
The Perpetual Authority
of the Latin Mass

Revisiting the Apostolic Constitution
Quo Primum
_______________________________________________________________
What part of the word
“Forever”
do we no longer understand?
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
and the concept 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 Roman Missal of the
Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum (Missale Romanum ex
decreto Sacrosancti Concilii Tridentini restitutum) of 1570
with the Novus Ordo Missae (New Order Mass) on April 3, 1969
— for the Missale Romanum unambiguously and repeatedly states
that the Latin Mass (as we have come to call it) is, and always
will be, the only valid Mass, and as such irreformable, 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But this unalterable Mass had, in fact, been superseded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”
-
“Past”
we no longer understand as
“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 diametric concepts pertaining to time
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 permutation
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.”. 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
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-does-one-arrive-at-th/
“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.”
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 - 2023 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.
|
|