I Got Mugged (by Ryan Rodrick Beiler)
Two months ago, for the first time in my eight years living in Washington, D.C., I was mugged. Two young men rolled up in a pickup truck while I was unloading groceries from my car in the alley next to my condo building. They made me lie on the ground, held a gun to my neck as they took my money, and then locked me in the trunk of my car as they made their getaway. Fortunately I still had my cell phone in my pocket and was able to call 911 from the trunk. The police were able to free me, as well as pursue and arrest two suspects who are now in the District court system.
I was not hurt, they took little of real value, and I feel like I've done a pretty good job of refusing to let fear change the way I live. Fairly or unfairly, with my privileged status, I'm not worried about my future or my survival. I am worried about those two young men, and many others like them. What influences, role models, or lack of positive options allowed them to make such stupid and destructive choices?
In reflecting on my mugging, I've only recently begun to connect a few dots. For the past six years, I've been on the board of Urban Family Development (UFD), a nonprofit organization that currently runs programs for after school enrichment, tutoring, and mentoring - and we have lots of big dreams for expansion. However, it's always been a struggle to find funding and volunteers for this kind of work with such a great need, many worthy ministries, and a limited pool people willing to sacrifice their time or money.
I don't know what the government of D.C. is going to spend to prosecute and potentially imprison those muggers, but I'm pretty sure it would be enough to give UFD a solid financial boost - and then some. The most visible anti-crime measures in my neighborhood consist of portable floodlights rotated around sketchy street corners. A church friend who once interned at UFD and is now a D.C. policeman confirms what a band-aid these strategies are, even as he tries to do his job with integrity. Instead of high-visibility, low-impact band-aids, I want UFD to provide better options for as many youth as possible, so that fewer young men and women grow up to make stupid choices like wrecking their lives to steal my $20. I want to execute a preemptive strike on this kind of stupidity by supporting a program that provides a safe place for children, gives them mentors through the difficult years of adolescence, and then celebrates their success - all of which UFD does.
Why can't we - both as a society and as a church - do better at providing positive choices for our youth? And for me it is a both/and. I've seen more small-government conservatives willing roll up their sleeves and volunteer as tutors. Meanwhile, it's mostly the justice-minded liberals who march and lobby to end poverty and violence. How can we get more liberals to show up at UFD and more conservatives to advocate? (I know these categories are unfair and far from universal, but I've seen this dynamic over and over in my own church experience.)
Government at every level must do better at making the needed resources available, if for no other reason that the churches simply don't have the resources to do it all on their own. But the church must also be the conscience of the state - challenging not only with words, but by example in serving and caring for those at the margins of society. Conversely, the words of the prophet Jeremiah may inspire the church, but they were originally spoken to a king: "Did not your father eat and drink and do justice and righteousness? Then it was well with him. He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know me? says the Lord." (Jeremiah 22:15b-16)
Consider this as the onslaught of opportunities for "Canned Compassion" wash over us with the holiday season, and look for opportunities to do both justice and mercy, not with band-aids of a march here or a meal there, but with sustained service and activism that seeks real healing for our communities.
Ryan Rodrick Beiler is web editor for Sojourners.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Thank you for showing grace and compassion where vengeance and judgement would have been more normal. May my father's grace and love rest in you.
p
Posted by: payshun | November 21, 2007 11:55 AM
Wow, fantastic article, Ryan. I agree with the above commenter as well.
Posted by: Jeshua | November 21, 2007 1:35 PM
Just wanted you to know I am forwarding your article to my cousin Cathy Lanier who is the chief of police in DC. I believe that she is only too aware of the socioeconomic underpinnings of the crime problems in DC and other major metropolitan cities (poverty, educational issues, lack of opportunities, etc.). I know her to be a deeply compassionate person who SEES, really SEES and I am aware that she, mayor Fenty and others are developing/implementing a "holistic" approach to the problems that contribute to crime and and a poor qaulity of life for so many of the residents of DC. May God bless you, Jim Wallis and all at Sojourners and the Mayor and Police Chief of DC. I do think their hearts are in the right places.- Debra Lanouette
Posted by: debra lanouette | November 21, 2007 1:46 PM
True love and compassion are wires that sometimes get crossed or short-circuited in the brains of some of those who profess to be Christian. God's way is best, and when he tells us that justice for theft requires restitution or punishment, people of faith will believe without substituting their idea of justice as something that requires social programs such as Urban Family Development (UFD). "What influences, role models, or lack of positive options allowed them to make such stupid and destructive choices?" That is humanistic thinking, to feel like we can change a person's evil heart by giving them some program or teaching them "self-respect". If we care about our fellow man, we will recognize an evil heart that needs motivation to change, as in Eccesiastes 8:11, we read: "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." Note, the "sentence" is a judgment, not a social program, sand it needs to be "executed" immediately and done by government who is to bear the sword for punishment of evildoers so that God's people may live in peace. Romans 13:4 4: "For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." AND First Peter 2: 13, 14: 13: "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
14: Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well."
Mr. Beiler, will you work for change in government to punish evildoers so they are inclined to repent and have a change of heart, or even be removed from society via execution as has always been God's will for those who harden their hearts and continue in evil ways? Remember, Government is not meant to be Christian, they are in a different kingdom (John 18:36), and society can most readily be improved by removing those who have hearts dedicated to evil actions.
Posted by: Leon Moyer | November 21, 2007 1:54 PM
The primary reason you will not see conservatives march and lobby is that it will not produce changed hearts. Conversely, one must ask why liberals will not put their hand to the plow. Likely also a heart problem
Posted by: Jason | November 21, 2007 2:12 PM
Leon, nowhere in his piece did Ryan say the two attackers should not be punished. He was not advocating after-school tutoring and mentoring as a substitute for punishment for crime, but as a preventative measure to help reduce crime. It serves us well to ask what causes young men to turn to crime and then try to prevent it. Yes, prevention might include "programs." Go to any inner-city neighborhood and you'll find church programs that are successfully reaching out to youth and showing them a better way than what they find on the streets. Try telling those committed program workers they are being "humanistic" and should stop.
Posted by: I and I | November 21, 2007 2:14 PM
This mainstream Christian and moderate Democrat has some thoughts for you. Some people allow evil to seep in and take over their lives. They become mean criminals. Other people in the same circumstances rise above the bad influences around them and make better choices.
Those two criminals made many choices in their lives to go this route. It wasn't an accident. They are not the victims. You are the only victim. I feel more sorry for you.
However, I do realize that government can play a positive role and try to intervene with programs to help alleviate the problems. I'm not like the conservative who wants to hate all government on one hand and then praise the government troops in one big contradiction.
Many of the large conservative churches don't seem to want to analyze these problems in great detail for comprehensive solutions. Maybe it is their black & white nature to just touch the surface of the problem, have an inflexible opinion about it, and do only the things that lead to a more important and big time status in the local community? Money spent on large buildings and advanced audio-visual equipment with the latest in technology is more rewarding than being in the ghetto handing out soup. That way, they don't "walk across the room" referring to a best selling book on spreading the gospel.
Posted by: Ohio River Man | November 21, 2007 2:52 PM
I forgot to mention that Leon did certainly jump to some conclusions about what Mr Beiler said and shame on him. What should Leon's punishmentbe?
I agree with him there must always be punishment for wrong doing. So, Leon? How about a big fat personal check to UFD programs in DC?
The point here is we can reduce the number of criminals in many ways and it very effective to utilize these social programs that conservatives constantly vote to block or dismantle. We can punish them by taking them out of power.
Posted by: Ohio River Man | November 21, 2007 3:04 PM
It is demonstrable that street crimes such as Ryan suffered are more frequent in distressed neighborhoods. And if you survey people in different areas, you'll find relatively low levels of hope in these neighborhoods. I think that if you searched surveys and studies, you would find support for Ryan's thesis of lack of hope being tied to crime levels.
We must understand that among the "least of these" of whom Christ spoke are those without hope who sometimes engage in such anti-social behaviors. So this is not just a "humanistic" response; it is the call of the Gospel on our lives.
We face problems that involve the byproducts of social evils and multiple problems of long standing. We need multiple approaches to address them. We do need churches and nonprofits reaching out to people in despair, giving them reason for hope and practical ways to live a better life. We also need prophetic advocacy regarding the institutional issues that result in poverty and despair amidst great affluence. We need governmental action to change patterns of governmental policies that feed the problem, and provide programs that address the lingering effects of things like slavery.
Posted by: Bill Samuel | November 21, 2007 3:09 PM
Great article. I find it really interesting that "conservatives" (politically) ALWAYS run to the line that says "we shouldn't spend new money on government programs" and cry "stop raising taxes"... when we spend billions of taxpayer's dollars to prosecute and incarcerate criminals. All Ryan is wondering aloud is: could that money be BETTER spent? That is NOT to say we should NOT punish. But it is to ask "can we prevent?"... I agree that hearts need to be changed and laws don't always address that... but then, Leon, does that also apply to OTHER hot button conservative issues? It seems to me truly ironic that Christians who consider themselves conservatives politically will put money, time, and effort to get laws passed for CERTAIN moral programs run by the government... but not others...
Posted by: e-dubya | November 21, 2007 3:17 PM
I like this article and am in agreement. This sentence puzzles me, though:
"How can we get more liberals to show up at UFD and more conservatives to advocate?"
Obviously both are needed... the personal touches as well as the bigger-picture activism. But maybe it should be enough for individuals to each follow their own passion and style in addressing poverty, hunger, crime, etc.? If we're all part of the metaphorical body... if I'm a hand and you're a foot, then I should embrace my "hand-ness" and be the best hand I can be, while appreciating the unique gifts and approach that you have as a foot. or whatever. You know what I mean. We all work together in this, doing what we each feel called to do, and somehow God makes it all fit together.
Maybe the problem is when we think that everyone else should be doing what we are doing ourselves, without appreciating the unique contribution that others are making in their own ways.
Posted by: Angie | November 21, 2007 3:38 PM
It seems to me truly ironic that Christians who consider themselves conservatives politically will put money, time, and effort to get laws passed for CERTAIN moral programs run by the government... but not others...
Posted by: e-dubya
I think your not really facing the real issue here . Many conservatives don't see the policies that throw money at problems as beneficial .
Excuse the HUGE exageration , but the point is hopefully made here
For instance raising more dollars to spend on government day care , cause two parents to work to pay for their raise in taxes who before did not need to even consider government help in day care . In other words mayve paying more taxes for a government system that could have been so much cheaper done in another way . Regulations that stop say your neigbor caring for your kids and anothers because they do not have a liscense .
Right these are exagerations , but the concept is what I am hoping you understand what some conservatives see wrong with how government handles some problems .
People in DC deciding laws on criminals for the whole country , in DC the employees take their jewelery off when they are off work getting on the bus , some people in DC live in apartments with bars on them . These people are making laws for people for some of us who still live in communitoes where we leave our doors unlocked .
That to conservativism is what is wrong , people deciding things for us that live 3000 miles away and have no clue to our way of life .
I think you are really mis representing conservatism here , at least how I view government . For instance I thought the Faith / government idea of Bush was a good one , because it supported policies of all Faiths that work , why because they tend to help on a more personal level . But I guess it did not work .
But your not really being honest , come up with policies that can convince conservatives they work , at least Christian Conservatives , and I think you will have much more support for your ideas .
The narrow and no caring views just stops conversations . It always appeared to me and us those ridicules are made by people who can not win the debate , so they throw mud .
Posted by: Mick Sheldon | November 21, 2007 3:45 PM
Perhaps the reason conservatives don't advocate like liberals is that we don't agree on policy with the liberals. It's not an "either-or" proposition; either you help the poor yourself or you advocate for more government money and programs. Some of us believe that by advocating for smaller, more effective government we are helping the poor far more than the liberals who lobby for large government bureaucracies. Advocacy for conservative? Certainly, but we'll advocate for welfare reform, tax reform, reform of health care that avoids the snare of state medicare, and other matters on which we differ with liberals. Christians can differ on these policy points, something that Sojourners seems to forget.
Posted by: Ben Wheaton | November 21, 2007 4:03 PM
Ben
as a progressive I don't understand why we can't do it all. When managed well big government programs can promote positive social change. Examples of good government rebuilding and social justice policies include the Marshall Plan, the Voting Rights Act... But Conservatives on principle are against those too. I am not saying that big government is the solution to everything either. I am a member of the green party and we work locally, nationally and globaly to promote change and see that the poor and oppressed are protected.
Don't think I won't critique my shallow leftist brothers and sisters. Many of them don't know how to disciple and create the type of change they want to see. Not only that but they are just as spiritually shallow as my right wing brothers and sisters. I guess I am going back and forth between the church and state and for that I apologize as this post could be confusing. I was talking about the church in the above paragraph.
My main point is that all our country's resources should be used to build our society, secular, and spiritual, governmental or non-governmental. Our society should set up values and goals and use our vast resources in making that happen.
p
Posted by: payshun | November 21, 2007 4:27 PM
Washington DC probably has the funds to both prosecute and imprison criminals as well as fully fund programs like UFD. Unfortunately there is so much corruption that millions of dollars that could be put to this use are wasted every year. Every month there is a new scandal in the newspaper about city employees stealing money or getting paid six figures to do common, everyday jobs.
But in general, Ryan's point is a good one with no easy answers.
Posted by: Eric | November 21, 2007 4:59 PM
"People in DC deciding laws on criminals for the whole country , in DC the employees take their jewelery off when they are off work getting on the bus , some people in DC live in apartments with bars on them . These people are making laws for people for some of us who still live in communitoes where we leave our doors unlocked .
That to conservativism is what is wrong , people deciding things for us that live 3000 miles away and have no clue to our way of life ." Mick Sheldon
Yowser, Mick, has Seattle ever changed since I was there last.
Posted by: canucklehead | November 21, 2007 5:33 PM
Yowser, Mick, has Seattle ever changed since I was there last.
Posted by: canucklehead
I live in a rural area a ferry ride away . Not as rural as it use to be , many folks have been moving in . We just had a new HS built
The Prices were so low and people wanted the rural area too , take the ferry to work in Seattle . Now the prices are really high , I would be rich if I sold my house , till I bought my next one anyway . Still nice where I live , I took the ferry and walked to the Seahawks Game with my 25 year old last week . Then took the ferry home , drove a little , looked out for the deer and bears , and am in the Great Northwest again , safe and sound . First game I have been to since 1982 , it was hoot !!!We won .
Posted by: Mick Sheldon | November 21, 2007 6:46 PM
Leon, I wish it was that simple for me, but unfortunately, I believe that the line that separates good from evil runs through people and not between people. Fortunately, I also believe that Jesus was clear on that one and chose not to punish us, but rather to die for us all; even forgiving the guilty prisoner that was crucified next to him. Personally I think that our concept of punishment is far too simplistic and needs to be reviewed. There is no doubt that we need to create societies that work for everyone and not only an elite few. The key here is to get involved, to continue to ask questions and dig deeper for causes rather than to come with prescriptive answers from a distance. I for one will leave the judgement to Jesus and continually work on the how to love God and neighbour within my own life and setting. (Something that I must confess that I don't do very well.) Here in South Africa we face an epidemic of crime on a daily basis. My wife has been held up twice, once at home by three armed robbers and once at work by five. It is not easy to live under these conditions, but there is no doubt that we are currently paying for the sins of our fathers. The sad reality is that if we don't change the social conditions and the structure of the societies within which we all live, our children are going to continue to pay for ours. Ryan has my full backing, it's time to meet the people on the ground, be it the UFD or other organisations like them, understand the conditions, don't stop asking the questions and get involved.
Posted by: Colin | November 22, 2007 4:20 AM
I saw an article in the NY Times today about how Megachurches are getting into lucrative businesses like shopping malls, limousine services, upscale property developments and sports stadiums. Now some of this could be the propensity to translate belief in private enterprise as the economic salvation for the poor by giving them similarly upscale jobs. However, when ministries like those of T.D. Jakes are cited, I begin to wonder, for there is a strong influence of the "prosperity doctrine" and being a "king's kid" who drives a half-million dollar Bentley automobile involved in his particular doctrinal emphasis. It's not difficult to see that there could be some temptation to justify tax-free profit-taking instead of doing some taxing prophet making. under the guise of being "blessed."
Some wag observed that what starts as a church, too often turns into a business and ends up as a racket.
Jakes, White, Joyce Meyer, Copeland, Roberts, Hinn, Crouch and others are now under investigation for their lucrative personal financial empires built on tax-exempt religious charitable donations.
When we call for justice, in the form of punishment for the thief, do we just mean the penny-ante crook who is often a prisoner of circumstances he can't fully comprehend, or do we include the multimillionaires who ply their thievery under the sophisticated and powerful protection of church, government or big business?
I submit that too often we equate financial success with the stamp of approval by God, regardless of the means by which those riches were achieved, and we ascribe a curse to those whose crimes just weren't big or clever enough to meet with our highly materialistic standard of spiritual approval.
Posted by: N.M. Rod | November 24, 2007 12:09 AM
Maybe good people don't make it in politics.
BTW, you just don't see conservatives silencing dissent like you do the liberals and progressives. These thugs are the results of feminism and decadence unleashed by the hippy-turned-liberal-turned-progressive. That truth is what is expunged here. I write no more than many, many other voices here.
Posted by: Donny | November 24, 2007 8:04 AM
This article, just reading into it and not the whole thing, caused me to stop quick at this sector of society: young men who didn't have good influences and still have to make it somehow. It will be a new cause for me, starting with prayer.
Posted by: A Knight | November 24, 2007 8:16 AM
My overgeneralization is that all gerneralizations about liberals and conservatives should cease.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 24, 2007 9:24 AM
Washington DC needs more government expenditure.
Hm-m-m-m-m-m-m
I have a serious problem when deep poverty and/or social dysfunction happily coexist as neighbors with wealthy churches, universities, or White Houses.
My emphasis is on "happily."
Have you ever had an addict in your family? Did you note the severe challenge it is to just remain a healthy person and not become part of the 'illness/brokenness/dysfunction.'
I worked many years at a youth program similar to Urban Family Development. The neighborhood within 100 feet of the center was deeply broken (e.g. I witnessed at least one dozen dead bodies on the street within a stone's throw of the center). A great place to minister. However, I have to say we 'happily coexisted.' It is hard to remain healthy and not made ill by the 'addict.'
I contend the farther removed the institution is from the personal relationship; the increased liklihood that it will systematically adapt itself to the sickness/dysfunction.
I would hope the values and functioning of the Federal bureaucracy would be so clear and strong, that its overwhelming presence would make for a very 'unhappy' coexistance with the two street muggers in Washington DC. I fear, however, the relationship is very happy.
I feel government is too often looked to as upholding our highest values when the reality is that at best the values are the lowest common denominator. Hence there is such a need for community institutions (e.g. churches) to flesh out our highest values in holistic forms.
Posted by: letjusticerolldown | November 24, 2007 10:00 AM
Letjusticerolldown,
I agree w/ you which is why I believe government can be amazing at getting resources to the poor but it can be disatrous aswell. It just depends on how we use it. We need to use all our tools to help the poor.
p
Posted by: payshun | November 24, 2007 12:13 PM
No comments on Rod's observations that "blessings" of materialism also sometimes might be ignored crimes while the poor are demonised?
Posted by: The Elephant in the Room | November 24, 2007 1:40 PM
"Why can't we - both as a society and as a church - do better at providing positive choices for our youth? And for me it is a both/and."
Well said, Ryan. Thank you for allowing us to hear your well-developed and Christ-driven thoughts.
Posted by: Daniel | November 24, 2007 2:25 PM
If any members are experiencing problems with their posts, please follow the guidelines as set out by the Rules of Conduct (link below POST A COMMENT) and email staff with your concerns.
Thank you,
Beliefnet_Tiger
Community Monitor
Beliefnet.com
Posted by: Beliefnet_Tiger | November 24, 2007 3:16 PM
Tiger,
My wife and I have noticed that this website seems to tilt entirely too much to the left. You remove content that doesn't sing a liberal tune. These thugs mentioned in this article wouldn't be so numerous if conservative values were not so hated by places like this and it appears the entire media establishment. The liberalness taught from first grade to college gives these people excuses for what they do. It also seems to give places like this the excuse to remove any dissenting voices of the liberal madness that created our current inner city problems.
T. Williams
Chicago Illinois
Posted by: Terry L. Williams, Chicago Illinois | November 24, 2007 5:38 PM
I haven't noticed a particular "tilt to the left" - most often, the majority of posts are either genuine disagreements with the articles - which is OK - or screeds that vilify liberals as enemies of everything true and good, after first identifying evil as an exclusive liberal trait.
In truth, the left-vs-right cant is tiresome and has no more genuine relevance to problem-solving than violent competing soccer fans on the rampage have any meaningful cause.
Posted by: N.M. Rod | November 24, 2007 6:13 PM
I don't moderate this blog (nor does any other Belifnet staff). My duties here are releasing posts held up by our spam filter and removing accidental duplicate posts.
Thanks!
Beliefnet_Tiger
Community Monitor
Beliefnet.com
Posted by: Beliefnet_Tiger | November 24, 2007 6:30 PM
The liberalness taught from first grade to college gives these people excuses for what they do. It also seems to give places like this the excuse to remove any dissenting voices of the liberal madness that created our current inner city problems.
This is just not true. Liberal policy did not start or create problems for the innercity or for the various ghettoes that predate it. They were started and held by the religous elite and were used to keep foreigners from moving into their neighborhoods. Examples include the early Jewish ghettoes in New York..., the Chinese ghettoes in San Fransisco... These were not places liberals started. Not only that but if you actually look at HUD records conservatives came in, gutted the programs and made sure they would fail. They were designed to from jump so if you really want to lay blame here lay it on conservative ideals that want government to fail.
p
Posted by: payshun | November 24, 2007 7:29 PM
All the finger pointing saying...
"Everything is the fault of liberals..."
"Everything is the fault of conservatives..."
It's not a monologue, it's TWO monologues.
Posted by: N.M. Rod | November 25, 2007 12:51 PM
Ryan Roderick Beiler wrote:
Instead of high-visibility, low-impact band-aids, I want UFD to provide better options for as many youth as possible, so that fewer young men and women grow up to make stupid choices like wrecking their lives to steal my $20.
While I do not deny that UFD is doing a lot of valuable work, it needs to be said that petty theft is not merely stupid, it is wrong. "Thou shalt not steal" and all that...
Consider this as the onslaught of opportunities for "Canned Compassion" wash over us with the holiday season, and look for opportunities to do both justice and mercy, not with band-aids of a march here or a meal there, but with sustained service and activism that seeks real healing for our communities.
I believe we have a new buzzword: "Canned compassion", a derogatory phrase for charity that is based upon individual giving and sacrifice rather than political activism.
Sojourners is perfectly free to make the case for its political program, but I doubt they will persuade many by dismissing the efforts of private volunteers and the gifts of voluntary donors as "canned".
Wolverine
Posted by: Wolverine | November 25, 2007 8:46 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?