I recently finished reading the book, "What Difference Do It Make", the sequel to, "Same Kind of Different as Me." A while back I wrote a real, professional-like, book review (sarcasm) on the first book. Here it is if you are interested in checking it out... Same Kind of Different as Me.
So, I thought it would be appropriate to do the same with the second book (because I know you are all dying to read what I think about it).
I have decided to share what impacted me the most from the book and then use the default, "You'll just have to read it to really know how awesome of a book it is", excuse. Because, it really is a great read.
The most impactful idea/thought that caught my attention from the book stems from one of the co-author's, Ron Hall, suggestions about how he thinks we (Christians/the Church) should approach ending homelessness. In response to most cities having some ten or fifteen year plan to end homelessness Ron says this,
"Don't get me wrong. I'm glad the problem of homelessness is on the government's radar. It's just that the problem of homelessness will never be solved by government. That's because government can put a roof over a man's head and food in his mouth and even give him a job. But government can neither love a man nor lovingly hold him accountable. The chronically homeless, whether homeless, whether homeless through tragic circumstance or through messes of their own making, have a whole constellation of inner issues that food, shelter, and a paycheck won't fix...The chronically homeless need love, compassion, accountability, and someone to come alongside them and hold then steady as they limp along the winding, pitted road to wholeness."
So, because Ron had been to several cities and observed their ten and fifteen year plans several years in to their effort with no real progress he began to ask himself two questions:
How many homeless are in the city?
and
How many churches are in the city?
What he discovered is that, in most cases, there are more churches than homeless. This is what lead him to the following idea...
"How about if your pastor or rabbi or priest or imam motivates his or her congregation to adopt one chronically homeless person. Each body of believers, whether it's fifty or a thousand strong, would assume collective responsibility for taking in one person and loving that person back into society.
Let's pretend for a moment that this person's name is Je and the body of believers is the First Baptist Church (FBC), a congregation of three hundred people. The first order of business would be, of course, to befriend Joe. Bless him with a few dollars, take him to coffee or maybe a meal here and there- always in pairs, in public, and never in a way that could physically endanger church members, of course. While some members of the church do this work of outreach, others could check Joe's background. In a church of three hundred, there are likely law enforcement and social services personnel who could make sure Joe is not too dangerous a character to take under the church's wing.
I want to be clear about this: loving people does not mean ignoring realities on the ground... remember what Jesus told His disciples when He sent them out to reach the lost: "Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves."
But there's another side to this safety issue--because while FBC is carefully gauging whether Joe is a safe person to be around, Joe is waiting to see whether FBC people are safe themselves. Will they catch and release him? Will FBC come on strong at first, then gradually slack off until Joe only sees them on holidays?
Homeless people are used to people who "help" with one hand and hold their noses with the other. They are used to catch-and-release friends, who feel warm and fuzzy and compassionate for a few days or weeks but then abandon their efforts when the going gets tough or when the busyness of their own lives takes over.
Will FBC be faithful to tend their relationship with Joe? Will they keep his confidences as he confesses the hardship and/or wrongdoing that put him on the streets? Joe will be watching for the same thing very other human being watches for before committing to a potentially life-changing relationship: trustworthiness.
Once the relationship is established, is it possible that FBC could go the next step and get Joe off the streeets? Could he stay in a room at the church? Could FBC members chip in twenty dollars a month apiece to rent him a room elsewhere? What about food? Can the FBC women's ministry--of the men's group--stock the refrigerator wherever Joe is staying?
"Well," you might be saying, "none of this requires Joe to do anything, to accept any responsibility."
Exactly! What FBC is offering Joe is unconditional love. Part of real love is loving a person from dependence to independence. But if that is to come, it will come in time. What the Joes of the world need first is a taste of dignity, someone to love them enough to take a chance on them.
Is it possible that Joe will freeload for a while, take advantage of the situation, then split? It's not only possible, but likely, at least for a little while. The chronically homeless are often addicts, petty thieves, and practiced at the art of the small con. You don't survive on the streets by being an upright citizen.
But if Joe turns out to be unable to follow through on real change, that's fine too. FBC has done what God called it to do. Jesus said we will be judged by how we treat the hungry, the thirsty, the prisoner, the stranger. We are judged by our compassion, how we live our lives, not by how Joe ultimately lives his. God commands us to love, not to calculate the end game. It is only when Joe is loved without strings that he is set free to (eventually) turn a corner and voluntarily become accountable to those who have placed faith in him.
Moving on in the thirty-day plan, think of the no-cost resrouces available in a single church. Doctors who can provide medical care. Licensed counselors who can provide mental-health assistance. Teachers who can help Joe brush up his reading, writing, and math skills or help hiom study for the drivers license exam. Social service workers who can help Joe secure the essential documentation he needs and navigate intimidating places like the social-security office, county clerk, and the most terrifying place of all - the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Here's something else a community of faith can do that the government can't: give Joe a job. While I was walking the streets of Fort Worth, I ran into former chefs, construction workers, personnel managers, auto mechanics, executives, skilled military technicians, and stonemasons. Homelessness does not confine itself to the unskilled. In a single church, there are bound to be people who, if they can;t employ Joe directly, know someone who can. If there aren't, maybe Joe would be willing to do general maintenance of the church facility itself, paid for out of the church's mercy fund or by collective, specifically contributions of members.
If one person tried to take on Joe, the task would be daunting, overwhelming, as I can tell you from experience. But many hands make light work. And within each body of believers, there are endless caregiving possibilities, that unlike government programs, can be customized according to need. You see, in this case it really does take a village.
So far I haven't heard of any takers on my thirty-day plan. I chalk that up to two very human factors: excuses and fear. When I first started going to missions with Debbie (his wife), I was far too busy to go- in my own mind, that is. I had plenty of excuses not to go: teenagers to tend, art to sell, clients to schmooze, accounts to manage, and many, many toys that clearly needed use and maintenance. I only went with Debbie to be a good husband having been such a lousy one years before."
What a great idea, right? I think so but apparently it's not catching on very well.
Honestly, the more I think about it the less likely I think that it could really happen. But it seems really simple when you start doing the math...
I can think of ten churches in Oklahoma City off the top of my head in 20 seconds.
I can think of ten homeless men/women in Oklahoma City off the top of my head in 20 seconds.
Then consider the fact that anyone living in the Oklahoma City area or anyone that has been downtown can find a homeless person on just about any corner south of Penn Square Mall and north of Moore.
So, finding churches isn't a problem and finding a homeless person isn't an issue. So what's the problem?
I think the problem is that I can also think of ten excuses in 20 seconds a lot of churches/people give or are giving as to why it wouldn't work and, therefore, isn't happening.
As far as I have learned, which hasn't been very long, most people aren't willing to get involved with an idea like this one because of the business of life. I get that. For me, it's easy to say because it's my job. I'm down here consistently and it's part of my objective. But the idea of a whole church taking on a single person seems sooooo much more doable.
It's like a semi-famous, urban speaker Ron, Paul and I get a kick out of listening to says, "Loving poor people is a team sport." - Bart Campolo
Whether you think that comment is funny or offensive, he's right. It's just like the author, Ron Hall, said towards the end of the excerpt I quoted, "You see, in this case it really does take a village."
I don't know. Maybe it's just my lack of faith in the church as a whole. Don't get me wrong. I know there are numerous churches throughout Okc, as well as other cities, that are doing this very thing. I also recognize that there are numerous churches throughout Okc and other cities that I am not aware of that are doing this very thing.
I am just questioning why this sort of thing isn't happening more often or more consistently.
If God, through Jesus, spoke so often about the poor, how we ought to treat the poor and placed so much emphasis on the poor why aren't ideas/initiatives like this one considered more heavily?
