Without justification?
You mean like posts 10, 26, and 43 where non-Catholics are mentioned and disparaged?
It’s my understanding that the caucus label is not protection or license to use to attack others while leaving them no recourse to defend themselves.
The “caucus” article and posts must not compare beliefs or speak in behalf of a belief outside the caucus.
According to the Religion Forum Guidelines,
“Closed” threads on the Religion Forum include devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses. The header of the thread should make it obvious that the thread is closed, i.e. like a church meeting behind closed doors. Such assemblies will not be disturbed. Any challenges or ridicule will be removed. Any thread can be designated a caucus - e.g. labeled as a “[Catholic Caucus]” or “[LDS Caucus]” - provided that neither the article nor any of the posts challenge or ridicule any other confession. These are “safe harbors” for those who are easily offended or are ill equipped to defend their own confession.
In post #10, Verga is challenging someone on their poor understanding of church teaching. In her response, she suggests the individual consider seeking another church more in keeping with her personal views.
In post #26, Verga remains on topic, lamenting the fact that many Catholics do not read the catechism.
In post $43, another freeper is simply relating the reaction received for citing scripture.
None of these comments qualifies as a disparaging remark. The topic of this thread is Catholic and regards Church teaching. There is nothing here that disparages any other denomination; hence, the Catholic Caucus remains.