Introduction

In this chapter we address one of the most significant areas of faith-based organisation (FBO) activity in many European cities – that of caring for homeless people. As has been made clear in a wide range of international research (see, for example, Jencks, 1995; Takahashi, 1998; Edgar and Doherty, 2001; Hopper, 2003; Edgar et al, 2004; Levinson, 2004; Cloke et al, 2010), homelessness is not a new phenomenon, but due to the increasing on-street visibility of homeless people it has emerged as a major social issue in most developed countries over the last 30 or so years (Toro, 2007). Simultaneously, homelessness has been rediscovered as an area of significant concern for faith-motivated individuals and organisations, and we suggest that there has been a particular affinity between the plight of homeless people and the targeting of faith-motivated social action in many European contexts. This chapter explores the role played by FBOs in the wider welfare landscape of care for the homeless.

The emergence of homelessness as a visible and multifaceted social issue has typically attracted a two-pronged response from central and local states (albeit with important local variations in different countries). The first phase of response has been to respond humanely to the crisis of (street) homelessness. Early service provision has typically been put in place by voluntary organisations, including FBOs. Some of these providers have had longstanding involvement in caring for excluded people (Protestant and Catholic organisations in cities, The Salvation Army), while others sprang up as a direct response to the visibility of, and encounters with, homeless people. In some cases, the state has often been prompted by third sector pressure groups (such as Shelter and Crisis in the UK) to become involved by making some specific provision for the welfare of homeless people. Taking the UK as an example, this provision has included programmes such as the Rough Sleepers Initiative and the Housing Action Programme (see May et al, 2005) that included the delivery of emergency accommodation for homeless people. Here, central state funding was used to enable service delivery by non-statutory providers, and this opened up opportunities for formal involvement by some FBOs in addition to the informal and non-funded service provision that was already taking place. Elsewhere in Europe, it was the local state that became responsible for funded programmes to various extents.