A Radical Minimum Standard

At the diner this morning I was reading from Shadow of the Almighty, the book in which Elisabeth Elliot compiles some the diary and letters of her husband Jim Elliot, one of the five missionaries killed by Indians in Ecuador in 1956.

A particular sentence jumped out at me this morning. Following the death of a man, Jim wrote,

Are you willing to lie in some native hut to die of a disease American doctors have never heard of? I am still willing, Lord God. Whatever You say shall stand at the time of my end. But oh, I want to live to teach Thy Word. Lord, let me live till I have declared Thy works to this generation (pp. 199-200).

We live in an age of great comfort and convenience, an age where spiritual commitment is measured in ways that seem totally foreign to the picture that Elliot imagines in his mind, lived in his life, and for which he gave his “last full measure of devotion.”

Erwin McManus, in An Unstoppable Force, writes of learning early in his Christian life of five levels of commitment: a calling to be saved, a calling for Jesus to be Lord, a calling to ministry, a calling to home missions, and a calling to foreign missions. He writes,

An honest evaluation of the dramatic number of callings that the church has created would reveal that we have found extraordinary ways of describing the overwhelming amount of Christless living in the church. …

What we now consider to be the highest level of calling in the Christian community was, for Jesus, the basic entry point. ...

In the process of creating a theology that accommodates apathy, disinterest, compromise, and even rebellion, we have lost the essence of the movement for which Jesus died. We made a mistake of making heroes out of those who were simply living a normal Christian life (pp. 201-202).

McManus is calling for a return to a “radical minimum standard,” echoing the sentiment of Elliot’s “native hut” death. Does the NT really call for anything less?

In an age where “being known,” “being comfortable,” and “being successful” has taken a back seat to being faithful and being radically committed, we should yearn for a generation of Christian leaders who will lead people to be nothing in eyes of men, to go to their grave “in some native nut” from a “disease American doctors have never heard of.” We should long for people who will go to their grave, known only in heaven and among the peoples whom they served in the mission of God to redeem those whom he has purchased. We should long for people who are satisfied with anonymity, so long as Jesus is exalted as the only King and only Savior who is at work reconciling all things to himself.

Perhaps that “native hut” for some will be found in the great cities of this country, among the ones that society has marginalized, to live in an area of danger, poverty, drugs, crime, and meaninglessness. Perhaps that “native hut” will be found in a jungle, or a desert, among those who live a life untouched by the conveniences of modern living. Perhaps that “native hut” will be found in a radical commitment to lay ministry, having a job only to provide money for the service of our great Savior.

May God return us the radical minimum standard that Christ talked about when he said,

“If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself?” (Luke 9:23-25)

If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple. Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. (Luke 14:26-27)

What will it mean for me today to pick up my cross, my instrument of execution, in order to be His disciple? Will I be willing to pay that price? Will you?