In a couple of recent threads, I was defending the action of my local bishop and the policy set forth by the USCCB that politicians are under the canonical jurisdiction of the Ordinary in their home diocese.

I was not adequately familiar with the idea of quasi-domicile as shown in Can 102 §2, above.

Based on the above, it is patently obvious that any Catholic politician serving in Congress has established a quasi-domicile in either the Baltimore, Washington, or Arlington dioceses.

My lack of familiarity with Can. 102's definition of quasi-domicile resulted in my concluding that the USCCB's document, while wimpy, was not in error and should be considered authoritative. This was an error in judgment on my part. Naturally, the USCCB cannot overrule canon law.

I am not a canonist nor do I play one on television. Despite that, I do not like being in error. However, I do like to think that I am man enough to admit when I am wrong.

Therefore, I humbly ask for you to forgive this error and the assertions that sprung from that error. While I do not believe I wrote anything uncharitably (nor did I intend to do so), I do tend to get rather vigorous when defending what I believe is the truth. While some might argue that this is a virtue when what is being defended is the truth, when one discovers that what was being defended was error, it is, to put it mildly, embarrassing and unacceptable.

I felt it necessary to publicly apologize rather than privately apologize to the specific posters with whom I discussed this, as I have had some on FR who have expressed privately to me that they have learned from my posts. I believe that posting publicly and posting what I did would be the best way to make sure that if the errors that I was promoting are corrected by the factual information.

And I hope you will excuse me while I wipe the rest of this egg off of my face and get the (crow) feathers out of my teeth.

THIS IS A CATHOLIC CAUCUS THREAD

Per Religion Moderator rules, Caucus threads are closed to any poster who is not a member of the caucus. For instance, if it says “Catholic Caucus” and you are not Catholic, do not post to the thread.

If you have any questions, please refer to the Religion Moderator Profile.

Thank you for your cooperation.

I'm tired, it's 1:30am, so I want to be careful with what and how I say this.

First, no apology is needed for me. I don't know a 10th as much as you do about cannon law. What my posts were about was just a lay view of what SHOULD be happening to Catholics that are in public rebellion against the church. If I were a priest, I can't know everyone's actions and opinions unless they openly declare them to me. However, these public figures have openly defied the teachings of the church and are in a position to affect the USA's treatment of the church's teachings. If you vote "yea" to kill babies, IMHO, you have openly defied the church and dared the church to say something about it.

Now it's good to know info that a congressman that moves to Washington IS under the jurisdiction of the local church, but If, for example, Kerry decided to campaign in Florida and was inclined to show his mug in a Miami church, If I were the local priest, I would deny communion to Kerry, knowing his views on abortion and sodomy.

Now it seems to me,( I could be wrong), the church teaching in Los Angeles should match the teaching in Boston, and Miami should match all the others. If the church cannot agree on abortion and sodomy, then what else is left? We may argue and comment on some vagaries, but I think baby murder is pretty much agreed upon by most church fathers.

Now you can argue that all this is regulated in church cannon and written down, but obviously there is some discrepancy in Boston, and other parishes.

Now we get to my opinion. I think these congress people need to be warned by the church of their error and REQUIRED to repent. If you didn't already know the church's teaching's, you may conclude that the pope is wrong and Kerry, Biden, Kennedy, Pelosi, and a MULTITUDE of others are correct and the pope is a radical that needs to be removed. I dare say the MAJORITY of Catholics elected to congress are liberals. It would be an interesting study to compare the numbers. Even appointments are anti church like HHS Secretary, and Napolitano. They feel completely comfortable to call themselves Catholic and hold anti Catholic views. This comfort level is what I am upset about. IMO, a person above a lay person should instruct these people in Catholic teaching, in public. When they vote to expand fetal stem cell research, the church should speak up and CALL NAMES! When these people come up for re election, I can't imagine the church supporting these "cafeteria" catholics, but they are voted in year after year by "(so called) "good" Catholics.

The recent archbishop's comments on Obama coming to Notre Dame is what I'm looking for x100. It's going to take the church government being fed up with rebellion to change anything. This one man is challenging the president of the US. That takes some determination to do such a thing, but if you have sworn your life to Christ, what is there to fear? But Obama isn't a Catholic. Kennedy is. These prominate congressmen should be trembling for their souls instead of strutting around like peacocks.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.