We reach here in Chapter 27 perhaps the most famous passage in Julian's Revelations: "al shal be wele, and al shall be wele, and all manner thing shal be wele."
I'm going to share below the fuller context of these famous lines to help us see how they fit into Julian's reflections.
To recap from the last post, Julian is reflecting upon the origin, presence, and nature of sin. Recall how this chapter is framed around this question Julian asks: "I often wondered why, by the great foreseeing wisdom of God, the beginning of sin was not prevented. For then, it seemed to me, all should have been well." If God loves us so much, why does sin exist? Jesus' answer to Julian is that sin is behovabil. Sin is "fitting" because through our sin our need for God and the great mercy of God become visible in the story of creation and in our lives.
Julian's reflections continue from there. She continues to ponder the nature and role of sin against the backdrop of the mercy and love of God:
But I saw not synne, for I beleve it hath no manner of substance ne no party of being, ne it myght not be knowin, but by the peyne that it is cause of; and thus peyne — it is somethyng, as to my syte, for a tyme, for it purgith and makyth us to knowen our selfe and askyn mercy.
For the passion of our Lord is comforte to us agens al this, and so is His blissid wille. And for the tender love that our good Lord hath to all that shal be save, He comfortith redyly and swetely, menyng thus: It is sothe that synne is cause of all this peyne,
but al shal be wele,
and al shall be wele,
and all manner thing shal be wele.These words were seyd full tenderly, shewyng no manner of blame to me ne to non that shall be safe. Than were it a gret unkindness to blame or wonder on God for my synne, sythen He blamyth not me for synne. And in these same words I saw a mervelous, hey privitye hid in God, which privity He shall openly make knowen to us in Hevyn, in which knowyng we shal verily see the cause why He suffrid synne to come, in which syte we shall endlesly joyen in our Lord God.
Translation:
But I saw not sin, for I believe that it has no kind of substance nor any part of being, nor could it be known except by the pain that it causes. And thus pain—it is something, as I see it, for a time, for it purifies and makes us to know ourselves and to ask for mercy.
For the Passion of our Lord is comfort to us against all this, and so is His blessed will. And because of the tender love that our good Lord has for all who shall be saved, He comforts readily and sweetly, meaning thus:
It is true that sin is the cause of all this pain,
but all shall be well,
and all shall be well,
and all manner of thing shall be well.These words were said very tenderly, showing no manner of blame to me, nor to anyone who shall be saved. Then it would be a great unkindness to blame or be astonished at God because of my sin, since He does not blame me for sin.
And in these same words I saw a marvelous, high secret hidden in God, which secret He shall openly make known to us in Heaven. In that knowing, we shall truly see the reason why He allowed sin to come, and in that seeing we shall endlessly rejoice in our Lord God.
There's lots to say about all this!
Let's start with Julian's description of the nature of sin. Her reflections follow Augustine's view that sin is privatio boni, the privation or absence of the good. As Julian says, "I saw not sin, for I believe it has no kind of substance nor any part of being." The only way we know anything about sin is "by the pain it causes." I think this is a profound insight. We cannot see sin or evil. And yet, we all experience locations where the good is missing, lacking, or absent because of the pain and suffering we experience in those locations.
For example, if we allow ourselves to use Julian's word "sin" as a term for all we call "evil" in life, consider our experience of death. Can we see "evil" in death? No, we can't see or point to it. But we know death, in all its forms, to be a location of great pain and suffering. Why? Privatio boni, a privation or absence of the good, namely life. Abuse, exploitation, and war are also locations of suffering and pain. Can we point toward evil in those locations? We cannot. There isn't a dark spot inside a person's soul toward which we can point and say, "There it is, the source of the evil." Rather, when we see harms being committed, we are witnessing the loss and absence of God. Love, care, and concern have gone missing. And when love goes missing, harms soon follow.
In short, when we look at pain and suffering in the world, we cannot see evil. Evil is not a locatable object we can point to. But at locations of pain and suffering, we do notice that some good is missing, from life to love. For as Julian says, "it is true that sin is the cause of all pain."
But all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of thing shall be well.
Julian's theodicy is eschatological. Sin plays its "fitting" part in the story, but the ending of the story is "all shall be well."
Importantly for Julian, and this is a point that we'll return to, one of the reasons all shall be well is because God shows "no manner of blame." This is one of Julian's key beliefs: God does not blame us for sin. So while we suffer from sin, we are not blamed. Our wounds, we might say, are self-inflicted. Consequently, God doesn't judge us but shows pity.
The distinctive thing to note here, especially against Julian's medieval backdrop, is the lack of judgment or wrath in God toward our sin. Sin is "fitting" as a part of our story precisely because we're not going to be blamed for it. To be sure, many will find Julian's theodicy inadequate, for our guilt and blameworthiness only explain a part of human pain and suffering. Which is why, above, my equating Julian's description of "sin" with "evil" such as death may be stretching her theodicy too far. But keeping to her narrower concerns, Julian can see a "place" and "role" for sin because God does not and will not blame us for sin. Rather, God meets our sin with love and compassion.
Again, this is a remarkable view of God, especially so in light of its time and place. And it's the view of God—that all shall be well because God does not blame us for sin—that makes Julian rightly famous.
But it raises a contested question: If God does not blame us for sin, and all shall be well with us because of this, was Julian a universalist?
In popular treatments of Julian, she's treated as espousing a vision of universal salvation. It's easy to see why. Connect the dots here—God does not blame us for sin, therefore, all shall be well—and the soteriological conclusion seems obvious. An obvious tension, however, emerges when we read the Revelations as a whole.
A full and comprehensive view of the Revelations reveals places where Julian assumes that some people will not be saved. We see some of that equivocation in the passage above, in Julian's oft-repeated reference to those "who shall be saved." For those "who shall be saved," "all shall be well." Debates swirl here.
The liberal take is that Julian says things like this to keep from running afoul of the church and being declared a heretic. Julian's universalism flows directly from her theology, her equivocations notwithstanding.
The more conservative take is that Julian really wasn't a universalist, that see believed in hell, but that her optimism and her view of God as wholly loving are, and remain, a stunning and remarkable high-water mark within the mystical tradition.
The point being, we need to be alert to how Julian is used in contemporary theological projects. She can be a Rorschach blot. My view is that Julian's vision of the love of God exceeded even her own ability to perceive it, so she struggled to make it fit within the doctrinal constraints of her time and place. By this I don't mean Julian didn't believe what she says she believed. I mean that her theological vision of God's love creates strains on other things she says, perhaps to the point of contradiction.
If I could chat with Julian about this, my point would be simple. God does not blame us for sin. And all shall be well. Come on, Julian, 1 + 1 = 2.
