In cities across Australia and the United States, and in much of the world, families are making impossible choices. A single mother in Sydney decides between paying rent and buying groceries. A retired couple in Phoenix watches their fixed income shrink as housing costs rise. A young teacher in Melbourne commutes two hours each way because affordable housing near her school has vanished. These stories repeat themselves millions of times over, forming a quiet crisis that reshapes communities, fractures families, and leaves lasting wounds on human dignity.
Housing has become one of the defining moral challenges of our time. The church has historically responded to such challenges with prophetic voice and practical action, building hospitals and schools, feeding the hungry, and welcoming the stranger. Today, housing insecurity calls for the same response. This is a matter of urgent priority for religious communities, a primary social and spiritual issue that touches the foundations of human flourishing, and an area where religious organizations can work alongside government and civil society to achieve meaningful change.
The Sacred Significance of Shelter
Scripture repeatedly speaks about dwelling places, the significance of home, and the tragedy of displacement. The Hebrew scriptures contain detailed instructions about housing the stranger and protecting those who lack secure shelter. Deuteronomy’s vision of a just society includes provisions to ensure that no family permanently loses its ancestral land. The prophets thundered against those who accumulated houses while others had none, with Isaiah condemning those who “join house to house” until no space remains for people with low incomes.[1]
Jesus himself experienced housing precarity. Born in borrowed space because there was no room at the inn, raised as a refugee fleeing to Egypt, and later declaring that “the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head,” Christ knew the vulnerability of displacement. His ministry consistently elevated hospitality as a central virtue, from staying in the homes of both tax collectors and religious leaders to his parable of the Good Samaritan, which pivots on providing shelter to a stranger in need.
Catholic social teaching has developed extensive frameworks connecting housing to human dignity. Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum in 1891 defended the right to property while insisting on its social obligations. Subsequent encyclicals have consistently affirmed that housing security is essential to family life, child development, and community participation. The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states that access to adequate housing is among the conditions necessary for human dignity.[2] Protestant traditions have similarly emphasized stewardship, economic justice, and care for the vulnerable as theological imperatives bearing directly on housing questions.
At its core, the theological case for housing rests on a simple conviction: every person bears the image of God and deserves conditions that allow human flourishing. Stable housing enables families to form lasting bonds, children to develop in consistent environments, communities to build the trust that makes civic life possible, and individuals to participate fully in a religious community. When housing becomes precarious, all of these goods are threatened.
Housing Insecurity as Spiritual Crisis
The practical harms of housing instability are well documented: poor health outcomes, disrupted education, reduced employment prospects, and increased rates of family breakdown. But the spiritual dimensions deserve equal attention. Housing precarity erodes the conditions necessary for spiritual formation. Constant worry about next month’s rent or the possibility of eviction creates chronic stress that crowds out the contemplative space prayer requires. Frequent moves fracture the relationships that sustain faith communities. When families must choose between housing and other necessities, church involvement often becomes a casualty.
“When housing becomes precarious, the conditions necessary for spiritual formation erode. Constant worry about next month’s rent crowds out the contemplative space prayer requires. Frequent moves fracture the relationships that sustain faith communities. When families must choose between housing and other necessities, church involvement often becomes a casualty.”
Congregations feel these effects directly. Churches in gentrifying neighborhoods watch longtime members displaced to distant suburbs, breaking bonds built over decades. Pastors report spending increasing time helping parishioners navigate housing crises. Young families who might form the next generation of church leadership struggle to establish themselves in communities where housing costs consume unsustainable portions of their income.
The psychological toll compounds these challenges. Research consistently links housing insecurity to depression, anxiety, and diminished hope. Children who experience housing instability show elevated rates of behavioral problems and reduced academic achievement. For adults, the shame associated with housing struggles often leads to social withdrawal, including withdrawal from religious communities that might otherwise provide support. The crisis feeds on itself: those who most need community support become increasingly isolated from it.
Understanding the Crisis: Australia and the United States
The Australian Context
Australia faces a housing crisis of historic proportions. Median house prices in Sydney and Melbourne now exceed ten times median household income, placing homeownership beyond reach for most young families without parental assistance. Rental vacancy rates hover near record lows in most capital cities, giving landlords enormous power and leaving renters with few options when facing rent increases or eviction.
The consequences appear in stark statistics. Over 120,000 Australians experience homelessness on any given night, with the number growing steadily.[3] More than a million households experience rental stress, defined as paying more than 30% of income on housing costs. Waitlists for public housing stretch into years and sometimes decades, with some states reporting wait times exceeding fifteen years for applicants without urgent priority status.[4]
Structural factors drive this crisis. Negative gearing provisions allow property investors to offset rental losses against other income, creating tax advantages that encourage investment in existing housing stock. Capital gains tax concessions favor property investment over different assets. Population growth, concentrated heavily in Sydney and Melbourne, has outpaced new housing construction. Planning restrictions limit density in established suburbs, pushing development to the urban fringes, where infrastructure and services are inadequate. Public housing stock has declined as a proportion of total housing for decades, leaving a shrinking safety net.
The American Context
The United States faces parallel challenges with distinctive features. Homelessness has reached levels unseen in decades, with over 770,000 people experiencing homelessness on a single night.[5] In cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York, encampments have become permanent features of the urban landscape. Rural homelessness, less visible but equally devastating, affects thousands more.
The affordable housing shortage extends far beyond those experiencing homelessness. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates a shortage of over seven million affordable rental units for extremely low-income households.[6] For every one hundred such households, only thirty-three affordable units exist.[7] This gap forces families into housing that consumes unsustainable portions of their income, into overcrowded conditions, or onto the streets.
American housing policy has retreated from its mid-century commitments. Federal investment in public housing has declined dramatically since the 1980s, leaving many public housing authorities managing aging, deteriorating stock. The Housing Choice Voucher program, which subsidizes private-market rentals for low-income families, serves only about one-quarter of eligible households due to funding limitations.[8]Exclusionary zoning in wealthy communities restricts multifamily housing construction, maintaining patterns of economic and racial segregation while constraining supply.
Why the Church Has a Distinctive Role
Religious organizations bring unique assets to housing challenges. Churches hold significant land, often in established neighborhoods with good access to transport and services. Many congregations occupy sites far larger than their current ministry requires, with parking lots empty six days a week and buildings underutilized. This real estate represents an extraordinary resource for affordable housing development.
“Churches hold significant land, often in established neighbourhoods with good access to transport and services. Many congregations occupy sites far larger than their current ministry requires, with parking lots empty six days a week and buildings underutilised. This real estate represents an extraordinary resource for affordable housing development.”
Beyond physical assets, churches possess moral authority. Congregations can speak from a platform of values rather than interests, advocating for policies that may not benefit their members directly but serve the common good. Religious leaders have historically played crucial roles in movements for social change, from abolition to civil rights. The housing crisis calls for similar moral leadership.
Churches also maintain a long-term presence in communities. While businesses come and go and government priorities shift with electoral cycles, many congregations have served the same neighborhoods for generations. This stability enables patient, sustained engagement with complex social problems. Churches can make commitments that span decades, the timeframe housing solutions often require.
Finally, congregations constitute networks of relationships and care. When families face housing crises, church communities often provide immediate support: meals, temporary accommodation, financial assistance, and emotional sustenance. These informal networks catch many who would otherwise fall through official safety nets. Yet charity alone can’t solve structural problems, and religious communities must couple direct service with advocacy for systemic change.
Practical Pathways: Australia
Policy Reforms Worth Supporting
Several policy reforms could significantly improve housing affordability in Australia, and churches can advocate for these changes. Increased investment in public and community housing tops the list. Australia’s social housing stock has declined as a proportion of total housing for decades, and rebuilding this stock requires sustained government commitment. State and federal governments should establish long-term funding streams for social housing construction, potentially through dedicated levies or bonds.
Tax reform remains contentious but necessary. Negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions direct investment toward existing housing rather than new construction, inflating prices while doing little to increase supply. Phasing out these provisions, with grandfathering for existing investments, would redirect capital toward more productive uses. Build-to-rent developments, where institutional investors construct and manage rental housing, could be encouraged through favorable tax treatment that includes affordability requirements.
Planning reform offers another avenue. Many local councils resist density in established suburbs, pushing development to the urban fringes, where infrastructure costs are high, and services are sparse. State governments can override local resistance to ensure adequate housing construction near transport and employment centers. Inclusionary zoning, which requires developers to include affordable units in new projects, has shown promise in other jurisdictions.
What Australian Churches Can Do
Australian churches hold substantial property assets that could be mobilized for affordable housing. Denominational property trusts should audit their holdings and identify sites suitable for development. Partnerships with community housing providers allow churches to contribute land while professional organizations handle development and management. Several Australian dioceses and denominations have already embarked on such partnerships, creating models that others can follow.
Congregational advocacy matters enormously. Politicians respond to constituent pressure, and churches can organize members to engage with housing policy at the local, state, and federal levels. Writing letters, attending community meetings, meeting with elected representatives, and supporting candidates who prioritize housing affordability all contribute to political change. Denominational social justice bodies can coordinate these efforts across congregations.
Direct service continues to matter. Churches can support organizations working on homelessness, contribute to rental assistance programs, and offer space for services that connect people with housing resources. Some congregations have established housing ministries that help families navigate the complex landscape of assistance programs. Others partner with Housing First initiatives, providing wraparound support for people transitioning from homelessness to stable housing.
Practical Pathways: The United States
Policy Reforms Worth Supporting
The Housing Choice Voucher program represents one of America’s most effective anti-poverty tools, but funding limitations leave most eligible families without assistance. Expanding voucher funding to serve all eligible households would dramatically reduce housing insecurity. Churches can advocate for this expansion at the federal level while working to improve local implementation and reduce barriers that prevent voucher holders from finding willing landlords.
Zoning reform has gained momentum across the political spectrum. States like California, Oregon, and Minnesota have enacted laws limiting exclusionary zoning practices that restrict multifamily housing. These reforms allow apartments and other affordable housing types in neighborhoods previously reserved for single-family homes. Churches can support similar reforms in their states, recognizing that resistance to housing construction often reflects the same patterns of exclusion the civil rights movement challenged.
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program finances most affordable housing construction in America. Expanding this program and reforming it to serve the lowest-income households better would increase affordable housing supply. Some advocates call for renewed federal investment in public housing or the creation of social housing development authorities modeled on successful international examples. These approaches merit serious consideration given the scale of the shortage.
Tenant protections prevent displacement and provide stability. Rent stabilization policies, just-cause eviction requirements, and the right to counsel in eviction proceedings all help renters remain housed. Churches can advocate for these protections while recognizing the legitimate concerns of small landlords who depend on rental income.
What American Churches Can Do
American churches have a rich history of housing development through faith-based Community Development Corporations. These organizations have built thousands of affordable units while maintaining a connection to congregational values. Churches considering housing development can learn from established CDCs by partnering with experienced organizations or by building internal capacity over time. The Episcopal Church and several mainline Protestant denominations have developed toolkits and support networks for congregations pursuing this path.
Community land trusts offer another model. These organizations hold land in perpetual trust, leasing it to homeowners or developers under conditions that preserve long-term affordability. Churches can contribute property to land trusts, ensuring that their assets serve affordability goals permanently rather than providing a one-time benefit. Several faith-based land trusts have emerged in recent years, combining community ownership with religious values.
Political engagement through faith-based organizing networks has proven effective on housing issues. Networks like the Industrial Areas Foundation, PICO National Network, and Gamaliel Foundation train congregations in community organizing methods that build power for policy change. These organizations have won significant victories on housing policy in cities and states across the country. Congregations joining these networks gain access to training, resources, and the collective power that comes from acting with allies.
Within their own communities, churches can address the NIMBY attitudes that block housing construction. Many congregants reflexively oppose new housing development near their homes, sometimes on aesthetic grounds, sometimes from concerns about traffic or parking, and sometimes from thinly veiled class or racial prejudice. Pastors and lay leaders can reframe these conversations around values of welcome, justice, and love of neighbor, helping congregants see housing development as consistent with their faith commitments.
Global Perspectives: Lessons for Other Nations
The housing affordability crisis extends far beyond Australia and the United States. Cities across Europe, Asia, and the developing world face similar pressures, though local conditions shape distinct challenges and opportunities. Religious communities in these contexts can draw lessons from the principles outlined above while adapting strategies to their particular circumstances.
The United Kingdom and Ireland
Britain faces a housing emergency rooted in decades of underbuilding and the erosion of social housing. The Right to Buy policy, introduced in the 1980s, allowed council tenants to purchase their homes at significant discounts. While this created wealth for individual families, it depleted the social housing stock without adequate replacement. Today, council housing waiting lists stretch for years, private rents consume unsustainable portions of income in London and other cities, and homeownership has become increasingly confined to those with family wealth.
Irish housing policy followed a similar trajectory, with heavy reliance on private markets and neglect of social provision. Dublin now ranks among Europe’s most expensive cities for renters, and homelessness has reached historic highs. Young Irish people face the prospect of permanent exclusion from homeownership in the communities where they grew up.
Churches in Britain and Ireland hold substantial property, particularly the established churches with their historic endowments. The Church of England has begun exploring how its land holdings might serve housing needs, though progress remains slow. Catholic dioceses and other denominations face similar questions about stewardship of assets accumulated over centuries. Advocacy for increased social housing construction, planning reform to enable density, and tenant protections all merit religious engagement. Faith-based housing associations already play significant roles in British social housing provision, offering models that could be expanded.
Western Europe
Germany, France, the Netherlands, and other Western European nations have historically maintained stronger social housing sectors than Anglophone countries. Yet even these systems face pressure. German cities that once offered affordable rents have seen dramatic increases as international capital flows into property markets. The Netherlands struggles with housing shortages despite strong planning traditions. French social housing, though extensive, concentrates poverty in peripheral estates that have become sites of social exclusion.
Religious communities in these contexts operate within different church-state relationships than their Anglophone counterparts. Established churches in Scandinavia and Germany, and the strong Catholic presence in southern Europe, provide institutional platforms for advocacy. The tradition of Christian Democratic politics in continental Europe has historically supported social housing provision, offering natural allies for faith-based advocacy. Churches can advocate for maintaining and expanding social housing commitments against pressures for privatisation and market liberalisation.
East Asia
Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and major Chinese cities face extreme housing affordability challenges. Hong Kong residents endure among the world’s smallest living spaces and highest housing costs relative to income. Young Koreans have largely abandoned hope of homeownership in Seoul, coining terms like “hell Joseon” to describe their economic despair. Chinese cities have experienced extraordinary price increases that have enriched property owners while excluding younger generations.
Religious communities in East Asia operate as minorities in largely secular or multi-religious societies. Christian churches, Buddhist temples, and other religious organisations nonetheless maintain significant presence and can contribute to housing solutions. Singapore’s public housing model, which houses over eighty percent of the population in government-built flats, demonstrates that Asian societies can achieve housing security through determined policy intervention.[9] Churches can advocate for policies that prioritise housing as shelter over housing as investment, challenging the speculative dynamics that drive unaffordability.
The Global South (Majority World)
Developing nations face housing challenges of different character and scale. Rapid urbanisation has created vast informal settlements lacking secure tenure, adequate services, or safe construction. Slums house over a billion people worldwide, with projections suggesting this number will grow substantially in coming decades. Climate change compounds these challenges, as sea level rise and extreme weather threaten coastal settlements where many of the urban poor live.
Religious communities often maintain their strongest presence precisely in these communities of need. Churches, mosques, and temples in informal settlements provide social infrastructure where government services are absent. Faith-based organisations deliver education, healthcare, and community organisation in contexts of extreme deprivation. This presence creates both opportunity and responsibility.
Secure land tenure represents a foundational intervention in many developing contexts. When residents lack legal rights to the land they occupy, they cannot invest in improvements, access formal credit, or resist displacement. Religious organisations can advocate for tenure regularisation programs that give informal settlers legal security. Community land trusts, adapted to local legal frameworks, offer models for collective ownership that can protect against both displacement and speculative pressure.
Incremental housing approaches recognise that formal housing standards often exceed what poor households can afford, pushing them into informality. Programs that provide secure tenure and basic infrastructure, allowing families to improve their homes over time, have shown success in various contexts. Religious organisations can support such approaches while advocating for the public investments in water, sanitation, and electricity that make incremental improvement possible.
Microfinance for housing has emerged as a tool for helping low-income households improve their living conditions. Small loans for construction materials, repairs, or incremental additions can significantly improve housing quality when formal mortgage markets are inaccessible. Faith-based microfinance institutions operate in many developing countries and can incorporate housing lending into their portfolios.
Common Principles Across Contexts
Despite vast differences in housing systems, economic conditions, and religious landscapes, certain principles apply broadly.
Housing functions as a foundation for human flourishing everywhere. The theological conviction that every person deserves conditions allowing dignified life transcends cultural boundaries. Religious communities in every context can articulate this vision and work toward its realisation.
Market mechanisms alone will not provide adequate affordable housing. Every nation that has achieved broad housing security has done so through significant public intervention, whether through direct provision, regulation, subsidy, or some combination. Religious voices can counter ideological claims that markets will solve housing problems if only freed from interference.
“Every nation that has achieved broad housing security has done so through significant public intervention, whether through direct provision, regulation, subsidy, or some combination. Market mechanisms alone will not provide adequate affordable housing.”
Land represents a finite resource with unique characteristics. Its supply cannot be increased in response to demand, and its value derives largely from public investments and community development rather than owner effort. These features justify public intervention to ensure that land serves broad social purposes rather than enriching speculators. Religious traditions that emphasise stewardship over absolute ownership provide resources for articulating this perspective.
Local context shapes effective solutions. What works in Singapore will not work identically in Lagos or London. Religious communities embedded in particular places can discern appropriate strategies while learning from experiences elsewhere. International networks of religious organisations can facilitate this exchange of knowledge and solidarity.
Long-term commitment matters. Housing problems develop over decades and require sustained effort to address. Religious institutions, with their multigenerational perspectives and patient capital, can maintain focus when political attention wanders. This persistence represents one of the church’s most valuable contributions to housing work.
The housing crisis is global, and so is the community of faith. Christians in Sydney share communion with Christians in São Paulo, Mumbai, and Manchester. Muslims in Melbourne belong to an ummah spanning continents. This global connection creates both obligation and resource. We are called to care about housing conditions wherever our siblings in faith struggle, and we can learn from their experiences and support their efforts. The work of housing justice, pursued faithfully in diverse contexts, participates in the building of a world where all people can dwell in dignity and peace.
Working Together: Religious and Secular Collaboration
The scale of the housing crisis demands cooperation across traditional boundaries. Religious organizations can partner with government agencies, receiving public funding for service provision while maintaining their distinctive identity. Community housing providers welcome church land contributions and can handle the complex work of development and property management. Secular advocacy organizations benefit from the moral voice and organizing capacity that congregations bring.
Such partnerships require navigating real tensions. Churches entering housing development must maintain transparency and accountability, avoiding the scandals that have occasionally tarnished faith-based social service provision. When accepting government funding, congregations must comply with requirements regarding non-discrimination and the separation of religious programming from publicly funded services. Advocacy coalitions must find common ground across theological differences that participants may hold on other issues.
Despite these challenges, collaboration offers extraordinary potential. Government brings resources and regulatory authority; churches bring land, relationships, and moral legitimacy; nonprofit housing organizations bring technical expertise. When these assets combine effectively, transformative projects become possible. Developments that seemed financially infeasible become viable when donated land reduces costs. Policies that seemed politically impossible gain traction when diverse coalitions of religious and secular voices unite behind them.
The prophetic role of religious communities need not conflict with pragmatic engagement. Churches can work within existing systems to achieve incremental progress while continuing to articulate a vision of justice that transcends current arrangements. The point is to house people, and that goal justifies working with imperfect partners through imperfect processes.
“Our societies need affordable housing, which is a fundamental human right. The prophetic role of religious communities need not conflict with pragmatic engagement. Churches can work within existing systems to achieve incremental progress while continuing to articulate a vision of justice that transcends current arrangements. The point is to house people.”
A Call to Action
The moral cost of inaction grows daily. Each year of delay means more families experiencing the trauma of homelessness, more children’s development stunted by housing instability, more older adults choosing between medication and rent, more young people locked out of communities where they hope to build their lives. The crisis compounds generationally: children who grow up in housing insecurity face diminished prospects as adults, perpetuating cycles of disadvantage.
Housing serves as a foundation for other goods we value. Educational achievement depends significantly on housing stability, as children who move frequently fall behind academically. Employment outcomes improve when workers can live near jobs without crushing commutes or housing cost burdens. Both physical and mental health correlate strongly with housing security. Family formation and stability require homes where relationships can grow. Religious participation itself depends partly on residential rootedness that allows lasting congregational bonds. When housing fails, these interconnected goods fail with it.
“Housing serves as a foundation for other goods we value. Educational achievement depends on housing stability. Employment outcomes improve when workers can live near jobs. Physical and mental health both correlate strongly with housing security. Family formation requires homes where relationships can grow. When housing fails, these interconnected goods fail with it.”
Individual believers can respond in multiple ways. Education comes first: learning about housing policy in your community and understanding the experiences of those facing housing insecurity. Political engagement follows: contacting elected representatives, supporting candidates who prioritize housing, and attending public hearings on development proposals. Financial support matters: contributing to organizations working on housing, whether direct service providers or advocacy groups. Personal relationships count too: opening conversations about housing in your congregation and community, challenging NIMBY sentiments when you encounter them, and welcoming new housing development in your neighborhood.
Congregations can act collectively. Form a housing committee to assess church property assets and explore development possibilities. Join advocacy coalitions working on housing policy. Partner with housing organizations for education and service opportunities. Include housing in your congregation’s prayers and preaching. Examine your own attitudes toward housing development and density with honesty and openness to change.
Denominations and religious bodies can coordinate these efforts at scale. Develop toolkits and resources for congregations exploring housing development. Create networks for sharing best practices and lessons learned. Use institutional voice for advocacy at the state and national levels. Examine denominational property holdings for housing potential. Commission theological reflection on housing that grounds practical action in faith tradition.
Conclusion: Home as Holy Ground
The places where we live shape who we become. A child’s bedroom becomes the site of imagination and growth. A family’s kitchen table hosts conversations that form identity and belonging. A front porch or stoop connects private life to the public community. These ordinary spaces carry extraordinary significance. When they become precarious or disappear entirely, something sacred is lost.
“The places where we live shape who we become. A child’s bedroom becomes the site of imagination and growth. A family’s kitchen table hosts conversations that form identity and belonging. A front porch connects private life to public community. These ordinary spaces carry extraordinary significance.”
Religious traditions have always understood this. The Hebrew word for “dwell” (שכן/shakan) gives us the word for God’s indwelling presence among the people, the Shekinah. When we work to ensure that all people have stable, affordable places to dwell, we help create conditions where divine presence can be experienced, and human dignity can flourish.
The housing crisis won’t solve itself. Markets left to themselves won’t produce the affordable housing that low-income and moderate-income households need. The government alone lacks the resources, legitimacy, and relationships that comprehensive solutions require. Religious communities bring essential elements to this work: theological vision, moral voice, material assets, relational networks, and patient commitment. The question is whether we’ll deploy these gifts with the urgency the moment demands.
In Matthew 25, Jesus identifies himself with those in need: the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick, the imprisoned. “Whatever you did for one of the least of these,” he says, “you did for me.” In our time, the least of these include the mother sleeping in her car with her children, the older man facing eviction, the family paying half their income for a cramped apartment, and the young couple who despair of ever owning a home where they might raise their children. How we respond to them reveals what we truly believe about human dignity, about community, and about the God who chose to dwell among us.
The work is urgent. The resources exist. The question is whether we’ll act. Let us build homes, transform policies, and create communities where every person can dwell in dignity and peace.
Bibliography
Australian Bureau of Statistics. “Estimating Homelessness: Census 2021.” Released 22 March 2023. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/housing and https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/housing/estimating-homelessness-census/2021.
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “Federal Rental Assistance Fact Sheets.” Updated 23 January 2025. https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing and https://www.cbpp.org/research/housing/federal-rental-assistance-fact-sheets#US.
Housing and Development Board, Government of Singapore. “Public Housing: A Singapore Icon.” https://www.hdb.gov.sg/about-us/our-role/public-housing-a-singapore-icon.
Mission Australia. “Response to Report on Government Services 2024: Housing and Homelessness.” 21 January 22, 2024. https://www.missionaustralia.com.au/media-centre/media-releases/2024/mission-australias-response-to-report-on-government-services-2024-housing-and-homelessness/.
National Low Income Housing Coalition. The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes. Washington: NLIHC, March 2025. https://nlihc.org/gap.
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church. Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2004. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The 2024 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, Part 1: Point-in-Time Estimates of Homelessness. Washington: HUD, December 2024. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ahar.html and https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ahar/2024-ahar-part-1-pit-estimates-of-homelessness-in-the-us.html.
References
[1] Isaiah 5:8 (ESV): “Woe to those who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is no more room, and you are made to dwell alone in the midst of the land.”
[2] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, §482.
[3] Australian Bureau of Statistics, “Estimating Homelessness: Census 2021.”
[4] Mission Australia, “Response to Report on Government Services 2024: Housing and Homelessness.”
[5] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, The 2024 Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, Part 1.
[6] National Low Income Housing Coalition, The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes.
[7] National Low Income Housing Coalition, The Gap: A Shortage of Affordable Homes.
[8] Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “Federal Rental Assistance Fact Sheets.”
[9] Housing and Development Board, Government of Singapore, “Public Housing: A Singapore Icon.”
