Self-Other-Us and Spiritual Karate

SPEAKING OF KARATE
I walked by a dojo the other day and it reminded me of Mark Scandrette's idea of a Jesus Dojo. In Japanese "dojo" means "the place where you learn the way." So a Jesus dojo is a place where you learn the way of Jesus. Pretty cool image for a church. For me it's much more compelling than the current lecture hall image which predominates North America.

Just a few days earlier I had learned in my Japanese class that "karate" means, literally, "empty hand." So the martial art of karate isn't "this is how you fight with a stick," or "this is how you fight with sword," it's "this is how you fight with nothing in your hands."

The image of fighting with nothing in my hands got me thinking about Ephesians 6, stuff about not struggling against flesh and blood but against "spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."(Ephesians 6:12NIV) What would it look like to learn spiritual karate in a Jesus dojo? I can think of all kinds of ways this imagery could be abused. So an incredibly important question is: who would we be training to fight against? Well, the critical thing to remember is we aren't fighting against flesh and blood. So what do we fight against, with nothing tangible in our hands?

That got me thinking about a conversation I had on Dwight Friesen's back deck about "self," "other" and "us." What does self-other-us have to do with anything, you may well ask? Well, I think this idea of "Us" sheds light on who it is we fight against, with nothing tangible in our hands. My thinking is greatly influenced by Jacques Ellul and Walter Wink, their writing has guided my reading of passages like Ephesians 6:10-18. [This is my humble attempt to draw out some ideas, but to really get Ellul and Wink I'd suggest going to the source starting with "The Meaning of the City" by Jean Jaques Ellul and "The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium" by Walter Wink.

SELF, OTHER, US
Dwight used the picture of marriage to talk about a notion of "self," "other" and "us." He talked about it in the context of his marriage. However, for the sake of linguistic clarity I'll use the example of my marriage, but it could be any marriage. It's less about marriage per se and more about a graspable example of human interaction.

In the context of my marriage there is "Steve" as definable and distinct from my wife Lindi. There is "Lindi" as definable and distinct from Steve. But our friends can point to an "Us" that is neither Steve nor Lindi. The "Us" emerges from the relational dynamic between Steve and Lindi and is distinct from either "Steve" or "Lindi." This self-other-us picture of marriage gives marriage a decidedly trinitarian aspect, but you can talk to Dwight about that, it's his bailiwick.

For my part, I was thinking about this self-other-us dynamic and put it together with Ellul and Wink.

In the context of my marriage there isn't one version of "Us," there are two. A generative "Us" that arises out of the good of our marriage and a degenerative "Us" that arises out of the brokeness of our marriage. The impact of "Us" in the world depends on which version is in control.

Here's another important point, the degenerative "Us" is the generative "Us" gone awry, so the degenerative "Us" is redeemable. Just as I, a distinct person have gone awry and am redeemable, the relational "Us" that arises between two individuals is also redeemable.

The generative and degenerative "Us" are in constant tension. The generative can become degenerative and the degenerative can become generative. My wife and I have to apply constant vigilance to the embodied practises of our relationship. We have to constantly inspect the systems and structures—the accrued reality of embodied practices—our marriage operates within in order to insure our embodied practises give rise to a generative "Us" rather than a degenerative "Us."

In other words, the more my wife and I live out of our brokeness, our selfishness, self-centredness, unloving-ness, the more our marriage is defined by a broken "Us." However, the more my wife and I live out of our goodness, faith, hope and love, the more our marriage is defined by a good "Us." [I use the rich Hebraic notion of "good" here, meaning internal and external right-relationship]

But how do we move toward Good Us and away from Broken Us? There are two ways: first, I can allow God's redemptive power to restore "self." The best thing I can do to move toward a Good Us is to let God restore "me." Second, I can actively fight for a Good Us. Once I rightly understand my enemy as Broken Us I'm freed from focusing my fight against flesh and blood, namely my wife, and I can rightly focus my fight against Broken Us.

SYSTEMIC KARATE
How do I fight against a degenerative "Us?" Systems give rise to embodied practises and embodied practises give rise to "Us." Systems arising out of love, hope and faithfulness give rise to loving, hopeful and faithful embodied practises, which in turn give rise to a Good Us; conversely systems arising out of non-love, non-hope and unfaithfulness give rise to un-loving, unhopeful, unfaithful practises which in turn give rise to Broken Us.

So, by creating and nurturing systems which arise out of love, hope and faithfulness I fight for Good Us;  conversely, by disrupting and subverting systems which arise out of non-love, non-hope and unfaithfulness I fight against Broken Us.

For me, this notion of the unseen Broken Us of human systems opens up new understanding to verses like Ephesians 6:12. "Our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." For me it makes the whole thing less pseudo-voodoo and more tangibly about my relationship with the Father, Son and Spirit and my living out of that relationship. It doesn't make it less mysterious and out of my control, I'm still as dependant on God, but this understanding somehow makes the supernatural natural.  The way things work are the way things work.

COMPLEX US
So here's the important thing for the church, this idea of "Us" exists in the outworking of all human systems; a marriage, a neighbourhood, a clan, a company, an organization, a city, a country, or a local body of believers.

The same "self," "other," "us" dynamic we've been looking at is present in these far more complex systems. These complex systems give rise to either Broken Us or Good Us. Further, in these complex systems the same two strategies remain in moving away from Broken Us and toward Good Us. First and foremost I can allow God to change "Me." Second, I can disrupt and subvert systems which uphold unloving, unhopeful, unfaithful practices.

CHURCH US
What if our church systems—the accrued reality of our embodied practises—contribute more toward Broken Us than toward Good Us? What if what we do in the name of Good Us actually manifests more of a Broken Us?

Our world is one of institutions ruled by hyper-rationalism, numbers dominate. The hubris of self sure categorizing, measuring and analyzing give us the illusion of control. The comfortable lives of the affluent are marked by fragmentation, isolation and loneliness. The desperate lives of the poor are marked by a lack of dignity, lack of hope and lack of care. The Broken Us that arises from our culture is an Us of anonymous consuming deluded by a hyper-rational illusion of control.

I am, admitedly, only describing the Broken Us of our culture. For sure there is a Good Us that arises from our culture, and for sure the Broken Us and the Good Us are in constant tension as to which defines Us. But I'd like to focus on the nature of the Broken Us of our culture for a moment, because I'd like to point out something about the way we do church.

EMPTY HANDS
If the way we do church requires categorizing, measuring and analyzing to precede ancient church disciplines [prayer, meditation, fasting, study, generosity, celebration and worship] rather than those ancient disciplines preceding our categorizing, measuring and analyzing; then aren't we giving rise to a Broken Us that is the mirror image of the Broken Us of our culture at large? How can the Broken Us of a local body of believers tear down the strongholds of the Broken Us of the broader culture when the Broken Us of the church is the bastard child of the Broken Us of the broader culture? How can anonymous consumerism burdened with an illusion of control tear down the strongholds of anonymous consumerism burdened with an illusion of control? Even though a hyper-rational numbers dominated way of doing church does give rise to a Good Us, I guess I have to ask, is it worth it? Does that way of doing church leave Good Us or Broken Us in control? Does the way we do church hobble us when it comes to fighting the Broken Us of our culture?

Maybe we can't engage in sprititual karate because we have too many flesh and blood weapons in our hands. Maybe we need to put down some things and come at it empty handed. With empty hands we, out of sheer necessity, pick up truth, righteousness, readiness, faith, salvation and the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God. We don't take up these things to attack people, we take up these things to attack un-loving, un-hopeful and unfaithful practises; un-loving, un-hopeful and unfaithful systems; we take up these things to attack Broken Us.

Posted via web from The Broken Wing