Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian

Abstract

Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian. By Grace M. Jantzen. New York and Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 2000. xxv + 230 pp. $16.95 (paper). Ordinarily a reviewer is asked to comment on a new work. It is my pleasure here to reflect on a book that has become an old friend. Indeed, it would be hard to find any substantial work on Julian of Norwich, published since 1987, that does not include the first edition of Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian in its bibliography. have found particularly exciting about this new edition, however, have been Grace Janzten's own reflections after thirteen years in a newly written introduction. One of the endearing attributes of Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian is its record of a scholar's quest for integrity. As a philosopher of religion, Jantzen was not content with objective analysis of questions of mysticism. original preface (unfortunately omitted from this edition) tells us that the work was intended as a preparatory exercise for a broader philosophical study of mysticism. author notes: Christian tries to pray, and to learn from the giants of prayer in her tradition. A philosopher tries to think, and to understand what is true. A Christian philosopher tries to pray thoughtfully and think prayerfully. In this effort of integration, Julian is a splendid guide (1st edition. London: SPCK, 1987). structure of Julian of Norwich: Mystic and Theologian itself reflects this search for integration. Although outside her particular discipline as a philosopher, Jantzen dedicates the first half of the book to a largely historical study of Julian's background, biography and spirituality as a medieval English anchoress. There is an acute awareness that the political and personal peculiarities of Julian's experience are crucial to an integral understanding of her theology. Jantzen, in hindsight, herself critiques the work for not going far enough in this respect: What sort of time warp is it necessary to assume if [Julian's] teaching is to be appropriated in the twenty-first century? One of my embarrassments about my book as it stands is my easy use of 'we' and 'us'.. . Julian is writing for people of her time, not for 'us'; though some of 'us' may listen in and find that her teaching resonates in ways that can be appropriated today. hope that if were rewriting my book now would be much more circumspect in this matter, less chummy, more aware of the strange otherness of the medieval world, even while valuing its wisdom (p. xv). second half of the book seeks to find this ideal of integration within Julian's theology. It begins with a chapter entitled `Love was his meaning': Julian's Theological Method, incorporating a phrase taken from Julian's own summary of her hermeneutics: I desired many times to know in what was our Lord's meaning... was answered in spiritual understanding, and it was said: What, do you wish to know your Lord's in this thing? Know it well, love was his meaning (p. 91). Jantzen goes on to develop a psychotheological reading of the complex weave of visionary narrative and speculative theology in Julian's writing, concluding with a section on the pivotal questions of theodicy. Commenting on Julian's struggle with the existence of sin and suffering, Jantzen writes: The task of spirituality is to become a whole person, to reunite our sensuality with our substance in union with God. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.