Landlords coming across the
want ad, ‘Wanted – Lodgings for Unemployed Single Man’ might be forgiven if
they don’t excitedly get in touch with the advertiser to offer their
accommodation. It is reasonable for
those renting rooms to be sure that their prospective tenants have the means of
paying their rent.
If the homeless had
described himself as a ‘gentleman with private means’ it would give
encouragement to landlords, especially those that have had their share of
rent-skipping fly-by-nights, because most landlords don’t let their
accommodation spaces for love. They are
in the lodging business to make income.
If the lodging seeker had
been more forthcoming about his life-style and intentions for the future,
someone with a room to let might have been prepared to take a risk on him.
It has been said that an
optimist is someone looking for a room that takes his saxophone and piano
accordion along on the hunt. How much in
need of a tenant does a landlord have to be to open his doors and arms wide to
someone that carries with him the means of annoying his other tenants?
Let’s play fly-on-the-wall
to find out how this particular unemployed single man spends his time. Why shouldn’t we? Landlords are only human and the old adage
‘Once bitten twice shy’ is at the front of every landlord’s mind. If it isn’t, then he is either new to the
business, or else he has been lucky.
There are always certain
risks when you open your home to strangers. It makes sense to learn as much as possible
about a potential client and the more you know about him the better you are to
make a sound decision about whether or not to take him in. However, all that is known is that he is
unmarried, out of work, and needs a place to stay.
We have a room to rent,
times are hard, but we must be careful, we feel justified in being cautious and
so we followed him discreetly to acquaint ourselves with his character.
A few days and we had our summary. It was not encouraging. It noted that he keeps company with dubious
characters, drinks with working men but never buys a round, and he is known to
take meals with contemptible people. He
seems comfortable when he is with outcasts that some believe are the dregs of
society, the lumpenproletariat.
He talks a lot, is generally soft spoken, and, strange to
say, most people enjoy listening to him.
He dresses like an out-of-towner, talks with a northern accent, and
wants the polished speech of genteel urbanites.
More disturbing is the
observation that he has attracted the attention of the police, who, it is said,
are watching him closely. He has a small
gang of permanent followers that are as impoverished as he is, so we presume
that they too live on the generosity of strangers.
A red flag was raised by the
particularly harsh way he spoke to a group of evangelists. It looked as if they were trying to make him
into saying something they could use against him, but he was too smart for them
and called their bluff. Loudly he
denounced them as heretics - and worse.
The result was that they were quite humiliated and shuffled off
muttering excitedly that they would make him pay for what they took to be his
sarcasm. Whatever they thought, it was
clear that he felt justified in exposing their hypocritical cant and
superficial religiosity.
When speaking to others he
was so gentle that he put them at ease.
Most people liked him and moved in closer to him as if they were old and
comfortable friends. This made us think
he might have a split personality, such as a Mr Nice Guy and a Mr Nasty. We were not the only ones that thought
that. Some even thought he was mad, or
drunk, or in the grip of a malevolent humour, and said so. Others nodded in agreement.
The summary concluded that
he was either a wonderful or a dangerous man, depending on which group your ear
got caught in, and which you believed.
It was not helpful to us because it didn’t tell us whether would he
murder us in our beds, pay his rent, bring outcasts home to disturb our peace,
set fire to the house, or run off with our daughter? We were just as indecisive as we were
before. He didn’t seem like a lot of
trouble, but would he have our rent money?
Then the matter was taken
right out of our hands because he was arrested.
It looked as if his goose was well and truly cooked because some powerful
people brought accusations against him.
We knew he was different, but the complaints showed a side of him that
knocked us right off our buffets.
He was accused of anarchy,
plotting to overthrow government, and of making himself more important than
local and national authorities. It was
told he had run amok in a market, assaulted people, and had upset their stalls. Some said he was mentally ill, paranoid, a
megalomaniac, and a danger to life and limb.
We had had a close shave! It was
even charged that he intended to destroy a national monument and then build a
better one by his alleged magic power.
Others said he was a political
activist, a revolutionary leading an army of terrorist insurgents that would
attack the city at night, overthrow the administration, and set up his
junta. His wandering habits and his
parleying with all and sundry was really a secret campaign to recruit fellow
radicals to his cause.
They dragged him quickly to
trial. His trial was unusual because
witnesses flatly contradicted each other.
Some opined that witnesses had been paid to lie and there would have been
laughter in court as one witness after another contradicted each other, except
the court dealt harshly with any that didn’t take its proceedings with absolute
gravity.
He was pronounced guilty of
everything they charged him with. It was
obviously a pre-determined verdict. However,
what was even more unusual was the chief justice’s announcement that he was
sending the case to the Supreme Court for sentencing.
Some demurred at verdict, but did
so quietly, on grounds that no defence was mounted. The homeless man was not represented, and
didn’t open his mouth in his defence. By
any legal standards, it was clearly a mistrial, but it was evident that the
court officials were not willing to risk losing control of the situation and
relinquish the opportunity to have the ultimate punishment of death imposed.
When he was set before the senior
judiciary the prosecution was reluctant to define the charge for which it
sought the death sentence. The
transcript of this part of the trial reads:
Chief Justice: What is the charge against the accused?
Prosecutor: Don’t you worry about
the charge. He is clearly guilty. If he were not guilty, we would not have
brought him here! Just sentence him to
death.
Chief Justice: No charge, no trial! If that’s how you feel, then take him back to
your court and deal with his offence.
Prosecutor: We cannot do that because we are not authorised
to pass a sentence of death.
After that things went badly for
our almost lodger. The high court avoided its duty to uphold the
law by giving in to popular clamour that ensured he was put to death. It was as just as a lynching in the lawless
Wild West.
It was all over in a very short
time. He was sentenced to die, taken,
and then executed. No appeal, no plea
for clemency, nothing offered in mitigation, no sense that justice had been
served. For most of the citizens it was
just another hard day in their hard lives.
Nevertheless, the executed man
was not forgotten. He was talked about
all over town. We learned much more
about him than we had found out for ourselves.
Some of the accounts seemed far fetched, but those telling the stories
were honest folks with nothing to gain by lying. Some had seen him heal sick people of ills
such as lameness, paralysis, and blindness.
Others said he had fed big crowds of people with a few scraps of
food.
One said he turned ordinary well
water into delicious wine. Another that
he had changed the weather, and more than one said they had seen him raise the
dead. It was hard to know what to
believe.
We solved our lodger situation by
renting the room to a weaver. There was
nothing unusual or outlandish about him.
He paid his rent, made his cloth, and sold it in the market place. He was easy to feed, very quiet, the children
liked him, and apart from his snoring we hardly knew we had him.
Late at night, my wife and I
talked about the homeless man and what it might have been like if he had come
to live with us. I was unsettled because
there were too many unanswered questions.
However, my wife, simple soul that she is, said she liked him because he
had a kind face and smiling eyes. She said
she thought he would have been a good lodger.
And then, and I know it’s a funny
thing, but I was in the city centre a few weeks later when one of his people
was talking about him to a crowd, and he talked about him as though he was
still alive – and still looking for lodgings!
It is amazing how some people
manage to look serious when saying daft things.
This fellow was saying that the homeless guy still needed a
lodging. That’s when I lost interest and
skirted the crowd to make my way home.
The world is mad enough without making more madness. I could still hear him going on about the
dead man until I was almost home.
When I got back home I told my
wife what I had heard, and she quizzed me as if I was the one on trial. I had no choice but to tell what I had heard,
expecting her to laugh. But she was not
amused. She looked at me in that way she
has when she wants me to listen carefully
“Is that exactly what you heard
him asked?” she asked. I had to admit
that it was not exactly word for
word.
“Then what was it? What did he say? Exactly!” she returned.
“Let me see,” I needed time to think.
“Ah, yes,” I said when I had collected my
thoughts. “He said, ‘This man you
delivered to be killed has been raised from the dead by the power of God and is
alive today.’ He also said that the man’s
name was Joshua, and that God has made him both King and Messiah.’”
“Messiah? King?
And then what?” asked my bold - getting bolder - wife.
“Well, that’s when I started to
leave. I had heard enough to know it
wasn’t something I wanted to get mixed up in.”
“What did the others do?”
“They seemed thunderstruck. Their mouths gaped open. Some began to cry and pull out their hair,
and they all wanted to know what they ought to do.”
“And then?”
“Then this big fellow told them
to change their ways and be baptised in the name of homeless Joshua and that if
they did God would wash off their sins and then they would be given a special
Spirit. When I heard that it seemed so
reasonable that I almost wanted to go back and join them.
“What else?” demanded the curious
one.
“He said that this applied to
people in all parts of the world, and told them to save themselves by finding
safety in Joshua.”
“I must go to them,” said
she. “I must become one of them.”
“Hold on!” I said, seeking to
prevent her making a fool of herself and me.
But she was determined and went out through the door to make her way
downtown. I couldn’t let her go alone so
I went with her. Anyway, I still had a
couple of questions that needed answers, although, being the sensible one, I
had my doubts that it was anything worth our while.
I thought the whole thing absurd,
but I detected a funny feeling in the air, much like the atmosphere when a big
thunderstorm is coming, and I knew my lady had felt it. And then there was this peculiar urge growing
inside me and before I knew it, we were in the crowd hearing about Joshua.
The longer I listened the more it
made sense to me. I mean about the
lodger thing. It transpired that the
homeless man, Joshua, had told a man that asked to join his band he was welcome
to join him but that if he did he would be homeless, because although foxes
have dens, and birds have nests, the Son of man, that’s what this Joshua he
called himself, didn’t have a place to lay his head at night.
Hearing this I felt ashamed that
I had ever hesitated to take him under our roof. But what could I do about that now? My wife and I talked with his chief follower
and found that though he is no longer homeless, it was not him that needed
lodging in the first place, but us that needed him as our lodger. They told us he had gone into heaven to his
Father and his God, but has promised to live with us as our Comforter.
We went home with the funniest
feeling I have ever experienced. It was
as if my heart was bursting with joy.
Well, we were both exhilarated by what we had learned and come to
believe.
We talked and talked for hours through
the night about the homeless man, warming ever more to him as we did. As we were talking excitedly at what the day
had uncovered to us, we were silenced by a knocking on our door.
We looked at each other in the
feint glimmer of the oil lamp. The
question "who is it?" hung on our lips unasked. I looked through the window to see the Homeless
One.
“It’s him, wife!” I shouted.
“It is the Homeless One!”
“Well then, open the door!”
husband she shouted, standing and taking off her apron.
Hurriedly I unlatched the door
and invited him into our home, and into our hearts. Before he crossed our threshold, he said,
“Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and
open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with
me.”
He came into our home with his
aura of light. But not only light, but joy. And not only joy, but hope, and not only
light, joy, and hope, but peace, a perfect peace so profound that we while cannot
understand it we are nevertheless transformed by it.
Our Lodger now has a permanent
home with us. Moreover, he has promised
us a permanent home with him.
© 2010 – Ronnie Bray
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED