[April 2005] I read Nouwen’s Life of the Beloved (1993) again a few days ago. The reading awakened the sobering question I faced as I put the book aside after reading it soon after publication – i.e., why did Nouwen fail in his attempt to “write something about the spiritual life” for his friend – secular and Jewish – Fred Bratman? As Bratman explained to Nouwen after reading the manuscript for Life of the Beloved --
Although it is clear that you try to write for me and my friends from your own center and although you express to us what is most precious to you, you do not realize how far we are from where you are. You speak from a context and tradition that is alien to us, and your words are based on many presuppositions that we don’t share with you. You are not aware of how truly secular we are.
Nouwen did not fail for lack of time with Bratman. A decade of interactions had made them deeply aware of each other. Their friendship had sensitized Nouwen to “the plea that arose on all sides – wherever I was open to hear it”.
Bratman: “Speak to us about the deepest yearning of our hearts, about our many wishes, about hope . . . about hope . . . about trust . . . about love. Speak to us about a vision larger than our changing perspectives and about a voice deeper than the clamorings of our mass media. Yes, speak to us about something or someone greater than ourselves. Speak to us about . . . God.”
Nouwen: “Who am I to speak about such things? . . . I don’t have the experience, the knowledge, or the language you are asking for. You and your friends live in a world so different from my own.”
I remember wondering: “Why could Nouwen not grasp the secular mentality? . . . Why had he not realized how wide the gap is between the ‘religious’ and the ‘secular’? . . . Will he try again? . . . If so, what will he do differently?”
Nouwen’s failure shook me. By 1992 I had passed the point of no return in the resolve to be ‘with the world face to face’. I thought about the medical students, residents, teaching physicians, practicing physicians I was attempting to prompt re an approach to spirituality and ethics not dependent on ‘religious’ presuppositions when I read Bratman’s appeal that resulted in Life of the Beloved –
You can do it. . . . You have to do it. . . . If you don’t, who will? . . . Visit me more often; talk to my friends; look attentively at what you see, and listen carefully to what you hear. You will discover a cry welling up from the depths of the human heart that has remained unheard because there was no one to listen.
I resolved in 1993 after finishing Life of the Beloved not to presume I had anything to say in being ‘with the world face to face’. I resolved to suppress speaking out of insecurity. I resolved instead to listen . . . to observe . . . to feel . . . to care.
It is my understanding that Nouwen lived and thought in the ‘religious’ sphere when he wrote Life of the Beloved. He visited Bratman’s ‘secular’ world. By contrast, the ‘religious’ sphere had ceased to be ‘home’ for me by the time I read Nouwen’s attempt to speak meaningfully to individuals who are not ‘religious’. Educational and existential experiences over the previous two decades had carried me far from Nouwen’s ‘religious’ presuppositions and, in doing so, had triggered a radical (i.e., into the deepest roots) rethinking of spirituality and ethics in my personal journey. I had more in common with Bratman than with Nouwen. I was aware of one core aspect of the task Nouwen seems not to have realized – i.e., that the task has to do with far more than transposing ‘religious’ ideas into ‘non-religious’ wording.
