Blog #5: St. Julian's Revelations of Divine Love - Vickie GG

Since I'm having trouble grasping ecstatic / mystical religious experience, I decided to read St. Julian's Revelations of Divine Love, which Dr. Redick mentioned in class. On the positive side, I found much beauty in St. Julian's varied experiences of unity with God / Christ / The Trinity, and I gained much from considering the idea of Jesus as Mother. But, in terms of the didactic and logical aspects related to the problem of evil / sin, I must admit I am deeply disturbed and thus not feeling any more comfort nor clarity on why Aslan would create Narnia knowing the White Witch was already there.

More below on each of the above ideas. 

Pros

Unity with God 
In Dr. Redick's "Poetic Participation," the ontological framework of "participation" is described as a meeting where two entities remain separate, or "koinonia," - "to share with [a separate] someone in something which he has" [my addition] (1). Such participation is explicitly not a "convergence into oneness" (2). But my favorite descriptions within St. Julian's revelations - the ones that most helped me toward understanding mystical religious experience - are the ones that emphasized a more (paradoxical) full unity with God while still retaining individuality. 

• "Here saw I a great oneing betwixt Christ and us, to mine understanding: for when He was in pain, we were in pain" (Chapter XVIII).
  While this could be interpreted as an empathic bodily connection between two separate entities (like what Dr. R described in class about feeling pain in your own body when someone else describes their pain), the use of the word "oneing" suggests a more encompassing unity to me, but the "He" vs. "we" being in pain also retains individuality or separateness. 
  
  
• "He hath us all in Himself enclosed" (Chapter VI).
  "So are we, soul and body, clad in the Goodness of God" (Chapter VI).
  "He is our clothing that for love wrappeth us, claspeth us, and all encloseth^[2] us for tender love, that He may never leave us" (Chapter V).
  These ideas of being "enclosed" in God or "clad...in God's goodness" again speak to me of both a unity and a separateness. You can only be enclosed in something (else) if it is separate from you, but once enclosed, it is your outer part. Likewise, though clothing we wear is separate from us, it is one with our body and moves with our body for as long as we are so clad. 

• "For in man is God, and God is in all" (Chapter IX). 
  That we are in God, and God is in us: Whom we see not" (Chapter LIV).
  These lines remind me of Brahman (a Hindu religious idea that has always resonated with me). If something is "in" us, that sounds like it is a part of us, though we also know that God is separate from us. But for us to also be in God suggests even further unity. And the idea that God is in "all" or everything is, again, very Brahman-like. 
  
  
• “Unity betwixt God and man's soul” (Chapter I). 
  "Prayer uniteth the soul to God" (Chapter XLIII).
  In the first quote, there's both "unity" but also still a "betwixt," the latter of which could only be enacted if there's still a separation within the stated unity. Likewise, while the second quote says the word "uniteth," the act of prayer necessitates one subject praying to another (separate) Subject. 
  
  
• "He is the Head, and we be His members" (Chapter LI) 
  This is a great metaphor to support the possibility of being both united and separate at the same time. I have one body, of which both my head and my arms are a part. But my head and my arms are also separate entities (that can move separately) within the whole of my body. 

Jesus as Mother 
In my limited Biblical knowledge from my Christian upbringing, I am used to the Christian divine (especially God) being conceived of the masculine "father," with the masculine pronoun "He" applied to both God and Jesus. So, the idea of Jesus as (the feminine) mother in Chapter LX was very interesting to me (and, since I'm a feminist, instantly appealed to me). "Our Kind Mother, our Gracious Mother,[1] for that He would all wholly become our Mother in all things." The analogy between a human mother suffering while giving birth and Jesus suffering on the cross to give all humans eternal life and salvation worked for me both on the logical level and on a visceral level (thinking back to my own experience of birthing a human child). And the idea that Mother / Jesus "witteth and knoweth the need of her child" is a helpful start (but unfortunately not sufficient argument to me) for why it seems like God sometimes allows or does things that seem problematic but are actually "for our own good." But mostly, thinking of God / Jesus as mother rather than father is something that never occurred to me and something that made me instantly feel more open to the concept of and a connect with God. 

Con - The Problem of Evil / Sin

To try to understand how St. Julian learned through her revelations to reconcile sin and the problem of evil, I'll continually refer back to the five precepts we discussed in class re: the problem of evil. (While I am not fully persuaded by any of these answers, I think Answer #3 is the strongest of the 4 attempts to reconcile the problem of evil.)

1) God is omnibenevolent.   
2) God is omniscient. 
3) God is omnipotent. 
4) God is the sole creator of the world. 
5) (But) Evil exists. 

Answer #1: Evil Does Not Exist
At times, St. Julian's revelations suggest one response to the problem of evil that we already discussed in class: that #5 is not strictly true, that evil does not exist. As St. Julian outlines it, the reason evil cannot exist is that, whether we have joy or suffering, it is all love from God, and nothing that God creates or does could possibly be evil, for God is all good (precept #1). Quotes that support this: 

• "But freely our Lord giveth when He will; and suffereth us [to be] in woe sometime. And both is one love" (Chapter XV)
•  That we are kept all as securely in Love in woe as in weal, by the Goodness of God" (Chapter I).
  
• "All-thing that is done, it is well-done: for our Lord God doeth all...for He is in the Mid-point of all thing, and all He doeth. And I was certain He doeth no sin" (Chapter XI)
• "See! I am God: see! I am in all thing: see! I do all thing: see! I lift never mine hands off my works, nor ever shall, without end: see! I lead all thing to the end I ordained it to from without beginning, by the same Might, Wisdom and Love whereby I made it. How should any thing be amiss?" [my bolding] (Chapter XI). 
• "For a man beholdeth some deeds well done and some deeds evil, but our Lord beholdeth them not so: for as all that hath being in nature is of Godly making, so is all that is done, in property of God's doing. For it is easy to understand that the best deed is well done: and so well as the best deed is done—the highest—so well is the least deed done; and all thing in its property and in the order that our Lord hath ordained it to from without beginning. For there is no doer but He" (Chapter XI)
• "There be deeds evil done in our sight, and so great harms taken, that it seemeth to us that it were impossible that ever it should come to good end" [my bolding] (Chapter XXXII). 
• "And upon this we look, sorrowing and mourning therefor, so that we cannot resign us unto the blissful beholding of God as we should do. And the cause of this is that the use of our reason is now so blind, so low, and so simple, that we cannot know that high marvellous Wisdom, the Might and the Goodness of the blissful Trinity. And thus signifieth He when He saith: Thou shalt see thyself if^[1] all manner of things shall be well. As if He said: Take now heed faithfully and trustingly, and at the last end thou shalt verily see it in fulness of joy" (XXXII)
• "Love and Dread are brethren, and they are rooted in us by the Goodness of our Maker"
  (Chapter LXXIV). 

Answer #2: Evil Exists But Is Necessary (and Thus Kinda Good?) 
But St. Julian's account more commonly discusses pain as real (though fleeting) and sin as also real, so this initial "evil doesn't exist" answer cannot stand. More frequently, St. Julian's account seems to uphold all five of the above tenants but still resolve the problem of evil by noting evil's necessity, for a variety of possible reasons: 1) evil must exist so that we (temporarily) suffer so that we can be humbled and willing to come to God to eventually receive and unite with the ultimate good OR 2) that evil is necessary in order to see God's miracles / fully embrace and understand the extent of God's omnipotence. In other words, while evil does exist, it is actually both necessary and thus, in some sense, good (back to answer #1 above). But, to me, this answer still does not work because to require beings to go through pain as a prerequisite for good and/or just so that they can see how awesome God is is immoral if a being is omnipotent (and thus could deliver the good without the pain, shouldn't have to brag about / show off its miracles, etc.), and therefore this answer would contradict God's omnibenevolence (#1). 

Quotes from St. Julian to support necessity of (temp) suffering to cure us of vanity so we can connect with God: 

• "Through learning in this little pain that we suffer here, we shall have an high endless knowledge of God which we could never have without that"For [that] I would be purged, by the mercy of God, and afterward live more to the worship of God because of that sickness" (Chapter XXI).
  
  Even prior to receiving the revelations, St. Julian's plea to God that he give her serious illness so she will afterward be closer to God suggests that something we consider bad and a form of suffering (illness almost to the point of death) is actually necessary and a good because it results in better knowing the Lord. In other words, rather than an "(evil) ends justifies the means" philosophy, the means themselves match the end, and thus - if the end is the greatest good possible - then the means must also be good (or lese St. Julian would not seek this illness)
  
  
• "That our Lord joyeth of the tribulations of His servants, with ruth and compassion. On each person that He loveth, to His bliss for to bring [them], He layeth something that is no blame in His sight, whereby they are blamed and despised in this[Pg 59] world, scorned, mocked,^[1] and outcasted. And this He doeth for to hinder the harm that they should take from the pomp and the vain-glory of this wretched life, and make their way ready to come to Heaven, and up-raise them in His bliss everlasting. For He saith: I shall wholly break you of your vain affections and your vicious pride; and after that I shall together gather you, and make you mild and meek, clean and holy, by oneing to me"(Chapter XXVIII). 
  But why would God make humans so prone to vanity that they would need to be cured of it? It's like a doctor causing a disease so he can then swoop in and cure it and be seen as a savior when he was also the originator of the disease? 
  
  
• "He would be born of her that was a simple creature of His making, knowing the greatness of her Maker and the littleness of herself that was made, that a helpless soul come to Him simply and plainly and homely" (Chapter IV). 
  Even the (human) Jesus needed suffering in order to truly come to God. This definitely makes me have respect for God / Jesus b/c He / They is/are not hypocritical, but I still don't see why an all-powerful God would make anyone - let alone his own son - have to go through this...? 
  
  
• "Then is this the remedy, that we be aware of our wretchedness and flee to our Lord: for ever the more needy that we be, the more speedful it is to us to draw nigh to Him.^[2] And let us say thus in our thinking" (Chapter LXXVII).
  
  
• "For bliss is lasting without end, and pain is passing and shall be brought to nought for them that shall be saved"(Chapter XV).
  
  
• "But He willeth then that we use the condition of a child: for when it is hurt, or adread, it runneth hastily to the mother for help, with all its might. So willeth He that we do, as a meek child saying thus: My kind Mother, my Gracious Mother, my dearworthy Mother, have mercy on me: I have made myself foul and unlike to Thee, and I nor may nor can amend it but with thine help and grace." (Chapter LXI).
  
  

Quotes from St. Julian to support necessity to help us understand the miracles / power of God: 

• "It is known that afore miracles come sorrow and anguish and tribulation^[5]; and that is for that we should know our own feebleness and our mischiefs that we are fallen in by sin, to meeken us and make us to dread God and cry for help and grace. Miracles come after that, and they come of the high Might, Wisdom, and Goodness of God, shewing His virtue and the joys of Heaven so far at it may be in this passing life: and that to strengthen our faith and to increase our hope, in charity. Wherefore it pleaseth Him to be known and worshipped in miracles. Then signifieth He thus: He willeth that we be not borne over low for sorrow and tempests that fall to us: for it hath ever so been afore miracle-coming" (Chapter XXXVI)
  So, because God wants to be worshiped for his cool miracles, people have to suffer? Why? If God is all-powerful, he could make it so people could see and love his miracles without making them suffer. And if he is all-good, then he would not make beings suffer just in order to get praise - that would be super selfish if a human did that! 

• "As verily as sin is unclean, so verily is it unkind"—a disease or monstrous thing against nature. He shall heal us full fair." (Chapter LXIII).
  Again, if a doctor created or allowed a disease to proliferated, we wouldn't celebrate him when he then cured it...? 

• "But in this I stood beholding things general, troublously and mourning, saying thus to our Lord in my meaning, with full great dread: Ah! good Lord, how might all be well, for the great hurt that is come, by sin, to the creature? And here I desired, as far as I durst, to have some more open declaring wherewith I might be eased in this matter.

  And to this our blessed Lord answered full meekly and with full lovely cheer, and shewed that Adam's sin was the most harm that ever was done, or ever shall be, to the world's end; and also He shewed that this [sin] is openly known in all Holy Church on earth. Furthermore He taught that I should behold the glorious Satisfaction^[1]: for this Amends-making^[2] is more pleasing to God and more worshipful, without comparison, than ever was the sin of Adam harmful. Then signifieth our blessed Lord thus in this teaching, that we should take heed to this: For since I have made well the most harm, then it is my will that thou know thereby that I shall make well all that is less" (Chapter XXIX). 
  

• "That which is impossible to thee is not impossible to me: I shall save my word in all things and I shall make all things well." (Chapter XXXII). 

• "For this is the Great Deed that our Lord shall do, in which Deed He shall save His word and He shall make all well that is not well" (Chapter XXXII). 

Answer #3: Evil Exists Because Humans Perverted the Good that God Created 
Though God created the world and all things in it (#3), because of free will, humans can manipulate or change that which God made (all of which is good), and thus humans essentially turn God's good creation into evil. In other words, evil exists not because God created evil but because that which he created as good humans perverted into evil. This possible answer is intimated throughout St. Julian's account, indicating that humans are responsible for their own sin and thus deserve the suffering they receive, as a penance necessary to eventually reunite them with God. (This answer is also not persuasive to me, though, since God would have had to give humans the ability to change this good creation into evil, and therefore it is still God - not humans - who is responsible for that evil. E.g. Eve and Adam chose to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, but why did God even put that tree there in the first place, and why did he allow the serpent or whoever to exist to tempt the humans?) 

• "And if we see soothly that our sin deserveth it, yet His love excuseth us, and of His great courtesy He doeth away all our blame, and beholdeth us with ruth and pity as children innocent and unloathful" [my boldings] (Chapter XXVIII).
• "It is needful to see and to know that we are sinners: wherefore we deserve pain and wrath" (Chapter XLVI).
• "God seeth all our living a penance: for nature-longing of our love is to Him a lasting penance in us" (Chapter LXXXI).
• "I know well thou wilt live for my love, joyously and gladly suffering all the penance that may come to thee; but in as much as thou livest not without sin thou wouldest suffer, for my love, all the woe, all the tribulation and distress that might come to thee. And it is sooth.^[1] But be not greatly aggrieved with sin that falleth to thee against thy will" (Chapter LXXXII).
• "But for failing of love on our part, therefore is all our travail" (Chapter XXXVII). 
    i.e. because we alienate ourselves from God and his goodness and/or don't love him enough, 
    we are separated from the Good and instead change good to evil / sin / suffering 
  

Answer #4: Evil Exists Because Satan Perverted the Good that God Created 
Same as above, except this time Satan gets the blame, not humans. But again, if God knows everything past, present, and future (#2), why would he create Satan at all? 

• And that is his [Satan's] sorrow, and full evil is he ashamed: for all that God suffereth him to do turneth [for] us to joy and [for] him to shame and woe. And he hath as much sorrow when God giveth him leave to work, as when he worketh not: and that is for that he may never do as ill as he would: for his might is all taken^[3] into God's hand" (Chapter XIII). 
  
  
• "Then he [Satan] shall see that all the woe and tribulation that he hath done to them shall be turned to increase of their joy, without end; and all the pain and tribulation that he would have brought them to shall endlessly go with him to hell" (Chapter XIII)."
  But God created both Satan and Hell, so....?