Horizons

http://journals.cambridge.org/HOR

Additional services for Horizons:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

Re-imagining Redemption: Universal Salvation

in the Theology of Julian of Norwich

Maureen L. Walsh

Horizons / Volume 39 / Issue 02 / September 2012, pp 189 - 207

DOI: 10.1017/S0360966900010677, Published online: 18 March 2013

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0360966900010677

How to cite this article:

Maureen L. Walsh (2012). Re-imagining Redemption: Universal Salvation in the
Theology of Julian of Norwich. Horizons, 39, pp 189-207 doi:10.1017/
S0360966900010677

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/HOR, IP address: 131.104.249.157 on 15 Mar 2015

 RE-IMAGINING REDEMPTION: UNIVERSAL
SALVATION IN THE THEOLOGY
OF JULIAN OF NORWICH1

Maureen L. Walsh
Georgetown University
ABSTRACT

The revelations Julian of Norwich received in 1373 provided her

with unique insight that transformed her understanding of the
Christian faith and prompted her to re-imagine traditional notions
of sin, Gods love, and salvation in new ways. Her re-interpretation
of these doctrines causes great anxiety for Julian inasmuch as what
she learned from her showings was at odds with church teachings,
particularly her new understanding of Gods plan of salvation for
all humanity. I argue that Julian develops a theology of universal
salvation characterized by an open understanding of who will par-
ticipate in the salvation of Christ, and this openness places Julian in
tenuous relationship with the church of her day. Ultimately, Julians
trust that all will be well allows her to push beyond the tension
between her insight and church teachings, in effect challenging the
official teaching of no salvation for those outside the church.

It is with words of love that the woman we know as Julian of

Norwich both begins and ends her account of the showings she
received in 1373. Soon after receiving these sixteen revelations, Julian
wrote a short description of what she had experienced. Twenty years
later, she wrote a much longer account, this time filled with rich
interpretations of what her showings meant. Opening the long text
she declares, This is a revelation of love,2 and she concludes by
saying that love is the whole reason for the showings in the first place.
Know it well, she writes, love was [the Lords] meaning.3 This
1
I am grateful to Horizons anonymous reviewers for their helpful questions and
suggestions. I am also indebted to Julia Lamm of Georgetown University for first
introducing me to Julian and her writings.
2
Julian of Norwich, Showings, trans. Edmund Colledge and James Walsh (Mahwah,
NJ: Paulist, 1978), 1:175. I will be quoting from the Long Text (chapter:page number)
unless otherwise noted. For the latest critical edition of Julians text, see The Writings of
Julian of Norwich, ed. Jacqueline Jenkins and Nicholas Watson (University Park, PA:
Pennsylvania State University Press, 2006).
3
Showings, 86:342.

Maureen L. Walsh is a postdoctoral fellow in Georgetown Universitys theology department

and Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship. Her teaching and research
focus on systematic theology, religious pluralism, and pregnancy loss.

HORIZONS 39/2 (2012): 189207

190 HORIZONS

love is what she calls the strength and foundation of everything [that]
was revealed.4
These showingsvisual, locutional, and spiritualcame to Julian
after she had prayed to have a recollection of the Passion, bodily
sickness, and three wounds.5 Through the first two requests, she
hoped to better understand the suffering of Christ on the cross as
well as to receive the sacrament of last rites and the experiences that
precede death in order to live a life more fully devoted to God.6 The
three wounds she hoped to receive were the gifts of true contrition,
loving compassion, and longing with her will for God.7 In the end,
the showings Julian received went far beyond her original requests and
provided her with unique insight that transformed her conception of the
Christian faith, particularly the notions of sin and redemption in light
of a new understanding of Gods love. Writing in fourteenth-century
England, not long after the expulsion of the Jews, the peasant uprisings,
and the devastation of the Black Plague, it is not hard to imagine why
Julians message of Gods universal love comes through as something
innovative and radical.
In this essay I focus on the question of salvation in Julians Show-
ings, an issue that crystallizes a little over a third of the way into the
long text. After affirming Christs assurance that all will be well in
spite of the great sin of humankind, Julian questions how all can be
well if, according to church teaching, those who die out of the faith of
Holy Church are necessarily damned.8 Clearly Julian sees a disjunc-
tion between the possibility of eternal damnation and the promise of
all being well. Her frequent disclaimers about her loyalty to the
churchs teachings intimate her struggle to reconcile the tension
between her revelations and the faith of the church of her day. For
Julian, though, the idea of no salvation outside the church is not only
a stumbling block for her faith; it haunts her as she considers the
horrific fate she believes awaits those who will not be saved. Ulti-
mately, it is her trust that, indeed, all will be well that allows her to
push beyond this tension, in effect challenging the official teaching
of no salvation for those outside the church. I shall argue that in doing
so Julian develops a theology of universal salvation in her Showings,
which functions subversively insofar as it captures the disruption
caused by her revelations to her relationship with the church and
its teachings.

4
Ibid., 7:186187.
5
Ibid., 2:177.
6
Ibid., 2:178.
7
Ibid., 2:179.
8
Ibid., 32:233.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 191

Before proceeding to my main argument, two preliminary points

need immediate clarification, namely, the use of the terms theology
and universal salvation. First, though traditionally Julian of Norwich
has been considered a mystic of the Christian tradition, many recent
scholars have noted the theological acumen of her writings.9 It is not
that the label mystic is inaccurate, but rather that in her writings,
Julian moves beyond what is typically thought of as mysticism in the
theologically-thick interpretations of her revelations that she offers. One
reason she has often been overlooked as a theologian is that she did not
write her theology in the manner typically associated with theologians of
her day. Her writing, though systematic, does not follow a formal
method like that of scholasticism, and the conclusions she draws are
often very subtle and nuanced. Nicholas Watson, scholar of English ver-
nacular theology, posits that, on the whole, vernacular theology has been
misunderstood as the popular writings derived from high Latin theo-
logical writings. Instead, he argues that writings like Julians were gen-
erated primarily from the internal resources of vernacular culture.10
Though her writings may not fit the mold of traditional theologies,
Julian of Norwich deserves to be recognized as a constructive thinker in
her own right.
Second, clarification of the phrase universal salvation is in order
since it is not used by Julian and is used here anachronistically. Uni-
versal salvation refers neither to what salvation is nor to who accom-
plishes it, but refers rather to who will be saved. Here I use the term
universal salvation as a way to name the openness of Julians under-
standing regarding who will be granted salvation. It is this openness
toward the salvation of more than just Christians that puts Julian in

9
For example, Denys Turner, Julian of Norwich, Theologian (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 2011); Frederick Bauerschmidt, Julian of Norwich and the Mystical Body
Politic of Christ (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1999); Grace Jantzen,
Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian (New York: Paulist, 1987); Julia Lamm,
Revelation as Exposure in Julian of Norwichs Showings, Spiritus 5 (2005): 5478; Joan
Nuth, Two Medieval Soteriologies: Anselm of Canterbury and Julian of Norwich,
Theological Studies 53 (1992): 61145.
10
Nicholas Watson, Visions of Inclusion: Universal Salvation and Vernacular
Theology in Pre-Reformation England, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies
27 (1997): 14546. After situating her writings in the context of other vernacular texts
from the same era, Watson also argues that Julian offers a theology of universal salvation.
He posits that these texts embody a universalist outlook due to the fact that they are
written in horizontally-oriented Middle English vernacular as opposed to Latin, which
he suggests inscribes hierarchy by its very nature (170-71). While Watson attends to the
particulars of Julians understanding of salvation in constructing his position, the central
thesis of his argument is linguistically based. My argument supports many of the points
Watson makes but is grounded in a close reading of Julians theology and how it relates to
the prevailing doctrinal beliefs of the church of her time rather than in the intricacies of
Julians indebtedness to the Middle English vernacular culture.
192 HORIZONS

tenuous relationship with her Holy Church. Here one could question
whether the salvation of non-Christians is a serious concern for Julian.
Certainly during her life as an anchoress, Julian would not have come
in contact with many persons of other faiths. Nonetheless, it is clear
from her Showings that she draws a distinction between those who are
and are not baptized, has an awareness of other faiths, and is concerned
about the soteriological potential of those outside the church.11
In order to illustrate Julians theology of universal salvation and
its subversive character, I will take the following approach. First, I will
explore how Julian understands the churchs soteriology, supple-
menting her perspective with a very brief history of the question of
salvation outside the church. Then, I will demonstrate how Julian
reconceives sin and redemption in a more open manner in light of the
depth of Gods love revealed to her in the showings. Finally, I will
turn to the second half of my thesis to demonstrate how Julians
re-imagination of the traditional doctrines of sin and redemption chal-
lenges the churchs teaching and indeed subverts it, despite her many
affirmations of fidelity to her Holy Church.

I. No Salvation Outside the Church: Cyprian and Julian

Discussions regarding universal salvation as a theological question

frequently begin with the third-century bishop Cyprian of Carthage. It was
Cyprian who, now infamously, said, Extra ecclesia nulla salus, no
salvation outside the Church.12 The situation that prompted Cyprian
to make this declaration was a baptismal controversy related to schisms
in the North African church. The question at hand was whether those
baptized by other groups, which Cyprian did not recognize as churches,
needed to be baptized again in order to join Cyprians church.13 Bishop
Cyprian responded that there is one baptism, that of the catholic Church,
and that in consequence we do not rebaptize, but baptize, all those who,
coming as they do from adulterous and unhallowed water, have to be
washed and sanctified by the true water of salvation.14

11
Showings, 3233:23334.
12
Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 73, in Early Latin Theology: Selections from
Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Jerome, trans. and ed. S.L. Greenslade (Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1956), 169.
13
S.L. Greenslade, Cyprian: General Introduction, Early Latin Theology, 115.
14
Cyprian of Carthage, Letter 73, 158. Augustine would, as is well known, come to
disagree with Cyprian on the question of the validity of baptism for those Cyprian would
have considered outside the church. For details on the development of the question of
salvation outside the church with specific reference to the context and evolution of
Cyprians axiom, see Francis A. Sullivan, Salvation Outside the Church? Tracing the
History of the Catholic Response (New York: Paulist, 1992) and Jacques Dupuis, Toward
a Christian Theology of Religious Pluralism (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2001).
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 193

As this account demonstrates, what would become a sort of catch-

phrase in the approach to religious pluralism for most of Christian
history originated in the context of a specifically intra-Christian debate.
Cyprians adversaries were Christian heretics, not Jews or so-called
pagans, but in Cyprians eyes there does not seem to be much of a
difference. He writes, Baptism cannot be common to us and the here-
tics, for we do not have God the Father in common, nor Christ the Son,
nor the Holy Ghost, nor the faith, nor the Church itself.15 One is clearly
in or out of the church: there is no middle ground.
Closer to the time of Julian, Cyprians answer to the question of salva-
tion outside the church would be formalized as an ecclesiastical doctrine
at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, and then again in the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries through papal decrees.16 The orientation of these
later reiterations of no salvation outside the Church focused beyond
Christian heretics and schismatics (though these were certainly still a con-
cern) to include followers of other religions, specifically Judaism and Islam.
In a less exclusive formulation, Cyprians maxim was reasserted as
recently as the Second Vatican Councils Dogmatic Constitution on the
Church (Lumen Gentium), through the affirmation that the church is a
necessity for salvation. The document states: For Christ alone, who is
present to us in his body, which is the church, is the mediator and the way
of salvation. . . .17 This formulation moves beyond Cyprians primarily
ecclesiological and sacramental doctrine to point to the christological locus
of salvation. Of course, these most recent developments in soteriological
doctrine occurred long after the time of Julian of Norwich. Nevertheless, as
we move into a discussion of Julians soteriology, noting this development
in the official ecclesiastical doctrine will help to highlight the sophistica-
tion of Julians understanding of salvation in the fourteenth century.
Within the Showings, one chapter communicates Julians under-
standing of the Churchs teaching on salvation most clearly. It appears
shortly after Julians Christ assures her that all will be well, and all will
be well, and every kind of thing will be well.18 In the thirty-second
chapter of the long text, when describing the churchs teaching about
salvation of those outside its membership, Julian does not mince words.

One article of our faith is that many creatures will be damned, such
as the angels who fell out of heaven because of pride, who now are
devils, and many men up on earth who die out of the faith of Holy
15
Cyprian, Letter 73, 169.
16
Jacques Dupuis, Christianity and the Religions (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2001), 203.
17
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) 14,
in Norman P. Tanner, ed., Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, 2 vols. (Washington, DC:
Georgetown University Press, 1990), 2:860. Cf. Dupuis, Christianity and the Religions,
20406.
18
Showings, 27:225.
194 HORIZONS

Church, that is to say those who are pagans and many who have
received baptism and who live unchristian lives and so die out of
Gods love. All these will be eternally condemned to hell, as Holy
Church teaches me to believe.19

In this example, of note are the many groups excluded from salvation:
sinners, non-believers, and lapsed believers. Note also the equation of
dying out of faith of Holy Church and dying out of Gods love. A
close connection is drawn here between salvation, baptism, and the
Churchmuch like Cyprian of Carthages positionalthough the con-
nection is not exclusive insofar as those who are baptized can still be
damned.20 Though other places in the text point to the disruption in
Julians understanding of Holy Churchs teachings caused by her show-
ings, this example illustrates her initial trust that, as the Church taught, a
great number of people outside the Church would be condemned to hell.

II. Interpreting Julians Way of Address

To appreciate how Julians notion of salvation differed from the

churchs traditional teaching, despite her best pledges of loyalty, one
helpful starting point is examining the issue by way of address. Through-
out the text, Julian draws the reader into her story, writing familiarly and
inclusively of we and us, and of our desire for salvation.21 In the
long text version of her Showings, Julian never specifies to whom pre-
cisely her writing is addressed. By contrast, the short text begins by declar-
ing that Julians account contains very many words of comfort, greatly
moving for all those who desire to be Christs lovers, suggesting she
writes only for Christians.22 Still, Julians other forms of address within
the text suggest neither that Christs lovers refers exclusively to
Christians nor that Christians are the exclusive audience of her writing.
The most explicit references Julian makes that might suggest her
writings pertain strictly to a Christian audienceand therefore suggest
that only Christians will be savedoccurs when she refers to her fel-
low or even Christians.23 For example, she writes:

So I saw how Christ has compassion on us because of sin; and just as

I was before filled full of pain and compassion on account of Christs
19
Ibid., 32:233.
20
Denys Turner, in Julian of Norwich, Theologian (10309), prioritizes Julians assertion
that some people are condemned to hell and looks less favorably upon the argument
presented here (and by others) that Julian has a universalist soteriological orientation.
21
Ibid., 49:264.
22
Ibid., Short Text, i:125.
23
Ibid., 37:241; 79:334.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 195

Passion, so I was now in part filled with compassion for all my fellow
Christians, because he loves very dearly the people who will be
saved, that is to say Gods servants.24

Yet as narrow as the category of fellow Christians seems, at other

points in the Showings Julian broadens her audience by referring sim-
ply to those who will be saved.25 Indeed, her formulation of the
saved becomes quite broad in some places, as when she writes, our
good Lord speaks in love to all mankind who will be saved,26 placing
no limits on who may be included in salvation. Another illustrative
example is when Julian writes, [Christ] suffered for the sins of every
man who will be saved; and he saw and he sorrowed for every mans
sorrow, desolation and anguish, in his compassion and love.27 Even
within this single sentence, she moves from a narrower to a broader
conception of the saved. In moving from every man who will be
saved to every man as the focus of Christs Passion, Julian makes an
important, universalizing shift by not limiting whom the redemptive
work of Christ affects. These lines suggest that Julian envisions the
group of those who will be saved as open and including more than just
those who are baptized or who are in the church.
One example in particular points to this interpretation. Early in the
text, Julian writes, I speak of those who will be saved, for at this time
God showed me no one else. But in everything I believe as Holy Church
preaches and teaches.28 In effect, by connecting these two sentences
with the conjunction but, Julian switches directions, suggesting
that what she writes in the first sentence may not correspond precisely
to the second sentence. The second sentence, then, could be read as a
corrective to, or qualification of, the first sentence, suggesting that the
group of those who will be saved is not necessarily identical with
those saved according to church teaching.
Julians ways of referring to her audience and to those who will be
saved, when taken in isolation, do not conclusively demonstrate that
Julian holds a universal vision of salvation. They do, however, point to
an openness in her thought that allows her to move beyond the strict
formulation of no salvation outside the Church to a more expansive
conception of who will benefit from salvation. Still, Julians perpetual
qualifications, inserted to limit the group of those who will be saved,

24
Ibid., 28:226.
25
Ibid., 9:192.
26
Ibid., 25:222.
27
Ibid., 20:213 (emphases added).
28
Ibid., 9:192.
196 HORIZONS

illustrate that a great tension exists in her writing between broad and
narrow conceptions of the saved, centering on the apparent conflict
between her open understanding of salvation and her belief, rooted in
the churchs teachings, that in reality not all will be saved.

III. Re-Imagining Salvation and Sin

In her Showings, Julian does not claim to know exactly what salva-
tion will be or how it will be accomplished in its fullness. This, she says,
is something only God knows.29 Yet, based on the experiences of her
showings, she offers three main, intimately related descriptions of what
salvation will be, or better, of the experience of the saved as a result of
salvation. Each of the images of salvationrest, bliss, and uniongains
its true force of meaning when contrasted with the alternative of no
salvation. For Julian writes of Christs Passion, [H]e has by it redeemed
us from endless torment in hell . . . [and] brought us up into heaven.30
The first image Julian offers of salvation is one of rest. This heav-
enly rest is contrasted with the stress of worldly cares, for this is the
reason why our hearts and souls are not in perfect ease.31 She writes
that only God is true rest and that to receive spiritual rest is to
have him who is everything.32 In describing this rest of salvation,
Julian creates one of the most beautiful and striking images of all of the
Showings. Though many of the pictures she paints are grotesque and
disturbing portraits of the suffering of Christ in the Passion, this partic-
ular image captures the sense of Gods familiar love and of Christ as
our clothing, who wraps and enfolds us for love, embraces us, sur-
rounds us for his love.33 In recounting her tenth showing, she writes:

With a kindly countenance our good Lord looked into his side, and
he gazed with joy, and with his sweet regard he drew his creatures
understanding into his side by the same wound; and there he
revealed a fair and delectable place, large enough for all mankind
that will be saved and will rest in peace and in love.34

Focusing on the side wound Christ received during the crucifixion,

Julian describes the respite of salvation as being drawn into a womb of
safety, warmth, and comfort. For we cannot be blessedly saved until
29
Ibid., 32:23233; 36:23841.
30
Ibid., 23:220.
31
Ibid., 5:183. The Jenkins and Watson critical edition of the Julians text clarifies the
difficult wording of these particular lines (Writings, 14041).
32
Showings, 5:184.
33
Ibid., 5:183.
34
Ibid., 24:220.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 197

we are truly in peace and in love, for that is our salvation.35 The focus
on Gods tender love demonstrated in this quote will be significant as
we move into the discussion of the universality of Julians understand-
ing of salvation.
The second image of salvation Julian offers is one of bliss and
reward. In the description of her sixth revelation, Julian tells of how her
understanding was lifted up to heaven where she saw that the Lord,
with a glorious countenance [that] fills all heaven full of the joy and
bliss of divinity, had gathered a feast for dear friends, that is, the
beloved saved.36 Her recollection of this revelation communicates a true
sense of elation, intended to give hope to the living. She describes the
reward of bliss that every soul will have in heaven who has voluntarily
served God in any degree upon earth.37 The souls bliss is a reflection of
the Lords pleasure. Yet, this promise of joy is not just an eschatological
hope. Though this bliss is among Julians images of final salvation, she
believes that humanity should be happy while still living out of antici-
patory gratitude for the gift of salvation. As the first image of rest serves
as a model against worldly anxiety, the second image of bliss incorpo-
rates instruction about living this life in a way that is a reflection of and
thankful for the work of salvation that has already taken place.
The third description of salvation is, in a sense, the culmination of
the first two images as the union of the soul with God in a Trinitarian
vision of peace, joy, and harmony. Julian offers this image of salvation
when recounting the revelation in which the Lord showed her some-
thing small, no bigger than a hazelnut. She notes the apparent insig-
nificance and fragility of the hazelnut, for which the Lord corrects her,
saying, It lasts and always will, because God loves it; and thus every-
thing has being through the love of God.38 Learning of the depths and
power of Gods love, she comes to a new realization.

It is that God is the Creator and the protector and the lover. For until I
am substantially united to him, I can never have perfect rest or true
happiness, until, that is, I am so attached to him that there can be no
created thing between my God and me.39

For Julian, the relationship between Creator and creature is like that
between parent and child and entails some sort of substantial and
essential connection. She writes that in our creating [God] joined and

35
Ibid., 49:264.
36
Ibid., 14:203.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid., 5:183.
39
Ibid.
198 HORIZONS

united us to himself40 and in the Incarnation God joined himself

to our body,41 suggesting a shared nature (or kind) between God
and humanity. It is in this loving, protective connection between the
Creator and creature that the root of redemption can be found.
The three images of rest, bliss, and union reflect Julians own joy
and hope in salvation. At the same time, they point to why salvation is
necessary. That is, in describing what salvation is, each of these images
implies what salvation is not, or how this life is not a full realization of
salvation. Instead of rest, bliss, and union, the world is filled with dis-
ease, sorrow, and fragmentation. Yet, having glimpsed the fullness of
salvation through her showings, Julian laments, I saw that nothing
hindered me but sin, and I saw that this is true of us all in general, and
it seemed to me that if there had been no sin, we should all have been
pure and as like our Lord as he created us.42 This awareness of what life
could have been like had humanity not fallen into sin leads Julian to
wonder why the Fall had not been prevented in the first place.43 Though
she is ashamed for daring to ask such a question of Christ, he answers
her kindly, saying, Sin is necessary, but all will be well, and all will be
well, and every kind of thing will be well.44 Despite seeming initially to
accept this response, she pushes the question further, asking, Ah, good
Lord, how could all things be well, because of the great harm which has
come through sin to your creatures?45
Later in the text she takes up the issue of sin again: For I know by
the ordinary teaching of Holy Church and by my own feeling that the
blame of our sins continually hangs upon us, from the first man until
the time that we come up into heaven.46 Hence, one can imagine her
astonishment as she saw our Lord God showing no more blame to us
than if we were as pure and as holy as the angels are in heaven.47
In these two examples, we can see Julian putting forward the
Churchs teaching about sin only to have it challenged directly by Christ.
She writes, And between these two oppositions [the Church teachings
and her showings] my reason was greatly afflicted.48 Julians use of the
language of affliction suggests that this opposition in her thought goes
40
Ibid., 58:293.
41
Ibid., 57:292. This connection between the nature, or kind, of God with that of
humanity has been explored by other scholars. For a discussion of the issue, see, for
example, Frederick Bauerschmidt, Order, Freedom, and Kindness: Julian of Norwich
on the Edge of Modernity, Theology Today 60 (2003): 6381.
42
Showings, 26:224.
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid., 27:225.
45
Ibid., 29:227.
46
Ibid., 50:266.
47
Ibid.
48
Ibid.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 199

beyond just intellectual uncertainty to personal disorientation and tur-

moil. Essentially, she is trying to reconcile her original notion of sin
with the knowledge gained through her revelations, and in the end, this
leads her to re-imagine sin in a creative way.
Julians new, alternate conception of sin unfolds over the course of
the text, but it is captured most succinctly by the parable of the lord and
servant presented in the fifty-first chapter of the long text. In it, Julian
describes the revelation of a lord and a servant, who are intended to
represent God the Father and God the Son, respectively, and in which
Christ is identified with Adam, that is, with humankind.
The lord, who cares greatly for the servant, sends him off to do
his [the lords] will, but when trying in earnest to please his master,
the servant falls and is injured, and is unable to do the lords bidding.
Ashamed, the servant does not turn to his lord for help, but instead,
suffers the pain of his fall alone. Julian writes that she was amazed
that this servant could so meekly suffer all this woe, and she wonders
if he is to blame for his fall and resulting pain.49 Indeed, she sees that
the lord finds no fault in the servant, and looks upon the servant
tenderly . . . with great compassion and pity.50 She explains that,
the only cause of [the servants] falling was his good will and his
great desire. And in spirit he was as prompt and as good as he was
when he stood before his lord, ready to do his will.51
Here we can see that Julian offers a new interpretation of the fall
of Adam, the original sin of humankind, insofar she places no blame
on the servant for failing to do his masters bidding, that is, for sin-
ning. Instead, she simply attributes it to his eagerness to serve and to
his naivete and ignorance.52 In addition, Julians interpretation of
sin is new in that it correlates sin with pain, as the suffering of
the servant illustrates.53 She describes the pain of the fall not only
in terms of subsequent physical discomfort and ineptitude, but also
the resulting intellectual and emotional disorientation, isolation and
anxiety, all of which we can see Julian understands to be part of the
human condition.
The effects of this new interpretation of sin appear throughout
Julians writings. In particular, her understanding of the work of
redemption is deeply influenced by it. Still, the way in which she
re-imagines sin in light of her showings should not be misinterpreted
as minimizing or neglecting to attend to its gravity. Indeed, Julians

49
Ibid., 51:268.
50
Ibid.
51
Ibid.
52
Ibid., 47:260.
53
A similar argument is put forth in Nuth, Two Medieval Soteriologies.
200 HORIZONS

Christ affirms that Adams sin was the greatest harm ever done or
ever to be done until the end of the world.54 Yet, for Julian, nothing
is more amazing and truly awesome than the fact that Christ chose
to redeem the sins of all humankind and, in fact, takes delight in the
work of salvation. It is in her view of the work of redemption that
Julian moves towards a universalist interpretation of salvation.

IV. Re-imagining Redemption

Desire for intimate knowledge of the Passion originally inspired

Julian to make the prayers that she believes led to her showings. Grace
Jantzen maintains that the Passion is the central, orienting element of
Julians thought. Whatever she has to say about creation, the Trinity,
the incarnation, or any other topic . . . must ultimately be measured by
the standard of the cross.55 Due to their placement at the beginning of
her revelations and at the beginning of the text, the Passion showings
serve as a lens through which the rest of Julians theology must be
read. Julian asserts that there are three ways in which to contemplate
the Passion: by focusing either on Christs suffering, on the love that
led Christ voluntarily to endure suffering, or on the delight Christ
takes in his Passion.56 This three-fold interpretation is captured when
she writes, And contemplating all this through his grace, I saw that
the love in him which he has for our souls was so strong that he
willingly chose suffering with a great desire, and suffered it meekly
with a great joy.57 Indeed, it is in Christs Passion that Julian sees the
primary work of salvation.
The descriptions of Christs Passion that Julian recounts from her
showings are both disgusting and horrifying. She learned of the depth
of suffering Christ endured through images of his copious bleeding
and deep drying.58 As graphic as these images are, what is striking
about Julians account of the Passion is that she focuses on Christs
body and suffering (the first way to contemplate the Passion), and
not on the actions of those who persecute him. In other words, her
focus is on what is going on with Christ, not on what others are doing
to Christ.
One example of this is the way in which Julian describes the blood
of Christ, which ran out so plentifully that neither skin nor wounds

54
Showings, 29:228.
55
Jantzen, Julian of Norwich, 90.
56
Showings, 2023:21418.
57
Ibid., 20:214.
58
Ibid., 7:187; 16:206.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 201

could be seen.59 Here she does not focus on what caused him to bleed,
but on the work of redemption done by the blood.

[Christs blood] descended into hell and broke its bonds, and deliv-
ered all who were there and who belong to the court of heaven . . . [it]
overflows all the earth, and it is ready to wash from their sins all
creatures who are, have been and will be of good will . . . it flows in
all of heaven, rejoicing in the salvation of all mankind, which is and
will be there, and filling up the number which is lacking.60

Here we see that Christs blood spills into all corners of heaven, earth,
and hell. As Julian learns from Christ, the spilling of his blood, his
suffering, was not without purpose: He suffered for the sins of every
man who will be saved.61 Just as the sins of all humankind are
represented in the Fall so are all humans redeemed through the Passion.
In spite of the tremendous pain and anguish of the Passion, Julian
re-imagines redemption by focusing on Christs voluntary and joy-
ful suffering (the third way to contemplate the Passion). She writes,
[T]his atoning is more pleasing to the blessed divinity and more hon-
ourable for mans salvation, without comparison, than ever Adams sin
was harmful.62 As a result, she says we should [l]et our delight in our
salvation be like the joy which Christ has in our salvation, as much as
that may be whilst we are here.63

V. Re-Imagining Gods Love

As noted above, Julians focus is on Christ as the sufferer, not on

who or what caused him to suffer. To be sure, what he suffered and
for whom he suffered are what Julian calls two lesser particulars,
for the most important point to apprehend in his Passion is to medi-
tate and come to see that he who suffered is God.64 This attention to
who accomplished the work of salvationnot just a man named Jesus,
but Jesus Christ, God Incarnatefocuses Julians and the readers atten-
tion beyond the physical suffering of Christ toward that which led
Christ willingly to suffer, that is, love (the second way to contemplate
the Passion). Indeed, she writes, The love which made him suffer
surpasses all his sufferings, as much as heaven is above earth; for the

59
Ibid., 12:199.
60
Ibid., 12:200.
61
Ibid., 20:213.
62
Ibid., 29:228.
63
Ibid., 23:219.
64
Ibid., 20:213 (emphasis added).
202 HORIZONS

suffering was a noble, precious and honourable deed, performed once

in time by the operation of love.65
In Julians account of the Passion, it is clear that Christ delights in
the redemption of humankind. As her Christ told her, How could it
be that I should not do for love of you all that I was able?66 Despite
the cost of his great suffering, Christ takes joy in bringing humankind
away from sin and closer to God,67 and though she is initially dis-
turbed by the intimate knowledge of the Passion she gains, Julian
comes to take pleasure in it, knowing that Christ was acting out of
saving love for humanity.68
Because Julian places less emphasis on the culpability of human-
kind for its sins, her notion of redemption takes on a more positive
character than, say, Anselm of Canterburys notion of divine satisfac-
tion, in which the work of salvation is rooted in Gods honor and
justice, not love. It is through this focus on love that one can clearly
see the universal character of Julians soteriology. She writes:

God has made everything that is made, and God loves everything that
he has made. And he who has general love for all his fellow Christians
in God has love towards everything that is. For in mankind which will
be saved is comprehended all, that is to say all that is made and the
maker of all. For God is in man and in God is all. And he who loves
thus loves all.69

This love is rooted in the Triune God as the Creator, Redeemer and
Sustainer who created everything for love, and by the same love is it
preserved, and always will be without end.70
This intimate relationship between God and humanity points to
the development of a universal notion of salvation in Julians thought,
based on the inclusive notion that it is God out of whom we have all
come, in whom we are all enclosed, and into whom we shall all go.71
For Julian, humanity is wholly enveloped by the love of God.72
She writes, There is no created being who can know how much and
how sweetly and how tenderly the Creator loves us.73 Earlier I noted
that Julian describes the churchs vision of damnation as dying out of

65
Ibid., 22:217.
66
Ibid.
67
Ibid., 23:220; 72:320.
68
Ibid., 2324:21821.
69
Ibid., 9:191192.
70
Ibid., 8:190.
71
Ibid., 53:283 (emphases added).
72
Lamm, Revelation as Exposure in Julian of Norwichs Showings, 5478.
73
Showings, 6:186.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 203

Gods love,74 but considering the love shown to her in her revelations,
dying out of Gods all-encompassing love seems impossible. For Julian,
it is this universal love that is at the heart universal salvation.
Before turning to the subversive potential of Julians theology,
allow me to make one final point about Julians understanding of the
work of salvation. In addition to Christs redemptive suffering in the
Passion, there is a second part of salvation that is much more ambigu-
ous than the first. Julian says it is hidden from us and closed,75 yet
she demonstrates great confidence in this eschatological deed. She
writes, This is the great deed ordained by our Lord God from without
beginning, treasured and hidden in his blessed breast, known only to
himself, through which deed he will make all things well.76 Despite
not fully comprehending what this deed will be, Julian emphasizes its
power and trusts in its goodness, or better, in the goodness of the God
from whom it will come. In Julians soteriology, this unknown deed
plays an important role in that it creates a space for the possibility of
the reinterpretation of the traditional notion of salvation as well as for
greater theological humility, recognizing that humanity cannot fully
comprehend Gods plan.

VI. Salvation as Subversion

Earlier I described Julian as having an openness to the possibility

of salvation for those outside the church. While this is still true, I argue
that Julian surpasses a simple openness and takes on a universalist
orientation as a result of what she learns of the dynamic, welcoming
love of God for humanity, as exemplified in Christs Passion. It is
in light of her re-imagining of redemption, based on a new doctrine of
sin, that Julian is able to trust in Christs assurance that all will be
well. It is precisely this trust in what was revealed to her, however,
that places Julian in tenuous relationship with her Holy Church.
In spite of the ways in which she re-imagines traditional doctrines,
Julian is always quick to declare her allegiance to the church and its
teachings. Demonstrating her trust in the general authority of Holy
Church, Julian explicitly affirms that everything which is profitable
for us to understand and know our good Lord will most courteously
show to us by all the preaching and teaching of Holy Church.77 Yet, in
the instances in her showings when her expectations based on church

74
Ibid., 32:233.
75
Ibid, 30:228.
76
Ibid., 32:23233.
77
Ibid., 34:235.
204 HORIZONS

teachings were not met, Julians language grows more cautious, and
she begins couching each statement that could be read as a challenge
in an affirmation of her faith in the church.
Julians writings can be read as subversive inasmuch as they capture
the disruption of her faith caused by what was revealed in her showings,
and in the way that her reinterpretations of traditional doctrines stand as
a challenge to the churchs teachings. Despite her repeated pledges of
faith in the church, by developing an alternative interpretation of salva-
tion, Julians writings have the potential to undermine church teachings,
especially because the authority with which she writes is outside the
formal ecclesiastical authority structure. In particular, her claim to have
had direct interaction with Christ without any intermediary could be
seen as threatening the churchs role and authority.78
In addition, she subverts the churchs claim to authority when she
describes it as the lower judgment in contrast to the higher judgment of
God.79 Certainly the church would have recognized itself as subordi-
nate to the judgment of God, but Julian goes so far as to inquire in what
way the judgment of Holy Church here on earth is true in [Gods]
sight.80 In trying to resolve the tension between the two judgments,
she wants to know how they might both be reconciled as might
be glory to God and the right way for me,81 suggesting that though
she may not understand how, she trusts that the two authorities are
not incompatible.
In general, the central conflict of the text is between the authority
of God revealed in her showings and the authority of the teachings of
the church, also presumably received from God. Yet one could also
read it as a conflict between Julians authority and that of the church.
In reality, Julian explicitly denounces any claim to having her own
authority. She does this first by disclaiming any sort of privilege as a
result of her showings. She writes, I am not good because of the
revelations, but only if I love God better. . . . For I am sure that there
are many who never had revelations or visions, but only the common
teaching of Holy Church who love God better than I.82 Second, she
undermines her own authority directly by saying she should not be
considered a teacher. In the short text, after declaring, I am sure that
anyone who sees [my writings] will be taught the truth and be greatly
comforted, she immediately negates her own authority, writing, God
forbid that you should say or assume that I am a teacher, for that is not

78
Ibid., 4:181.
79
Ibid., 45:25658.
80
Ibid., 45:257.
81
Ibid.
82
Ibid., 9:191.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 205

and never was my intention; for I am a woman, ignorant, weak and

frail.83 Interestingly, Julian omits these latter lines from the longer,
later account of her experience, proclaiming what she learned from
her showings without such a disclaimer. Frederick Bauerschmidt offers
a fascinating interpretation of the way that Julian denounces her own
authority in arguing that by diminishing her own personal authority,
she is really strengthening the authority of her writings by attributing
its content directly to Christ with Julian merely serving as a channel of
divine communication.84 Still, simply writing as she does, she pre-
sumes some sort of authority, at least insofar as she has something that
she thinks is important to share with others.
As I have illustrated, throughout the Showings it is clear that Julian
is struggling to reconcile the faith of the church with the insight she
gained through her revelations. The manner in which she deals with
the tension between these two authorities can be read in at least
three ways. First, employing a more skeptical hermeneutic, one can
read Julians repeated affirmations of the churchs teachings as pander-
ing to ecclesiastical authority, put forth to help keep her otherwise
subversive writings out of trouble.85 Second, taking her words at face
value, one can sense a real feeling of disorder and confusion. The
teachings of the church, which she had always trusted as an authority,
have been destabilized by her own visions, and she is struggling to find
her place between these two worlds. One can see this when she writes:

In everything I believe as Holy Church preaches and teaches. For the

faith of Holy Church, which I had before I had understanding [i.e.
her showings], and which, as I hope by the grace of God, I intend
to preserve whole and to practise, was always in my sight, and I
wished and intended never to accept anything which might be con-
trary to it.86

Clearly she wants to maintain her trust in the church despite the dis-
ruption in her faith prompted by her showings.
A third way in which one can see her dealing with this tension
involves an interesting shift in her interpretation of the nature of the
church in light of her re-imagination of other important doctrines.
Throughout the text, particularly the early chapters, Julians depiction
of Holy Church is primarily as a human institution, rooted in the
word of God, which teaches the articles of the faith and administers

83
Showings, Short Text, vi:135.
84
Bauerschmidt, Julian of Norwich and the Mystical Body Politic of Christ, 76.
85
This is roughly the argument of Jantzen, Julian of Norwich, 9698.
86
Showings, 9:192.
206 HORIZONS

the sacraments.87 Quoting Christs words to her in one of her show-

ings, Julian writes, I am he whom Holy Church preaches and teaches
to you.88 Later in the text, however, Christ is directly identified with
the church, rather than simply being the object of its teachings. For
example, in the thirty-fourth chapter, Julian writes, God showed the
very great delight that he has in all men and women who accept,
firmly and wisely, the preaching and teaching of Holy Church, for he
is that Holy Church.89 This shift from the church as a human institu-
tion to the church as the Body of Christ both undermines and asserts
the authority of the church to the extent that it grants authority to
the earthly church only insofar as it remains connected to Christ, its
source.90 This essential connection is when, referring to the work of
salvation in the Passion, Julian explains, We are bound to this by
God, and drawn and counseled and taught, inwardly by the Holy
Spirit, and outwardly through the same grace by Holy Church.91
In other words, the churchs teaching about redemption is true insofar
as it preaches the same reality as that which is proclaimed by the
Holy Spirit. Thus, Julians soteriology, though primarily theological
and christological, is also ecclesiological insofar as the church is the
Body of Christ. Likewise, the church plays a role in salvation inasmuch
as it remains faithful to its theological and christological core.

VII. Conclusion

In this essay I have argued that Julian of Norwich develops a

theology of universal salvation that is based on her re-imagining of
traditional Christian doctrines of sin and redemption, and that is
rooted in her overwhelming confidence in Gods love for humanity.
This new theology is subversive insofar as it implicitly challenges
the church teachings of her day while at the same time explicitly
assenting to the churchs authority. In spite of this conflict between
the showings and the churchs teachings, between her own theology
and her desire to assent to Holy Church, Julian does not end the Show-
ings lost in turmoil; she concludes, rather, with that which forms the
foundation for her theology of universal salvation: Gods love. After
struggling to understand the meaning of her revelations, she comes
to this insight of love. She writes, Know it well, love was his meaning.
Who reveals it to you? Love. What did he reveal to you? Love. Why
87
Ibid., 1:176; 2:178; 9:191.
88
Ibid., 26:223.
89
Ibid., 34:23536 (emphasis added).
90
Bauerschmidt, Julian of Norwich and the Mystical Body Politic of Christ, 10813.
91
Showings, 30:228.
Walsh: Re-imagining Redemption 207

does he reveal it to you? For love. Remain in this, and you will know
more of the same.92 Though Julians theology of universal salvation
comes in conflict with church teachings, she ultimately sets aside
trying to resolve this tension, admitting that resolution is beyond
her.93 While keeping faith in the church, Julian also has faith in Gods
love, and she surrenders herself to the Lords affirmation that all will
be well, and all will be well, and every kind of thing will be well,
resting in the peace of the promise of salvation.

92
Ibid., 86:342.
93
Ibid., 32:233.