Rooted: Toward the Normalization of "Radical" Forms of Care
C. Phifer Nicholson, Jr., Medical Student and Theology, Medicine and Culture Fellow, Duke University SOM and Duke Divinity School
In the synoptic Gospels, there is an exchange between Christ and a rich young man who asks what he must do to “inherit eternal life.”[1] The man states that he has upheld all the commandments throughout his life. Jesus then says, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” In all three accounts, the man walks away sad, unable to part from his possessions. Christ then turns to his anxious disciples, stating, “There is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold…”
This narrative has unsettled and inspired many to “radical” lives. St. Francis left his wealth, instead living alongside and ministering to the poor.[2] Dorothy Day lived a life of solidarity with the working class.[3] Dr. Tom Catena chose to forego a comfortable practice and become the medical director of the Mother of Mercy Hospital in the Nuba Mountains, remaining as the sole physician for nearly one million people when civil war erupted.[4] Sr. Mary Stella Simpson dedicated her life to accompanying impoverished communities through midwifery, on the way helping found the first Federally Qualified Health Center and revolutionizing obstetric care in the U.S.[5]
Labeling these stories as “radical” or “exceptional” can serve to elevate these individuals and render their lives as “unattainable” or “other.” This paper argues that we can better frame these stories as “radical” in the way the term is understood in medicine: “of or pertaining to the root.” When one performs a radical procedure, one gets at the “root” of the pathology. Similarly, these stories are best read not as exceptional but as demonstrating the root of faith. They should be normalized, viewed as a natural and attainable outworking of life with the God who chose to—at great cost—accompany the lowly, the lost, and the poor. Seeing such lives as normal changes one’s imagination, making the radical seem “commonplace,” thereby inviting people of all traditions and vocations—particularly those who care for the sick—to consider a similarly “rooted” life.
This narrative has unsettled and inspired many to “radical” lives. St. Francis left his wealth, instead living alongside and ministering to the poor.[2] Dorothy Day lived a life of solidarity with the working class.[3] Dr. Tom Catena chose to forego a comfortable practice and become the medical director of the Mother of Mercy Hospital in the Nuba Mountains, remaining as the sole physician for nearly one million people when civil war erupted.[4] Sr. Mary Stella Simpson dedicated her life to accompanying impoverished communities through midwifery, on the way helping found the first Federally Qualified Health Center and revolutionizing obstetric care in the U.S.[5]
Labeling these stories as “radical” or “exceptional” can serve to elevate these individuals and render their lives as “unattainable” or “other.” This paper argues that we can better frame these stories as “radical” in the way the term is understood in medicine: “of or pertaining to the root.” When one performs a radical procedure, one gets at the “root” of the pathology. Similarly, these stories are best read not as exceptional but as demonstrating the root of faith. They should be normalized, viewed as a natural and attainable outworking of life with the God who chose to—at great cost—accompany the lowly, the lost, and the poor. Seeing such lives as normal changes one’s imagination, making the radical seem “commonplace,” thereby inviting people of all traditions and vocations—particularly those who care for the sick—to consider a similarly “rooted” life.