Skip to main content

In Season and Out

By December 10, 2007March 2nd, 2019Fr. Angelo Geiger, News, Politics

When was the last time you heard a major candidate for president of the United States say something like this?

The reason we have so much government is because we have so much broken humanity,” he said. “And the reason we have so much broken humanity is because sin reigns in the hearts and lives of human beings instead of the Savior.

Fr Angelo

Author Fr Angelo

I am Franciscan Friar of the Immaculate, and a priest for more than twenty years. I am now studying in Rome for my licentiate in Theology.

More posts by Fr Angelo

Join the discussion 6 Comments

  • Scott says:

    “In one of the first churches I was assigned to, I thought I was supposed to be the captain of a warship leading the congregation into a battle against spiritual darkness,” he said.
    “But they wanted the captain of the Love Boat. They just wanted everybody to be happy. It was not about how many people were won to Christ or how many teens were pulled away from drugs or how many marriages were saved. Instead, it was about the seniors having a great trip going to watch the fall leaves change, the teen-agers going to a better summer camp than the church across town.”

    This has a familiar ring to it. If we were told what we needed to hear instead of what we wanted to hear, many things would be different.

  • BillG says:

    When was the last time a group of brothers lost their tax-exempt status?

  • Fr Angelo says:


    I don’t recall it ever happening, and why should it in this case? I suppose you think religious people are now not even permitted to even report what a candidate might have said.

    And what might be the constitutional basis for your objection?

    I have had this discussion before. Once, someone like yourself said I was being deceptive because my real intention was to promote a certain candidate, even if I did not explicitly do so.

    In fact, the law does not forbid a tax-exempt organization to do what I have done here, which is not the endorsement of a candidate, but a mention a religious statement. It is fairly obvious that a Christian organization is going to be interested in the Christian statements made by political candidates and will be inclined to think favorably of them. Why should I walk on eggs about it? I will not surrender my first amendment rights.

    Unless I actually endorse someone, or otherwise explicitly promote someone’s candidacy, you really have no constitutional basis for your objection.

    But this misses the whole point of the post. Doesn’t it? What America needs most of all is a humble and contrite heart. Political races are purely secondary to a change of heart.

  • BillG says:


    I hope that you will look deeply into yourself, as you recommend a humble heart to others, and ask whether you have achieved it in yourself. The manner in which you and your brother post to this blog – the occasional high-handed arrogance – suggests that you haven’t.

  • Fr Angelo says:


    I appreciate your admonition. May I be delivered from such things.

    I believe in direct but respectful dialogue. It seems you question the lawfulness of a tax-exempt religious community from exercizing free speech. You asked the question, and I answered respectfully.

    My experience has been that many who oppose religious ideas would like to hedge the free expression of such within the smallest possible limits. It is one thing to disagree with someone. It is another to suggest that the free expression of an idea you disagree with should be penalized, especially when there is no constitutional basis for such a penalty. If I misunderstood your question, I apologize. It seemed fairly plain to me.

    I do not suggest that I am better than anyone. I thought my very brief post was plain enough, and its point very important. For that reason I reiterated it at the end of my last comment. It would be a shame for that point to be lost in this secondary discussion about religious liberty.

  • sonopa says:

    BillG – how are you?

    Before I start, I want you to know that I do not favor Huckabee and would not vote for him. But, that is not the point of my writing this comment.

    I understand what you are trying to say about the tax exempt status – we have discussed this issue before. If you read the code, there are provisions that permit a person in a tax exempt status from expressing their political opinions. But, with that aside, the political system and government are corrupt. These systems are so corrupt, that the government uses my tax dollars (and yours) to support initiatives with which I do not agree. For example, does the government support such groups as Planned Parenthood, or does the government pay for low-income people to have abortions? Even worse, how much money does the US fund the U.N.? Are we even counting in millions any more? Right now, you and I do not have a choice in how the government allocates these funds.

    The financial cost (cost in the sense of a perceived violation of the non-profit code) of a friar or a monk suggesting a quality in a presidential candidate they find admirable pales in comparison to the government financial waste in other area. To that extent, I would like to add how the “Reverends??? Jackson and Sharpton, among many, outwardly endorse candidates? I have read few, in fact, I do not recall any, blogs/articles/etc…against the Jacksons and Sharptons of the world implying they are violating non-profit tax laws.

    So, when a “group of brothers??? states an opinion that has led us to talking… I do not isolate them because the “other side??? is doing it also. In addition, I refer you to the response from Frangelo – no sense repeating those points here.

    I wish more Catholic leaders would speak out and express their opinions.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.