A COOL WAFT IN THE HEART

This is what is noted on critical poetry sites an ego-centric  "journal entry" in which a writer is engaged in **telling** himself what he feels (all your lines are declarative -- and note how many times you use "I")  rather than showing through the use of imagery his feelings in such a way as to bring readers inside his experience.

As Howard Miller has noted:

"Two fundamental definitions:

1. Journal entry--Writing in which the writer **tells** the reader what emotions the writer is experiencing about something.

2. Poem--Writing in which the writer causes the reader to experience emotion about something.

This is a 1. It's "self expression" at its worst and shows us nothing other than the writer totally obsessed with himself/herself, staring with rapt fascination into the complex lint-laden intricacies of his/her own navel as if it were the only subject of interest in the world -- and to the writer, it doubtless is. Not so, alas, to anyone else, since there's absolutely no reason embodied in this demonstration of typing to care anything about the writer or the writer's navel fuzz. This is writer-centered writing, in which the writer's only concern is himself/herself."

Poetry, on the other hand, is reader-centered; its sole purpose is to create experience for the reader. There's an enormous difference between the two. "

http://www.everypoet.org/pffa/showthread.php?89297-The-Abyss&p=678110#post678110

Moreover, it's grammar gaffed.

This line: "my parents an those whom l loved" needs to have been written "my parents AND those whom l loved "

And this line: "not scared of breach in His vast skies." needs an article before "breach" or, given your love of measurement (which accounts for the solecism here), could have been written " not scared of  ANY breach in His vast skies."

But what should anyone who is a sprit and in "heaven" fear breaches in the sky, even assuming that there are such things?

And how would you recognize your relatives if they do not have bodies, the markers of identity?

Poor writing,  poor metaphysics,  and heretical Christian theology which dispenses with the biblical notion that our destiny after death is a bodily one on a renewed earth, not sone Platonic realm.

Cue the charge that the reason I have made these remarks is that I lack "poetic imagination" and that I know nothing about what makes a writing poetry.

Dear Baldwin,
Thank you very much for your comment.
1- an: you are right. It should be AND. It's a typo. Thank you for telling me. I've corrected it.
2- BREACH: According to any dictionary, it is C/U. So it is not a mistake.
3- Thank you for your generous advice.

Breach is uncountable only if it is used to mean "infraction or violation **of** a law, obligation, tie, or standard".

breach
From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
breach1 /briːtʃ/ ●○○ noun    
1 [countable, uncountable] an action that breaks a law, rule, or agreement
breach of
This was a clear breach of the 1994 Trade Agreement.
They sued the company for breach of contract.
a breach of professional duty
be in breach of something
He was clearly in breach of the law.

Otherwise, all other uses of the word are countable, especially when it is used to mean "a broken, ruptured, or torn condition or area".  See the OED.

So your use of it without an article or "any" is very much a mistake.

No, it's not a mistake. According to Longman,
Breach, C/U, an act of breaking, not obeying, not fulfilling a law, promise, custom, etc. Here it can be a SORT OF HABIT, or a HABITUAL ACTION. What about this ETCETERA?

So you are saying that God's vast skies were full of acts of breaking the law?  
 
**A** sort of habit?  
 
And Longman notes (as I cited beforehand) that when "breach" is used this way, it needs to be set out as  "breach of" to be syntactically correct.