Hamartiology & Houselessness
Does how we understand the human condition affect how we address social services?
Denver’s struggles with the unhoused population
Like many major cities, Denver Colorado has been experiencing a significant uptick of unhoused individuals, with over 9,000 persons lacking permanent housing, a number that grew 32% from 20221 and is certainly much higher from newly arriving migrants in 2024.2 Yet even before the flow of migrants began, persons experiencing homelessness was a serious challenge for the city.
One anonymous resident, known only by the Instagram handle DoBetterDnvr, has been “advocating” for a different plan of action since 2021.3 In short, the account regularly publishes videos of persons living on the streets or in makeshift camps doing drugs, starting fires, or otherwise living in squalor. Posts also regularly criticize Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and city leadership. While the mangers of the account are seen as “anti-homeless,” “dehumanizing,” and “horrible human being(s),” the account bio says something markedly different. “A better Denver starts with you. Let’s find compassionate, tough-love solutions to homelessness.”4
@ Do Better DNVR
A recent article in the left-leaning Westword newspaper recently did a feature on the handle, including comments from the anonymous people behind the handle and critics of the account. From one critic, a leader with Colorado Coalition for the Homeless (CCH) says this; “I think we’re really disappointed in the content they put out because it perpetuates stereotypes and the stigmatization of people experiencing homelessness… It’s so invasive and intentionally disrespectful to film people who are struggling just to try to score headlines or social media views." In response, the @DoBetterDNVR founder told Westword “she believes ‘drug use in our public spaces should be stigmatized’ and claims she talks about solutions frequently on her page.”
While I tend to lean on the side of CCH on the efficacy of this Instagram account, DoBetterDNVR does make an interesting point, however imprecisely and impolitely.5 Essentially, the account holder is arguing that making people feel bad or face consequences for their poor choices is an important step in them finding a better way of living. This approach stands in stark contrast to the methodology that has largely shaped social outreach efforts over the last several years, which instead has been rooted in providing education, opportunity, resources, and more.
Reasusseau’s influence.
This approach, that what’s lacking in people is not a realization of their own failures and mistakes but rather a lack of education, opportunity, and resources, according to Andrew Root, stems from the thinking of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, an influential18th-century European Enlightenment philosopher. In his book, The Church in an Age of Secular Mysticism, Root discusses how Rousseau made claims that hitherto were unheard of. “Rousseau asserts that what corrupts the inner life, suffocating the self in perdition, does not come from within the self. Corruption can only ever come from without. Whereas Augustine believes that the inner life is sinful…Rousseau believes the exact opposite. The inner life is pure and innocent as it is. It is the outside inbreaking that corrupts it."6 Meaning, what makes humans bad isn’t any kind of “original sin” but rather the corrupting influence of wider society. Therefore, education or opportunity that empowers the individual is the best way to improve humanity.
What’s particularly interesting to me is how much this way of thinking has crept its way into Progressive Christian thinking. I remember parroting almost these exact words during my time in a Mainline seminary—this idea that we as humans are fundamentally good and its really just society that screws us up.7 But, one can see this almost entirely throughout Progressive Christianity. Root also discusses this in Churches and the Crisis of Decline when he gives the example of a pastor that had given a church the “watchword” they they are “good enough” on their own. I’m also reminded of the song I referenced in a previous post. But, are we good enough on our own?
Does Information lead to transformation?
If we are good enough on our own, then the solution is quite simple—more education and opportunity is what is needed, rather than external intervention. Root is of course of the opinion that external intervention, aka God, is needed. I’m not sure I totally buy into the idea of original sin, at least how it is historically taught, but I think this is a key question.8 If humans are intrinsically good and our only brokenness comes from outsiders rather than ourselves, then of course it follows that the solution to our brokenness is education and opportunity.
But, does education lead to transformation? Jay Kim, in his book Analog Church, makes the point that information does not transform, it only informs. Jessie Cruickshank makes a similar point in her book Ordinary Discipleship. She writes, “Experiential learning, revelation, and testimony allow for learning to be life changing as opposed to learning facts that we can either agree or disagree with” (my emphasis). More, she writes, “I am of the strong conviction that propositional truth is a weak discipleship method and that it literally educates us beyond our obedience.”9 Of course, one could argue that Cruickshank is making a point about religious formation or discipleship.10 Technically, but I think her point has broader implications, which I am seeking to flesh out here.
Back to Root
In his book, The Pastor in a Secular Age, Root goes into deep discussion about this dichotomy, noting that in our modern world, nothing is seen as a personal failure or a result of inner sinfulness. He writes, “You might feel guilty, but what you feel comes from your brain chemistry or misinterpreted history. It isn’t you that is sinful (if anything, you’re sick)… Your self does not need confession or an outside ontological force to bring healing and a new moral trajectory; you just need analysis or a pill.”11 Or, if I may interpret Root through the words of Cruickshank (or vice versa), the modern idea is that we can agree or disagree with someone else’s observation, accepting it only when I find it useful of my own accord.
But, even external observations are questionable Root notes. For in what feels especially relevant to the Do Better DNVR example, Root says “The modern moral order of the buffered self, cordoned off from ontological encounter, asserts that no one is allowed to judge anyone. People are not sinful, just sick, and it is rude to point out and judge sick people” (my emphasis).12 In short, “Our modern moral order assets that it is wrong to judge anyone.”13 Basically, no one other than ourselves is allowed to examine or evaluate our actions. And, as an outsider, the only way to help someone who may need help is simply to be available when they come to us.
As an aside, I just can’t help but think about the soteriological implications of this, assuming of course I’m understanding Root correctly. As I understand the gospel message, God takes the initiative without our prerogative, essentially saying humanity needs help and that we, on our own, can’t get ourselves out of the mess we’ve made. This of course stands in sharp contrast to the ideology that Root seeks to critique throughout his Ministry in a Secular Age series—that God is sort of just a cheerleader or life coach wanting to help us be our best self.
A theological clash
What makes the Do Better DNVR handle so interesting and so polarizing is that it is a real-life example of a clash of ideas and essentially theology (hamartiology & anthropology). Its also a real-life example of all the things Root claims one is not supposed to do in modern society. Note again the words of the CCH homeless advocate, who asserts that what Do Better DNVR is doing to these persons “perpetuates stereotypes and the stigmatization of people experiencing homelessness… It’s so invasive and intentionally disrespectful.”
This is exactly what the handle is doing, and therefore, in direct violation of Root’s guidance about living in modern society where it is considered, “rude to point out and judge sick people” and “wrong to judge anyone.” It’s quite apparent why this handle would be so polarizing when the account feels quite the opposite; “drug use should be stigmatized” they say
. Do Better DNVR seems to think there does need to be some amount of external intervention. We have here, quite clearly, to competing understandings of how personal failings14 should be addressed/atoned.15
Addiction, drug abuse, and houselessness are topics for which I have much to learn. And to be fair, using this as an example may be doing more harm than good. In truth, the point of this writing is not to evaluate specific policy actions but rather to consider the theological assumptions underpinning each through the examples of the Instagram account and the CCH representative. As someone who has worked in theological and social contexts, I find it interesting how approaches are informed by contradictory values and I wonder if part of the reason there tends to be so much disagreement and divisiveness around these topics is that advocates for each approach do not realize they are separately arguing from a completely different foundational proposition (e.g. Rousseau vs. Augustine).
Kevin Jeffers and Jennifer Brown, “Who Is Homeless in Denver? Let’s Look at the Numbers.,” The Colorado Sun, December 21, 2023, https://coloradosun.com/2023/12/22/denver-homeless-by-the-numbers/.
Miriam Jordan, “Big Burden of Migrant Influx Strains Denver,” The New York Times, February 13, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/us/denver-colorado-migrants.html.
Chris Perez, “DOBETTERDNVR: This Social Media Account Shines an Uncomfortable Light on the City,” Westword, February 25, 2024, https://www.westword.com/news/how-dobetterdnvr-shines-an-uncomfortable-light-on-denvers-homeless-19365137.
From the Instagram account bio.
Andrew Root discusses the importance of “politeness” in our modern society in The Pastor and the Secular Age.
Root, The Church in an Age of Secular Mysticism, 14.
This being said, I’m also not fully on board with the idea of original sin or that we are corrupt from the start. I’m not sure completely where I land on the topic of hamartiology/anthropology, which is essentially what this post is examining.
My understandings of Family Systems Theory influences my thinking around sin and brokenness, especially the idea of generational trauma transmission. Yet, even acknowledging such, are we not somewhat responsible for our own actions, even if they are strongly influenced by family history?
Jessie Cruickshank, Ordinary Discipleship, 97.
Those paying attention will note I am referencing two Evangelical authors, which tracks with my “Beyonder” framework which Root examines in The Church in Age of Secular Mysticism and I situate myself in this post.
Root, The Pastor in a Secular Age, 74.
Root, The Pastor in a Secular Age, 75.
Root, The Pastor in a Secular Age, 105.
The modern moral order would balk even at this language.
This leads me to wonder if the approach should look more like Alcoholics Anonymous, and one aspect in particular. A key part of the healing process, as it seems to me at least, is the necessity that someone admit they have a problem. Each meeting, a participant has to come and say “Hi, my name is ____, I’m an alcoholic.” Such an admission is a confession of failure, an acceptance that they are unable to, on their own, conquer alcohol. And their attendance of a meeting suggests they realize they can’t do it on their own—they need external help, maybe even, a higher power (dare I say God). In his book, The Church in an Age of Secular Mysticism, Root argues that this model of confession and surrender is ultimately what leads to true transformation.