Gracious Predestination in Augustine and Julian of Norwich Carmel Bendon Davis & Joseph Lam Cong Quy

“The Parable of the Lord and Servant” The Salvific Memory: Gracious Predestination in Augustine and Julian of Norwich Carmel Bendon Davis & Joseph Lam Cong Quy

Abstract. — In the Christian tradition medieval female mystics were often treated with suspicion. This does not seem to have been the case with Julian of Norwich who, in contrast to some of her female contemporaries, endeavoured to interpret her visions in the light of ecclesial faith, a process in which Augustinian theology can be demonstrated to have played an important role. This article focuses on the relationship between medieval Augustinian theology and the visions of Julian of Norwich. Moreover, it describes the impact of Augustinian theology on Julian of Norwich’s work “Revelations of Divine Love,” in particular on the theological connection between memory and predestination. For Augustine and Julian the memory of God is the precondition for understanding predestination. Nevertheless, Julian of Norwich was a mystical theologian in her own right. While for Augustine predestination included the idea of justification which pre- sumes a lapsarian sinfulness in humanity, Julian of Norwich wrestled with the contra- diction between the goodness of God’s creation and the very idea of sinfulness itself. For Julian, God’s memory is essentially filled with love and her explication of this view allows her to present a more accessible and simpler version of some complex theological questions. In this way, it is argued that Julian can be seen to have used Augustine’s ideas but not to have been confined, nor defined, by them.

Introduction

This article is synthesised from a larger project on the influence of Augustinian Theology on the mysticism of the High Middle Ages as represented, particularly, by the English mystic, Julian of Norwich. The scope of Augustinian influence can be widely demonstrated in Julian’s Revelations but the immediate focus here is on similarities in Augustine’s and Julian’s expressions in relation to memory and predestination. The article establishes that Julian’s approach owes much to Augustine, whether by conscious intention or unconscious inclusion. In either

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 312312 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 313

instance, the discernible similarities point to a high level of Augustinian influence in Julian’s writing, the extent of which has not been considered to date.1 The implications of this influence are far-reaching insofar as Julian, as a female and mystic, complements (male) Augustinian theology and brings a new voice to the tradition, a voice that the potential to revise aspects of the tradition and to point towards an inclusiveness that the Church of the current day is seeking.

I. The Life of Augustine and Julian of Norwich

One thousand years of history separate St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430) and Julian of Norwich (1342- after 1416). Augustine lived and worked mostly in the Romanized North Africa of the fourth and the fifth century. He was a highly respected theologian, a recognized pastor and mystic of the early Church2 whose thoughts and spirituality have inspired theologians through the centuries, into the time of Julian of Norwich and beyond, to the present day.3 While the life, theology and spirituality of Augustine have been the subjects of countless studies,4 scholarly interest in Julian of Norwich has gained prominence relatively recently and investigation into Julian’s life is in comparative infancy. What we know of Julian of Norwich comes to us primarily from her writings.5 There, she tells that on 8th May, 1373, when she was

1. To the authors’ knowledge, there are only three publications to date which specifically explore Augustine’s influence on Julian of Norwich. See Kerrie Hide, “The Deep Wisdom of the Trinity Our Mother: Echoes in Augustine and Julian of Norwich,” The Aus- tralasian Catholic Record 4 (1997) 432-444; John P. H. Clark, “Nature, Grace and the Trinity in Julian of Norwich,” The Downside Review 100 (1982) 203-220. See also Denise Nowakowski Baker, Julian of Norwich Showings: From Vision to Book (Princeton, NJ: Uni- versity Press, 1994) which includes a short chapter on Augustine and Julian of Norwich. 2. See Agostino Trapè, S. Agostino: L’uomo, il pastore, il mistico, Maestri di spiri- tualità: Mondo primitivo (Fossano: Città Nuova, 1976); John Peter Kenney, The Mysti- cism of Saint Augustine: Rereading the Confessions (New York: Routledge, 2005). 3. See Alister E. McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification. The Beginnings to the Reformation (Cambridge: University Press, 1989) 17: “The theology of the medieval period may be regarded as thoroughly Augustinian, a series of footnotes to Augustine, in that theological speculation was essentially regarded as an attempt to defend, expand and where necessary modify, the Augustinian legacy.” 4. Hubertus R. Drobner, “Studying Augustine: An Overview of Recent Research,” Augustine and His Critics, ed. Robert Dodaro and George Lawless (London: Routledge, 2000) 19. 5. Accounts of Julian’s revelations are extant in two forms, now referred to as the “Short Text” and the “Long Text.” The unique copy of the Short Text, likely to have been made after 1435 from a 1413 exemplar, is preserved in BL MS Additional 37790. Selections from the Long Text, dated around1500, are found in Westminster Treasury

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 313313 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 314 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

30-and-a-half-years old, she received what she herself refers to as sixteen revelations of God’s love. The definite date, and her age at that date, allow the calculation of her birth year as late or 1342 or early 1343. We know that she was still alive in 1416 when local records show that she received small bequests in two local wills. At some stage in her life she became an anchoress enclosed in the Augustinian church of St Julian’s in Conisford, Norwich. Based on this fact it is unlikely that ‘Julian’ was her birth name and it is generally supposed that she assumed the name of Julian in honour of the church that housed her.6 Julian’s revelations, variously also called “showings” and “visions,” are extant in two versions. The immediate details and impact of the revelations were recorded by Julian in her (so-named) “Short Text” (ST) quite soon after the actual experience but, by her own admission, the greatly expanded “Long Text” (LT) with its complex theological explications, is the final product of up to twenty years contemplation on the initial showings. Based on this scant evidence it would seem unlikely that Augustine and Julian could have much in common. It would seem even less likely that Julian’s humble living situation would have allowed her much acquaintance with the great theological and philosophical works of St Augustine; and, yet, evidence can be adduced to the contrary, both by an examination of the likelihood of Julian’s contact with Augustinian advisors in Norwich and by close attention to substantial theological similarities to Augustinian thought in Julian’s texts. It is the authors’ contention that the clear reiteration of Augustinian theology in Julian’s work cannot be attributed to mere accident or coin- cidence. The pervasiveness of Augustinian thought in Julian’s writings attests to a thorough knowledge instilled either by personal study and reflection on Augustine’s works, or by intensive instruction by spiritual advisors with an Augustinian training; or, perhaps even more likely, a combination of both. This latter possibility is reliably surmised on the basis of several studies which show that in the fourteen century the Augustinians played an essential role in religious life of this culturally and commercially “substantial” city.7 Specifically, just across the lane

MS 4 but all complete versions of the Long Text are over a century later. Principal among the Long Text representatives are the Bibliothèque National Fonds anglais MS 40 and the BL MS Sloane 2499. The first modernized version of the Long Text was pub- lished in 1670 by the Benedictine Serenus Cressy. 6. For a new perspective on Julian’s name see Eddie A. Jones, “A Mystic By Any Other Name: Julian(?) of Norwich,” Mystics Quarterly 33 (2007) no. 3, 1- 16. 7. See, in particular, Elizabeth Rutledge, “Norwich before the Black Death,” Medi- eval Norwich, ed. Carol Rawcliffe and Richard Wilson (London: Continuum, 2004) 157.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 314314 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 315

from Julian’s anchorhold, was the Austin friars’ “handsome house … [with] a fine library.”8 As an international Augustinian house of special studies (studium particulare)9 the library of Norwich presumably owned the entire collection of Augustine’s work10 and, as a religious woman and neighbour, it is very possible that Julian would have had access to the theological collection.11 In addition, during the 14th century, the Conisford friary saw a succession of highly influential priors.12 The exceptional preacher and excellent theologian, Benedict Icenus, was a prior there and from 1330 also acted as auxiliary bishop of Norwich.13 His successor in the priorship, Richard Cheffler, is recognized as an author of ‘elegant’ sermons, and as the spiritual advisor of Lord Morley. In 1390 the great Augustinian theologian Roger Twyford,14 became prior and this puts him in an

8. Edmund Colledge and James Walsh, “Introduction” to Julian of Norwich: A Book of Showings. Part One and Part Two (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1978) 39. 9. See Francis Roth, The English Austin Friars 1249-1538, vol. I (New York: Augus- tinian Historical Institute, 1966) 314: “Norwich was a large house. Its membership was 40 in 1325 and 37 in 1328 … A studium particulare or school of philosophy was established here which was in such a high reputation that even foreign students were sent to it.” 10. See ibid., 375: “the tendency of medieval Austin libraries to have a complete set of St. Augustine’s work…” 11. See ibid., 311-316; Colledge and Walsh in their “Introduction” to Julian of Norwich: A Book of Showings, 39-40, also note that “The rules promulgated by the prior general of the Augustinians on 3 February, 1456, for the administration of the London Austin Friars library, [like Conisford] recently rebuilt, which may be taken as normative, provide that books, ‘especially those of a speculative kind’ are not to be taken from the library unless they are duplicates. This suggests that Julian might have been able to bor- row from her neighbours…” 12. Father John-Julian comments in The Complete Julian of Norwich (Paraclete Giants), 2009, 47 about the library of Norwich: “Across Southgate from Julian’s Church in the fourteenth century stood the huge Augustine Friary that was known throughout England for its outstanding library. It is likely that one of the Augustinian Cannons may have served as Confessor for Dame Julian, and it is also possible that the Friary library may have loaned books to the anchoress.” According to the medieval practice which attached “all woman who were anchoresses, that is to say living in a cell, or “anchorage,” to a religious house or a parish church” (Norman Tanner, “Religious Practice,” Medieval Norwich, 139) it was likely that Julian has received spiritual guide by the Augustinian friars. 13. F. Roth notes that Prior Benedict Icenus was Richard Caister. This name is significant in regard to supporting a view that the Augustinians were likely spiritual advisors to Julian of Norwich because Caister is named in the Book of Julian’s contemporary, Margery we, as the “Holy Vykary [who was] confessowr to this creature.” The Book of Margery Kempe, ed. Sanford Brown Meech, EETS, o.s. 293 (London: Oxford University Press, 1997) 40 no. 21. (Subsequent references to the writings of Margery Kempe are also from this edition). 14. See Roth, The English Austin Friars 1249-1538, 580 mentions a record of the chronicle of City of Norwich where it states: “In 1390 flourished Roger Twyford, who had the sobriquet of Roger Goodluck. He was an Augustinian whose main skill lay in

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 315315 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 316 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

interesting position around the time that Julian would have been prepar- ing the Long Text version of her revelations. According to the custom of the day, only the prior acted as spiritual advisor or confessor15 to enclosed women of higher social standing. Not only does his position as prior qualify Twyford to act as spiritual advisor but the possibility is strength- ened when his authorship of Itinerarium mentis in Deum – a book of spiritual guidance – is also considered. Even if, as has been suggested, Julian’s habitation of the Conisford anchorhold post-dates the reception and composition of her revelations, her demonstrated level of learning allows for considerable Augustinian (and other) influence, and belies Julian’s description of herself as “unlettered.” This epithet represents nothing more than the “humility topos” that appears in many medieval mystical texts, particularly those authored by women and, in Julian’s case, any suggestion of inferior or inadequate learning is dispelled by observing the high degree of intellectual sophistication that she brings to exposition of complex theological questions prompted by the experience of her revelations. At this stage, the extent of direct Augustinian influence on Julian of Norwich awaits further investigation. However, at the very least, it can be demonstrated that many of Julian’s theological elaborations are reflec- tive of large portions of Augustinian theology, particularly Augustine’s clearly expressed ideas on memory, salvation, grace and predestination.16

II. Augustine and Julian on Memory

In Confessions Book 1017 Augustine outlines his theory of memory using an architectural paradigm.18 On his own experience of the nature and power of memory he says, … I enter the fields and roomy chambers of memory, where are the treasures of countless images, imported into it from all manner of

his acquaintance with the early Fathers. He was a man of prayer.” Twyford was according to Roth the prior of Augustinians in Norwich in that year. Twyford was probably the author of the book “Itinerarium mentis in Deum.” 15. According to the criterion of the Augustinian order the confessor must be famil- iar with theological terminology; see Roth, The English Austin Friars 1249-1538, 200. 16. See Tanner, “Religious Practice,” 151. 17. Translation taken from St. Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, ed. John Rotelle OSA, vol. 1: The Confessions, trans. M. Boulding (New York: New City Press, 1997). 18. It is very likely that Julian knew something of the method of mnemonic visualisation but there was another means advocated for effective memorising in practice at the time. This was the method established by Ramon Lull. On this, see F. A. Yates, The Art of Memory (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1966) 173-198.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 316316 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 317

things by the senses. There is treasured up whatsoever likewise we think, either by enlarging or diminishing, or by varying in any way whatever those things which the sense has arrived at; yea, and whatever else has been entrusted to it and stored up, which oblivion has not yet engulfed and buried. When I am in this storehouse, I demand that what I wish should be brought forth, and some things immedi- ately appear; others require to be longer sought after, and are dragged, as it were, out of some hidden receptacle; … Other things suggest themselves without effort, and in continuous order, just as they are called for… (10.12). While in many ways this description is in line with the then popu- lar understanding of memory, based on Cicero’s Ad Herennium,19 this is only one aspect of Augustine’s approach. For Augustine, memory is “one of the three powers of the soul [and these three] Memory, Understand- ing, and Will … are the image of the Trinity in man.”20 Julian of Norwich’s approach to her Revelations shows an utilisation of memory that both reflects and builds on Augustine’s understanding of it. In broad terms, the Revelations centre on visions and insights Julian received over three days as she battled a debilitating illness. The life- threatening nature of the illness was obvious enough to others to occa- sion them to call a priest to administer the Last Rites to Julian. As the priest stands before Julian, he holds a crucifix in front of her and, as she fixes her gaze unerringly upon it, the Christ figure on the cross is vivified in all His Passion. This gaze and the responding vivification precipitate the revelations in which Julian receives insights and understanding into the nature of suffering, sin and God’s all-encompassing love. These immediate details and the impact of the revelations are recorded by Julian in her Short Text quite soon after the actual experience but, by her own admission, the greatly expanded Long Text, with its complex theological explications, is the product of up to twenty years contemplation on the initial “showings.” Such contemplation inevitably involved the recollection, again and again, of the primary visions and, thus, the role of memory becomes pivotal to a proper understanding of Julian’s theology. As Barry Windeatt has observed, What had started in A Vision as the story of Julian’s visions becomes in A Revelation the history of how she comes to understand them. As an authorial re-edition of the earlier text – and something of a journal recording intervening meditation – A Revelation now includes

19. For a complete discussion of Ad Herennium and memory see ibid., 1-17. 20. Ibid., 49.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 317317 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 318 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

within itself so much extended commentary analysing the earlier narrative of Julian’s revelatory experience as to shift the balance and revise the focus of the earlier account and refashion its genre.21 Such authorial control speaks to the importance of memory in an age in which access to the written word was limited. The role of memory in Julian’s elaboration has not been considered as an essential focus of her theological thought before. Yet, it is implicit in the long stretch of contemplative years between the production of the two texts, a natural and necessary part of human praxis, particularly when it is connected with the preparation of texts. Arranging and editing material in the Mid- dle Ages was a labour-intensive activity and required of the author/editor an overarching grasp of whole project as well as complete familiarity with the details. For medieval women, in particular, the possession of/access to books was a privilege, not a normal occurrence. However, this does not necessarily mean that access to the content of books was also unavail- able to them. Female scholarship in the medieval period was frequently based on oral transmission of ideas and the content of texts, and therefore the reliance on memory was implicit. Julian’s contemporary, Margery Kempe, for example, gives evidence of participating in a textual sub-culture in which even illiterate women like her could have access to the important texts of the day. Margery refers to a newly-arrived priest to the town of Lynn who read “to her many a good book of high contemplation and other books such as the Bible … Saint Bridget’s book, Hilton’s book, Bonaventure, the Stimulus Amoris, the Incendium Amoris and other such books.”22 In her own (dictated) autobiography Margery not only reiterates the titles of relevant books but also demonstrates a solid knowledge of the books’ contents which, by necessity in Margery’s case, must owe much to the practice of memorising texts. Presumably for those unable to read some discernment as to what should be retained was necessary and this reflects Augustine’s view that there is a certain deliberateness in memory. Augustine says that Even beasts can perceive corporeal things outwardly through the senses of the body, can recall them when they are fixed in the memory, can seek for what is beneficial in them, and flee from what is unpleasant. But to take note of them, to retain them not only as caught up

21. B. Windeatt, “Julian’s Second Thoughts: The Long Text Tradition,” A Com- panion to Julian of Norwich, ed. L. H. McAvoy (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2008) 102. On the rationale for the distinction here of a difference between “a vision” and “a revelation” see N. W. and J. Jenkins (eds.), The Writings of Julian of Norwich: A Vision Showed to a Devout Woman and A Revelation of Love (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006). 22. Author’s translation from The Book of Margery Kempe, 143.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 318318 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 319

naturally, but also as deliberately committed to the memory, and to impress them again by remembrance and reflection, when they are gradually slipping away into forgetfulness, in order that, as the thought is formed from that which the memory bears, so too this very same thing, which is in the memory, may be firmly fixed in thought…23 In Julian’s case, as receiver and disseminator of her revelations from God, the very process that Augustine describes can be seen to have brought Julian’s visions of 1373 to the full expression we find in the Long Text (of 1393, or thereabouts). That is, Julian “deliberately committed to memory” that which she had received from God and, in the intervening years before setting everything down in writing, she had ensured that God’s revelations were “impress[ed] … by remembrance and reflection.” Her own understanding is shown to be brought to bear on her reflections and, ultimately, her will is aligned with God’s will in bringing the full version of the revelations to all her “e’vn Cristens” in the form of her Long Text. As Roland Teske points out “Memory for Augustine has not merely the rather straightforward role of retaining recollections of past experiences, but also the much more problematic tasks of holding in mind present realities and even of anticipating the future”24 and Julian’s commitment to expanding her initial experiences into a more complete version is emblematic of this Augustinian “past, present and future” synthesis of memory. That is, though the visions took place at an exact time in the past (as Julian painstakingly establishes and emphasises by her reference to not only the date on which she received the visions but her exact age at the time)25 her continual (present) recollections of them in contemplation allows her to bring her present understanding to bear in order to inform her Will to effect / ensure (future) dissemination of her insights.

23. Trin. 12.2 (translation taken from the St. Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, ed. John Rotelle OSA, vol. 5: The Trinity, trans. Edmund Hill (New York: New City Press, 1991). 24. Roland Teske, “Augustine’s Philosophy of Memory,” The Cambridge Com- panion to Augustine, ed. Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann (Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 2001) 148. 25. “This reuelation was made to a simple creature vnlettyrde leving in deadly flesh, the yer of our lord a thousannde and three hundered and lxxiij, the xiij daie of May…” (“This revelation was made to a simple unlettered creature living in mortal flesh, in the year of Our Lord 1373 on the thirteenth day of May”) (LT. 2.285:1-3); and “And when I was xxx yere old and a halfe, god sent me a bodily sicknes” (“And when I was thirty and a half years old God sent me a bodily sickness”) (LT. 3.289:1). This, and all subsequent references to, and citations from, Julian’s revelations are the author’s (Davis) translation from: Julian of Norwich, A Book of Showings, Part Two, ed. Edmund Colledge and James Walsh (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1978).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 319319 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 320 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

At this stage it could be suggested that any apparent similarity between Augustine’s and Julian’s approach to memory is coincidental and merely indicative of a mode of writing in Julian’s time that had grown out of the extremely well-established methods and ideas of the early church Fathers, Augustine in particular. The point is valid and supportable as far as medieval authorial convention is concerned but the explication of content of Julian’s revelations indicates, as we have already said, a familiarity with, and acceptance of, Augustinian theology that extends far beyond stylistic boundaries. Augustine’s influence on Julian’s writings, particularly as it pertains to memory has not been explored before this present study. However, some scholars have noted aspects of Augustinian influence in other aspects of Julian’s work. Denise Baker, for example, points to a link based on the contentious issue of predestination: … Julian of Norwich introduces a solution to the problem of evil that challenges the juridical paradigm of Augustinian theodicy. Rather than expounding the causes of sin, she examines its conse- quences. And instead of trying to blame and justify God’s punishment of sinners, she explores the manner in which “alle shalle be wele” at the end of time for all people. Stressing the gratuitousness of salvation over the justice of damnation, Julian presents predestination as a comforting rather than terrifying prospect. Her optimism about the large number of the elect and the possibility of salvation even for those not predestined contrasts with the far more distressing opinion of contemporary theologians that the great majority of humankind is damned.26 Baker makes her observations based on Julian’s 13th Revelation but it is the authors’ contention that the full elaboration of, and engagement with Augustinian predestination is tackled by Julian in the 14th Revela- tion and, more specifically, in the ‘Lord and Servant allegory’ within that revelation. This allegory follows on from the insights Julian gained in the 13th Revelation which centred on her grappling with the question of Sin, its role in human history, and the way in which God deals with it. In fact, the thorny question of Sin and its effect on who will be saved, is woven throughout all sixteen of Julian’s revelations, but reaches a culmination in the 13th Revelation and produces Julian’s most quoted phrase, “All shall be well” as the solution to the question. The enigmatic quality of the answer, however, does not fully appease Julian’s deep sense of disquiet over the issue and it is not until the following, 14th, revelation

26. Baker, Julian of Norwich’s Showings, 82.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 320320 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 321

– and most particularly, the so-called “Lord and Servant” allegory which constitutes the bulk of that revelation, that Julian arrives at a satisfactory resolution to the puzzle.

III. Augustine’ s De Trinitate Books 4 and 13

1. Memory: Adam and Christ There is no doubt that the “predestination” is an essential concern of Books 4 & 13 of De Trinitate. Of the total seven occurrences of discussion on predestination in De Trinitate, three are to be found in Books Four27 and Thirteen.28 What has not been recognised to date is that Julian of Norwich’s 14th Revelation is also manifestly concerned with the issue of predestination. Furthermore, Julian’s presentation of the issue brings together, and expands upon, a discernibly Augustinian approach to memory and predestination. Julian’s “Lord and Servant” allegory (sometimes referred to as a parable) constitutes the longest chapter in the entire account of her revelations. It does not appear at all in the Short Text and Julian indicates that the reason for its exclusive appearance in the Long Text is because its contents were initially unfathomable for her. That is, though it seems to have been part of her initial revelatory experience, she could make no sense of it at that time and therefore omitted it from the first account. However, following around twenty years contemplation on the allegory she gained in understanding and therefore included it, at length, in her second text. The parable begins with a faithful, respectful, and well-intentioned servant setting off, at his Lord’s behest, to find a particular treasure. In his enthusiasm to serve, the servant hurries off to do the lord’s bid- ding, only to fall into a slade. He is injured in the fall, and the resulting bodily pains and injuries are only one consequence of the fall. In addition to these, as Julian explains, the “fourth [consequence] was that he was blinded in his reason and confused in his mind” to the extent that he lost his memory of his lord.29 The parable continues with Julian seeing that, despite the servant’s fall and consequential forgetting of both his lord and the errand he was

27. Trin. 4, 17 ( for the latin text see also the series CCL 50) 28. Trin. 13, 19.20. 29. “Iiij was that he was blyndyd in his reson and stonyd in his mynde so ferforth that almost he had forgeten his owne loue” (LT. 51.515:25-516:27).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 321321 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 322 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

on at the time of the fall, the lord imputes no blame to him but regards his servant tenderly, looking on him “with a double outlook, one outward, very meek and mild, … another inward, more spiritual.”30 Julian, too, experiences a “double aspect” after this, coming to understand that the Lord stands for God and the servant for Adam and, by extrapolation, all humanity for “in the sight of God all humanity is one man, and one man is all humanity.”31 Later on she recognizes in the servant the Christ, the Son of God, whose labours aim to protect and to save the fallen Adam. Centuries earlier, Augustine had expressed the same idea and it is likely that Julian owes this theological interpretation to the Augustinians or, perhaps, to her own reading of Augustine. Augustine wrote the fourth and thirteenth books probably between 414 and 418, amidst the ongoing campaign against the Pelagian concept of Grace. According to Augustine, the Pelagians perceived Grace only as an additional assistance to the good nature with which God has endowed human beings.32 Contrary to this view, Augustine maintains that Grace operates also inwardly as it prepares the alignment of the human will with the divine will and therefore enables human beings to do, outwardly, good works. For the Bishop of Hippo Grace achieves the harmony between human and divine will and within this unity it also restores the consistency between human will and action. In this context Augustine contrasts in Trin. 4, 17 the role of Christ to that of the “diabolus.” Both can be called mediators, but their goals differ substan- tially from each other. While Christ is the mediator of life, the “diabolus” is characterized as the “deceptor,” who falsely represents himself as the mediator to life.33 In reality, he is the “mediator ad mortem” for the arrogant people (“superbi”) who were seduced by the wrongful promise of purification rituals.34 According to Augustine the “seducer” brought death, rather than life to his followers. Thus the bishop concludes: But being unable either to share in our death or to rise again from his own, he could indeed apply his own single death to our double death, but he certainly could not apply a single resurrection, in

30. “With a double outlook, one outward, very meekly and mildly, with great compassion and pity … the other inward, more spiritual…” (LT. 51.516:39-40). 31. “In the syghte of god alle man is oone man, and oone man is alle man” (LT. 51.522:103-104). 32. J. Lam C. Quy, Die Menschheit Jesu Christi in den Werken des Augustinus, Bishof von Hippo (Roma: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 2007) 213. 33. Trin. 4, 17: “falsoque se opponit ad uitam.” 34. Trin. 4, 17: “nomine purgationis per sacra et sacrificia sacrilega quibus superbi seducuntur.”

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 322322 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 323

which there would be both the mystery of our renewal and the type that future awakening at the end of the world.35 How does the single death of the “deceptor” result in the double death of the proud? Augustine declares that pride is the result of the existence of sin in human beings as they seek to ascribe to themselves what should primarily be attributed to God. In that sense the “superbus” has abandoned God. A Godless soul, however, is without life. Thus, death is transmitted to the body as the latter depends on the life of the soul: “… that the spirit abandons the body unwillingly, because it has willingly abandoned God, so that the spirit must abandon the body, even though it is against its will, because by its will it has abandoned God.”36 As a result of this chain the soul dies because of impiety and the body departs physically because of natural necessity. In this sense human “superbia” has caused the disharmony between soul and body, having disrupted the unity between the human being and God. In line with St. Paul, who understands that “I do the evil that I do not will,”37 the fallen human being acts against his own good will. The concupiscence, a consequence of the inherited sin, has darkened the ratio of the human soul, so that it rather prefers to love the physical instead of the spiritual world. The soul of the fallen being loves what he should only use in order to love God: “Consequently … the false mediator does not draw them to higher things, but rather lies in await and blocks off the road by inspiring his followers with affections, which are all the more malig- nant the prouder these men are.”38 This inversion of the order of love brings death to the soul and body as the human being does not love God who is the creator of life but, instead, that which is due to change. Life becomes then instable and restless. Augustine interprets this situation as a punishment, because the soul has abandoned the “regio beatitudinis”39

35. Trin. 4, 17: “nec participationem mortis nostrae habere potuit nec resurrectionem suae, simplam quidem suam mortem ad duplam nostrum potuit afferre; simplam uero resurrectionem in qua et sacramentum esset renouationis nostrae et eius quae in fine future est euigilationis exemplum non utique potuit.” 36. Trin. 4, 16: “quia spiritusuolens deseruit deum, deserat corpus inuitus ut cum spiritus deum deseruerit quia uoluit, deserat corpus etiamsi noluerit.” 37. See Rom 7:15: “Quod enim operor, non intelligo. Non enim quod volo bonum, hoc ago: sed quod odi malum, illud facio.” This is a crucial passage for Augus- tine; see Marleen Verschoren, “‘I do the evil that I do not will’: Augustine and Julian on Romans 7:5-25 during the Second Pelagian Controversy (418-430),” Augustinana 54 (2004) nos. 1-4, 223-242. 38. Trin. 4, 15. 39. Werner Beierwaltes, “Regio Beatitudinis: Zu Augustins Begriff des glücklichen Lebens,” Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch- Historische Klasse 6 (1981).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 323323 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 324 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

in order to live in the region of dissemblance.40 This inversion of love produces in the soul a distorted memory as it becomes more and more acquainted with the lower things. The memory commits itself to the inferior materials and in the end identifies itself with them.41 Ignorance of God follows subsequently. Thus the inversion of love is at the same time an inversion of identity. In Julian’s parable, the servant exhibited both ignorance and weakness as a result of his fall even though, prior to it, his will was aligned totally with his lord. In the fall, as a result of his loss of memory, the servant loses not only contact with but also knowledge and remembrance of his lord. She relates that, in his distress the servant “… groaned and moaned and wallowed and writhed but he could not rise or help himself in any way. And with all this, the most trouble that I saw him in was the failing of comfort, for he could not turn his face to look up to his loving lord who was very near to him, and in whom is all comfort.”42 Like the fallen human being in Augustine’s explication, Julian’s servant is literally acquainted only with lower things in his inability to “rise” from the ditch into which he has fallen. He is unable even to turn his face towards his Lord and, thus loses his “identity” as a faithful servant just as he loses his memory of the “regio beatitudinis.” Complete ignorance of his Lord swiftly ensues. The role of ignorance in allowing the entry of pride and, consequently, sin, into the human situation is more thoroughly explicated by Augustine than by Julian. Augustine does not doubt that human sins originate in the transgression of Adam, the first human being. This is very clearly expressed in Trin. 4, 15.43 The identification between Adam and fallen humanity can be dated back to at least 395 AD when Augus- tine began an incomplete commentary on St. Paul’s letter to the Romans (Exp. ad Rom). This position is repeated later in c. ep. Pel. 4, 7 when Augustine refers again to the authority of Paul against the Pelagian veto

40. Aime Solignac, “Regio dissimilitudinis,” Note compl. 26, Bibliothèque Augustinienne, 13 (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1962) 689-693; Eugene TeSelle, “‘Regio Dissimilitudinis’ in the Christian Tradition and Its Context in Late Greek Philosophy,” Augustinian Studies 6 (1975) 153-179. 41. Trin. 12, 2. 42. “… gronyth and monyth and wallwyth and wryeth, but he may nott ryse nor helpe hym selfe by no manner of weye, And of all this the most myschefe that I saw hym in was feylyng of comfort, for he culde nott turne his face to loke vppe on his loving lorde, which was to hym full nere, in whom is full comfort” (LT. 51.515:16-20). 43. Trin. 4, 15: “Via nobis fuit ad mortem per peccatum in Adam: ‘Per unum quipped hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, per peccatum mors, et ita in omnes hominess peccaverunt’ (Rom 5:12).”

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 324324 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 325

which rejected the transmission of sin through Adam by pointing to the fact that the Latin translation “mors in quo” of Rom 5:12 is not endorsed by the Greek version of the Bible because death in Greek is feminine and thus the “in quo” does not refer to mors, but rather to Adam. This would mean that sin is not inherited, but that death happens through individual imitation of Adam’s sin. However, Augustine insisted on the authority of the Paul by saying: “They want us to understand that it was not sin that was passed on, but death. What, then, do the following words mean: ‘in whom all have sinned’? For the apostle said that all sinned either in that one man about whom he said: ‘through one man sin entered the world’, or in that sin or certainly in that death. After all, it should not disturb anyone that he did not say ‘in which’, but ‘in whom all have sinned’.”44 Adam’s children are somehow plagued, therefore, with an inexplicable “contritiones,” which manifests in the human incapacity to perform any good work, despite the existence of good will.45 In that context Adam is not an individual human being, but he symbolizes the whole race of humanity.46 Sin has achieved its universal dimension as sin became part of Adam’s fallen life. According to Augus- tine only a true mediator could break up this mortal chain. In the thirteenth book of De Trinitate Augustine speaks of the first Adam, who became the master of the human race and whose sin bound the “genus humanum.”47 The first Adam can only be overcome by the Grace of the second (new) Adam whom Augustine identified with Jesus Christ. The coming of the second Adam has a double task to fulfil. Firstly, it should repeal the despair of sinners and secondly it should restore the right order of love and show thus the place of the soul within creation through

44. C. ep. Pel. 4, 7 (CSEL 60): “ibi uolunt intellegi non peccatum pertransisse, sed mortem. quid est ergo quod sequitur: «in quo omnes peccauerunt»? aut enim in illo uno homine peccasse omnes dicit apostolus, de quo dixerat: «per unum hominem peccatum intrauit in mundum», aut in illo peccato aut certe in morte. non enim mouere debet, quia non dixit in qua, sed «in quo omnes peccauerunt».” 45. Conf. 8, 20.21 (CCL 27): “potui autem uelle et non facere, si mobilitas mem- brorum non obsequeretur. tam multa ergo feci, ubi non hoc erat uelle quod posse: et non faciebam, quod et incomparabili affect amplius mihi placebat et mox, ut uellem, possem, quia mox, ut uellem, utique uellem. ibi enim facultas ea, quae uoluntas, et ipsum uelle iam facere erat; et tamen non fiebat, faciliusque obtemperabat corpus tenui- ssimae uoluntati animae, ut ad nutum membra mouerentur, quam ipsa sibi anima ad uoluntatem suam magnam in sola uoluntate perficiendam … luceat misericordia tua, et interrogem, si forte mihi respondere possint latebrae poenarum hominum et tenebrosis- simae contritiones filiorum Adam.” 46. Ad Simpl. 1, 2, 16 (see CCL 44): “ut apostolus ait, ‘in Adam omnes moriun- tur’, a quo in uniuersum genus humanum origo ducitur offensionis dei…” 47. Trin. 13, 23: “Adam qui peccato suo genus obligauit humanum.”

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 325325 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 326 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

the demonstration of humility. But Christ does not use force, rather he persuades fallen humanity through love: “we must be persuaded how much God has loved us, lest through despair we should not dare to be lifted up to him. But we needed to be shown what kind of men we were whom he loved, lest being proud as it were of our merits, we should draw away the more from Him, and fail the more in our strength.”48 The second or “novus” Adam destroys the desperation by establishing a new hope through the forgiveness of sins. Likewise, Julian comes to understand that In the servant is comprehended the second person of the Trinity, and in the servant is comprehended Adam, that is to say, all men. And therefore, when I say the Son, that means the divinity which is equal to the Father, and when I say the servant, that means Christ’s humanity, which is the rightful Adam.49 In naming this equality in identity of the servant, the first Adam, the Second Adam-Christ and all humanity, Julian restates Augustine’s analogy and strengthens its import by presenting “the servant’s fall into the ditch, Adam’s fall in the garden “fro lyfe to deth” and Christ’s fall “in to the slade of the maiden’s womb” as the perfect expression of “the proper union which was made in heaven” between Christ and humanity.”50 Julian’s Adam-Christ-Humanity triad is, thus, wholly implicated in the fall and, by means of Christ’s Incarnation and Passion, wholly included in Salvation. Augustine has expressed this inclusion as being a “predestination to love which despoils the human desperation and which calls the sinners to unmerited salvation.” Julian writes that … all mankind that shall be saved by the sweet Incarnation and the Passion of Christ, all is Christ’s humanity. For he is the head, and we are his members. As members which day and time is unknown when every passing woe and sorrow shall have an end, and everlasting joy and bliss shall be fulfilled…51

48. Trin. 4, 2. 49. “In the servant is comprehendyd the seconde person of ≠e trynyte, and in the seruannt is comprehendyd Adam, that is to sey all men. And therefore whan I sey the sonne, it menyth the godhed which is evyn with the fade, and whan I sey the servant, it menyth Crystes manhode which is ryghtfull Adam” (LT. 51.532:211-533:215). 50. Carmel Bendon Davis, Mysticism and Space (Washington, DC: CUA Press, 2008) 125-126. 51. “… all mankynde that shall be savyd by the swete incarnation and the passion of Crist, alle is manhode of Cryst. For he is the heed, and we be his membris, to which membris the day and ≠e tyme is vnknowyn whan every passing wo and sorrow shall haue an eende, and the everlasting joy and blysse shall be fulfyllyd …” (LT. 51.537:254- 538:259).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 326326 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 327

Thus, just as Augustine positioned Jesus Christ as the mediator between the higher and lower parts of the soul,52 so Julian posits Christ as the mediator between God and humanity, between the fall and the recuperation of all that was lost as a result of that fall.

2. Memory: Predestination, Salvation and Divine Pedagogy Julian’s optimistic view of the recuperation of all that was lost seems, on the surface, to be in contrast to Augustine’s approach. In order to avoid a pessimistic interpretation of Augustine’s understanding of Grace and predestination, we need to keep in mind two modes of gracious operation. There is a divine perspective and a human understanding of forgiveness. If we interpret the forgiveness from the Trinitarian outlook, then we will see that the divine predestination does not discard human cooperation. Within this Trinitarian foundation Augustine holds the view that what Jesus did for fallen humanity was already anticipated in the will of the Father. Indeed Augustine states that forgiveness is only possible because the Father has always loved his creatures: “But I see that the Father also loved us previously, not only before His Son died for us, but before He founded the world, as the Apostle himself bears witness, who says: ‘As he chose us in him before the foundation of the world’ (Eph 1:4).”53 Julian, too, emphasises the Father’s prevenient love for His creatures. In particular, when the servant’s fall has resulted in a complete loss of memory of his own previous good will to serve his Lord, the Lord lovingly says, Look at my beloved servant, what harm and injuries he has had and accepted in my service for my love, yes, and for his good will. Is it not reasonable that I reward him for his fear and his dread, his hurt and his injuries and all his woe? And not only this, does it not fall to me to give him a gift that is more worthwhile than his own health should be? Otherwise, I think I would be ungracious to him.54

52. Joseph Lam Cong Quy, “Die Menschheit Jesu Christi und die Gottesschau in Augustins Werk ‘De Trinitate’,” Augustiniana 54 (2004) 417-430. 53. Trin. 13, 15: “sed uideo quod et antea pater dilexit nos non solum antequam pro nobis filius moreretur, sed antequam conderet mundum ipso teste apostolo qui dicit: ‘sicut elegit nos in ipso ante constitutionem mundi’.” 54. “Lo my belouyd servant, what harme and dysses he hath had and takyn in my servys for my loue, yea, and for his good wylle. Is it nott reson that I reward hym his frey and his drede, his hurt and his mayme and alle his woo? And nott only this, but fallyth it nott to me to geve hym a zyfte that be better to hym and more wurschypfull than his owne hele shuld haue bene? And ells me thyngkyth I dyd hym no grace” (LT. 51:517:45-518:53).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 327327 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 328 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

That is, no blame is imputed to the servant. Instead the Lord extends mercy, understanding and love; and promises the “gift” of his Son to reverse the servant’s plight. Therefore predestination and creation must been considered as a complementary pair which has its foundation in Trinitarian love. In the eternal Word God has potentially created and thus predestined all to have life. From this divine angle creatures are predestined for hope and love. In this sense God is never far from humanity. Augustine says in his Confessions: “You were more intimately present to me than my innermost being.”55 Therefore Augustine continues to say that human beings have never been cut off from God’s love.56 For that reason the incarnation of the Adam-Christ can be regarded as predestination to love which despoils the human desperation and which calls the sinners to “unmerited” salvation.57 It is unmerited because humanity is joined (in Julian’s terminology “one-ed”) with the Divinity without any preceding merits.58 According to Augustine, Christ’s assumption of humanity is the superlative demonstration of God’s humility and which, in addition, functions as a divine pedagogy in order that “the pride of man, which more than anything else hinders him from cleaving to God, might be refuted and cured by such great humility on the part of the Lord.”59 This recognition of the “great humility” of the Lord is intrinsic to Julian’s understanding of the operation of Grace in life. She plays on the “fortunate fall” motif to an extent when she explains that … thus we have matter for mourning, because our sin is the cause of Christ’s pains, and we have lasting matter for joy, because endless love made him suffer. And therefore the creature that sees and feels the working of love by grace hates nothing but sin, for of all things, as I see it, love and hate are the hardest and most immeasurable contraries. And notwithstanding all this, I saw and understood in our Lord’s meaning that we cannot in this life keep ourselves completely holy and from sin, in the full purity that we shall have in heaven. But we may well by grace keep ourselves from sins which would lead us to endless pain, as Holy Church teaches us… And if we by our blindness and our wretchedness at any time fall, then we readily rise,

55. Conf. 3, 11: “tu autem eras interior intimo meo.” 56. Trin. 4, 2: “ab incommutabili gaudio, nec tamen inde praecisi atque abrupti sumus.” 57. See similar in John P. H. Clark, “Predestination in Christ according to Julian of Norwich,” The Downside Review 100 (1982) no. 339, 79-91. 58. Trin. 13, 22; Trin. 13, 24 says that the incarnation of Jesus Christ was the supreme Grace given to humanity. 59. Trin. 13, 22.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 328328 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 329

knowing the sweet, touching of grace, and willingly amend ourselves according to the teaching of Holy church.60 Julian’s inclusion of a recommendation to “Holy Church” too, for its role in the amending of sins picks up on the notion of a Divine pedagogy that is mediated via an earthly instrument. Whether the pedagogy is accessible without the Church’s mediation is a debatable aspect of Julian’s theology because, as a medieval and religiously-affiliated woman, any suggestion on her part of the superfluity of the Church would have been tantamount to heresy. Some justification for the “double aspect” in negotiating the treacherous path between Sin and Grace, is found in Julian’s certainty that “God sees one way and man sees another way”61 and, that being the case, both God and the Church can be seen to be intertwined in the pedagogical process. For Julian person- ally, too, the pedagogical aspect is enlarged when she implicates her vision of the Lord and Servant parable as being “… the beginning of an ABC whereby [she] may have some understanding of our Lord’s meaning, for the secrets of the revelation are hidden therein, even though all the showing is full of secrets.”62 Some acceptance of the unknowability of God’s full intention for humanity is, Julian indicates, part of the pedagogical process. Unknowa- bility, however, is not the same as ignorance. As we have mentioned earlier, it is human pride which led humanity to abandon and to forget its Creator. Humanity became so ignorant of God that it no longer even knew His place within the order of creation. Ignorance as a consequence of human pride caused blindness of the human soul. The appearance of the Adam-Christ restored the harmonia between God and humanity and, concomitantly, within each human being.63 According to Augustine,

60. “… thus we haue mater of morning, for oure synne is cause of Cristes paynes, and we haue lastyngly mater of joy, for endless loue made hym suffer. And therefore the creature that seeth and feyth the working of loue by grace hatyth nought but synne, for of alle thing, as to my sight, loue hate be hardest and most vnmesurable contrarys. And nott withstondyng all this, I sawe and vnderstode in oure lordys menyng that we may nott in this lyfe kepe vs fro synne alle holy, in full clenesse as we shall be in hevyn. But we may wele by grace kepe vs fro the synnes which wolde lede vs to endlesse payne, as holy chyrch techyth vs … And if we by oure blyndnesse and oure wrechydnesse ony tyme falle, that we redely ryse, knowing the swete touching of grace, and wilfully amend vs vpon techyng of holy chyrch, …” (LT. 52.550:51-551:63). 61. “For other wyse is the beholding of god, and other wyse is the beholding of man” (LT. 52.552:69). 62. “… the begynnyng of an A B C, wher by I may haue some vnderstondyng of oure lordys menyng, for the pryvytes of the reuelacion be hyd ther in, not withstondyng that alle ≠e shewyng be full of prevytes” (LT. 51.539:268-272). 63. Trin. 4, 4.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 329329 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 330 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

the distortion of harmony by human ignorance led human beings to a one dimensional concentration on the “outward,” sensual life and, yet, in Augustine’s view, this “outer man” … is indeed wonderful, since the will to grasp and to retain blessedness is one in all: whence it comes about that there is, on the other hand, such a great variety and diversity of wills about blessedness itself, not that anyone does not will it, but that all do not know it. For if all knew it, it would not be considered by some to be in goodness of soul, by others in the pleasure of the body, by others in both, by some in this thing, and by others in that thing; for as anything particularly pleased them, so they placed it in their idea of the blessed life.64 Similarly, Julian’s interpretation of the Lord and Servant allegory establishes the permanent presence of the good will or, perhaps more accurately, that the human being is never cut off from happiness, as the desire for the blessed life is common to all people. She explains that, despite her own close scrutiny of the servant in his fallen state, she could find no fault in him, “… for the cause of his falling was only his good will and his great desire.”65 These two functions, will and desire, were not obliterated in the fall, merely forgotten. For Augustine as for Julian, human beings desire only good things because bad things do not make humanity happy. However, as Augus- tine indicates, there is also a second dimension to be considered and that is, that despite the existence of good will in human beings, there are different opinions about the nature and location of happiness. According to Augustine this discrepancy is the result of ignorance which causes humans to make wrong decisions and to misunderstand the true nature of happiness. Ignorance leads the memory to wrong conclusions as it cannot connect the different information stored in the various places in the memory. With the disconnection of proper remembrance and the detachment of good will, sin prevails. This is the reason that human beings prefer the lower and outward things because their love is disconnected with the inner and higher part of the mind where the image of God remains undisturbed. Jesus Christ’

64. Trin. 13, 7: “mirum est autem cum capessendae atque retinendae beatitudinis uoluntas una sit omnium, unde tanta exsistat de ipsa beatitudine rursus uarietas et diuer- sitas uoluntatum, non quod aliquis eam nolit, sed quod non omnes eam norint. Si enim omnes eam nossent, non ab aliis putaretur esse in uirtute animi, aliis in corporis uolup- tate, aliis in utraque, et aliis atque aliis, alibi atque alibi. ut enim eos quaeque res maxime delectauit ita in ea constituerunt uitam beatam.” 65. “for oonly hys good wyll and his grett desyer was cause of his falling” (LT. 51.516:35-36).

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 330330 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 331

role is to restore the harmony of the two parts of human memory by establishing anew the unfailing love. For Augustine, knowledge is the result of love and right memory. He asks rhetorically: “Does the life of happiness exist in the memory?” and replies that “We should not love it if we had no acquaintance with it.”66 He goes on to explain, in words drawing on his own experience, that I have never seen, heard, smelled, tasted or touched it [happiness]; in my mind alone I experienced being happy, and the knowledge of it stuck fast in my memory, so that I am able to remember it, sometimes with contempt and at other times with longing for the various things which I recall having enjoyed.67 Shortly after this reflection in Confessions, Augustine defines the source of happiness which finally answers the long errant itinerary of his “restless heart”: “This happy life and this alone: to rejoice in you, about you and because of you.”68 The Trinitarian dimension of the happy life is specifically explored in the last three books of the Confessions where Augustine discusses the timelessness of God’s good creations through his eternal Word (eternal predestination): Here he praises God, saying Solely by your abundant goodness has your creation come to be and stood firm, for you did not want so good a thing to be missing … Thus these formless things would have depended on your Word even had they not by that same Word been summoned back to the your unity and received form, and become, every of them, exceedingly good because they are form of you, the one supreme God.69 Here we can see the two dimension of God’s action. In the eternal Word God has predestined without time the creation to be good and in the incarnated Word He calls fallen humanity back to the same goodness. In the light of what we have said earlier about human despair and pedagogical humility, we can see clearly the salvific role of the memory of the Adam-Christ. In regard to human despair, God endows humanity with hope because God has anticipated the forgiveness of sins in his eternal Word. From the perspective of divine predestination sins are “insubstantial evils.”70 However, seen from the human angle, sins can be interpreted as “substantial,” because of the inexplicable and yet inevitable

66. Conf. 10, 29. 67. Conf. 10, 30. Addition is mine. 68. Conf. 10, 32. 69. Conf. 13, 2. 70. Rowan Williams, “Insubstantial Evil,” Augustine and His Critics, 105-123.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 331331 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 332 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

operation of sin in human actions. The coming of the second Adam- Christ in his humanity helped to overcome concretely the human despair; but anticipated forgiveness could lead human beings to pride which, in turn, could make them negligent in love and ignorant of their own mortality. The incarnated Word, which Augustine often describes as the highest grade of God’s humility,71 took flesh in order to teach humanity a lesson of hope. In the theology of Augustine human beings share the same quality with which God has predestined the “unmerited” unity of the two natures in Jesus Christ. He explains that In order that the grace of God might be commended to us in the man Christ without any preceding merits of our own, because even He himself did not obtain by any preceding merits that He should be joined in such great unity to be true God might be refuted and cured by such great humility on the part of God.72 For man also learns how far he has departed from God and what efficacy there is in pain to cure him when he returns through such a mediator, who, as God, helps men by his divinity, and as man adapts himself to them by his weakness.73 For Augustine, Christ’s humility aims to place the human being back into an ordered love and knowledge of obedience. In that way the Adam- Christ has triumphed over the first human Adam. As Augustine puts it, The conqueror of the first Adam, and the master of the human race, was conquered by the second Adam and lost the Christian race that was liberated out of human race from human guilt through him who was not in the guilt, although he was from the race, … And this was so done, not that man might be exalted, but that, he who boasts, let him boasts in the Lord. For he who was conquered was only a man, and, therefore, he was conquered because in his pride he desired to be God; but he who conquered was both man and God, and, therefore, He so conquered, being born of a Virgin, because God in humility did not govern that man as He governed the other saints, but bore him as a Son. But this great gifts of God, …, could not exist unless the Word were made flesh.74 The Adam-Christ liberates fallen humanity by making his own all the yokes and hardships, which have weighed down the humanity.

71. Joseph Lam Cong Quy, “Incarnatio,” Augustinus-Lexikon, vol. 3 (Basel: Schwabe, 2006) 566. 72. Julian also speaks of unity, referring to a “onyng” [one-ing] between God and humanity but this present article does not allow discussion of the complexities of her explication on this subject. It will be/is addressed in detail in the full project/book. 73. Trin. 13, 22. 74. Trin. 13, 23.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 332332 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 333

According to Augustine Jesus Christ even descended with the humanity into the infernum, where no memory of God’s presence is felt.75 Thus, the sheol is a place where the bond with God is broken off but, even there, Christ re-members the break. Within the explication of the Lord and Servant allegory, Julian discusses Christ’s descent into hell in terms of the restoration of that which was broken. She says, that At this point he first began to show his might, for then he went into hell; and when he was there, he raised up the great root out of the deep depth, which rightly was joined to him in heaven. The body lay in the grave until Easter morning; and from that time he lay no more.76 Here, Julian emphasises that not only is the servant’s (and all humanity’s) fall reversed in Christ’s Passion and Resurrection but also that “Christ’s descent into Hell prior to the Resurrection … fulfils scrip- tural precedents [and] reinstates his “might” from the lowest to the highest point in, and beyond creation”77 and, in that way, is demonstrative of Christ’s extensive salvific reach. Augustine’s position is that Jesus Christ also restores the unity of the formerly distorted memory of fallen human beings who … placed as they were in these lowest things, … could not but seek for some means whereby they might reach those sublime things which they had understood; and so they fell into the power of these deceitful demons, who brought it about that they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into a likeness of the image of corruptible man, of birds, or four-footed beasts, and of serpents. For in such forms they even set up or worshiped idols. Christ, therefore, is our science, and the same Christ is also our wisdom. He himself plants the faith concerning temporal things within us. He himself manifests the truth concerning eternal things. Through him we travel to him … But we do not depart from the one and the same Christ in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.78 Like Julian, Augustine maintains that the memory renovated by Jesus Christ leads finally to the joy of the whole Trinity as represented in the trinitarian operations of will, knowledge and love within the memory: “Hence, the will, which there combines those things retained

75. Ciu. 20, 15 (CCL 47). 76. “And at this point he beganne furst to show his mysght, for then he went in to helle; and whan he was ther, than he reysed vppe the grett root oute of the depe depnesse, whych ryghtfully was knyt to hym in hey hevyn. The body ley in the grave tyll E(as)ter morrow; and fro that tyme he ley nevyr more” (LT. 51.542:302-543:304). 77. Davis, Mysticism and Space, 230-231. 78. Trin. 13, 24.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 333333 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 334 CARMEL BENDON DAVIS & JOSEPH LAM CONG QUY

in the memory, and those impressed from it on the gaze of thought, completes indeed a trinity of some kind, since itself is added as a third; but man does not live according to this when he does not accept those things of which he has thought, since he regards them as false. But when he believes them to be true and loves those things there which are to be loved, then he already lives according to the trinity of the inner man, for everyone lives according to that which he loves.”79

IV. Conclusion

By any standards, Augustine’s explications of Divine predestination and of the nature and operation of memory are complex. The level of textual and formal similarities between Augustine’s approach and that of Julian of Norwich that we have begun to outline here must, at the very least, alert scholars to the need for a reappraisal of Augustinian influence in medieval England. Additionally it points to the need for some re- examination of Julian as a theologian in her own right. Her clear incor- poration of an Augustinian theology of predestination and of memory indicates a level of scholarship not previously attributed to Julian and could fairly position Julian as integral to the justification of the legacy of Augustinian theology to the medieval, and into the modern, world. By that we mean that Julian can be seen to be renovating Augustine’s theology on certain points while, at the same time, refusing to be drawn into later pessimistic Augustinian conclusions. For Augustine human nature was complex and therefore full of ambiguity. This might explain the complexity and density of Augustine’s concept of predestination and salvation. In contrast, Julian had a certain freedom – albeit under the usual scrutiny applied to any medieval, enclosed, religious woman – to consider and present more accessible and simple versions of complicated questions. The many years of quiet contemplation following her own remarkable experience of mystical revelations from God would have ena- bled her to choose the most applicable components of Augustinian theology in the elaboration and recording of those experiences; in that way, she can be seen to have used Augustine’s ideas but not to have been confined, nor defined, by them. Certainly she understood the relationship between memory, understanding and the will and, in her own way, utilised this triad to give a form and means of expression to her own

79. Trin. 13, 26.

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 334334 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23 PREDESTINATION IN AUGUSTINE AND JULIAN OF NORWICH 335

particular theology in a time when women were prohibited from teaching theology. The achievement of such a balance could prove to be a significant contribution to a Church which, today, is seeking a new voice for the tradition and an inclusiveness of diverse views without abandon- ing orthodoxy.

Carmel Bendon Davis is Lecturer in Spirituality at the Catholic Institute of Sydney. Her most recent publication is Mysticism and Space: Space and Spatiality in the Works of Richard Rolle, “The Cloud of Unknowing” Author, and Julian of Norwich (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2008). Address: 99 Albert Road Strathfield NSW 2135, Australia. carmel.bendon. [email protected].

Joseph Lam Cong Quy, OSA is Senior Lecturer in Systematic Theology at the Faculty of Philosophy and Theology of the Australian Catholic University. His research interests include Latin Patristic theology, Augustine, Christology, and the thought of Joseph Ratzinger. His most recent publication is Theologische Verwandtschaft: Augustinus von Hippo und Joseph Ratzinger / Papst Benedikt XVI (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 2009). Address: 25/A Barker Road, Strathfield, NSW 2135, Australia. [email protected].

994609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd4609_LouvStud_09-4_02_Davis.indd 335335 11/07/11/07/11 10:2310:23