On Tuesday, my group had volunteered at S.O.M.E (So Others Might Eat). SOME just might be my favorite ministry site. It is a site that 'meets the Immediate Needs of the poor, destitute and hungry.' They will provide anyone who shows up at their doors with a meal and a shower. They have other programs which include medical care, dentistry, counseling, rehabilitation, job-skills training and halfway housing. Their ultimate goal is to make the individuals who started out with immediate needs to be able to live on their own.
The reason that I respect SOME so much is because they demand respect from their clients, they work hard and run on a rigid schedule. They keep a clean environment and their attitudes are amazing. In return, they expect to be respected by the people that they serve. At times, they may seem 'too uptight.' They regulate portions, and are efficient. But, when they demand respect, it pays off. A lot of the staff that now works full time at SOME are graduates of their programs who, at one time had immediate needs that needed to be met. It's so cool to see that as SOME gives to these people, they in turn give back.
The day after we served at SOME, we served at a soup kitchen that provides meals to women in need of food. At this kitchen, their work is also amazing and their employees are incredible. The biggest difference that I noticed between this second site and SOME is that the second site went above and beyond to personally cater to the woman in their site. They took individual requests for their food, and always provided more than the women asked for.
Both of these sites are ministries in the city, but what do they have to do with sociology?
During our training, the President gave us a training session on how to help break the cycle of poverty while assisting the economically challenged, rather than to just provide food for a meal. One of the ways that he went about this was by giving us an example of a sociological idea that we could put into practice. It's something like this. If one person provides a second person with a gift, they have a relationship. BUT, once the first person provides the second person with a second gift, and expects nothing in return, the relationship is unbalanced, and creating a level of equality is (almost) impossible. The point behind it, is that if all we do is continually give, we create an unequal relationship. It automatically places 'us' at a higher level than 'them.' It makes those we are aiding (even though our intentions may be pure) think that they have nothing that they can give us that would be of equal value to whatever we are giving them.
It was fascinating to me to watch this play out. At SOME, they demand something in return from those they aid. They demand respect, cooperation and a certain level on conduct. As they build a relationship with these people, a lot of them come back to work for SOME and are crucial to their organization. At the other site, where much was given, and nothing was expected, it was seen in the attitudes of the people. They became picky, irritable and demanding in regards to what they were given. Not all of them were like this, but a substantial amount were.
It was a great reminder to me. It made me realize that as I go about my job this summer, I need to be receiving as much as I am giving. I need to listen to the stories of the individuals I meet, and I need to learn from them. I need to take what they have to give me, as they receive my gifts as well. They may not have material goods to give me, but a lot of them have life experiences that I don't have. And sometimes, those are even more priceless than any tangible gifts I could provide. If I can keep myself in check, I know I will be able to create relationships that can last for a lifetime.
No comments:
Post a Comment