ADBC: 12 – Submission, The States and Those Songs

This is another entry in the ongoing blog conversation with my brilliant brother, David. Here’s the premise.

Previously in the conversation: I got him!! Yeah, I got him!! I wasn’t looking to get him. I didn’t set him up to be got … but I got him. What do I mean? So David gave a great response to some of the questions I posed him, but there was this one. There was this one question I asked him and … well, it would be spoiling it to say what he said, but I really want you to read it for yourself. You’ll see what I mean. Enjoy the great answers he gives, really, enjoy those and then … well put it this way, he really makes a meal of it. (You’ll get it when you read it.)

I got him alright, but has David already had his revenge with these questions he’s asked me? Well for sure my chances of being well-loved by one country might be under threat …:

Q – The union of the multiple states of America was an unrealistic goal and has led to what is essentially a failed state and banana republic. True or false. Explain your answer. (See https://www.dictionary.com/browse/banana-republic, the second definition, if you’re unsure what I mean by “banana republic) In order that you answer the question, you can use any definition of “failed state” that you justly deem sufficient.

Thanks for this question, David. I’m sure there was no intent at all to get me into a tricky position where my response would have me marked by certain organisations and bodies that are now looking into my emails and financial concerns.

This question is an odd one for me to answer because some from across the pond would question my credentials to engage with such a question. What do I know about America? How can I make a comment on them? Fair questions and yet I’m going to answer the question anyway based on my brief understanding of American history and the state of the country at this time.

Work with me. Union of multiple states. How is a union expressed? This is a country that knows about civil war. This is a country that knows what it’s like to be driven by various divisions across many factors. Yet this is a country that has still retained its political union. The federal nature of its make-up and the presentation and image that it’s given itself as a world power has worked wonders to maintain that union. As well as the narrative of what it is to be American. As with a number of unions, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to see that the political union is one of convenience for those in it.

Is it a banana republic? In the sense of an ‘exploitative government that functions poorly for its citizenry while disproportionately benefiting a corrupt elite group or individual.’ It would be easy to say ‘yes’. Then again on that measure, it would be difficult to name a country or state that isn’t a banana republic. Does the government function well for its citizenry? Really? Because you’re given a vote? Because your methods of dispatching with people are more tasteful than others? Because of your so-called support for ‘human rights’? Really? I look at the story given about the USA as ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave’. I understand why so many in that country believe, trust and are wholeheartedly devoted to the story. To drink that in requires conveniently overlooking some glaring issues going on and a comparative approach with other countries that sees them as superior because of their own history and values and perceived great tasks. I see it, though and I’m not that impressed. I don’t particularly subscribe to their ‘values’. I think actions and policies have served the interests of the ‘elite’.

Yet did the effort to have the united states really fail? Did it? They’re still carrying on as a dominant force in world affairs, they want their voice to be heard and it clearly has sway both on how it treats its own people as well as other peoples. It doesn’t look like a failed project in terms of it disintegrating any time soon.

Q – Romans 13:1 says “Let every person submit oneself to the higher authorities, because there is no authority except from God and the existing authorities are put there by God.” In your understanding,

• Who are the higher authorities?
• To what extent must one submit?
• Is this an unchanging command for you to keep?

There are questions that I’m asked at times that get me to a deep breath, stretch my fingers together and sit back thinking carefully about how I’m going to respond. This is one of those questions. It’s a majestic question. It’s one of those that you should write a book about it, especially in the light of what many people have seen in the capitulation of the church in recent times over a number of political and cultural issues.

Who are the higher authorities? Who did Paul have in mind when he was writing to the church in Rome? All pointers appear to indicate that he’s making reference to the Roman Empire of the day as expressed through Caesar and the governors and state representatives. It could also indicate what is a legitimate authority depending on your position in life. Parents are authority figures. Paul would in another letter refer to how slaves should treat their masters, which again could infer that those in positions of mastery exercise a degree of authority.

To what extent must one submit? To the extent that authorities exercise their authority in line with the righteous rule of God. Where that rule clearly opposes the righteous rule of God those under that authority have no longer need to submit to that authority. There are examples of that in the Bible such as the three Hebrew men who defied Nebuchadnezzar’s instruction to bow before the image he’d built. Likewise, Daniel’s defiance of the instruction not to pray to anyone except the king. In the New Testament, John was reportedly on the island of Patmos for the occasion of having the Revelation of Jesus Christ because he defied the instruction to only acknowledge the edict, ‘Caesar is Lord’.

I write that and am aware of extreme takes on that – some have such a subservient approach to authorities that they don’t know enough about the righteous rule of God and know where to draw the line in submission. Others have such high regard for their autonomy that they equate ‘the righteous rule of God’ with ‘whatever is convenient for my rights’ and so for almost the slightest infraction an uproar will be caused. As the peace-making types that they’re called to be in following Jesus, believers aren’t really supposed to be the ones that look to rebel against authorities at the drop of a hat. At the same time submitting to authority in honour of God does not have to express itself as cosying up to those authorities and no longer be a prophetic voice to refer back to the righteous rule of God when decisions are made.

Is this an unchanging command for you to keep? Well, there’s no obvious reason why it should change. The principle behind it is reinforcing an ethos of submission that is replete throughout scripture and evident in Jesus’ attitude to His Father and subsequent instructions to those that follow Him.

Q – When you hear the sweetest chord/melodic progression in your head, what is the song and what part of it contains the progression?

So a bit of an insight on how I approach answering these questions. More often than not, I’ll go through the questions in the order that they’re asked. On this occasion, though, this question was the one I addressed first because it’s the one that captured my imagination the most. First of all, you limit it to a song, as if that’s how it could work in my mind. There’s no way it could ever be just one song. That is to say, I don’t think about a chord/melodic progression as the sweetest. There are a number of particularly sweet chords/melodic progressions in songs.

The first one that came to mind was this bit in Stevie Wonder’s Tuesday Heartbreak and to be clear it is specifically on the album version at the particular mark (1 min 30secs) where the keys do a particular progression right at the point where Stevie sings ‘be a drag’ and before he sings again. David. I heard what that instrument did in that song and it blew my mind. I was out of my seat and put that track on repeat just to listen to that segment for the best part of an hour.

And the second is like the first in its impact on me when I heard it. Abundant Life by Ron Winans Family & Friends. I rave about it being the greatest gospel song ever written and a lot goes into why that’s the case, but it made a mark because of the simple repetitive up-building chord progression from the sax solo from 2 minutes and 34 seconds in. It’s that bass bit that does it, but all over the simple climb and going back to build it up again. It’s one of the reasons why I love the song in particular. And the fact that it features in the reprise as well just makes it all the sweeter because I admire the vocal ability of Marvin Winans a great deal. And as it’s repeated so often to close out the song, I just love the variety that the musicians incorporate into the riff whether on the drums, or the keys or the bass. I remember hearing the song from way back in the 90s and it’s not lost any of its appeal especially for what to me is such a sweet chord progression.

My brother, that’s just two songs where I hear a chord or particular part of a track and it really does feel like a shot to the system, my temperament and countenance can change when bathing in those tunes with those sweet points in them. But there are plenty of other songs with moments, vocals, chord progressions and moments that are euphoric.

---

Those are the questions for me, here are the questions for you:

Q – What, in your view, are five key factors that make for a good friendship? 

Q – What five measures would you give to assess a healthy and harmonious community and how can that be realised?

Q – If you could design your life to be a happy and flourishing one, what five elements would be present and why?

This has been a challenging one to put together, bro, so thanks for stretching me (and making me consider changing my name for my trips across the pond). Until your responses, dear brother, thank you for this privilege.

For His Name’s Sake

Shalom

C. L. J. Dryden