‘This is the Way the World Ends: Not with a Bang but a Whimper’- T.S. Eliot
There is not a dispensational bone in my body. I think so rigidly about the Psalter’s optimism, that I wouldn’t dare opine in opposition. I guess I am one of those fellas who take the enthusiasm of a martyr to the bank. Bonhoeffer died with immense hope and Kanye West talks like a postmil–how can I not see better things ahead?!
But there is something rather surprising about the “whimper” observation Eliot notes in the “Hollow Men,” and I want to use the same logic to make a differing conclusion. My argument is that fruitfulness is the result not of “bangs,” but “whimpers” in the history of the Church. If the world/ideology ends with whimpers, so too do such worlds and ideologies thrive with whimpers. We too often observe that unless something radical occurs, we shall have no world left for us and our grandchildren. That kind of exact-ism is too forceful! The changes that take place in the Bible are often through “still small voices,” which I interpret as small acts of goodness and gratitude enough to fill the world with music.
There is an incredible investment in the evangelical community in the word “radical.” There is nothing inherently sinful about the word, but its common usage has turned into a marketing scheme. For instance, well-known author David Platt in his book “Radical” observes:
“Radical obedience to Christ is not easy… It’s not comfort, not health, not wealth, and not prosperity in this world. Radical obedience to Christ risks losing all these things. But in the end, such risk finds its reward in Christ. And he is more than enough for us.”
Whether or not we are comfortable with Platt’s conclusion is a different question. But crucial to this discussion is the use of the word as an accentuation of the Christian faith: Radical faith=authentic faith. In sum, if there is no “bang” there is no faithful Christianity. I demur.
Is this how the Bible portrays the Christian life? In other words, why do so many authors and speakers find the need to insert the word “radical” into the clear commands of the Bible? Is radical faith a kind of secret life that only a few can find through a consistent impulse to abandon wealth and prosperity and the American dream? Simply put, are we making Jesus’ yoke hard and his burden heavy? Are we creating a sub-culture of radical Christians who do the risky thing for Jesus while the others are left in this trite category of non-radical? Will the world end if we don’t function at the speed of “bang”? Will we not be blessed through small whimpers?
Part of the genius of the Christian Bible is that the ordinary is radical. Forcing an alliance of radical Christians into the Scriptures makes the ordinary unnecessary. Certainly, the impetus of such a move is to offer the evangelical world a more robust expression of Christian living. But my assertion is that creating a radical platform to encourage people to do their ordinary work is not an encouragement, but a detriment to pursuing the ordinary work of Christian living. Who, after all, feels radical after a long bout of chemotherapy? You feel ordinary. In fact, you feel incapable of being anything more than ordinary. In fact, your calling at this point is to be as ordinarily Christian as you can as your body decays from within.
Ordinary Christian living is different from radical Christian living. It does not feel shame in the comfort of a hammock at the lake or in the luxury of an afternoon game at the stadium or the perfectly grilled steak. Ordinary Christian living does not negate the good, it gives thanks for the good. It does not negate the routine of a mother’s third diaper change of the day, it exalts the role of motherhood. I do not doubt many in this movement would affirm these assertions, but the reality is that the kinds of disciples these authors and speakers are producing are either misunderstanding the message of “radical” proponents like Platt and Piper, or they are using this message as a way of avoiding ordinariness or to look down upon the common.
We live in an age where we need less radical things and more ordinary things lived out daily in the Church. We need more bread and wine, more hugs, more encouragement, more connection with one another, more good night kisses, and more tickling of babies. We need more ordinary. Jesus accomplished the radical. Let’s live out the radical nature of the ordinary in faithful obedience. Fruitfulness comes with the ordinary whimpers of disciples. If explosive acts of transformation do occur, I’d be happy for them. But I do not find the explosive acts as the expected way of Christendom. The ordinariness of the faith is good enough.
