Made Of Wool

All throughout the endless ages
men have sought with fervor deep
to assuage with isms of every ilk
their bruised and injured consciences.
Taking upon themselves the mantle
of prophet, these self-appointed sages
like inspired heralds of the wind
seek to rescue the lost and wayward sheep.
These shepherds of worldly wisdom
attempt to corral the mass of mothers’ milk.

While in clothing made of wool
these wolves of ravenous appetite
bark their rubbish and ram their bile
upon the dwellers of ancient earth.
And the ants of the busy and comatose hill
wanting their neighbor’s tree and their tummy’s full
cast themselves upon the pyre
of the shepherd’s glowing light.
Crying “bread and circuses” in plebeian fashion
the wolf answers with a sardonic smile.

Then from the depths of liberty sought
a strange and kindred idea arises.
It percolates like wisdom not of man
and whets the yearning for breath clean and clear.
Then the conflict rages like thunder and rain,
the war is waged and the fight is fought.
The goodness of one is the bane of the other
yet which shall claim the victory prizes?
Aye there’s the rub, ‘tis for you to say
which is dissonance and which fits the plan.

The Face Of God

If the countenance of God be hid
Bid me speak in tones muted
Suited for just a somber sense
Whence cometh only the night.

Light, though, shines when He is near
Fear and mourning fade like dew
True to the sun’s abiding face
Grace be His nature and mercy mild.

Child of affliction made pure as gold
Bold I come to the bountiful throne
Prone in heart yet set on high
Nigh to Him that makes me His.

‘Tis only He that bids me come
From my estate to one so grand
Branded with a name that’s new
Through the face of God not hid.

Weeping May Endure

Weeping may endure for a night,
yet night seems millennia.
Distress and dissonance, the crimson
flow and torrent of freight,
like a siege, assaults the heart and mind,
from judges and magistrates,
drunk with shrewdness, dancing in the dark,
to slay mercy and kill the kind.
The cries, the yearnings, like sound and fury,
a tale of slim and meager significance
to a world infatuated with the celeb du jour
and deaf to all but a consecrated jury.
For joy to come at morning’s fresh light
and reign be given to justice,
for ashes to turn to breath and bones
and meekness to holy might,
the ransom paid must exalted be,
and mercy poured from heaven,
from the sides of the north to planet earth
must come the crown of victory.
Yet not on wings of wrath and ire
will morning see its pleasure,
but in the turning of heart and soul
to the crucible’s righteous fire.

Many Are The Gods

Many are the gods of this and that
self appointed idols and icons aplenty
with a vision in concrete like a movie plot
the atomic weight of Krypton and a cheap shot
and versions of the truth, maybe ten or twenty
‘cause that’s how it feels or that’s where it’s at.

Their mouths are full of malice like perfumed mace
and a scepter of peer praise is given in jest
for before their thrones lie an angelic chorus
singing phrases of doom that need a thesaurus
to rescue their wonder and kill all the rest
and shove it like rage back into your face.

From headline to dollar sign comes the weeping
and mourners pay the ferryman with coin of the realm
while spitting with venom is a concert event
and Isaiah’s caution is mangled and bent
as actors and players take charge of the helm
to lock our lost nation into their safe-keeping.

But the gods are hollow jesters of stage
and hubris is fertile like box-office winners
for desperation is an art and a skill
and some folks are stupid but know what they will
like who are the righteous and who might be sinners
and spurn the convoy to a smug tinsel cage.

So woe to the gods and woe to their train
and woe and alas must the echo be loud
to tell and exclaim of the toxins that flow
from the mountain of America’s minstrel show
and those that live on a sardonic cloud
we shun the storm and embrace the spring rain.

Gay Rights?

According to Wikipedia the term “gay” to describe “homosexual” has been a long time coming, though it’s shift as an antonym for “straight” seems to have picked up steam in the mid 20^th century (say, 1950s) as a defense against other pejorative terms such as “queer.” Today it is even risky to use the term “homosexual” in public discourse for fear of offending. In today’s (October 6, 2009) Washington Times article “Obama To Address Major Gay Rights Group” author Matthew Mosk uses the term “gay” seven times without ever using any other synonym, four times with the word “rights” as its modified noun. But when did “gay” (homosexual behavior) get to be a right? Oh, most certainly the right to choose one’s moral decisions was given in the beginning when God gave mankind a free will. In that sense gays have the God-given right to choose homosexual behavior as much as do adulterers, thieves, liars, murderers, and blasphemers to choose theirs. In fact, that would include all of us if we are candid about our sinfulness. Yet I suspect the rights in question aren’t referring to the code of conduct which is the subject of J. Budziszewski’s “Written on the Heart” but rather the legal claim of justified due that is granted to all citizens. In others words, homosexual activists insist that the right of same-sex behavior be recognized by law and by culture as equal to the recognition of rights by virtue of race, color, religion, national origin, sex and age. However, there are two important questions with respect to the homosexuals’ claim that must be answered. First, is there a moral equivalence between homosexuality and the other recognized groups? Second, what are the consequences to our national security and longevity in affirming the claim? Each of these questions deserves a treatise in answer and I won’t attempt that in this essay. Nevertheless, don’t be under the mistaken illusion that it doesn’t matter.

I think farting in a crowded elevator is wrong. In fact, the expulsion of body gases in any kind of confined space is, in my judgment, reprehensible. Of course, I labor over whether or not to impose my personally held judgment of this practice on those that do not share my position. The argument goes that it is as wrong to impose a restraint on others as it is to practice the dreaded behavior. Certainly I would never commit the act of publicly breaking wind because I believe it to be a violation of human dignity and an impolite imposition on society. Yet, to insist that others follow my own moral compass would be a violation of their right to follow their own ethical azimuth. So, here I am, having yielded to respect for the others’ right of self-determination, I am regularly and relentlessly bombarded with the odor de jour. How fortunate for the practitioners of this personal freedom that I have respected their rights. How could I have not understood that it could have been the other way around? They might have been compelled to honor my right of a stench-free environment. If I had understood that there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum -- not naturally anyway, it would have meant that I would have known that there could be no compromise on this issue. The law of non-contradiction [“It is impossible for the same thing to belong and not to belong at the same time to the same thing and in the same respect”) (Aristotle, Metaph IV 3 1005b19–20] illustrates the impossibility of compromise. Ergo, my acquiescence on this point has served to empower the opposing point of view. How did this happen? How was it that expediency became a moral right? Could it be that I don’t really hold to my own stand with honest conviction? Might it be that the constant, loud, and accusatory polemic from the gassers have put me on the defense and set me on my heels? Somewhere along the way I bought in to the prospect that insisting on the limitation of others’ personal freedom was selfish and unsupportable. And, in accepting such a prospect I wound up ceding the philosophical and legal landscape to the opposition. They certainly understood that compromise was impossible and demanded their rights instead of mine. They were not confused about what was at stake. In the rhetoric of debate, never has the other side been known to utter, “I believe in my right to fart in public but I don’t think it is right to impose my belief on everyone.” Thus has the dispute arrived at this juncture! It seems clear to me now that if I truly believe in the rightness of my position regarding public flatulence, I am bound to argue with confidence and sincerity that when two polar opposite freedoms are at risk, the law of non-contradiction demands one or the other. Compromise is simply agreement to the opposing viewpoint. And, if the subject of this brief essay actually was about farting in public, it would be near meaningless.

Last month I sensed an urge to render an opinion on the current eco-political state of affairs in America. Today I read with interest an article by Jon Meacham on “The End of Christian America” taken from the April 13 issue of Newsweek. In it he remarked on another author’s observation in which was argued that “Christianity’s claims transcend any political order . . . and that Christians should not have any illusions about the nature of human governments.” It’s distressing to note in the media that nearly half the country has placed its hope in Barak Obama and his new administration, and the other nearly half seems to place their hope in a political solution of the opposite approach. Sadly, few appear to subscribe to the admonishments of Scripture, “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” (2 Chr. 7:14) It’s an ancient promise but one that has proven true throughout the ages. I believe the people of God in our country need to transform their approach to “national healing” from a Moral Majority approach to government wherein we focus on electing good government, to a prayer closest approach wherein we repent of our own spiritual absenteeism and mention our presidents, senators, governors, representatives, mayors and others not with contempt but in contrition from a kneeling position. We are reminded, “For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God” (1 Peter 4:17). If we get our act together, it is so like the character of God to allow that overflow to bless the general population.

When looking at the history of modern western civilization it appears acutely clear the United States of America’s birth and nurture was providential. However, the question is no longer “What hath God wrought?” (Num. 23:23) but “Since no man knows the future, who can tell him what is to come?” (Eccl 8:7) Simple observation reveals we are on the cusp of squandering our blessings while we put our generous benefactor to the test daily. It should be obvious that neither Democrat nor Republican, neither Libertarian nor Independent can restore us to the “city on a hill” status we once enjoyed. Neither tax reform, social reform, government reform, nor a constitutional convention can accomplish for us what must be accomplished in order to ensure our national destiny is neither collapse nor inconsequential on the stage of world affairs. Our shortcoming is not economic, not political, and not social – it is spiritual. More than ever, “the only way to avoid this shipwreck, and to provide for our posterity, is to follow the counsel of Micah, to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with our God.” (A Model of Christian Charity, John Winthrop, Sermon 1630) We must give up our addiction to political idols, cultural icons, and the drop-down menu of the “ism-of-the-day” mind-set and corporately and individually return to the source of our blessings. It’s not enough for the people of God to register and vote in greater numbers. God says “you have forsaken your first love.” (Rev. 2:4) It’s long past time to take responsibility for our condition and ask Almighty God to restore us to His favor. If we continue to rely on the arm of man we shall surely fail. “Some trust in chariots and some in horses . . .” (Ps 20:7)