"Radical?"

Radical.  This word is so commonplace that it's almost lost it's punch.  Not to take away from its legitimacy as a word in our English language, but it seems to be one of those catch words that is used to blanket so many things.  As a child of the 1980's, I heard it used in its shortened form - rad - way too many times to mention.  Now I hear it to describe how followers of Christ should be in their faith, just as Jesus was the original radical.  The term radical has been used all over the place to label multiple groups and ideologies.

The other night I watched a show about the abduction and subsequent recruitment of Patty Hearst by the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA).  The SLA was a "radical" left-wing group in the 1970's that used violence and crime to propagate their beliefs.  Their story, and their passion for their cause, intrigued me, yet their methods and their underlying "radical" beliefs were far from acceptable.  The story of the SLA brought to mind at least one other "radical" group, this time a group of musicians known as Rage Against the Machine (RAM).  If you listen to them for just a few minutes it doesn't take long to understand that their lyrics are manifestos on social and political issues.  To their credit, RAM are consistent in their disdain for the organized political system in America and their lyrics regularly trumpet the causes of who they perceive to be disenfranchised and persecuted.  However, the venom and hate that flow from their music make it highly unlikely that their "radical" approach will ever have a positive effect to lead to real change.

Is it ever okay to be inspired by those who are "radical" yet not for Christ?  The above two examples inspire me, yet not in the sense of my wanting to emulate them.  Instead, I see and hear the passion of these kinds of "radical" groups and my heart longs to see that kind of energy fueling the cause of the gospel.  When I look up the word "radical" in the dictionary I see the expected terms "extreme" and "drastic" used to define it.  However, the initial definition that I find seems to fit the ideal that as a follower of Christ I must strive for: "of or going to the root or origin; fundamental."  Nothing crazy or too extreme, just Christ first because He is first.

How is this supposed to look?  Do we need another denominational campaign or slew of books to come out to show us how to be "radical" for Christ?  Do we need clever slogans and over-the-top conferences across the country to call us to be "radical" while guitars wail in the background?  Or how about this: we know and follow the example of Christ?  Yeah, that would be pretty crazy.

There probably aren't many in the body of Christ that would disagree with the call of Christ being first above everything else.  After all, it's what we've studied our entire lives in the New Testament.  But even though the truth of who Christ is and how He lived is so blatantly revealed in the gospels, we are often more comfortable with the concept of Christ than we are with the actual reality of His call upon our lives.  Give your possessions away, pray for your enemies, put others before yourself, love the unlovable, never settle for comfortable religion?  Yes, all that and more.

To live as Christ lived would be pretty crazy and extreme.  You could call it radical.