A Friendly Letter

The Talk They Did NOT Hear at Friends Central School . . .

On May 25, Sa’ed Atshan was chosen by the Swarthmore College Class of 2018 to be the speaker at their “Last Collection,” an opening ceremony of their Commencement exercises.

Here are some excerpts from his talk. . . . I’m posting them as a sample of Atshan as a speaker, and as a man sharing his identity and evolution with younger peers. I believe much of this would have been in the talk he was planning for Friends Central School last year.

But this was an experience denied to the students at Friends Central School. To prevent Atshan from speaking there, two teachers at Friends Central were fired, and a high administrative official left. This shameful incident is now the subject of a federal lawsuit.

Atshan’s Swarthmore talk was intriguing to me for several reasons, but one was a question I’m still seeking the answer to:

What is it about this talk, and about this person, that was worth destroying the jobs of three loyal faculty at Friends Central School to keep both off their campus?

Many readers will know that the Friends Central administration has refused comment on this matter. So we’re on our own to sort it out. This talk is not a final answer; but is worth reading and pondering as the seeking continues.

“Quaker Education”: A Rare Peek Behind the Curtain

On Monday, February 6, 2017 announcements of Professor Atshan’s Friday talk were posted, and a morning announcement of the talk was read during homeroom. Upper School Principal Hall checked in with Plaintiff Eure to inform her that one parent had called with concerns but that the call seemed to go well.

26. That same day at 3:44 p.m., Mr. Hall sent Plaintiffs the following email captioned “A new development around Friday”, containing the following content: “Ariel & Layla: I need to speak with you about Friday’s invited guest. I do not want to divulge too much in an email, so I will catch up with you both tomorrow, if l don’t see you later today.”

27. Within 30 minutes of the receipt of above-referenced email, Plaintiff Eure spoke with Mr. Hall and was told that a number of parents had voiced their opposition to Professor Atshan’s speaking at FCS. Mr. Hall instructed them to cancel the speaker. At the same time, as part of his plan to divest himself of any responsibility, he branded the action as being “not fair and not right.” He assured Plaintiffs that he had told Defendant Sellers that Plaintiffs had been acting appropriately. At the same time, he said that he could not let the speech happen. Mr. Hall specifically left it to Plaintiffs to contact Professor Atshan and notify him of the administration’s decision.

28. On Tuesday February 7, Plaintiffs informed the club members of the decision to cancel Professor Atshan’s speech. The students revealed to Plaintiffs that they intended to walk out of Meeting for Worship the following day. This information was, in turn, relayed by Plaintiffs to the FCS administration. Mr. Hall specifically signified his approval of the action, as long as it was done in the spirit of Meeting for Worship, saying that it was not fair and not right for there not to have dialogue.

Three Reflections on Wisdom

So the Book of Proverbs and the other Wisdom texts are not just about good advice; but they embody a mode of “revelation” not reserved only to prophets or priests or ancient texts, but potentially available right now to anyone who is ready to observe keenly and reflect deeply.

Now, while my own observation & reflection has confirmed much of what I find in Proverbs, I have also seen much that doesn’t fit with its model of guaranteed riches & honor for the righteous. In fact I’m sorry to say that I’ve often seen the exact opposite happening.

So if I could talk to the editors of Proverbs, I’d want to ask – what about these people, righteous enough, innocent enough, who didn’t get rich and live happily ever after? Are they in your Wisdom texts somewhere?

Well yes, they are. Not so much in the Book of Proverbs, but very much in the Wisdom texts. And we’ll explore that next time.

The Embassy, the White House & the Bigots: Tears For Jerusalem.

Jeffress is, sadly, right that religious bigotry is not unique to him: lots of people share it. But there’s a difference between murderous bigotry and dissent: after all, I happen to think there’s stuff that’s both nutty and dangerous in Mormon doctrine & theology; I also have serious doubts about various tenets in Islam, and others in some Jewish subgroups. (And did I mention my quarrels with much of so-called “Christianity”?) Jeffress’s theology represents some of the worst of all (Speaking of “heresies from the pit of hell . . .”) and seeing him put by the White House front and center in a U.S. embassy anywhere, and especially in such a critical and hazardous spot, is way beyond belief.

Except that it’s true.