AMERICAN CHRISTIANITY 2009

A bit like the Athenians that St. Paul met, it seems to me that American Christians that I have been meeting and worship with lately are very religious and concerned about their relationship with God and whether they are growing in closeness to God. But I wonder, are they hearing anything from God of importance? What seems to me to be lacking is what I am most concerned about presently for myself, perhaps related to our leaving Belize where we had full time ministry opportunities among people needing something from God and us. I wonder very much, what is the heart of God desiring of his people, and me in particular? If I could sense the heart of God when he looks at me- that is what I am seeking after and wishing for others. It is not enough for Christians to be buried in commitments- socially, churchly, financially, in business or in this culture, and not seeking to know first the heart of God in our lives. What would please God the most from us? What is he longing for us to do? What should be the preoccupation of the church, any church?

It seems the biggest problem for Christians around me is that culture and commitments have so swallowed them up that they are not really free to seek the heart of God. People just can’t respond to anything that does not fit their present style and pace. They must first go and “bury their fathers” that is, putting off seeking the heart of God fully because they are wrapped up in the culture and their commitments that must be fulfilled. An economic standard of living dictated by society and our commitment to it is one big rock that weighs down many. They have little freedom to move with God’s heart leading them. Another is the assumption that they are already doing closely what God desires of them. Who would hear it if God would call them to a life of ignoring cultural economic values, (becoming a bit like the poor, for the sake of the Gospel) and perhaps considering geographic displacement? How many would respond to God’s revealed heart to rearrange their whole economic assumptions so that they could share half their wealth so that hundreds of millions could simple eat and hear the Gospel? I suppose most Christians could not imagine that God would desire anything like of them; and if he did, it would be impossible to respond to such a call. What would it take to revolutionize the church structures so that the adequate resources God gave the church for the salvation of the world would be released to meet those needs? When will worship and the church, cocooned now by culture, welcome the heart of God to break through to hear God’s design for humanity?                                                                                                          July 8, 2009

                                 LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF

When Jesus was asked by the rich young man what he must do to get eternal life, Matthew 19:12-22, Jesus listed some of the commandments and also, loving your neighbor as yourself. Certainly this was a personal challenge for personal salvation. But what about the salvation of the church- any congregation? What if a congregation was challenged to love its neighbors as itself in order to inherit eternal life? Now the church must ask, “Who are the neighbors of the church?” People may prefer to keep the question local. But when the needs from around the world vividly and repeatedly break through on our big TV screens, there is a whole new dimension to neighborhood compared to when Jesus was on earth. Is not the neighbor anyone whom you see in desperate need? Do not the orphans and all people around the world who have never had a chance to hear the Gospel become our neighbors? The neighbor becomes all people who have the need to experience the whole Gospel.

But back to the church faced with the global neighbor. What concern is the church challenged to have if it loves the ‘neighbor as itself’. Literally it would mean that the church has an equal responsibility to care for the ‘neighbor’ as for itself. Is it too bold to suggest that it might mean to share in equal measure in its prayer, financial, and personnel resources with the world neighbor? If so, a church would spend a lot of time and focus thinking about the needy neighbors around the world, just as it does on its local internal needs. One could ask how much the church is really giving to God’s wider kingdom goals when most of the financial and other resources are simply spent on taking care of its own needs. We pay for a comfortable environment so we can worship and fellowship with each others. The leadership is our servant and we pay them for their services- services to us. Churches have many miscellaneous items in their budgets. Is it really giving an offering to God when most is for our own benefit? Are we not really loving ourselves much more than the neighbor?

A congregation would be faced immediately on how it could help the global neighbor as much as itself. The answer is simpler on paper than in logistics: either cut local expenses or double giving through the church, or a combination of both. Certainly they would still need to meet the needs of the neighbors among themselves locally. They could not be ignored in favor for the neighbor abroad although the church would need to recognize the likely greater desperation of the neighbor around the world.

Remember, this was part of Jesus’ answer to the question of how to get eternal life. He spelled out the condition “if you want to be perfect”, of selling and giving to the poor [neighbor]. Is it too much to say that the church’s inclination to hoard resources leads Spiritual discontent- to “sadness” like it did for the young man rather than to the “perfection” with real happiness? Where does it fit in that God loves a cheerful [hilarious] giver? That sure is a long way from the uneasy church, or perhaps the church does not know how happy it could be if they would follow Jesus’ radical challenge to love the global neighbor like itself.                                                                                          August, 2009

                                                        The Family Constellation

There were 10 children born to Elam and Eliza Hochstetler, of whom I was the sixth, following 3 boys and 2 girls. There were alternately boy/girl until I broke the order; I would have been a girl by the “established” order. The first 6 were also spaced two years apart plus a few days or weeks. Let's look at each one of the siblings, especially as they related to me in the family constellation. Two have been referred to elsewhere and will receive minimum attention here.

Laban was the firstborn, 10 years my senior. He was the model child, something of the standard for each of us. He was well discipline and rather quiet of speech. He was almost grown up when I was a child. He left home to work on a farm at 18 in connection with the military draft, having a conscientious exemption from that draft. He would return home each weekend and returning Monday mornings by bicycle; I remember one such parting in which he entreated me to be a good boy while he was gone, whether he felt it necessary, or just in doing his part in encouraging me as he would be inclined.

Miriam was next. She was always around, although it seems I remember her a bit less. A helper around the home and caring for the younger siblings was her life. It seems she loved music and youth associations like any teenager. I recall a songbook she had of collected songs, some secular, like “Just Thirteen Steps Away”, songs which I learned from her. She had a boyfriend Lee, for quite a while but then quit. She served in various voluntary service locations such as Brooklane Farm in Maryland and then Loman, Minnesota where she met her husband to be Harvey Graber. Later they served as missionaries in Red Lake, Ontario for 5 years and then Brazil for 10 years.*

Samuel was next. He was an active young person growing up without much interaction with me that I can recall, no doubt blending into the family without much notice. I do recall he broke his arm once, which was considered resulting from being slow to do his duty in work. While I had always considered him to be a conventional youth, he took the initiative several years after marriage,  to pack up his family of two little boys and move to Virginia to participate in starting an outreach church. He became the leader and three sons became church leaders as well.

Esther was next. She was a friendly reaching-out person to me, perhaps at time more personal than I was comfortable with. She was very religious and devout. I still recall her mouthing her own praying when the family prayed as at meal time. Her untimely death after being on the mission field in Canada for 27 years was a shocker for the whole family while we were in Belize.

Daniel was my next older brother, with whom I had the most interaction in my childhood. This is noted in the essay, “Closeup: Me and Daniel.” Without doubt, he was the model for me, going before me as I was growing up, giving me many cues what to do and avoid.

Rhoda, two years after me was the sibling I never knew as she died before I was 3. Yet that loss no doubt heavily affected my emotional formation as it was in deep grief of my mother that I grew in my pre-school years. This was multiplied by my mother's loss of a sister and her father in the same years. Though I do not remember Rhoda, they say I felt deeply about her when they buried her, me not understanding death at all.

Marietta, written as Mary Etta in her childhood, followed Rhoda and breaking the timing of one child every two years. Mom felt she was a replacement for Rhoda. For reasons I can only guess, it seems I was in conflict with her more than any other siblings and the tendency gave me a bad reputation as a naughty boy which was likely justified. I know I found fault with her at her eating at meal time and was sometimes told “You look onto your on plate!”

Walter followed. We called him Sonny for some years and although he was 7 years my junior, we had a lot of fun together. I gave him the pet name “Valdensah” (Waldensian” )  He was intelligent and creative, whether in music or with his playthings. It seems I introduced him to musical theory and notes  In his imaginary playing earlier, he would line up furniture castors which he call horses or cows.

Joe, always Joseph as a child, concluded the family. Ten years younger, he was a favorite child and brother. It seems when he was young I could swing him up and he could stand on my shoulders with help. He was active in the family in spite of being a follower. I recall when at the supper table when everyone was telling little stories and he wanted to be there as well, He said, “Just think of it, I don't like bones!” (Denk mole draw, ich gliech nat g'nocha!)

Even living a more simple life on the farm, we children found ways of interacting and playing games together. In the summer we could play outside such games as dare base, hide and seek, tag. Sometimes we played such games with cousins our age. We were discouraged in playing “Monopoly”-  too materialistic?? although checker s was acceptable and even chess. But reading was a favorite. No recorded music- well no electricity. Sometimes as family we would sing together. I believe we all could “carry a tune” before we went to school. While it seems we were not close as siblings, we were taught to respect each other in language and interactions. It is remarkable that we remained close to each other in our life-time and all the more as we aged. Even choosing different church denominations has not separated us from a sense of closeness. I do not know of any family quarrels or frictions over the years. The family estate was also disposed of without any conflict and we kept a family woods for posterity where we gather every Memorial day with our ever-expanding families.

*One time Miriam, Dad, and God saved our house from burning down.  During breakfast one morning she went out to the milk house by the barn to bring in more milk for breakfast. As she headed back to the house, she suddenly saw fire or smoke coming from the door of the wash house that was attached to the house. Most likely screaming and running as fast as she could, she alerted us all. The older children carried water from the nearby pump house tank and brought it to Dad who poured pail after pail against the wall behind the water tub that was being heated up for washing clothes. I took a bucket to the wash room by the kitchen and pumped as fast as I could and also handed the buckets to Dad for putting out the fire. I don’t know how long it took but eventually it was under control and then put out. The charred walls were a reminder for the rest of our time living there that we were saved by the timing and cooperation of the whole family. God’s timing. A few minutes later would have been too late. No phone or fire truck would have reached us in time.

                                                      Nicknames for Our Children

Some things seem so trivial yet they are or were a part of our past which we might forget and probably just as well so. Yet trivia is cultivated frequently for whatever reason a person might indulge in it. Certainly so with pet or nicknames for our children. I suppose it is indicative of the "pet" nature of our relationships with those little ones. In our case, none of the names persisted into adulthood and phased out somewhere in childhood or early youth. It is impossible to remember 40+ years later which were important or endured long, so I will just begin with the oldest and go down the line. (Actually, I still mutter the first two nicknames in the privacy of our home at times!)

Paul, I called Saulos, which is the German and Greek name for Paul. Or Saulos Natan, again fully the German translation. It had no special significance, but just reflected the languages I knew and reflected a playful variety of what we had officially named him. Natan is also Hebrew for gift. Possibly Saulos is something like 'little' in one of those languages

Conrad, I called Kunraut, which was also the German form, at least so I thought. There was of course a Conrad Grebel, an early Anabaptist leader that I admired, from whom preference was originally derived. Probably Grebel was also German.

Grace, that is a longer story. Apparently one time Loretta was reading the story of Jack and the Beanstalk that greatly interested Grace. In enthusiasm for the story, she said "Beanstalk" excitedly. So that became her pet name. But she had another name as well, Bumper Crop. Whether this reflected her plump build at birth and childhood, or the fact that she followed so closely after Conrad I don't know. Certainly we could not always just call this vibrant young child by such a calm name as Grace.

Rachel, Why I called her Beanert is beyond me. She was also one of our precious children who could not have only one beautiful name, but had to have a play name for all the times I enjoyed so much to play her with me while I was going to college and reserved my evenings for my children..

Then there was Julie, who was named after the rising star, Julie Andrews who I was enamored with in the days of The Sound Of Music. But J. Andrews had also starred in My Fair Lady and sang, "wouldn't it be loverly". Did loverly metamorphose into Aberly? or just Aber.  I don't know, but that is what I called our Julie.  Julie Aber. And I could repeat that variation to the closing lines of Anderew's song, where I sang the name 4 times: Aberly, Aberly,Aberly, Aberly.

I don't remember If only I used these names but it seems primarily I did; Loretta remembers calling Rachel, "Rachel Baby". I hardly know if the children used the same names I did, but I know there were one or two names for each other, but about pet names, I suppose that was primarily my thing. Those kids were just a lot more to me than their legal names, however much we liked them.