DOMENICO, VENEZIANO. A Venetian painter, as his name suggests, active in Florence, where he was in 1461. Very little is known about him; it may be considered that he received his earliest training in Venice. In 1438 (the first certain date for him) he wrote to Piero de' Medici in Perugia, a letter in which he dared to place himself beside two of the most celebrated Florentine painters of the time, Filippo Lippi and Fra Angelico.
---
**DOMICILE (D.)**
I. DEFINITION. — The parochial domicile and the diocesan domicile are not two competing domiciles that can coexist simultaneously; rather, they exclude one another.
Domicile, as constituted above by one who is of legal age and of sound mind, is called voluntary domicile. On the other hand, legal or necessary domicile is that which the law itself assigns to certain categories of persons subject to another's authority.
Those who have legal domicile (can. 93 § 1) are: 1) the wife not legitimately separated, who has the same domicile as her husband; if, however, she is legitimately separated, she may acquire her own domicile; 2) the minor, who has the domicile of the person exercising authority over him; 3) the person of unsound mind, who assumes the domicile of his curator or guardian.
II. **QUASI-DOMICILE (Q.-D.)** — By analogy with domicile, the Code of Canon Law also delineates the institution of quasi-domicile: an institution purely canonical, slowly elaborated by doctrine. Can. 92 § 2 shows that it likewise arises from the same fundamental elements. The difference lies in the time intended or actually spent in residence: residence combined with the intention of remaining beyond half a year, or actual residence for the greater part of the year (i.e., for more than 182 or 183 days).
III. COMMON PRINCIPLES. — Quasi-domicile can coexist with domicile: there may be a coexistence of voluntary domicile with voluntary or necessary quasi-domicile, or of necessary domicile with voluntary quasi-domicile. Likewise, there is no contradiction in the coexistence of necessary domicile with necessary quasi-domicile, although some authors firmly deny the existence of the latter; two voluntary quasi-domiciles may also coexist. Moreover, canon law acknowledges the possibility of having multiple domiciles simultaneously, as in the case of one who resides during the year in four different places, each for a period of three months, with the intention of permanently remaining there.
Both domicile and quasi-domicile have their juridical relevance in establishing a bond between the resident and the ecclesiastical territorial circumscription to which the place belongs, and between the resident and the ecclesiastical superior who heads the circumscription. Thus, one speaks of the proper Ordinary or proper parish priest of someone, respectively the Ordinary or parish priest of the diocese or parish in which he has either domicile or quasi-domicile (can. 94; hence, the same person may have more than one proper Ordinary or parish priest). Every faithful person is called an *incola* in the place where he has domicile; an *advena* where he has quasi-domicile; a *peregrinus* if he is outside his domicile and quasi-domicile; and a *vagus* if he has neither domicile nor quasi-domicile in any place (cf. can. 91).
Voluntary domicile and quasi-domicile are lost when both the departure from the place and the lack of reverent intention occur simultaneously, or when necessary domicile is acquired (can. 95).
The loss, however, of legal domicile and quasi-domicile occurs through a change in the juridical condition upon which they originally depended.
**
Ph. Maroto, *Institutiones iuris canonici*, I, Rome 1921, pp. 475 ff.; J. M. Costello, *Domicile and Quasi-Domicile*, Washington 1930; A. Wermechersch, J. Creusen, *Epitome iuris canonici*, I, 6th ed., Malines 1937, pp. 179 ff.; I. Chelodi-P. Cipriotti, *Ius canonicum de personis*, 3rd ed., Vicenza-Trento 1942, pp. 154-159; Wernz-Vidal, III, pp. 10-19; F. Cappello, *Summa iuris canonici*, I, 4th ed., Rome 1945, pp. 155 ff. Enrico Zanetta.