"Eliminating homelessness" -- is that a realistic goal?

[Carol in Cal.]

What Elizabeth said.

I think it's a tough goal, but a worthy one. Yes, there are people who choose homelessness, but out of the entire homeless population I think their numbers are next to nothing.

 

Instead, it's 'Christian' worldview--more catholic (in the universal sense of the word.) When I saw the original post, the quote that LEAPED into my mind was Christ saying, "The poor you have always with you." Now, He helped and served the poor, consistently, and has instructed His followers to do the same. One of His markers was 'justice for the poor', which was unusual enough to be noteworthy. However, He also is realistic. As long as there is sin in the world, there will be effects of sin--collectively, not only individually. So while the goal of perfection is a worthy and appropriate one, it is also to be pursued with the knowledge that it's not possible, but still pursued avidly--the 'Already/Not Yet' conundrum.

 

That all probably sounds pretty complicated, but it's just one of those Christian paradoxes that flit through my mind when I read something like the original post.

[elizabeth]

I'm not making any sense out of this section. Best I can guess is that this writer does not believe in the Christian understanding -- (and this viewpoint is far from the property of Reformed theology, a theology 100% alien to me) -- of sin, want, poverty, etc. being post-Fall conditions of the world.

 

I sure hope that the writer is not assuming that just because this is the true state of the world, that Christians sit on their haunches saying, "Well, tough luck, buddy !" and doing nothing to help their neighbour. (Everyone is my "neighbour" !) If so, that would be an assumption not based in any reality I have encountered.

 

At any rate, I hope the writer will take time to clarify this murky passage.

 

Catholic. I do not think religious belief of any sort should be used to formulate public policy . Science .

[asta]

Ok, too many "fallen world/man" posts to quote here - I'm just going to have to side with Renee on this one from a doctrinal viewpoint:

 

Catholic doctrine defines and describes the state of fallen human nature in terms which we have explained on the basis of the data of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. It is clearly proposed in the Council of Trent and in the Credo of Paul VI. However, once again we note that, according to this doctrine based on revelation, human nature is not only "fallen" but also "redeemed" in Jesus Christ, so that "where sin increased, grace abounded all the more" (Rom 5:20). This is the real context in which original sin and its consequences must be considered.

The State of Man in Fallen Nature

 

I don't know squat about any other religion's theology, but the Catholics aren't falling anywhere.

 

 

a

[hsmom]

No it is not. I personally have met people who choose to be homeless. Who have walked away from their lives to live like that. I am not sure I agree with it, but they did it as a CHOICE. So, it is never realistic to eliminate it.

[cathmom]

As time goes on you have become one of the posters that I actively seek to hear from. You absolutely exude peace and kindness in your responses especially when you disagree with another persons pov. I respect that .

 

:iagree:

[lionfamily1999]

Catholic. I do not think religious belief of any sort should be used to formulate public policy . Science .

So churches should not be involved in caring for the homeless?

[elizabeth]

So churches should not be involved in caring for the homeless?

 

Absolutely not a problem if they choose to do so . Whatever they choose to do is wonderful and welcome however formulating public policy at the state , local and federal level is not appropriate under the Constitution from my understanding of it. I prefer that there is a absolute chasm between the state and religious belief and practice. I am appalled at the 501 3 c regs not being enforced regardless of party. If you are a 501 3 c political activity is prohibited or you lose tax exempt status. The supposed moral high ground that churches, synagogues etc hold is laughable considering they flout the federal civil law with impunity. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=163395,00.html

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

[lionfamily1999]

Absolutely not a problem if they choose to do so . Whatever they choose to do is wonderful and welcome however formulating public policy at the state , local and federal level is not appropriate under the Constitution from my understanding of it. I prefer that there is a absolute chasm between the state and religious belief and practice. I am appalled at the 501 3 c regs not being enforced regardless of party. If you are a 501 3 c political activity is prohibited or you lose tax exempt status. The supposed moral high ground that churches, synagogues etc hold is laughable considering they flout the federal civil law with impunity. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=163395,00.html

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

The case being discussed, though, has nothing to do with public policy. It's a "multi-faceted task force" and, the impression I got is that it has nothing to do with the actual city government.

 

That being said, what do you consider "formulating?" Do you mean holding an opinion, or attempting to sway their congregants?

[elizabeth]

The case being discussed, though, has nothing to do with public policy. It's a "multi-faceted task force" and, the impression I got is that it has nothing to do with the actual city government.

 

That being said, what do you consider "formulating?" Do you mean holding an opinion, or attempting to sway their congregants?

 

Great question. I am referring to the latter only, and it must be fairly specific in terms of violating the tax exempt status. For example , a position one way or the other on X issue is not a violation of the IRS code. Speaking from the pulpit using clearly obvious references to one candidate or handing out flyers with a candidate's name and likeness is a violation and they should be mindful of that violation. It is really and truly unlawful to do so and maintain one's status as a 501. This happened not once but thrice in our church.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't know that we'll ever eliminate homelessness, because I agree that there are people who choose (in one way or another) that lifestyle.

 

I think it's fine for churches to be involved in helping the homeless, the hungry, the needy. In fact, I think it's a moral imperative for them to be involved. Whether they offer/require religious counsel in order to receive help? I guess it depends upon how it is handled. It's their prerogative, I guess. Charity with strings attached is definitely why I agree that the church or even secular charities should not be the only way for people to receive help.

 

I agree that a lot of churches are flouting the tax laws when they do things like organize protests.

[lionfamily1999]

Great question. I am referring to the latter only, and it must be fairly specific in terms of violating the tax exempt status. For example , a position one way or the other on X issue is not a violation of the IRS code. Speaking from the pulpit using clearly obvious references to one candidate or handing out flyers with a candidate's name and likeness is a violation and they should be mindful of that violation. It is really and truly unlawful to do so and maintain one's status as a 501. This happened not once but thrice in our church.

I've never been in a church that trumpeted for a candidate, if I had been I would be furious... Except for one thing that just occurred to me, someone on the county board attends our church. He doesn't get preferential treatment and is not allowed to stump (is that the word I want?) at church, but he definitely uses his attendance to his advantage. I don't vote for him, because that turns my stomach.

I agree that a lot of churches are flouting the tax laws when they do things like organize protests.

Is protesting a violation of tax laws? I'm guessing you mean pro-right, or keeping God in schools, or other things along these lines.

[Mrs Mungo]

Is protesting a violation of tax laws? I'm guessing you mean pro-right, or keeping God in schools, or other things along these lines.

 

If they are stumping for/against a candidate from the pulpit or organizing *political* protests from the pulpit, then they are violating tax laws, imo. It doesn't matter the purpose of the protests. If it's a tax-exempt UU church and they arrange an anti-war protest or pro-gay marriage rally it would be an equal violation. In 2000 a church had its tax-exempt status revoked when it purchased newspaper ads to campaign against Bill Clinton.

 

To clarify: if a church wants to act as a political activist group, they have that right. However, they have to follow the tax laws set up for a political organization, not the tax laws for a non-profit organization.

 

eta: Other types of non-profits can't legally endorse candidates either, churches are not singled out.

Edited May 12, 2010 by Mrs Mungo

[lionfamily1999]

If they are stumping for/against a candidate from the pulpit or organizing *political* protests from the pulpit, then they are violating tax laws, imo. It doesn't matter the purpose of the protests. If it's a tax-exempt UU church and they arrange an anti-war protest or pro-gay marriage rally it would be an equal violation. In 2000 a church had its tax-exempt status revoked when it purchased newspaper ads to campaign against Bill Clinton.

 

To clarify: if a church wants to act as a political activist group, they have that right. However, they have to follow the tax laws set up for a political organization, not the tax laws for a non-profit organization.

 

eta: Other types of non-profits can't legally endorse candidates either, churches are not singled out.

I wonder if some get around that by saying their issue isn't political.

 

It seems like this would be found everywhere, but I really haven't seen this done. The closest I can think of is the Veteran's Day sermon our interim pastor preached. I really don't know what I'd do if a pastor took up my "learning the word" time to tell me who to vote for.

[Rosie_0801]

You're right but that's not what I'm saying. If a person has a problem stepping into a church because they don't want to hear a message, that's just plain foolish.

 

It is foolish to preserve one's remaining self respect? It might look foolish to a person who has a good stash of it, but from the inside, there's nothing foolish about it at all.

 

Rosie

[Laurie4b]

One of the largest contributors to homelessness was the deinstitutionalization movement in the 80's to get people out of living in mental hospitals. Prior to that, I can't recall ever seeing homeless people out begging in our community. Ever. Not to say that there weren't some here or there, but by my observation, that is a huge chunk of the puzzle. There was a very positive side to deinstitutionalization, but the negative side to it is the homeless problem.

 

Not all homeless people *want* the routine and responsibilies that come with renting, owning, or belonging to a group home.

 

While I think that eliminating homelessness is a dumb goal (there I said it, not you) I think that addressing some of the causes of homelessness is a good goal (like increasing mental health services). I also think each community should have shelters where the homeless can stay if they'd like to. Ours has a couple and people still stay in tents in the woods. The human waste disposal is a problem, as is begging .

[Alenee]

It is foolish to preserve one's remaining self respect? It might look foolish to a person who has a good stash of it, but from the inside, there's nothing foolish about it at all.

 

Rosie

 

Is it respectful to "self" to pass on food/shelter if it's offered? When I was a kid living with my dad and his wife, they came home with a food box from the Catholic church in town. Dad was raised Lutheran. You don't get more opposite than that. Yet out of his need, he ditched the pride and took the food being offered.

 

I get that it's extremely painful to take help when you don't want to *need* it but at that point, it really is a foolish thing to stand on your soapbox of self-respect and pass up help just because someone might try to share Christ with you.

 

Similarly, many many people on the streets pass up help that the government has for them because they don't want to submit to the requirements. Is that self-respect?

[Mergath]

It is foolish to preserve one's remaining self respect? It might look foolish to a person who has a good stash of it, but from the inside, there's nothing foolish about it at all.

 

Rosie

:iagree: For a lot of people living on the streets or close to it, that may be all they have left.

[LibraryLover]

I do not think it is an attainable goal, but I do think it is a lofty and lovely goal. Ime, these organizations are top-heavy with young people. I like that they care.

[Rosie_0801]

Is it respectful to "self" to pass on food/shelter if it's offered?

 

I get that it's extremely painful to take help when you don't want to *need* it but at that point, it really is a foolish thing to stand on your soapbox of self-respect and pass up help just because someone might try to share Christ with you.

 

Similarly, many many people on the streets pass up help that the government has for them because they don't want to submit to the requirements. Is that self-respect?

 

Self respect isn't a simple issue. Accepting food and shelter when it is offered would be respectful to oneself, yes; but rejecting it could be too. Neither of us are wrong. Maybe you don't understand the viewpoint I'm offering because you've never had large chunks of your self respect taken away. Maybe you don't think I understand your point? I do. Or maybe, being Christian, you're a lot bigger on the humbling business than I am. If you've got nothing but a shred of self respect, or pride if you'd rather call it that, you might find you want to hold onto that. Having nothing left at all would be a void to large to live with. Plus a lot of people like to maintain illusions of independence. I do, myself.

 

Rosie

Edited May 13, 2010 by Rosie_0801

[mcconnellboys]

Ummmm, no. In dealing with the homeless starting several years ago, I found that many of them actually choose that lifestyle for various reasons as you mentioned. Can they make them want to live a different way? Maybe, but as you've said, it would mean overcoming various mental difficulties as well as substance abuse, etc.

[Alenee]

Self respect isn't a simple issue. Accepting food and shelter when it is offered would be respectful to oneself, yes; but rejecting it could be too. Neither of us are wrong. Maybe you don't understand the viewpoint I'm offering because you've never had large chunks of your self respect taken away. Maybe you don't think I understand your point? I do. Or maybe, being Christian, you're a lot bigger on the humbling business than I am. If you've got nothing but a shred of self respect, or pride if you'd rather call it that, you might find you want to hold onto that. Having nothing left at all would be a void to large to live with. Plus a lot of people like to maintain illusions of independence. I do, myself.

 

Rosie

 

You make some good points. I have been at the point where I had little to no self-respect but I guess I'm wired differently so I finally took the help being offered. I've been at the point where I kept trying to keep that shred of self-respect and saw how foolish I was being. I've seen others doing it too and I just shake my head and wonder why they just won't get help.

 

We live in a country where there is help for everything. It just might not come packaged in the exact way we desire it. Which brings us back to the point of the op. Trying to end homelessness is a good aspiration but in the end, you won't convince every homeless person to take the help offered.

[Renee in NC]

:iagree: I completely 100% agree with you. What I don't understand in your statement is this : It isn't pride in the sense that they think they are too good for the programs.

 

Ummm, that's exactly what pride is. :confused: Again, every single place offering help asks for something in return. Yes, definitely there are places who appear to insist on you praying a prayer or listening to an endless litany on your sinful nature, however, these truly are the exception...

 

I wonder how many people here in this thread commenting on churches like this have actually truly experienced this or truly know someone who has? I've worked in churches that help the poor and I've never once seen anything like this. I have to say, it sounds like hyperbole and disdain for anything religious in nature and if that's the case, this discussion can't really go anywhere.

 

I meant that the homeless people don't have that kind of pride (that they're too good) but rather they don't want to be seen as a project.

 

I just think we should meet peoples' physical needs first and when that happens they will be in a position to look at their spiritual needs. If you put the priority on the spiritual needs first, I think there is a danger of the person responding in a way that they *think* the organization wants to rather than from their heart.

 

I don't necessarily think this is the goal of the helping organization, but it can happen because of the nature of the message.

[mommyrooch]

I think it's unrealistic and impossible for a person if that's how they choose to view a problem. It's one of those things that depends on your outlook and a quick look at history should provide many examples of "unrealistic" and "impossible" problems that have been solved.

 

Homelessness isn't that much of a puzzle. We know that most people on the streets are there because of problems with family life, addictions or mental health - All things we can help them deal with IF we reach out and do it.

 

Honestly, what besides a will to help the homeless would be a barrier to eliminating homelessness?

 

:iagree: completely!!

[Renee in NC]

Is it respectful to "self" to pass on food/shelter if it's offered? When I was a kid living with my dad and his wife, they came home with a food box from the Catholic church in town. Dad was raised Lutheran. You don't get more opposite than that. Yet out of his need, he ditched the pride and took the food being offered.

 

I get that it's extremely painful to take help when you don't want to *need* it but at that point, it really is a foolish thing to stand on your soapbox of self-respect and pass up help just because someone might try to share Christ with you.

 

Similarly, many many people on the streets pass up help that the government has for them because they don't want to submit to the requirements. Is that self-respect?

 

I guarantee you that the Catholic Church did not make your father listen to a religious message to get that box, though. That's what I am against. I am not against churches helping - that is their job! I just think that it is better to offer the help with no strings.

[Alenee]

I just think that it is better to offer the help with no strings.

 

Again, totally :iagree:100%!

[Alenee]

 

I just think we should meet peoples' physical needs first and when that happens they will be in a position to look at their spiritual needs. If you put the priority on the spiritual needs first, I think there is a danger of the person responding in a way that they *think* the organization wants to rather than from their heart.

 

.

 

I hate to use this but: Word!:lol:

 

It's been a long day so forgive me if I've gone on a rabbit trail...but what I said before is that churches that require *anything* really are the exception.

[Renee in NC]

As time goes on you have become one of the posters that I actively seek to hear from. You absolutely exude peace and kindness in your responses especially when you disagree with another persons pov. I respect that .

 

:iagree:

 

I was thinking when I read your post that I had given you a false impression. Peace and kindness are not usually words that I would use for myself.:lol: However, cathmom knows me in real life (more than 6 years) so I will just say thank you.;)

[BigMamaBird]

I think it's admirable to try to actively do everything in your power towards a goal like this. But I do agree with previous posters who say it's impossible.

[Renee in NC]

Ok, too many "fallen world/man" posts to quote here - I'm just going to have to side with Renee on this one from a doctrinal viewpoint:

 

The State of Man in Fallen Nature

 

I don't know squat about any other religion's theology, but the Catholics aren't falling anywhere.

 

 

a

 

Asta, it never ceases to amaze me at how much *more* you know of Catholic theology than I do and you're not even Catholic!

[mommyrooch]

I disagree as well. It isn't pride in the sense that they think they are too good for the programs. Would you want to go ask for help from someone who says, "Sure, I'll help you, but not until I tell you what a horrible, sinful person you are first."

 

I think we are to spread the Gospel - absolutely. The Gospel I read talks about feeding the poor, visiting the sick and those in prison, as well as caring for widows and orphans. You can spread the Gospel through your actions far better than words.

 

Besides, how many people so you think come forward and pray the sinner's prayer because they think they need to to get the help or hope that they'll get better treatment if they do.

 

Help the homeless, build a relationship, share Christ. Pray with people, talk with them, treat them as human beings made in the image of God, not projects.

 

I think this is probably the best post I have ever read on these boards.

 

Your views on this are the same as mine. People see what Christ and Christs love actually looks like by our actions, not our words. Actions speak louder than words!!!

[cjbeach]

I worked for a non-profit in the 90s. I have 2 IVDA brothers and had 2 MR uncles but even with that personal background dealing with the homeless exposed ME to a whole other side of life I never knew existed. I had quite a few homeless patients but the homeless I cared for all had mental health issues, some were dual dx (addiction and a MH dx). Back then most of my patients were HIV+ and keeping track of them was hard (and scary!) because the streets seem to "pull" them. Our patients had to have a residence (even if it was a shelter) to be seen.

 

If you work with homeless you understand that it's a cycle. That's their life and that's what they know. For a while all seems OK and they're stable on their meds (or if addicted, get clean) and maybe even in a shelter or halfway house, then things start to buckle, then crumble, and the streets are there for them. Their drug holidays begin or maybe they fall into bad habits again (like addiction, wrong peer group) and they know how to work the streets. Then they get sick or have an accident, wind up back in the ER, and the cycle starts again.

 

I don't think you can end homelessness due to the MH issues. Like a pp said without the institutions of years ago, where are these individuals to go? Group homes or halfway houses?? There's only so many out there and finding a good one in an urban area where there's a number of homeless all wanting that one open spot can be tough. Quick sidebar.OT:My uncles were institutionalized much of their lives (twins). One uncle went from group home to group home, back inpatient, then into another group home. He fell/?pushed off the roof of his last group home and died. His twin was in subsidized housing for the last 20 years of his life only because he married a woman he met at a group home who was a bit more functional. She cared for him as much as she could. They made out OK.

 

I think a more realistic short-term goal is to implement something like the Medical Outreach teams that go into homeless camps, but here in Central FL it is all volunteer based now. Yes, there are free medical clinics available but because of these individuals' issues, there is no constinency with medical follow-up until there's an issue/they're sick. It's so hard to case manage someone on the streets.

Edited May 13, 2010 by cjbeach
typo, typing too fast

[Peela]

I think it is definitely possible. UNlikely right now...but its so easy to get disheartened feelign like what one does makes no difference...when everything one does makes a big difference.

 

I love this story...a girl and her father are walking on the beach. There has been a storm the night before and there are thousands of starfish washed up on the beach. The girl is skipping along, picking up starfish and throwing them back in the ocean. Her father says to her "Why are you wasting your time doing that? There are thousands of starfish here- throwing a few back wont make any difference to teh numbers.". The girl responds, "Yes, but it makes all teh difference in the world to every sinlge one I do throw back in the ocean.".

 

I dont think it matters whether all homelessness is eradicated. We know it could be, ideally. So coudl all starvation. But what matters is that, if one is drawn to helping in that way, one doesnt get disheartened at the enormity of the problem..and just helps in whatever way one can, anyway.

[cathmom]

I was thinking when I read your post that I had given you a false impression. Peace and kindness are not usually words that I would use for myself.:lol: However, cathmom knows me in real life (more than 6 years) so I will just say thank you.;)

 

Has it been that long? I must be getting old! :D

[Haiku]

What do you think? Is it possible to end homelessness?

 

I don't think it is possible to end homelessness in America due to our very Puritan-work-ethic view of people. However, I have lived in two different large cities in Europe that did not have visible problems with homelessness. Both of these countries had far more generous social services than we do in America.

 

Tara

[TXMomof4]

I disagree as well. It isn't pride in the sense that they think they are too good for the programs. Would you want to go ask for help from someone who says, "Sure, I'll help you, but not until I tell you what a horrible, sinful person you are first."

 

I think we are to spread the Gospel - absolutely. The Gospel I read talks about feeding the poor, visiting the sick and those in prison, as well as caring for widows and orphans. You can spread the Gospel through your actions far better than words.

 

Besides, how many people so you think come forward and pray the sinner's prayer because they think they need to to get the help or hope that they'll get better treatment if they do.

 

Help the homeless, build a relationship, share Christ. Pray with people, talk with them, treat them as human beings made in the image of God, not projects.

 

Isn't this true of any kind of help we want to give. I just had a conversation a few days ago with someone who was complaining that she 'tried to help, but the person obviously didn't want her help'. She completely wrote off this person because her response wasn't to jump all over the help offered.

 

It could be pride. Heaven knows I've refused help because I didn't want to admit I couldn't handle a situation (nothing like homelessness, thankfully). The people who kept coming back and helping anyway were the biggest blessings in my life ever. I say they loved me in spite of myself. I think that's what we're called to do. Maybe they can't help themselves, maybe they don't want to. My actions don't depend on their response necessarily. Keep helping anyway.

[Haiku]

If people truly WANT help, they'll humble themselves and go get it wherever the help is offered.

 

(bolding mine)

 

That's not true. There are means of helping that some people find offensive or morally questionable and would turn down. That does not mean they don't truly want help help or are not humble. It means they wanted to be treated respectfully.

 

Tara

[Alenee]

(bolding mine)

 

That's not true. There are means of helping that some people find offensive or morally questionable and would turn down. That does not mean they don't truly want help help or are not humble. It means they wanted to be treated respectfully.

 

Tara

 

Yes, I do get that, however in most cases the places that do offer real help do so respectfully. I think this argument is based more on one person who wanted help but didn't like how they might get it rather than on the whole of places that do help. Kinda like plane crashes...we hear about them because they are so few and far between.