In 1954 the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) issued the landmark Brown v Board of Education of Topeka ruling regarding school segregation. The Court determined that the then current operational philosophy of “separate but equal” was a myth. That in fact (and in practice), segregated school systems were inherently unequal. Anyone with unimpaired observational ability knew that to be the case, but the myth lived on in order to justify the reigning prejudices of the time. Brown v Board exploded the myth. However, declaring an action unconstitutional is one thing; implementing the corrective action is something else.

In 1964 Matthew and Bertha Carter lived and worked on the Premble Plantation near the Mississippi Delta town of Drew. Bertha decided that her children deserved the best education possible, so she enrolled them in the still segregated Drew High School. Matthew’s and Bertha’s job was on the farm owned by Thomas Premble. The house they lived in was leased to them by Premble. To run afoul of one plantation owner was to run afoul of all of them. So, when the foreman of the Premble estate came to their house demanding that they remove their children from Drew High School, Matthew and Bertha knew that the stakes were high. Despite the foreman’s and Premble’s insistence, the Carters held firm. That is when the intimidation began—the nighttime gunshots through the window, the theft of the Carters’ livestock, and finally the eviction from their house. Premble assumed that as a homeless family the Carters would have to move from the area and consequently remove their children from the school. However, a Quaker charity bought the Carters a house in Drew and their children completed high school and went on to productive and successful careers.

The story of the Carters’ experience puts into focus a truth I need to be reminded of from time to time. And that is, identifying a wrong and working to right a wrong are two totally different things. It is relatively easy to declare something to be wrong. All it takes is an awareness of events and a moral compass that is not demagnetized by personal prejudices. That is not to say that declaring something wrong is without complications. Sometimes declaring an action or an attitude to be wrong meets with an unwillingness to be heard or a communal ennui. This, to be sure, can be frustrating. But these are small potatoes when it comes to trying to change the circumstances so that the wrong is upended. It is when we try to change a wrong that we often meet vehemently entrenched opposition—an opposition with vested interests in maintaining the wrong, and, most often, an opposition that holds more power than we do. And in the face of this overwhelming opposition it is temptingly easy to assume the inevitability (and immutability) of the wrong and make the best of it that we can.

Here is where the example of the Carters is so powerful. Segregation in public schools was wrong—both morally and legally. Still the wrong persisted. Matthew and Bertha determined that while they were powerless to change the system on the macro-level, they could, nevertheless, make a difference in the small Delta town of Drew. The action of enrolling their children in the local all-white high school was as courageous as it was dangerous, yet they were willing to assume the risks for the benefit of their children and for the sake of doing what was right. Theirs was just a minor act in an insignificant town in an obscure part of a backward state. But for their children and those who came after, it was a life-changing, future-altering event.

This is the time of year when we celebrate insignificant beginnings transforming lives and history. During this season of Advent let us recommit ourselves to challenging wrong by doing right and pray that our faithfulness will find a significance for the sake of others.

David Yeager

Sr. Warden