Many of the characters in this story are caricaturizations of themselves. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, imagined or actual, divine or depraved, is not coincidental. The use of the terms ‘The Catholics’ and ‘The Mormons’ is purely a vehicle to denote the two separate sides as it relates to the story and is in no way meant to condone or repudiate, degrade or promote, the teachings or doctrine of these two religious sects ...the analogy being ‘The Democrats’ and ‘The Republicans’)
So ...let’s say that sometime in the not too distant future, and just for the sake of interest regarding current events ...and much like George Orwell’s dystopian novel ‘1984‘ about the restructuring of governmental authority, Big Brother, and flying cars on highways in the sky, that a new moral equivalence has resulted in a fractured society and there has been a global call for the impeachment of God.
I realize this is bordering on blasphemous. However, it’s meant to be humorous and at best, amusing. You must admit it’s an interesting premise considering the current impeachment proceedings. It may even make a profound statement about who we are and what we’re worth as thoughtful, reasoning human beings.
In no way am I equating President Donald ‘Goldfinger’ Trump to God. The absurdity of the Trump presidency and administration begs for serious satire and constant criticism. The Republican Congress is even more critically absurd. What is wrong with these shameless men, and women, but mostly the men? Watching the impeachment hearings, they come off like a bunch of rude, nasty little boys. These are seemingly intelligent, mature individuals, but they are warped-wrong in their cause, whatever it is, and tactless in their execution. They disappoint. They are humiliating themselves and embarrassing the rest of us with their lack of integrity, honor, and civility ...Devin Nunes, Jim Jordan, John Ratclffe and Elise Stefanik in particular ...Graham, McConnell ...what’s wrong with them?
Both the analogy and juxtaposition regarding the idea of impeaching God himself emphasizes the lunacy of Donald Trump being President of the United States. The impeachment scenario is a metaphor vehicle to depict someone of the highest celebrity, beloved even, and of meaningful importance to many, finding himself in the hot seat, and for whatever reason, on the chopping block. So, let’s see how this goes and where it ends up and I’ll try not to offend you or get myself into too much trouble.
First, let’s assume that everyone believes in a God or some higher being ...creator of man and the universe, whatever. Even if you are an atheist, you must believe in science, and science and religion do intersect so you’re close enough. Whether it be God, Allah, Brahman, Buddha, etc., this is a universal movement so I’ll just use the term ‘God’ for the sake of brevity and use the western Christian experience scenario for simplicity and to mimic our current governmental crisis.
So, let’s say that two major factions emerged as the leading catalyst for the impeachment movement ...two religious organizations or sects having a stake in a global morality. And let’s just say for the purpose of identifying these two factions it’s say, the ‘Catholics’ who want God impeached, and the ‘Mormons’ who want God to stay. For the sake of organizational compliance we’ll say that Jesus is the next in line for the big job, and the Speaker of the House, the angel Moroni, being next in line after Him. Like Pence and Pelosi.
The premise accusation by the Catholics is ...how can a loving God allow so much pain, sadness, misery and human suffering to exist in the world? Conversely, the Mormon position is that it’s the will of God, don’t question it, he has a purpose for everything, and besides, God is the singular reason for all the love, kindness, joy, and beauty in the world.
Witnesses have been called to give depositions, and subsequently to testify on national television to a universal panel representing both the ‘Catholics’ and the ‘Mormons’.
The first witness is Eve, as in ‘Adam and Eve‘. She says that she wasn’t clear on the direction from God about not eating the apple. She attests that she was never told precisely who she reported to nor was she clear of her position in the chain of command regarding Adam. She believed that Adam reported to her. She asserts that she assumed the snake, Satan, whoever, was sent to reinforce her free will and discretion and to test her own good judgement in choosing whether or not to eat the apple. She did admit, however, to a supposition that she probably should have relented and have conferred with Adam about the apple, which she says she did, but that he agreed with her supporting her actions.
Although she had a weak case from the beginning regarding obedience, Eve told the panel that she accepted culpability but that she and Adam were simply hungry and wanted to eat the apple for its specific nutritional value. She said that even if there had been God-approved potato chips she still would have eaten the apple. That got a laugh from the panel. Smart move by Eve ...they loved her!
The Catholics being the House majority, defended Eve’s testimony as exculpatory and entered into the record that God could have been more forthcoming with Eve and more specific about the apple regarding “reason-why”. They pointed to incompetence and misdirection and a worldwide tendency toward confusion regarding right and wrong. A serious charge which amounts to obstruction of “reason-why” justice and even possible collusion with the snake.
The Mormons presented their argument supported by their star witness, Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon faith, now commonly known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Smith testified that the angel Moroni appeared to him while he was a teenager and directed him to a hill in which were buried ‘golden plates‘ that Smith subsequently translated into The Book of Mormon, the foundation of his church. Smith testified that the ‘Book’ brings joy, comfort and happiness to million of people, and that it paints a picture of a loving, competent, and fully involved God backed by historical fact.
The panel considered Smith’s testimony to be compelling yet unbalanced and unconvincing that Smith alone and his church were the all-encompassing road to happiness and universal peace of mind. However, they did agree that peace and joy were admissible evidence for the record, but with a slight variation regarding an inadmissible but concerning stipulation about wealth management.
Other witnesses called to testify included the Pope, Jerry Springer, Donovan, Santa Claus, Joseph Goebbels, and Marie Osmond. They all had points to make regarding both the value of God in our modern society and also the concerns they had over deity and its influence on social status, corruption, greed, drugs and violence. All of the hundreds of witnesses that were called had specific dealings with God and spoke openly of their own personal experiences. They seemed to be split over impeachment. Oddly, Joe Goebbels (one of Adolph Hitler’s closest and most devoted associates) was in favor of keeping God in place. Even more odd was that Santa Claus, Ole Saint Nick, voted to impeach God citing deplorable working conditions and issues regarding remuneration. The elves were a concern but this testimony was held behind close doors.
Bon Jovi was not called as a witness to testify.
The exhaustive impeachment proceedings continued for decades with both sides making their points to either impeach or not, until an agreement was ultimately reached in an unprecedented stalemate.
Both sides agreed to continue to disagree, and that God would not be impeached, but would be reconsidered by both sides regarding His practical importance in the new century while still maintaining a significant profile when used in a conscientiously applied program of moral hygiene and regular professional care.
God’s only comment regarding these proceedings came afterwards. He said ...”So this is the thanks I get, huh? Listen, just remember one thing. I brought you all into this world ...and I can take you out.”
John Kushma is a communication consultant and lives in Logan, Utah
https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-george-kushma-379a5762
Some past articles and op-eds
