It was Walter Brueggemann who introduced me to two writers who have been intellectual companions ever since. The first was the poet Denise Levertov; the second was Abraham Joshua Heschel.
Over the years I have read and returned to these two writers, looking for wisdom, reassurance, challenging questions, timely reminders, moral insight and a resumed conversation with two voices that are now loved and familiar to me.
Both have been treated by serious and scholarly biographers. Edward Kaplan's two volumes (1. Prophetic Witness; and 2. Spiritual Radical), are the definitive study - Kaplan is the leading scholar of Heschel's writing and thought. The second volume is especially important to place Heschel in the context of post-Holocaust Judaism, and the America of the nuclear age, civil rights movement and the Vietnam war.
Levertov's life and poetry have been explored in two substantial studies. The first by Dana Greene, Denise Levertov. A Poet's Life; the second by Donna Hollenberg, A Poet's Revolution. The life of Denise Levertov. All three of those volumes are rich in detail, fully acquainted with their subject and their writing, and critically appreciative of the subjects of whom they write. The two Levertov biographies are sufficiently different in approach and content to be complementary studies that both repay reading.
I mention this because I've been thinking about my own reading habits, and trying to understand why I have read what I have, and also why some writers become constant and significant companions, while others I can take then leave. Related to this I've been wondering too about my fascination with secondary studies, sometimes to the detriment of reading more of the primary sources of an author's work. Take Karl Barth for example. I've read Barth off and on for decades now, but not systematically and so far not in whole volumes. So much of his work in those fourteen volumes remains unread. On the other hand I've read much of the key secondary literature on Barth, and the truth is I have enjoyed and learned so much (Maybe more?) from some of Barth's finest expositors.
The same is true of Heschel and Levertov, most of whose primary works I have read, and some of them a number of times. But to read those who have made such writers as Barth, Heschel, Levertov a life study, is to be exposed to informed perspective, considered insight, critical thought, and an enthusiasm that at its best confers significance without the contrasting deficits of hagiography or hatchet job. I am an unrepentant fan of good secondary literature.
Back to Heschel. Brueggemann's early work on the Hebrew prophets' passion for justice within the covenant, owed much to two authors, Gerhard Von Rad and A J Heschel. But it was his engagement with Heschel that sent me looking for more.
Brueggemann is an admirer of Heschel's philosophy of religion and his insistence that to be human is to search for God and to be searched for by God. It doesn't take long for readers of Heschel to feel the force of his insistence that the human response to God is awe, wonder, worship, prayer, Torah obedience and radical trust. These are exactly the themes Brueggemann has spent a lifetime advocating as the strongest interpretive pillars of the Hebrew Bible. Those familiar with Brueggemann's essays and sermons, prayers and exegesis will recognise the longevity of those emphases in Brueggemann's own writing.
This photo of Heschel with MLK is evidence that the goodly fellowship of the prophets is not confined to the Old Testament. I find such personal connections fascinating. People whose lives have explored and expounded the prophetic themes of justice, righteousness and mercy as these are encountered in the God of faithfulness, and without injustice; People who have engaged persistently with the God of mercy and steadfast love whose care of creation and humanity has never ceased; the God who hears the cry of the poor, and sees the tears of the oppressed, and who calls for love of neighbour and radical compassion for life, human and creature. Brueggemann and Heschel, two very different people, but speaking with accents similar enough to place them in the same moral and spiritual regions, even if their theological traditions are from two tributaries flowing into the same river.
Recent Comments