Saturday, April 04, 2009

Closing Up!

For those who have been following this blog, I just want you to know that I am closing this one up. The themes I've been dealing with here are just too close to the "Homeless Ministry" blog I also write and I've often struggled as to which blog to post a particular topic, so I decided to leave it to one. So I will be moving all original topics over to the "Homeless Ministry" blog, and I enourage any of you following here to attend to that blog instead.

http://pastoralblog.blogspot.com/

Labels:

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Bible Passages on Social Justice

For those who are interested in developing a biblical theology of the poor, here's a good place to start: Look up all these passages!

Basic justice:
Exodus 23:2-3
Leviticus 14:21
Leviticus 19:15
Leviticus 25
Deuteronomy 24:14-15
II Samuel 12:1-6
Psalm 72:12-14
Isaiah 11:1-8

God’s provision to the poor:
Exodus 15:23-16:36
Psalm 145:15-16
Psalm 146
Matthew 6:25-34
Luke 18:2-8

The Plight of the Needy
Proverbs 13:23
Proverbs 14:20
Proverbs 18:23
Proverbs 19:4, 7
Proverbs 22:7
Proverbs 28:15
Proverbs 30:7-9
Ecclesiastes 5:8
Ecclesiastes 9:15-16

Acting with Generosity to the poor:
Genesis 18
Deuteronomy 15
Psalm 41:1-3
Proverbs 14:21, 31
Proverbs 19:17
Proverbs 22:9
Proverbs 28:27
Proverbs 29:7
Daniel 4:27
Isaiah 58:1-12
Matthew 6:19-34
Matthew 25:31-46
Mark 14:3-9
Luke 12:33-34
Luke 14:12-14
Luke 16:1-13
Luke 19:8-9
Acts 2:43-45
Acts 4:32-37
I Corinthians 13:3
II Corinthians 8:1-9:15
Galatians 2:10
I Timothy 6:17-19
Hebrews 13:1-3
James 1:27-2:13

Respect to the poor
Genesis 18:1-
Proverbs 17:5
James 2:1-12

God’s deliverance of the oppressed:
Genesis 19 and Ezekiel 16:49
Exodus 2:23-25
Exodus 5-15
Exodus 22:21-27
Psalm 22
Psalm 34:6
Psalm 37
Psalm 73
Psalm 82
Psalm 107
Psalm 146
Proverbs 21:13
Proverbs 22:16, 22-23
Isaiah 10:1-4
Isaiah 40
Isaiah 52-53
Jeremiah 5:26-29
Ezekiel 22:29-31
Amos 5:11-12
Zechariah 7:9-14
Matthew 6:2-4
Matthew 11:1-5
Mark 3:1ff
Mark 10:46-52
Luke 4:18-21
Luke 6:24-26
Luke 16
Luke 18:2-8
Romans 12:14-21
James 1:9-11
James 5:1-5
Revelation 6:9-11
Revelation 18:1-24

Warning against stinginess/greed:
Deuteronomy 15
Deuteronomy 24:14-15
Matthew 25:41-46
Mark 10:17-30
Luke 12:15-21
Luke 16:19-31
Acts 5:1-11
I Timothy 6:9-11
Revelation 3:14-22

God’s call to the outcast and lowly:
Genesis 50:15-21
Proverbs 19:1
Proverbs 19:22
Proverbs 20:13
Proverbs 21:17
Proverbs 28:3
Proverbs 28:6
Ecclesiastes 4:13
Isaiah 40
Matthew 5:3-12
Matthew 10:7-8
Matthew 21:28-32
Mark 2:13-17
Mark 4:17
Mark 12:42-44
Luke 4: 18-19 (Isaiah 61:1-4)
Luke 14:16-24
Luke 15:1-7
Luke 18:9-14
Luke 19:1-10

Calling to be poor:
Genesis 12:1-9
Genesis 22
Judges 7
Matt 6:19-34/Luke 12:22-34
Matthew 10:5-42/Luke 9
Luke 6:20-24
Luke 14:26-33

The Exaltation of the Outcast/needy:
I Samuel 2:6-8
Isaiah 52:13-53:12
Psalm 113:5-8
Luke 1:46-55
Luke 14:8-11
Philippians 2:1-11
James 1:9-11

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

"Get A Job!"

Many people think that the homeless should just "get a job". The homeless, especially in holding signs looking for money or work will be told this. However, it is very difficult for the homeless to get a job. I had been planning on writing an essay on this, but Steven Samra has done it for me! Check this out:

http://homelessness.change.org/blog/view/dont_be_homeless_get_a_job

Labels: ,

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

God's Call To A New Community

From The Mirror of Perfection, a biography about Francis of Assisi

Francis said, “The order and life of the Friars Minor is a certain little flock which the Son of God in these last times asked of his Heavenly Father, saying, ‘Father, I wish that You should make and give to me a new and humble folk in these last times, unlike to all others who have gone before them, in humility and poverty and content to possess me alone.’ And the Father said, having heard the Son, ‘My son, that which You have asked is done.’”

Francis used to say that for this reason God willed and revealed to him that they should be called Friars Minor, because this is that poor and humble folk which the Son of god demanded of his Father. This folk the Son himself speaks of in the Gospel, “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” And also, “Inasmuch as you have done it to one of the least of these, my brothers, you have done it to me.” And the Lord understood this of all spiritual poor men, yet He spoke it more especially of the Order of the Friars Minor, which was to be in his Church. And so, as it was revealed to Francis that it should be called the Order of Friars Minor, so he made it to be written in his testament and the first Rule which he took to Pope Innocent III who approved and conceded it, and afterwards announced it to all in Consistory.
-Section II, Chapter 23

What a contrast is Francis’ attitude of his people from the majority of the church! Today, we want bigger churches, bigger incomes, larger congregations, and more significant influence in the world. Francis, however, recognized that Jesus called the church to be of and among the disenfranchised, the outcast, the poor, the suffering, the lowly.

Jesus said that it was the wealthy who were to be cautioned, for “you have already received your comfort” and because “It is difficult for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus said that those who were lauded were to be unhappy for “this is how the false prophets were treated.” Francis sought out those who were willing to give up all they had to be lowly and poor and suffering and wretched. Jesus also told his disciples to be prepared for poverty, for the surrender of all we have, for injustice and for persecution. But in our teachings of the gospel, we encourage people to expect all blessings—a better life, health, wealth and honor.

Woe is us! Woe to those who preach the American gospel! Woe to those who think that they can gain everything in this world and have the next world as well! But blessed are the poor, for they shall receive the kingdom of God.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, February 03, 2009

The Injustice of the Inaugeration

An excellent article on "Treating Homelessness" found:
http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/news.aspx?id=0b40f7e1-834a-4a73-b8ac-91ea94362460&refer=rss


Treating Homelessness for the Long Term, By Scott Schenkelberg, Executive Director, Miriam’s Kitchen
A Problem That Can’t Be Swept Away


"Ironic” isn’t a term often used to describe the recent inauguration of Barack Obama. But it was, in my opinion.


Despite the event’s prevailing message of diversity and inclusiveness, there was one population that was left out: the homeless.


To ensure a safe inauguration, many of DC’s streets were closed, fences were erected around the Mall, and security sweeps were made throughout the city. While these measures were an inconvenience for many of us who work in the nation’s capital, they were devastating for the homeless men, women, and children who call those areas home. The places where they sleep — parks, bridges, and streets downtown — were swept “clean” to ensure security; but, perhaps more insidiously, they were swept to present a “clean” image of America’s capital to rest of the world: one that doesn’t include desperate poverty and grinding need.


These men and women were forced to abandon their homes and belongings in a way that none of us with more conventional homes would have tolerated. While we may not like thinking of their homes as the city’s streets and parks, they are. And they were ordered to leave those homes and spend the night before inauguration in a shelter.


Some might say that this seems like humane, if not generous, treatment for folks who don’t receive this kind of service every day. The city’s ten shelters are not normally open all day. And the city doesn’t usually provide free storage for men and women who have no place else to keep their worldly possessions. But they did for inauguration. And perhaps did it in an effort to hide the image of DC’s growing homeless population.


Just like any of us have our routines, so too do those who are homeless. Where they sleep, where they eat, and where they go for services are all part of their routine. But those are a much bigger part of their lives than just being a routine, they are methods of survival. By uprooting our homeless neighbors from their homes and taking away their possessions, we negatively impacted their lives—and their chances of surviving.


This may all seem perplexing—the city gave them shelter, warmth, and food during one of the coldest days of the year. How does that negatively impact them? On its face, it all seems fair. But when you consider that many of these men and women were shipped off to shelters on the outskirts of the city, that shuttles to and from the shelters were suspended on the day of the Inauguration, and that they had no access to their belongings, it begins to take on a different appearance.


Unfortunately, these injustices aren’t limited to inauguration day. They happen every day in cities across America. The “cleansing” of the city on inauguration day is emblematic of the little consideration that is given to the trials and tribulations of people living on the streets. Rather than looking at them as a temporary blight on the American cityscape, it is time we addressed them as a population that isn’t going away.


We need to lower barriers to services for the homeless and reach out to those in need, instead of waiting for them to come to us and making it difficult for them to receive services when they finally find us. Both the expunging of the homeless from downtown DC during the inauguration and the persistent treatment of homelessness as a temporary crisis with a fixed solution is insidious because it allows us to become complacent. We can’t think of homelessness as temporary; we have to think long term.


We here at Miriam’s Kitchen believe that much like hospitals serving sick patients, agencies like ours serving homeless men and women will continue to exist. They will have to. As advocates for our guests, we believe that homelessness is not going away. Therefore, we need to focus on providing the best services for those who experience homelessness on a regular basis.


The thought that homelessness isn’t a solvable problem will rankle many who are very well intentioned. Certainly, there are things we can do to help alleviate many of the problems associated with homelessness. Cities and organizations can invest more in permanent housing, make mental health and addiction treatment services more readily available, and provide basic income supports to those living on limited means. However, there are two strikes against ending homelessness through these reforms—the laws surrounding how those with persistent mental illness are engaged in treatment and the ongoing cycle of homelessness that those who find themselves newly homeless inevitably fall into.


The current laws surrounding how those who have severe and persistent mental illness are engaged in treatment are in part born out of the civil rights movement. Concurrent with the closing of state mental hospitals, patients’ rights also changed to rightly allow patients a say in their treatment. These laws counteracted the abuse that many patients faced in a mental health system that effectively held them as prisoners throughout their lives. Now, unless you are endangering yourself or others, you cannot be treated against your will. This high litmus test comes with a caveat, though: those who are held forcibly may only be held for 72 hours, after which an administrative hearing is held to determine whether the patient is meeting this standard for hospitalization. In three days, many patients have stabilized to a point that they no longer meet this standard, and they are released. For many of these patients, this means they are released to the streets. Unfortunately, this often begins the cycle of moving from hospital to street to jail and back again. And no matter how well constructed our safety net is for these patients, some are going to fall through it.


So what can we do?


By treating homelessness as a permanent need rather than a temporary crisis, we can build lasting institutions to serve these men and women. What are needed are downtown spaces that aggregate numerous services for those who are homeless. Instead of asking those with the least ability to travel to go numerous places for services, we should be working to consolidate services and make them geographically accessible. Service providers of all stripes—mental health professionals, addictions counselors, attorneys, medical doctors, job counselors, public benefits agencies, life skill coaches, and housing providers should all be available in these centers to meet people where they are rather than making them travel.


Permanent service centers such as this also allow people to develop trust in service providers. Creating a warm and inviting environment with competent professionals and caring volunteers goes a long way to convincing vulnerable people to take the next step to recovery. It is only through long-term commitment — not measured in weeks and months, but in years and decades — that we can start to deal with the persistent needs of those who are homeless.


The inauguration swept away homelessness in DC for a few days, but it is time we faced the reality that homelessness isn’t a temporary problem with a fixed solution. It is a fixture in American society that deserves long-term solutions for long-term needs.


Scott Schenkelberg is Executive Director of Miriam’s Kitchen, a homeless services provider in Washington, DC. Each year, they provide healthy meals, comprehensive case management services, therapeutic groups, and transitional housing to more than 4,000 homeless men and women


For more information, please visit www.miriamskitchen.org

Labels: ,

Sunday, January 25, 2009

The State Is Still The State

By David C in Young Anabaptist Radicals:

Yesterday was truly a big day in U.S. history. The inauguration of the first African-American President is truly a turning point for our nation, especially given our abysmal history on race. Moreover, it was encouraging to hear Senator Dianne Feinstein’s reflections on the nonviolence of Martin Luther King, President Obama’s message that we need not choose “between our safety and ideals” and his call to diplomacy and international aid over sheer violent force and military power, and Reverend Joseph Lowery’s prayer that one day we will “beat our tanks into tractors.”
Nevertheless, I had a difficult time getting too emotional or excited over this change of guard. For, while yesterday was historical from the perspective of the United States, it was a pretty small speck when history is viewed rightly. As John Howard Yoder tirelessly argued, the locus of history is not with the state but with God’s work through his church. The state is merely the context in which the real drama of history can unfold.

So, while the words and symbolism of the inauguration may be moving, the sobering fact is that the state is still the state. Yes, Obama seems more intent than Bush on using diplomatic tactics to secure peace, but his message to our “enemy” was still virtually the same: “We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.”

Not much room there for Jesus’s message to love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, and turn the other cheek. But this is as should be expected, because the state is still the state.

Ironically, with this change of guard many us open-minded, progressive Christians will begin to forget that the state is still the state. We will start to put our faith in the ideals of the state and our hope in its progress. As blogger Halden recently argued, now more than ever is it imperative (though difficult) to be resolute in our anti-empire polemics. It was far too easy to maintain a prophetic witness to the state when those in charge overtly sanctioned military aggression, torture, and seemingly unbridled increase of personal power. But when those in power seem to share many of our ideals, the temptation will be to give them a pass when they deem military violence necessary in this or that situation. And it will be difficult for us to make the unfashionable charge that those in power sanction the unjust extermination of the least of those among us. Indeed, to increase the irony still further, it may be the conservative Christians who begin to recognize with more clarity the separation between church and state (as many of my students, for example, ponder whether or not Obama is the anti-Christ!). They will now be the ones to speak prophetically, though their witness will be narrow and tainted by their continual use of political means to grasp for power.

It as at this time, perhaps more than any other, that we need to heed Yoder’s exhortation to what he calls “evangelical nonconformity,” quoted here at length:


When then Jesus said to His disciples, “In the world, kings lord it over their subjects . . . Not so with you”; He was not beckoning His followers to a legalistic withdrawal from society out of concern for moral purity. Rather, His call was to an active missionary presence within society, a source of healing and creativity because it would take the pattern of his own suffering servanthood.

Jesus thereby unmasks the pretension to use violence for the good as being a form of hypocrisy: these rulers call themselves “benefactors” but they are not servants. He who would claim to have the right to use violence, and especially legal violence, against another, places himself outside of the scope of Jesus’ mode of servanthood. This is not so much because he sins against the letter of the law from the Old Testament or the New but because he claims (with a pride intrinsic to his position) to have the right — (whether on the basis of official status, of superior insight, or of his moral qualities) — to determine in a definitive way the destiny of others. The older language in which the theme of “conformity to this world” was stated in Bible times had to do with “idols,” with those unworthy objects of devotion to whom men in their blindness sacrificed. Thus it is quite fitting to describe the use of violence as the outworking of an idolatry. If I take the life of another, I am saying that I am devoted to another value, one other than the neighbor himself, and other than Jesus Christ Himself, to which I sacrifice my neighbor. I have thereby made a given nation, social philosophy, or party my idol. To it I am ready to sacrifice not only something of my own, but also the lives of my fellow human beings for whom Christ gave His life.


- John Howard Yoder, “Christ, the Hope of the World” in The Original Revolution: Essays on Christian Pacifism, 174-75
In this time of celebration, may we not forget that the state is still the state. And we are still called to be the church.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

What Is Community?

A community is a self-sustaining entity
A community is a collection of different ideals that coalesce into a whole
A community is an “us” that lives together
A community doesn’t always live in harmony, but issues are resolved for the sustaining of the whole
A community is usually recognized by other communities as being a unit—but even if it is not, it does not negate its viability.

The homeless are not a “problem”. The homeless are a community.

I’m not talking about the homeless who are out on the street for a month, desperately seeking a way out and then getting a home to their great relief. I’m talking about the chronic homeless, who seek to sustain in a population that denies their right to survive. They are denied who they are because of the prejudices that are forced on them. The labels “addict”, “lazy”, “violent”, “irrational” that are less likely accurate to an individual person, but is applied to the group as a whole without remorse end up causing the homeless to hate himself for being a part of what he is not.

The chronic homeless are not just outcast, they are an outcast community. The homeless have gate-keepers, who take the newbies under their wing, guiding them to the methods of survival on the street. They have leaders that keep the peace and determine the limits and allowances of their community. They have loves and hates, dramas and conflicts, resolutions and truces, hopes and goals just like all other communities.

Although the homeless are at the center of their community, they are not the only members. At the outskirts of this community, one foot in, one foot out, are the middle class servers of the community. They offer food, clothes, showers, AA meetings, sermons, temporary housing and many other services. These charity givers have different purposes, and have different impacts on the community. Most of them do their service, but don’t really want to connect to the community out of personal preference or even fear. Many of them have relationships with some of the community, but only out of professional goals, due to their job. A very few actually make the full step into the community and have personal relationships with the homeless. These are the bridges, the ones who see the community for what it is and who try to communicate this vibrancy to those who live in fear of the community.

The community also has its enemies. The city leaders who deny the existence of the community, and only see the homeless as non-citizens, roadblocks to the way of life they are trying to achieve. The police who move camps on, telling the homeless to leave their city. The young people who attack the helpless, beating up and even burning the homeless who aren’t on their guard. Those who take it upon themselves to throw away the camps of the homeless, including their tents, sleeping bags and personal items that cannot be replaced. The mutual anger at these enemies can also sustain unity, just as every other community.

I deeply regret what the community is not allowed. They are religious but not allowed a church, for they do not have the land in which to have one. They are hard workers but not allowed to be self-sustaining, because no one sees them as working unless they become a part of the community of employed. They are proud but not allowed to be respected because they are outcast. They are moral but not allowed to be legal because they are by definition criminals.

The worst of all, is that, for the most part, the homeless receive their community definition defined by the stereotypes of the threatened community—the middle class. They see themselves as a community of addicts, of the lazy, of the worthless. Not because the community fits the definition—almost everyone they know are exceptions to the rule of the stereotype. But because everyone believes of themselves what they hear. No matter how untrue it is.

Labels: ,