"Radical" Christianity

I ran across an essay recently that attempted to bring to light the implicit biases we have when using the terms "radical" as it relates to Christians and Muslims. In other words, what people think of when the term "radical Christian" is used and likewise what comes to mind when hearing the term "radical Muslim."

 It gave some good food for thought. I'm not qualified to speak about Islam, but it did make me think: what is a 'radical Christian,' anyway? In my mind this kind of qualifying nomenclature comes into play only when juxtaposed with that of 'nominal or cultural Christianity' (a term one does not hear all that often, perhaps pejorative). It's a bit of a non sequitur, since a 'radical Christian' is nothing short of a "Christian", or to use the term one of my theology professors in grad school preferred, a "Christ-follower." Or, more directly, a "disciple."

 In secular culture, 'Radical' implies, "so-and-so actually believes this stuff and lives it." The non-qualified term "Christian" often refers to the systematic form of belief. One can "be a Christian" by believing in Jesus as the Son of God. Sometimes this comes with privileges as well as costs (depending on your culture, I suppose). But it is not always accurately indicative of a lived faith, as is written in the book of James, "Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like." (1:23-24)

 An intentional disciple, on the other hand, not only believes but follows, without conditions. They don't "take it a step farther" by putting that belief and call into action, as if earning extra credit. That is the starting point! A few points of scripture (of which there are many) which relate to this:


 "Jesus said, 'Come follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.' And they dropped their nets and followed him." (Mt 4:21-22)

 "Whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." (Lk 9:23)

 "Will [the master] thank the servant because he did what he was told to do?" (Lk 17:9)

 "Why do you call me 'Lord' and not do as I say?" (Lk 6:46)


 We're often told, (either explicitly or inferred) that you can be a Christian without getting 'carried away' by doing the kinds of things Jesus calls us to--loving our enemies, praying for those who persecute us, caring for the poor, loving God with our whole hearts, minds, and souls. That seems to be like having a car with no gas in the tank. You can sleep in it, I guess, maybe store some stuff in the trunk, or show it off to your friends in your driveway, wax it, etc. But it won't take you anywhere. More of a liability and baggage than anything of any real value if you ask me, or something that belongs in a car museum or something.

 Cultural Christianity has some historical value, I suppose. But it is more like a relic of the past, some entombed mummy or a trilobite in amber that future generations will study as an anthropological case study, the way we study cavemen or the Aztecs. Museums tend to put me to sleep, quite frankly. Not really interested.

 So called "radical Christianity" (intentional discipleship) is where things start to come alive. You're following in the footsteps of a REAL MAN, a REAL GOD, having a REAL RELATIONSHIP; who makes promises for things yet unseen but who is not untrustworthy, who is always with us (even when we forget or are not mindful of his presence) even when everyone may abandon us; who cares less about our customs and habits and more about having our whole hearts, minds, and souls. A terrifying prospect in its demands, one that requires a great amount of trust.

 I don't call myself a "radical husband," but simply a husband. My wife is not a "radical wife," but a wife (and an awesome one at that). We have made the commitment to love and serve in a real way, for the long haul, placing full trust in one another, legally and sacramentally bound, for life. We made vows...and we believed them! I could care less about having the label of 'husband' and could do without the privileges a marriage affords or being part of some married-persons club. But I could not do without my wife.

 There's something radical about that kind of relationship, I guess. But only in comparison to sham love, sham commitment, the kind our culture promotes. Which, when you think about it, is not worth having really anyway.