now”, “past”, “present”,
and “future”.
In other words, if “forever” is in any way abbreviated
to something less, then it is determinate and if it is determinate
it is quantifiable. In the present case it is reduced to 399 years,
9 months, and 11 days, or the period between Quo Primum (the
Latin Mass) in 1570 and its being superseded by Missale Romanum
(Mass in the vernacular) in 1969. What was deemed as binding “forever”
in 1570 and the following 400 years was breached by something new
(novus) and different in 1969. But how is this possible if
what was binding “now, henceforth, and forever” in 1570 was replaced
in 1969? How could “forever” come to mean, “only in force for 400
years — after which it is susceptible to being abrogated”? Logically
such a breach cannot occur without somehow re-defining the concept
of “forever”. But this is fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions
that make any effort of the sort possible.
Consider the following verse:
“I am the living bread that came down out of Heaven;
if anyone eats of this bread, he shall live forever” (St. John 6.51) What do we understand by this? That
those who “eat of this bread” shall live for 399 years, 9 months,
and 11 days? Of course not. We understand that they shall live
forever, which is to say, for all time into eternity. The
word “forever” or “for ever” occurs 472 times in Holy Scripture
and it is always spoken of or understood in terms of limitless perpetuity,
e.g. “for his mercy endureth forever.” (Ps. 135.20) By what possible warrant can we understand
God’s mercy as enduring for a finite quantum of time, say, 160 years,
6 months and two days? In other words, how do we quantify
forever? We cannot. It is not a quantifiable sum.
When Saint Paul says of Christ:
“Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today; and the same
forever”, how are we to hold “yesterday” as meaning, “the
day before this present day”, and “today” as “this present day”
— but “forever” as meaning “399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”? After
that limited duration of time does Christ become something different?
Why did Saint Paul not say “Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today;
and for 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”?
In other words, does the word “forever” in Sacred
Scripture, and in ordinary discourse, mean something different
than it meant in Quo Primum, and if it does, why just
Quo Primum? If we re-define the concept of “forever”
it must apply to each and every iteration of it, wherever
it occurs, sacred or profane. Are we prepared to do this? Is it
even logically possible? In a word, no.
Moreover, we must then ask, what then is the periodicity
of the concept “forever” once it acquires a terminus, an end — and
what is more, and of far greater importance, what lies beyond
it? If it is merely the most extensive temporal concept
in an array of other lesser, but equally determinate temporal concepts,
then its durability is finite — notwithstanding that the notion
of time itself is indefinite (for being discretely,
and however arbitrarily enumerated, it is at least conceptually
infinite by mere addition). As Saint Augustine pointed out in broaching
the concept of eternity (in which there is no time as we understand
it) it is pointless to ask “what preceded eternity?” for the notion
of precedence is itself a temporal notion, and to ask “what
preceded eternity?” (in which there is no time) is to ask “what
preceded time before there was no time.” We
are now asking, “what succeeds forever when “forever” as a determinate
time frame expires?” What do we call it? Can we concatenate a series
of “forevers” indefinitely? And if we do, what shall we call
it? Forever? We cannot — for “forever”, as we had said, has become
a determinate time frame following the Apostolic Constitution
Missale Romanum of Vatican II. Perhaps you begin to see the
inconsistency, the absurdity really, of tampering with the notion
of “forever”.
Even if we argue that the Pope has the authority
and the ability to re-define and abbreviate the
notion of “forever” by invoking Christ’s pronouncement to Saint
Peter:
“Whatever you bind on earth is bound in Heaven” (St. Mat. 18.18), we still have not circumvented
the problem. Heaven itself is the paradigm par excellence
of “forever” (and so, too, is Hell). Time and logic are not in the
arena of “Faith and Morals” in which alone the Pope is competent
and infallible. (Nor, incidentally is economics). Even if a pope
repeals a former pope’s Apostolic Constitution, he cannot repeal
logic nor re-define the intensionality of a concept, in this
case “forever”. To say that St. Pius V did not “intend” to use “forever”
in the way we, and all our predecessors understood it, is absolutely
without warrant or justification.
1 He meant that The
Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum would be binding forever.
If not, why the severest admonition at the end of Quo Primum?
“Therefore,
no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice
of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant,
indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition.
Should anyone dare to contravene
it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty
God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
consider the force,
extent, clarity,
and absolute perpetuity of the following twelve excerpts
from Quo Primum:
-
“It
is most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate
manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the
celebration of Mass”
-
“This
ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever”
-
“This
new rite alone is to be used”
-
“This
Missal is to be used by all churches,
even by those which in their authorization are made exempt,
whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if
by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their
rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner
whatsoever.”
-
“This
present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and
forever”
-
“Nothing
must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted
from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it”
-
“We
order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the
Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid
down by Us”
-
“They
must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies
or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal”
-
“This
Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely,
without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty,
judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used.”
-
“This
present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remains
always valid and retain its full force”
-
“The
Missal [must] be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world
and kept free of flaws and errors”
-
“Therefore,
no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission,
statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration,
will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene
it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of
the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Since Vatican
II, however,
“forever”,
it appears, has a terminus after all ... and does not mean ... well
... forever … at least in the reinterpreted and novel concept of
time enunciated by Pope Paul VI in his Apostolic Constitution
Missale Romanum — which abolished, or more properly expurgated
the notion of “forever” to accommodate changes that could not be
reconciled with that concept. Quo Primum leaves absolutely
no room for ambiguity as you will see in the document itself which
accompanies this article. If the proposal on the table is in open
conflict with the concept of “forever”, then one must go: the
proposal or “forever”. Paul VI opted for the latter.
It must either be redefined or abolished. He did both.
From a purely philosophical point of view, this quantification
of the temporal category that we understand as “forever” poses not
simply significant, but insuperable problems in any discussion concerning
the nature of any conceivable temporal discourse. Let us look at
a few instances.
If “forever” does not mean "uninterrupted continuity
without end", then by that same logic it simultaneously and necessarily
abrogates every other temporal permutation:
-
“Never”
does not mean
“at
no time”
— either in the past, the present or the future.
-
“Now”
does not mean
“at
this moment or in this present time”
-
“Before”
no longer means
“preceding
or anteceding the present”
-
And by the
“Past”
we no longer understand
“what
had preceded the present”
Altering the connotation or intension of any of these
five categories (forever, never, now, before, past — but especially
“forever”), not simply alters, but abolishes the connotation or
meaning of each and all of them.
Consider
the following diametrically polar concepts of temporal permutations
which — if “forever no longer means “absolute
perpetuity” — no longer connote, or mean, what we had erstwhile understood them
to mean in the temporal ordering of any state of affairs:
-
FOREVER / never, periodicity
-
NOW / before or after
-
PRESENT / past, future, soon
-
EARLY / late
-
OLD / new
-
MODERN / ancient
-
FIRST / last, second, third, etc.
(i.e. a series) — also, minute, hour, day, week, month, year,
decade, century, millennium, etc.
-
ETERNAL / temporal
As we see, quite a bit follows from “forever” no longer
being understood as forever but rather, as 399 years at which time
“forever” expires.
We must understand that the term “forever” subsumes
all the temporal categories and inflections under it, all of which
are determinate and finite extensions of time relative only to “forever”
(for all time and into eternity) which had erstwhile been understood
as indefinite and indeterminate — as so many parts, or segments,
if you will, of an infinitely extensive concept (forever) that is
indeterminate by definition.
In a word, if “forever” is arbitrarily determined
as a finite quantum, all that it subsumed beneath it and understood
relative to it is also susceptible to arbitrary determination and
we can no longer coherently enter into temporal discourse of any
kind that presumes to bind any state of affairs to a determinate
referent in time. A week, or month, for example, is only what we
arbitrarily understand it to be according to our purpose at hand.
The implications of “implicitly” redefining
the temporal concept of “forever” are enormous. Think of it. They
pertain, according to the canons of reason, not only to the simplest
geometric concept of a line (“A line has only one dimension:
length. It continues forever in two directions.”), but to the
trajectory, and ultimately, the destiny of the human soul according
to the most fundamental notions of Christian doctrine: the eternity
of God and the immortality of the soul.
“Now” as 3-minutes-27-seconds
Let us look at this more closely. If, by a pure fiat,
we are no longer to understand “now" as “the present moment", but
a duration of “3 minutes and 27 seconds” — what follows? Indeed,
can we even ask the question, “what follows?”
since “following” is a temporal concept meaning “occurring after
the present moment, or “now”.
What happened in the intervening “3-minutes-27-seconds”?
How do we understand that 3-minutes-27-seconds vacuum?
We cannot say that it did not exist, or that what occurred within
it did not occur — nor is it possible that nothing occurred
within it. Such an assertion accords with neither reason nor experience.
In the 3-minutes-27-seconds that intervenes between the present
now and the next now (3-minutes-27-seconds later) what do we say
of what we did or what had happened in that time frame?
Whatever it was, it did not occur in a “now", but in the hiatus
between 2 successive 3-minute-27-seconds “nows”.
When then did it occur? We do not have the apparatus to determine
this, for we have created a false and illogical time narrative that
involves not just inconsistencies but contradictions. By interjecting
3-minutes-27-seconds between successive “nows” we have superseded
the model of time and, of course, of the notion of a clock which
was ticking between, and enumerating those 3-minutes-27-second
“nows”.
“Before” as 2-minutes-17-seconds
What logically holds true for the concept “now” equally
holds true for every other category of re-interpreted time.
If, for example, we reinterpret “before” as preceding “now” by 2-minutes-17-seconds,
we face the same conundrum. It devolves through every other permuation
of re-interpreted time until we can have no coherent discourse or
discussion involving temporal characteristics. This is to say that
we cannot have a discussion in which anything is spoken, for “spoken”
is the past tense of the present tense “speak”. In a word, all discourse
is inescapably temporal. It occurs or had occurred or will occur.
We cannot say a lot in 2-minutes-17-seconds which,
by this reasoning, would qualify it as speaking “now”. Moreover,
when the 2-minutes-17-seconds are up, how are they differentiated
from the “following” or “previous” 2-minutes-17-seconds? Is there
a hiatus between the “previous” 2-minutes-17-seconds and the “following”
2-minutes-17-seconds? What is its duration? And what can — for something
must — occur within it? How then, shall we speak of it?
Once specific determinacy is predicated of
temporal concepts, they lose all coherence.
You may say, “Well, a clock enumerates 60 seconds
for each minute and 60 minutes for each hour, and so on — so there
is a specific and determinate time frame.” Yes … for atomic
clocks and the like (which are arbitrarily and artificially divided
to begin with — why, for example, 60 seconds for a minute and not
136, and what is the specific duration of a second
that is not already arbitrarily based on the present caesium
model (“The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of
the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine
levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.” The
International System of Units ) that is in itself a qualified
model. 2 Would the same numeric values
hold true if the model were based on barium?) In other words, this
may hold true for certain atomic clocks, but not for concepts.
Quo Primum and the indefeasible Concept of
“Forever”
All this has been a rather long and roundabout way
of demonstrating the most important fact that pertains to Catholics:
that “forever” as it pertains to time is not a finite quantum, but
means, as it has always meant, and will always be understood to
mean: "uninterrupted continuity without end". This pertains to Heaven
and it pertains to Hell. Therefore it intrinsically pertains to
Christian Doctrine. If either Heaven or Hell are merely 399 years,
9 months, and 11 days, the question naturally arises: what happens
after that? As we see ,we cannot escape the notion of “forever”
without logical inconsistency — and if Quo Primum states
“forever” concerning the way we celebrate Mass, it
was a definitive, unambiguous, and unimpeachable statement that
clarified, once and for all, the manner in which the Mass was, is,
and always will be celebrated — forever.
Even popes cannot change the nature of time and the
consistency of logic. Quo Primum and the traditional Latin Mass
prior to its enervation (or evisceration: you choose, for both apply)
following Vatican II, remains binding upon all Catholics
(read Quo primum which follows) — forever.
It is inescapable. Pope Saint Pius V forever
bound every successor to the Chair of Peter to it, together
with every Catholic.
The extremely frightening question that follows is
ineluctable: what does this mean concerning the validity of virtually
every Mass “celebrated” since Vatican II? If we can prescind from
an authentic Apostolic Constitution that binds us
forever to the Mass as it was celebrated prior to 1962, from
what else are we prepared to illicitly dispense with in the
way of the Deposit of the Faith and authentic historical
Catholic dogma? We already see it unfolding before us, especially
under the papacy of Francis among those who deplore a “throw away
culture” but appear to embrace a “throw away” Church.
Somewhere in every part of the world the authentic
Latin Mass is being celebrated; many under conditions similar to
the underground Church in China, and the only difference is that
those who police and brutally suppress these recalcitrant congregations
outside of atheistic China are the heavy-handed bishops of the
Church itself — many of whom appear to have lost the Faith —
but not the comfort and perquisites of their office.
____________________________
1
Despite
the purely conjectural assertion by apologists such as Likoudis
and Whitehead that, "Quo Primum [was] … not attempting to
fix one particular version of the Roman Missal for all time.” And
that “the ‘Tridentine Mass’ and the ‘New Order of the Mass’ constitute
different versions of the same Missal” — they do not even upon the
most cursory reading of both.
The Pope, the Council, and the Mass: Answers to Questions the Traditionalists
Have Asked,
1981 and 2006, Emmaus Road Publishing
2
http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/si-brochure/second.html
“The frequencies of all primary frequency standards should therefore
be corrected for the shift due to ambient radiation, as stated
at the meeting of the Consultative Committee for Time and Frequency
in 1999.”
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
What
“forever”
really means:
THE APOSTOLIC
CONSTITUTION
“QUO
PRIMUM ”

“From
the very first, upon Our elevation
to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind
and energies and directed all out thoughts to those
matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy,
and We strove with God's help, by every means in our
power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other
decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations
for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism,
the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published
for the instruction of the faithful, by God's help,
and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise
of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be
in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper —
for it is most becoming that
there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of
reciting the Psalms and
only one rite for the celebration of
Mass
— We deemed it necessary to give our
immediate attention to what still remained to be done,
viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.
Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men
of our selection. They very carefully collated all their
work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library
and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from
elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works
of ancient and approved authors concerning the same
sacred rites; and thus they have restored the
Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy
Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous
times and further emended, after serious study and reflection,
We commanded that the finished product be printed and
published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy
the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know
which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies
they were required to observe from now on in the celebration
of Masses.
Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed
down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher
of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung
or read according to any other formula than
that of this Missal published by Us.
This ordinance applies henceforth, now,
and
forever,
throughout all the provinces of the Christian world,
to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and
parish churches, be they secular or religious, both
of men and of women — even of military orders — and
of churches or chapels without a specific congregation
in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or
read privately in accord with the rites and customs
of the Roman Church.
This Missal
is to be used by all churches, even by
those which in their authorization are made exempt,
whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or
even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy
See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to
them by any other manner whatsoever.
This new
rite alone is to be used unless approval
of the practice of saying Mass differently was given
at the very time of the institution and confirmation
of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago,
or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar
kind which has been continuously followed for a period
of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in
no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or
custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen
fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We
grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to
its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop
or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else
to the contrary notwithstanding.
All other of the churches referred to above, however,
are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are
to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas,
by
this present Constitution, which will
be valid henceforth, now, and
forever,
We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our
recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it,
nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the
penalty of Our displeasure.
We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator,
and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity
they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman
Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence,
and We order them in virtue of holy obedience
to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and
manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and,
hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all
other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient,
which they have customarily followed; and
they must not
in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies
or recite any prayers other than those contained in
this Missal.
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue
of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in
perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the
Mass in any church whatsoever,
this Missal
is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any
scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty,
judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be
used. Nor are superiors, administrators,
canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious,
of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the
Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare
and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced
to alter this Missal, and that
this present document cannot be revoked
or modified, but remains always
valid and retain its full force
notwithstanding the previous
constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as
any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial
or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice
and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by
long and immemorial prescription — except, however,
if more than two hundred years' standing.
It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority,
We decree that, after We publish this constitution and
the edition of the Missal, the priests of the Roman
Curia are, after thirty days, obliged to chant or read
the Mass according to it; all others south of the Alps,
after three months; and those beyond the Alps either
within six months or whenever the Missal is available
for sale. Wherefore, in order that the Missal
be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and
kept free of flaws and errors, the penalty for
nonobservance for printers, whether mediately or immediately
subject to Our dominion, and that of the Holy Roman
Church, will be the forfeiting of their books and a
fine of one hundred gold ducats, payable ipso facto
to the Apostolic Treasury. Further, as for those located
in other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication
latae sententiae, and such other penalties as
may in Our judgment be imposed; and We decree by this
law that they must not dare or presume either to print
or to publish or to sell, or in any way to accept books
of this nature without Our approval and consent, or
without the express consent of the Apostolic Commissaries
of those places, who will be appointed by Us. Said printer
must receive a standard Missal and agree faithfully
with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal of
the large type (secundum magnum impressionem).
Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present
pronouncement to be sent to all parts of the Christian
world and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We
direct that it be, as usual, posted and published at
the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles,
also at the Apostolic Chancery, and on the street at
Campo Flora; furthermore, We direct that printed copies
of this same edict signed by a notary public and made
official by an ecclesiastical dignitary possess the
same indubitable validity everywhere and in every nation,
as if Our manuscript were shown there.
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted
to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance,
command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will,
decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene
it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God
and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Pope
Pius V
Pius Episcopus
Servant of the Servants of God
Ad Perpetuam Rei Memoriam *
Given at St. Peter’s in the year of the Lord’s Incarnation,
1570, on the 14th of July of the Fifth year of Our Pontificate.
________________________
*
Ad Perpetuam Rei Memoriam: The document is a trustworthy
and permanent record of fact to be kept in
everlasting remembrance.
|
Printable PDF Version

Totally Faithful to the Sacred
Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy See in
Rome
“Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti
verbum Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
“I
know your works ... that you have but little power,
and yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My
Name.”
(Apocalypse 3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2022 Boston Catholic Journal. All rights reserved.
Unless otherwise stated, permission is granted by the
Boston Catholic Journal for the copying and distribution
of the articles and audio files under the following
conditions: No additions, deletions, or changes
are to be made to the text or audio files in any way,
and the copies may not be sold for a profit. In the
reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic, text,
or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston
Catholic Journal.
|
|