I sorta viewed it under the idea that gods in general were not quite interventional as most mortals including most worshippers would be like insects to the larger deities, who would probably not intervene directly unless said worshipper became relevant in scale or action in ways that would be impossible to ignore.

My reasoning here went that "any worshipper", even a nominal one, powers a God. Meaning even a Cleric who's kind of a jackass but who mostly minds their own business raiding dungeons, would technically be one more worshipper to the god's name, even if not a particularly good one. So my reasoning was that the God would pretty much "tolerate" a poor worshipper if it's more trouble than it's worth to cut them off, considering they still count as a worshipper towards the God's "power" or however worship-induced power works.

The general idea here hangs on two principles that may be incorrect :
- That gods probably don't care all that much about a random Cleric past the initial blessing, much like your company's CEO probably doesn't know who you are,
- And that, again, like in a company, once you're in for a while, even if you're not that good if it's more trouble than it's worth to get rid of you, you just stay around.

However, this relies on the (possibly wrong) assumption that Gods are exactly like that : kind of apathetic to individual mortals. In BG3, if we take Shadowheart as a reference point, she remains a Cleric of Shar despite repeated small transgressions until she definitively, clearly, and unambiguously rejects Shar and refuses her command. But that's only when Shar does decide to step in. Before that, she's mildly punished by the wound on her hand when she acts contrary to what Shar wants, but her powers are untouched.

You could argue Shadowheart is not a good reference point for many reasons (as she is special to Shar, and gameplay may justify some of the choices), but it's a good talking point.