JULIANA OF NORWICH.

"One of the most remarkable books of the middle ages," writes Father

Dalgairns, [1] "is the hitherto almost unknown work, titled, _Sixteen

Revelations of Divine Love made to a Devout Servant of God, called

Mother Juliana, an Anchoress of Norwich_" How "one of the most

remarkable books" should be "hitherto almost unknown," may be explained

partly by the fact to which the same writer draws attention, namely,

that Mother Juliana lived and wrote at the time when a certain mystical

movement was about to bifurcate and pursue its course of development,

one branch within the Church on Catholic lines, the other outside the

Church along lines whose actual issue was Wycliffism and other kindred

forms of heterodoxy, and whose logical outcome was pantheism. Hence,

between the language of these pseudo-mystics and that of the recluse of

Norwich, "there is sometimes a coincidence ... which might deceive the

unwary." It is almost necessarily a feature of every heresy to begin by

using the language of orthodoxy in a strained and non-natural sense, and

only gradually to develop a distinctive terminology of its own; but, as

often as not, certain ambiguous expressions, formerly taken in an

orthodox sense, are abandoned by the faithful on account of their

ambiguity and are then appropriated to the expression of heterodoxy, so

that eventually by force of usage the heretical meaning comes to be the

principal and natural meaning, and any other interpretation to seem

violent and non-natural. "The few coincidences," continues Father

Dalgairns, "between Mother Juliana and Wycliffe are among the many

proofs that the same speculative view often means different things in

different systems. Both St. Augustine, Calvin, and Mahomet, believe in

predestination, yet an Augustinian is something utterly different from a

Scotch Cameronian or a Mahometan.... The idea which runs through the

whole of Mother Juliana is the very contradictory of Wycliffe's

Pantheistic Necessitarianism." Yet on account of the mere similarity of

expression we can well understand how in the course of time some of

Mother Juliana's utterances came to be more ill-sounding to faithful

ears in proportion as they came to be more exclusively appropriated by

the unorthodox. It is hard to be as vigilant when danger is remote as

when it is near at hand; and until heresy has actually wrested them to

its purpose it is morally impossible that the words of ecclesiastical

and religious writers should be so delicately balanced as to avoid all

ambiguities and inaccuracies. Still less have we a right to look for

such exactitude in the words of an anchoress who, if not wholly

uneducated in our sense of the word, yet on her own confession "could no

letter," i.e., as we should say, was no scholar, and certainly made no

pretence to any skill in technical theology. But however much some of

her expressions may jar with the later developments of Catholic

theology, it must be remembered, as has been said, that they were

current coin in her day, common to orthodox and unorthodox; and that

though their restoration is by no means desirable, yet they are still

susceptive of a "benignant" interpretation. "I pray Almighty God," says

Mother Juliana in concluding, "that this book come not but into the

hands of those that will be His faithful lovers, and that will submit

them to the faith of Holy Church." [2] And indeed such can receive no

possible harm from its perusal, beyond a little temporary perplexity to

be dispelled by inquiry; and this only in the case of those who are

sufficiently instructed and reflective to perceive the discord in

question. The rest are well used in their reading to take what is

familiar and to leave what is strange, so that they will find in her

pages much to ponder, and but a little to pass over.

It is, however, not only to these occasional obscurities and ambiguities

that we are to ascribe the comparative oblivion into which so remarkable

a book has fallen; but also to the fact that its noteworthiness is

perhaps more evident and relative to us than to our forefathers. It

cannot but startle us to find doubts that we hastily look upon as

peculiarly "modern," set forth in their full strength and wrestled with

and overthrown by an unlettered recluse of the fourteenth century. In

some sense they are the doubts of all time, with perhaps just that

peculiar complexion which they assume in the light of Christianity. Yet,

owing to the modern spread of education, or rather to the indiscriminate

divulgation of ideas, these problems are now the possession of the man

in the street, whereas in former days they were exclusively the property

of minds capable--not indeed of answering the unanswerable, but at least

of knowing their own limitations and of seeing why such problems must

always exist as long as man is man. Dark as the age of Mother Juliana

was as regards the light of positive knowledge and information; yet the

light of wisdom burned at least as clearly and steadily then as now; and

it is by that light alone that the shades of unbelief can be dispelled.

Of course, wisdom without knowledge must starve or prey on its own

vitals, and this was the intellectual danger of the middle ages; but

knowledge without wisdom is so much food undigested and indigestible,

and this is the evil of our own day, when to be passably well-informed

so taxes our time and energy as to leave us no leisure for assimilating

the knowledge with which we have stuffed ourselves.

We must not, however, think of Mother Juliana as shut up within four

walls of a cell, evolving all her ideas straight from her own inner

consciousness without any reference to experience. Such a barren

contemplation, tending to mental paralysis, belongs to Oriental

pessimism, whose aim is the extinction of life, mental and physical, and

reabsorption into that void whence, it is said, misfortune has brought

us forth to troublous consciousness. The Christian contemplative knows

no ascent to God but by the ladder of creatures; he goes to the book of

Nature and of human life, and to the book of Revelation, and turns and

ponders their pages, line by line and word by word, and so feeds and

fills the otherwise thin and shadowy conception of God in his own soul,

and ever pours new oil upon the flame of Divine love. Father Daigairns

writes: "Juliana is a recluse very different from the creatures of the

imagination of writers on comparative morals. So far from being cut off

from sympathy with her kind, her mind is tenderly and delicately alive

to every change in the spiritual atmosphere of England.... The four

walls of her narrow home seem to be rent and torn asunder, and not only

England but Christendom appears before her view;" and he is at pains to

show how both anchorites and anchoresses were much-sought after by all

in trouble, temporal or spiritual, and how abundant were their

opportunities of becoming acquainted with human life and its burdens,

and of more than compensating, through the confidences of others,

whatever defect their minds might suffer through lack of personal

experience. Even still, how many a priest or nun whose experience had

else been narrowed to the petty domestic interests of a small family,

is, in virtue of his or her vocation, put in touch with a far larger

world, or with a far more important aspect of the world, than many who

mingle with its every-day trivialities, and is thus made a partaker in

some sense of the deeper life and experience of society and of the

Universal Church! The anchoress "did a great deal more than pray. The

very dangers against which the author of her rule [3] warns her, are a

proof that she had many visitors. He warns her against becoming a

'babbling' or 'gossiping' anchoress, a variety evidently well-known; a

recluse whose cell was the depository of all the news from the

neighbourhood at a time when newspapers did not exist." Such abuses

throw light upon the legitimate use of the anchoress's position in the

mediæval community.

And so, though Mother Juliana "could no letter," though she knew next to

nothing of the rather worthless physical science of those times, and

hardly more of philosophy or technical theology, yet she knew no little

of that busy, sad, and sinful human life going on round her, not only at

Norwich, but in England, and even in Europe; and rich with this

knowledge, to which all other lore is subordinate and for whose sake

alone it is valuable, she betook herself to prayer and meditation, and

brought all this experience into relation with God, and drew from it an

ever clearer understanding of Him and of His dealings with the souls

that His Love has created and redeemed.

It is not then so wonderful that this wise and holy woman should have

faced the problems presented by the apparent discord between the truths

of faith and the facts of human life--a discord which is felt in every

age by the observant and thoughtful, but which in our age is a

commonplace on the lips of even the most superficial. But an age takes

its tone from the many who are the children of the past, rather than

from the few who are the parents of the future. Mother Juliana's book

could hardly have been in any sense "popular" until these days of ours,

in which the particular disease of mind to which it ministers has become

epidemic.

If then these suggestions to some extent furnish an explanation of the

oblivion into which the revelations of Mother Juliana have fallen, they

also justify the following attempt to draw attention to them once more,

and to give some sort of analysis of their contents; more especially as

we have reason to believe that they are about to be re-edited by a

competent scholar and made accessible to the general public, which they

have not been since the comparative extinction of Richardson's edition

of 1877. Little is known of Mother Juliana's history outside what is

implied in her revelations; nor is it our purpose at present to go aside

in search of biographical details that will be of interest only after

their subject has become interesting. Suffice it here to say that she

was thirty at the time of her revelations, which she tells us was in

1373. Hence she was born in 1343, and is said to have been a

centenarian, in which case she must have died about 1443. She probably

belonged to the Benedictine nuns at Carrow, near Norwich, and being

called to a still stricter life, retired to a hermitage close by the

Church of St. Julian at Norwich. The details she gives about her own

sick-room exclude the idea of that stricter "reclusion" which is

popularly spoken of as "walling-up"--not of course in the mythical

sense.

With these brief indications sufficient to satisfy the craving of our

imagination for particulars of time and place, let us turn to her own

account of the circumstances of her visions, as well as of their nature.

She tells us that in her life previous to 1373, she had, at some time or

other, demanded three favours from God; first, a sensible appreciation

of Christ's Passion in such sort as to share the grace of Mary Magdalene

and others who were eye-witnesses thereof: "therefore I desired a bodily

sight wherein I might have more knowledge of the bodily pain of our

Saviour." And the motive of this desire was that she might "afterwards

because of that showing have the more true mind of the Passion of

Christ." Her aim was a deeper practical intelligence, and not the

gratification of mere emotional curiosity.

This grace she plainly recognizes as extraordinary; for she says: "Other

sight or showing of God asked I none, till when the soul was departed

from the body." Her second request was likewise for an extraordinary

grace; namely, for a bodily sickness which she and others might believe

to be mortal; in which she should receive the last sacraments, and

experience all the bodily pains, and all the spiritual temptations

incident to the separation of soul and body. And the motive of this

request was that she might be "purged by the mercy of God, and

afterwards live more to the worship of God because of that sickness." In

other words, she desired the grace of what we might call a

"trial-death," that so she might better meet the real death when it

came. Further, she adds, "this sickness I desired in my youth, that I

might have it when I was thirty years old." And "these two desires were

with a condition" (namely, if God should so will), "for methought this

was not the common use of prayer." But the third request she proffers

boldly "without any condition," since it was necessarily God's desire to

grant it and to be sued for it; namely, the grace of a three-fold wound:

the wound of true sorrow for sin; the wound of "kind compassion" with

Christ's sufferings; and the wound of "wilful belonging to God," that

is, of self-devotion.

She is careful to tell us that while she ever continued to urge the

unconditional third request, the two first passed completely out of her

head in the course of years, until she was reminded of them by their

simultaneous and remarkable fulfilment. "For when I was thirty years old

and a half, God sent me a bodily sickness in which I lay three days and

three nights; and on the fourth night I took all my rites of Holy

Church, and weened not to have lived till day. And after this I lay two

days and two nights, and on the third night I weened oftentimes to have

passed, and so weened they that were with me.... And I understood in my

reason, and by the feeling of my pains that I should die, and I assented

fully with all the will of my heart, to be at God's will. Thus I endured

till day, and by then, was my body dead to all feeling from the midst

down." She is then raised up in a sitting position for greater ease, and

her curate is sent for, as the end is supposed to be near. On arrival,

he finds her speechless and with her eyes fixed upwards towards heaven,

"where I trusted to come by the mercy of God." He places the crucifix

before her, and bids her bend her eyes upon it. "I assented to set my

eyes in the face of the crucifix if I could; and so I did; for methought

I could endure longer to look straight in front of me than right up"--a

touch that shows the previous upturning of the eyes to have been

voluntary and not cataleptic. At this moment we seem to pass into the

region of the abnormal: "After this my sight began to fail; it waxed as

dark about me in the chamber as if it had been night, save in the image

of the cross, wherein I beheld a common light, and I wist not how. And

all that was beside the cross was ugly and fearful to me, as it had been

much occupied with fiends." Then the upper part of her body becomes

insensible, and the only pain left is that of weakness and

breathlessness. Suddenly she is totally eased and apparently quite

cured, which, however, she regards as a momentary miraculous relief, but

not as a deliverance from death. In this breathing space it suddenly

occurs to her to beg for the second of those three wounds which were the

matter of her unconditional third request; namely, for a deepened sense

and sympathetic understanding of Christ's Passion. "But in this I never

desired any bodily sight, or any manner of showing from God; but such

compassion as I thought that a kind soul might have with our Lord

Jesus." In a word, the remembrance of her two conditional and

extraordinary requests of bygone years was not in her mind at the time.

"And in this, suddenly I saw the red blood trickling down from under the

garland;"--and so she passes from objective to subjective vision;[4] and

the first fifteen revelations follow, as she tells us later, one after

another in unbroken succession, lasting in all some few hours.

"I had no grief or no dis-ease," she tells us later, "as long as the

fifteen showings lasted in showing. And at the end all was close, and I

saw no more; and soon I felt that I should live longer." Presently all

her pains, bodily and spiritual, return in full force; and the

consolation of the visions seems to her as an idle dream and delusion;

and she answers to the inquiries of a Religious at her bedside, that she

had been raving: "And he laughed loud and drolly. And I said: 'The cross

that stood before my face, methought it bled fast.'" At which the other

looked so serious and awed that she became ashamed of her own

incredulity. "I believed Him truly for the time that I saw Him. And so

it was then my will and my meaning to do, ever without end--but, as a

fool, I let it pass out of my mind. And lo! how wretched I was," &c.

Then she falls asleep and has a terrifying dream of the Evil One, of

which she says: "This ugly showing was made sleeping and so was none

other," whence it seems that her self-consciousness was unimpaired in

the other visions; that is, she was aware at the time that they were

visions, and did not confound them with reality as dreams are

confounded. Then follows the sixteenth and last revelation; ending with

the words: "Wit well it was no raving thou sawest to-day: but take it,

and believe it, and keep thee therein, and comfort thee therewith and

trust thereto, and thou shalt not be overcome." Then during the rest of

the same night till about Prime next morning she is tempted against

faith and trust by the Evil One, of whose nearness she is conscious; but

comes out victorious after a sustained struggle. She understands from

our Lord, that the series of showings is now closed; "which blessed

showing the faith keepeth, ... for He left with me neither sign nor

token whereby I might know it." Yet for her personally the obligation

not to doubt is as of faith: "Thus am I bound to keep it in my faith;

for on the same day that it was showed, what time the sight was passed,

as a wretch I forsook it and openly said that I raved."

Fifteen years later she gets an inward response as to the general gist

and unifying purport of the sixteen revelations. "Wit it well; love was

His meaning. Who showed it thee? Love. Wherefore showed He it thee? For

love."

Having thus sketched the circumstances of the revelations, we may now

address ourselves to their character and substance.

There is nothing to favour and everything to disfavour the notion that

Mother Juliana was an habitual visionary, or was the recipient of any

other visions, than those which she beheld in her thirty-first year; and

of these, she tells us herself, the whole sixteen took place within a

few hours. "Now have I told you of fifteen showings, ... of which

fifteen showings, the first began early in the morning about the hour of

four, ... each following the other till it was noon of the day or past,

... and after this the Good Lord showed me the sixteenth revelation on

the night following." Speaking of them all as one, she tells us: "And

from the time it was showed I desired oftentimes to wit what was in our

Lord's meaning; and fifteen years after and more I was answered in

ghostly understanding, saying thus: 'What! wouldst thou wit thy Lord's

meaning in this thing? Wit it well: Love was His meaning.'" But this

"ghostly understanding" can hardly be pressed into implying another

revelation of the evidently supernormal type.

We rather insist on this point, as indicating the habitual healthiness

of Mother Juliana's soul--a quality which is also abundantly witnessed

by the unity and coherence of the doctrine of her revelations, which

bespeaks a mind well-knit together, and at harmony with itself. The

hysterical mind is one in which large tracts of consciousness seem to

get detached from the main body, and to take the control of the subject

for the time being, giving rise to the phenomena rather foolishly called

double or multiple "personality." This is a disease proper to the

passive-minded, to those who give way to a "drifting" tendency, and

habitually suffer their whole interests to be absorbed by the strongest

sensation or emotion that presents itself. Such minds are generally

chaotic and unorganized, as is revealed in the rambling, involved,

interminably parenthetical and digressive character of their

conversation. But when, as with Mother Juliana, we find unity and

coherence, we may infer that there has been a life-long habit of active

mental control, such as excludes the supposition of an hysterical

temperament.

Perhaps the similarity of the phenomena which attend both on

extraordinary psychic weakness and passivity, and on extraordinary

energy and activity may excuse a confusion common enough, and which we

have dwelt on elsewhere. But obviously as far as the natural

consequences of a given psychic state are concerned, it is indifferent

how that state is brought about. Thus, that extreme concentration of the

attention, that perfect abstraction from outward things, which in

hysterical persons is the effect of weakness and passive-mindedness--of

the inability to resist and shake off the spell of passions and

emotions; is in others the effect of active self-control, of voluntary

concentration, of a complete mastery over passions and emotions. Yet

though the causes of the abnormal state are different, its effects may

well be the same.

In thus maintaining the healthiness and vigour of Mother Juliana's mind,

we may seem to be implicitly treating her revelation, not as coming from

a Divine source, but simply as an expression of her own habitual line of

thought--as a sort of pouring forth of the contents of her subconscious

memory. Our direct intention, however, is to show how very unlikely it

is antecedently that one so clear-headed and intelligent should be the

victim of the common and obvious illusions of the hysterical visionary.

For her book contains not only the matter of her revelations, but also

the history of all the circumstances connected with them, as well as a

certain amount of personal comment upon them, professedly the fruit of

her normal mind; and best of all, a good deal of analytical reflection

upon the phenomena which betrays a native psychological insight not

inferior to that of St. Teresa. From these sources we could gather the

general sobriety and penetration of her judgment, without assuming the

actual teaching of the revelations to be merely the unconscious

self-projection of her own mind. But in so much as many of these

revelations were professedly Divine answers to her own questions, and

since the answer must ever be adapted not merely to the question

considered in the abstract, but as it springs from its context in the

questioner's mind; we are not wrong, on this score alone, in arguing

from the character of the revelation to the character of the mind to

which it was addressed. Fallible men may often speak and write above or

beside the intelligence of their hearers and readers; but not so He who

reads the heart He has made. Now these revelations were not addressed to

the Church through Mother Juliana; but, as she says, were addressed to

herself and were primarily for herself, though most that was said had

reference to the human soul in general. They were adapted therefore to

the character and individuality of her mind; and are an index of its

thoughts and workings. For her they were a matter of faith; but, as she

tells us, she had no token or outward proof wherewith to convince others

of their reality. Those who feel disposed, as we ourselves do, to place

much confidence in the word of one so perfectly sane and genuinely holy,

may draw profit from the message addressed to her need; but never can it

be for them a matter of faith as in a Divine message addressed directly

or indirectly to themselves. So far as these revelations are a clear and

noble expression of truths already contained implicitly in our faith and

reason, which it brings into more explicit consciousness and vitalizes

with a new power of stimulus, they may be profitable to us all; but they

must be received with due criticism and discernment as themselves

subject to a higher rule of truth--namely, the teaching of the Universal

Church.

But to determine, with respect to these and kindred revelations, how far

they may be regarded as an expression of the recipient's own mind and

latent consciousness, will need a digression which the general interest

of the question must excuse.

There is a tendency in the modern philosophy of religion (for example,

in Mr. Balfour's _Foundations of Belief_) to rationalize inspired

revelation and to explain it as altogether kindred to the apparently

magical intuitions of natural genius in non-religious matters; as the

result, in other words, of a rending asunder of the veil that divides

what is called "super-liminal" from "subliminal" consciousness; to find

in prophecy and secret insight the effect of a flash of unconscious

inference from a mass of data buried in the inscrutable darkness of our

forgotten self. Together with this, there is also a levelling-up

philosophy, a sort of modernized ontologism, which would attribute all

natural intuition to a more immediate self-revelation on God's part than

seems quite compatible with orthodoxy.

But neither of these philosophies satisfy what is vulgarly understood by

"revelation," and therefore both use the word in a somewhat strained

sense. For certainly the first sense of the term implies a consciousness

on the part of the recipient of being spoken to, of being related

through such speech to another personality, whereas the flashes and

intuitions of natural genius, however they may resemble and be called

"inspirations" because of their exceeding the known resources of the

thinker's own mind, yet they are consciously autochthonous; they are

felt to spring from the mind's own soil; not to break the soul's

solitude with the sense of an alien presence. Such interior

illuminations, though doubtless in a secondary sense derived from the

"True Light which enlightens every man coming into this world,"

certainly do not fulfil the traditional notion of revelation as

understood, not only in the Christian Church, but also in all ethnic

religions. For common to antiquity is the notion of some kind of

possession or seizure, some usurpation of the soul's faculties by an

external personality, divine or diabolic, for its own service and as its

instrument of expression--a phenomenon, in fact, quite analogous, if not

the same in species, with that of hypnotic control and suggestion, where

the thought and will of the subject is simply passive under the thought

and will of the agent.

Saints and contemplatives are wont--not without justification--to speak

of their lights in prayer, and of the ordinary intuitions of their mind,

under the influence of grace, as Divine utterances in a secondary sense;

to say, "God said to me," or "seemed to say to me," or "God showed me,"

and so on. But to confound these products of their own mind with

revelation is the error only of the uninstructed or the wilfully

self-deluded. Therefore, as commonly understood, "revelation" implies

the conscious control of the mind by another mind; just as its usual

correlative, "inspiration," implies the conscious control of the will by

another will.

There can be no doubt whatever but that Mother Juliana of Norwich

considered her revelations to be of this latter description, and not to

have been merely different in degree from those flashes of spiritual

insight with which she was familiar in her daily contemplations and

prayers. How far, then, her own mind may have supplied the material from

which the tissues were woven, or lent the colours with which the

pictures were painted, or supplied the music to which the words were

set, is what we must now try to determine.

The Faith of the Millions (2nd series) · 第 8 / 32 题