He stoutly guarded God
From an unruly world
An unreveling creation
And in such earnest
He, and millions others, were
Relieved of their doody
Perhaps only a small relief
For God above
Yet for such bellow
Refuse-ing
To be passed so easy
As some foul gag
Unyielding unearth
As unheavin’
A feudal gesture
In such an unholy rupture
Leaving behind
All the crap in religion
Until vomit us
Does God need guards or protectors? Is God unable to fend for God’s self? Can God create such a mess so big that even God can’t clean it up?
It seems to me that God and godliness are incarnated by our lives reflecting what is good, as opposed to enforcing precepts or ideas/beliefs. I view means and ends as inextricably linked. How else could it be? Love begets love. And God is love. Violence begets violence. And while many might be skeptical of love, of God, few doubt that “means” lead to “ends.” It strikes me that the separation from living in the foundational nature of God, that is unconditional love, is the beginning of sin. Similarly, trying to take shortcuts to God’s reign by “enforcement” strikes me as the birth of idolatry, wanting to lord over others. This approach strikes me as feudal! This approach is futile in the same way that expecting violence will end violence is foolish. Both our materialist and spiritualist aspects can unite around this necessary order. Unless your view of reality is wholly absurd, there is lawful order in the universe — certain things lead to other certain things. Now, not everything is certain. But uncertainty is not a license to ignore those things which are certain. For example, you can ignore the law of gravity, but, quite predictably, this will not serve you or others well. Likewise, you can ignore the laws of love, or violence, but don’t pretend that such lawlessness will bring greater order and harmony in the world.
Back to this poem’s theme of “all the crap in religion.” Organizing love can be a perilously backwards approach, since love is the prime mover. Trying to franchise God — that is, franchise love — will fail inasmuch as: 1) love is not what we preach, and 2) we don’t practice what we preach (regardless of what it is that we preach). The first is being on mark with the purpose of religion. There is plenty of disagreement here, on what love means. The second is about authenticity and authority. Authority is undermined inasmuch as you preach one set of rules and live by another. This perilous law is where law-giving and law-preaching most commonly fail. Preaching lawfulness while practicing lawlessness, well, just doesn’t do much for lawfulness. The Lord of all has authority because God’s nature is unconditional love, manifest in grace, generosity, mercy, patience, and joyful freedom. In Christianity, Jesus is lifted up because he came as a servant leader. Jesus is the way inasmuch as Jesus melded the sacred nature of God as unconditional love fully into his way of living. That’s the kind of leader worth emulating. And all who stand against this, will fail. But like gravity, the law of love seems weak and slow, particularly in narrow contexts and short time horizons. Still, gravity, as love, will work its way, its purpose, in a sure and steady way. Ignore such laws at your own peril.
