Reformation Schizophrenia

I have two minds about the Reformation, especially when we are differentiating between what is called the Magisterial and Radical reformations. I love parts of the Magisterials, and on the other hand I love significant parts of the Radicals. Here's how I break it down:

Reformation Analysis	Human Action (Ethics)	Divine Action (Soteriology/Theodicy)
Radical	Radical Reformers	Magisterial Reformers
Progressive	Magisterial Reformers	Radical Reformers

I love the radical theology proper of the Magisterials, and conversely cannot really abide the synergistic anthropomorphized weak God of the Radicals (Anabaptists really since they're the only sect that had a developed theology). I love the radical human ethics of the Radicals, and conversely cannot abide the syncretistic imperialism of the Magisterials (Lutherans or Calvinists).

I want to find a practical and ideologically coherent way of synthesizing the radical parts of both movements, a Christian ethic that is radical BECAUSE of its radical theology proper.

Two questions: 

1. Do you think this possible?

2. If possible, is it wise? Are there good reasons why things must be this way?

Bonus:

3. Is it stupid to rashly conclude that this is the problem with modernism and post-modernism?