Early Morning Homeless Outreach

“What about that guy?” asks the voice from the back seat of the van. I quickly look to my right as we pass an elderly gentleman with slumping posture shuffling down the sidewalk. He definitely looks as if he might be homeless. Or he might just be out to pick up his newspaper. Courtney, my supervisor at PATH (People Assisting The Homeless) stops the van against the closest available stretch of curb that’s not in front of a driveway or blocked by cars parked on the street. She remains seated as I and our two volunteers step outside, going over in our heads the best way to approach this guy Our goal is having him complete a homelessness survey and offering him a free bag of toiletries and snacks without offending him, just in case he turns out to be a retired homeowner going for his daily jaunt around the block. Clutching my clipboard close against my chest for warmth in the frigid southern California air, I think about how I would be able to see my breath if it weren’t for the pre-dawn darkness.

Wendel, one of the volunteers, is a resident of the surrounding neighborhood of Baldwin Hills and has shown ambitious enthusiasm in helping our agency conduct a preliminary “snapshot” of the homeless population in his area. He confidently strides toward the man who’s now crossing the street. “Excuse me....” he calls out, “hey ol’ G.” I’m not exactly sure what “ol’ G” means, but the stranger stops to see what on earth we could possibly want from him at 6 o clock in the morning.

As I catch up to them and look the guy over, any anxiety surrounding how to inquire whether or not he’s homeless with tact and delicacy quickly vanishes. He’s wearing a tattered long sleeve shirt with a stretched collar that’s falling off of his right shoulder, and he’s walking on top of the ends of his baggy pant legs. His feet are almost completely covered by his blue jeans, but not entirely, and I see the toes of his socks peeking out through the holes. Having spent many years living in or close to the inner city, I wouldn’t have even noticed the low way he was sagging his pants if he had been wearing shoes. Well, shoes, and underwear, that is. Richelle, the other volunteer, who is Wendel’s fiance and is out here with us this morning even though it’s her 42nd birthday, immediately notices the same thing. We both quickly look away while the man tugs upward on the front of his pants to keep from exposing himself.

Wendel introduces me by saying that I work for PATH and that we’re conducting surveys in effort to start providing quality assistance to homeless people in the area of Baldwin Hills. If he participates in the survey, he’ll receive a bag stocked with deodorant, shampoo, a toothbrush, toothpaste, granola bars, a bottle of water, a razor, socks and other goodies. Before I start the survey I whisper to Richelle to check the bag that we’ve brought with us to make sure that it really does include a pair of socks. She checks. It doesn’t. Wendel jogs back over to the van to exchange it for a different one.

“Hi there,” I say, deciding not to extend my usual handshake when I see that the guy still has his fingers buried inside the front waistband of his pants. “First off, can you tell me your name?”

“OG” the man replies softly. I think to myself: Does Wendel somehow know this guy? I’m still not sure whether OG is a name or some sort of code. (I would later learn that “OG” is short for Older Gentleman.)

“Umm, sorry, what’s your first name?”

“OG” he repeats.

“Okay, so what’s your last name?” I ask stupidly, still not sure if I’m hearing him correctly.

“Just put ‘OG’ as his name” Richelle advises me as O.G. repeats his name for the third time.

“OK OG, can you tell me where you slept last night? A shelter? In the streets? In a vehicle?” I inquire, reading off the options on our survey form.

Normally when I interact with people on the streets I’m one of those guys that always tries to talk as if I miraculously grew up in “the ‘hood” instead of a middle-class white household (and according to my friends I usually just end up sounding embarrassingly silly and self-conscious), but I get the feeling this time that it’s going to be difficult for me to communicate with O.G. if I’m trying to imitate the speech pattern of a hip hop artist. So instead I’m asking him the questions in the same way I would talk to my 96 year old grandfather.

“In the streets,” he answers my question without elaborating.

“And how long have you been homeless?”

“Six months.”

“Six months?” I double check. I was guessing he’d say at least 10 years.

“Yeah.”

I write his answers down and continue with the survey. I start getting the feeling that he doesn’t trust me. The other two people we’ve interviewed this morning have told us stories and explained almost every answer. O.G. on the other hand is giving the bare minimum of information; just enough for me to fill in blanks and check boxes on the survey form. Plus, it seems like he’s saying “No” to every single yes-or-no question. No, he doesn’t have any health problems. No, he hasn’t been to the emergency room in the past 3 months. No, he’s never been to jail. No, he doesn’t have any mental health issues. No, he’s never been told he abuses drugs or alcohol. When I get to the question that asks which specific drugs he uses, Richelle interjects to clarify that we’re not with the police or government, and that his answers are completely confidential. However, he doesn’t change his answers and insists he doesn’t use any type of drugs or alcohol.

It’s a long survey; it takes nearly 10 minutes to finish the whole thing, and by the end I consider that O.G. might be giving such short, bland answers because he doesn’t want to spend forever standing on the sidewalk talking to strangers with no shoes or jacket when it’s 45 degrees outside. Finally, we finish the survey. Wendel gives him the bag as we wish him good luck, and the three of us trudge back to the van.

“Not a single one of our bags had any socks in it!” Wendel declares as soon as we’re outside of earshot.

“I was afraid of that” I say. “I made up the bags last week, and we only had about 30 pairs of socks.” Today is day two of our three day homelessness survey blitz in the city of Baldwin Hills. Courtney, Wendel and I are one of five teams composed of PATH staff and volunteers that are combing the streets, parking lots and alleyways of the city limits in an effort to gather as much information as possible about the number and vulnerability of the local homeless population. Each team is assigned a specific area of the city in which to conduct surveys between the hours of 5am and 7:30am: presumably the time when people are most likely not to be busy or moving about and in the same places in their daily “routines.” After day one we had already documented 22 people (and thus given out 22 bags), so I was not at all surprised to learn that we no longer have socks.

“Yeah, it’s ok; I just gave him my own pair of socks,” Wendel says plainly. Richelle, Courtney and I are all touched, and we each give him a variation of some sort of “oh my gosh, that’s so sweet” affirmation. Wendel just shrugs, knowing it was simply the right thing to do. As we drive off to explore the parking lot of a nearby McDonalds, I can see the orange glow of dawn beginning to break across the palm tree-lined LA horizon.

A Fairly Easily Resistible Philosophy on Life: Living as an Ordinary Moderate-Liberal Protestant

I've almost finished reading Shane Claiborne's The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radical (for the second time; the first time I read it was 2 years ago). I've been thinking about the book a lot, as it now has many direct applications for the manner in which I want to live my life during this year in Hollywood (and beyond...) I was originally going to blog tonight about some experiences working at PATH, but some thoughts on Irresistible Revolution have been weighing on my mind instead.

For those of you who don't know anything about Shane Claiborne's book, it is basically an account of how one individual has chosen to live his life in accordance with the message of the Christian Gospel. Shane Claiborne is a founding member of The Simple Way, an intentional community in Philadelphia. He is passionate about not only "serving" the poor, but living amongst the poor and even "being poor" by 21st century US standards. He notes that a huge segment of Christians base their faith on being "born again" because there's an account of Jesus telling someone in the Bible that they must be "born again" to enter the kingdom of heaven. What if there were an entire segment of the Christian population who based their faith on selling all of their possessions and giving the money to the poor -- because there's an account in the Bible of Jesus telling one guy to do exactly that, as well.

A couple weeks ago, my housemates and I, along with Matthew our site coordinator, were having a discussion on the book (we have "community day" where the six of us take time to check in, have book discussions, pray and be present with each other every monday). One of the interim pastors of First Pres. Hollywood had joined us as a guest to talk with us about some of his own experiences in Christian mission. The pastor hadn't read the book, but he eagerly listened as we talked about it and gave him a brief synopsis of the book's premise. During the discussion, the pastor cautioned that many types of theology like Shane's tend to "idealize the poor." Just because people find themselves in conditions of poverty doesn't mean that they're blameless and that their lifestyles should be imitated. We don't worship the poor or the Revolution, or Social Justice; we worship Jesus Christ. Poor people have their own spiritual problems and lifestyle problems that don't only stem from poverty.

This was a good point for me to hear. One of my only criticisms of the book up to that point had been my "theory" that Shane had to have sugarcoated and left details out of many of his stories and anecdotes that he describes in the book. He talks about giving away thousands of dollars to people on wall street and seeing people use it to share with each other and buy food for strangers. He recalls how a group of college protesters and homeless people working together helped overturn laws that forbid people from sleeping in an abandoned building or eating in a park. He tells stories about how he and his cohorts seemingly effortlessly would teach inner city kids to resist entering the cycle of violence. As someone that at least has a LITTLE bit of experience with some of these issues, I read the book and think to myself "How is it so easy for him to do all this cool stuff?!" There MUST be 20 stories of failure for every one beautiful kum-bay-ya moment. In the small neighborhood where we live, it seems unbelievably difficult for kids to escape the pull of gangs. The middle schoolers we tutor in our community house curse at each other, constantly talk about how "gangster" they are, and evidently must be watched closely because they're very frequently "dared" to steal things from the community house. Usually from my point of view, it does not seem like living in urban poverty should be idealized.

As I've made the startlingly clear realization that Shane Claiborne in his book and I myself in my own theology tend to "idealize the poor," I've tried to make sense for how I should change my outlook. Does Shane have something that I'm missing? Does he not realize that he idealizes the poor? Has he really lost sight of worshiping Jesus in his quest to live simply among the "least of these?" And at this point, I've reached the conclusion that *duh* of COURSE Shane Claiborne and other intellectual, liberation theology author types realize that they idealize the poor. Shane KNOWS he's sugar coating. He knew that his book wasn't going to get the majority of middle-upper class citizens to move out of their suburbs and into the inner city and start inviting homeless people over for dinner. He's got a little more self-awareness than that. He's heard from plenty of critics and he knows perfectly well that many well-thought out projects and sincere efforts to live among and increase the quality of life for poor people fall flat on their faces.

But why the hell would he admit that in his book? "Um yeah, God says that there should 'be no poor among you,' but even though I personally am working to change that, it's really not practical or necessary for most people to try it. Besides, plenty of homeless people are perfectly content just living on the streets getting by on the products of other people's guilt anyway." That type of attitude isn't going to move anybody. Although many people in conditions of poverty were born into it with very little chance of getting out, not every single poor person is a "victim of the system." Some have no one to blame but themselves. Some have simply made poor decisions -- and some have been given second and third chances and continued to make bad decisions every time. Some prefer to rely on the government/other people's aid and have very little interest in becoming self-sufficient or taking responsibility for their own lives. Most people who have encountered poverty in the US know this. I contend that Shane Claiborne knows this. It's a politically incorrect, but widely known truth -- and it's the reason why attempts to fight poverty are so half-hearted (well, one of the reasons anyway).

Shane Claiborne knows that it's true, but declaring that it's true and then LIVING as if it's true only perpetuates the problem. If we seriously let this truth become a guiding principle of our lives, we stay walled in our suburbs. We become convinced that poverty shouldn't get too high on our priority list, because our efforts to solve it fail. The more important truth is that the reason that our efforts to solve poverty fail is that we never TRULY believed poverty could be solved in the first place.

It is really, really tough to make any headway on issues like poverty and homelessness. Shane Claiborne (and slowly but surely, I as well) know that short-term mission trips, under-funded non-profits, and the charity of middle-class Christian "do-gooders" isn't going to get it done. The only way to affect real change is through entire lifestyle changes that are, as the book title says, quite radical. When wealthy people go out to meet and really get to know the poor with the attitude that real change really is possible, that's when both sides are radically transformed. And the only way to create that sort of encounter is to idealize the poor. Idealize them as much as possible. Make it sexy as hell for gifted, privileged white kids to forgo comfort and money in favor of totally dedicating their lives to living in solidarity with people who aren't so privileged. And perhaps some of those facts about life that most of us know to be true will become myths some day.