|
|
|
|
 More Books to review click here |
|
| Book Reviews | ||
|
Google has some great 'FREE' software! |
The Motherhood of God?, May 3, 2003 Reviewer: Steve Gifford (lake forest, ca USA) - See all my reviews CS Lewis said Revelation of Love was the most "dangerous" book he has ever read, dangerous in a positive, life-changing way, not life-threatening way. God's masculine attributes have been explored, disected, expanded throughout the centuries. He is our Father: the Protector, the Provider, the Discipliner... And it is quite theologically and grammatically correct to refer to God with a masculine title "Him" "He" or "Father". The original Greek in our New Testament and in the translation of the Old Testament into Greek (Septuagint) use masculine pronouns in reference to God. Yet the God who created man, also created woman. Every attribute that we love about our moms ...; caring, compassionate, gentle, etc can be found in our God. Julian stretches one's view of God, even making one uncomfortable as she makes analogies and comparisons with God's feminine nature that one may be unfamiliar with: "until now and even until Doomsday, He feeds us and helps us, according to the high sovereign kindness of His Motherhood that answers our kindly needs of childhood. Fair and sweet is our heavenly Mother in our soul's sight; precious and lovely are His gracious children in the sight of our heavenly Mother...for a child will never dispair of a mother's love".But she, in no way, goes as far as liberal scholars today who want to change the masculine pronouns in the Bible to neutral ones. All this gender discussion should not hinder one from reading this book. Julian's words are a fresh, gentle breeze or even sometimes a strong gust, to cool the sweat from faces heated by the serious discussions of doctrines and eschatology "our Lover desires the soul to stay close to Him with all its strength, clinging ever more tightly to His goodness. Of all things the heart may think, this pleases God the most and affords us much progress." "I (Julian) saw His continual working in every conceivable thing is done so goodly, so wisely, and so mightily that it defies imagination, and all that we can guess or think". "Take the discomforts of this life as lightly as we can by counting them as nothing" "He did not say , 'You shall not be tempted, you shall not be in trials, you shall not be distressed,' but He said 'You shall not be overcome'." Some of the visions in her book were too confusing and feel free to skim over them to search for the refreshing drink of encouraging words Julian offers us. My favorite part is where she describes how Jesus, if He could, would [end life] on the cross over and over again until we lost count, just to show us how much He loves us! Comment | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this) 2 of 2 people found the following review helpful: A Revelation for Today, May 27, 2002 Reviewer: DaughterOfTheKing "ngrace88" (Louisiana) - See all my reviews Mother Julian's message reaches across the years and speaks to contemporary Christian spiritual seekers. Many have heard her famous, "And all shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well." These comforting words are only one of the many jewels to be found in the The Revelation of Love. In particular, I am gently touched by her imagery of Christ as Mother. Having fled the hell-and-brimstone denomination of my youth, Mother Julian affirms that my concept of an all-loving God isn't something we've concocted in recent years to make ourselves feel better. While Fr. John Julian's translation of this text is my favorite, it is currently out of print. This version is a close second and I highly recommend it to fellow pilgrims. Comment | Was this review helpful to you? (Report this) 22 of 22 people found the following review helpful: A Wonderful Revelation, May 4, 2001 Reviewer: Evelyn Uyemura (Torrance, CA USA) - See all my reviews If you have never read Julian of Norwich before, this is the place to start. If you've read other editions, I think you'll like this translation. Julian of Norwich wrote her revelations in Middle English, and is perhaps the first woman ever to write a book in the English language. Because Middle English is fairly accessible, what is needed is not so much a translation as a re-casting into modern English. John Skinner does a masterful job of retaining Julian's voice and brings many of her terms over into modern English. Rather than supply the Latinized "union with God" (or even more abstract sounding "divine union") he keeps Julian's own words "our oneing with God," as he does with words such as "again-making" and "dear-worthy" giving a strong sense of actually hearing Julian's own voice. And what a lovely voice it is. Her language is, as she would say, "homely and courteous," simple yet refined and elegant. Her mind is clear, honest, intelligent, and wise. Although she is often termed a "visionary," the visions that she spent her life pondering happened in a single day. In fact, what she experienced is what modern people would call a "near-death experience." As she lay in a state somewhere between life and death, she saw a series of visions, beginning with an image of Jesus dying slowly on the cross. In my first approach to her writings, I was somewhat put off by the Medieval-ness of what she saw. But, like Julian herself, I needed to press through the first impression, and seek for the meaning that she drew from what she saw. What most endears Julian to me is that she thinks. First of all, she admits that after regaining normal consciousness, she said of her visions, "I raved," meaning that she dismissed what she had seen as merely delirium. But in some manner the visions were repeated, and she realized that she was in danger of dismissing a spiritual experience of great depth and meaning. Julian then reflected on the meaning of what she had seen for the rest of her life. These "showings" became the basis for continuing spiritual insight, as she wrestled with the symbolism, the conflict they presented to accepted doctrine, and the need to understand what she had experienced so vividly. Julian goes back to God again and again, asking questions, asking for understanding, wanting "with all her might" as she says, to know the truth. And God most courteously deepens her understanding. But not everything can be known or said. Her parable of the lord and the servant opens up a view of Original Sin that turns that doctrine from a stumbling block to a source of comfort. She also sees the Trinity as ultimately including "all who will be saved," which is her way of saying (without quite saying) all of humanity. It is fascinating to see Julians's mind and spirit deal with the fact that when she was face to face with God, she could not see the existence of sin. She debates within herself, and with God, asking, Is it not a fact that we are all sinners? The church teaches it and experience proves it. She feels torn between what she believes, and what God now showed her. And with all her mind and all her spirit, she seeks a way to reconcile the conflict. In the end, she comes to a view of sin that, if we could all catch her vision, would be the means of making all things well, as God promised her. God's love for humanity pervades Julian's thought and her very words seem to me to be full of light and grace. Skinner uses footnotes sparingly, although some of the footnotes he does include are cryptic and confusing. His glossary is very helpful in understanding Julian's language and thought. But in one key term, there is, I believe a punctuation mistake which alters the meaning that I think the translator intends: "sensuality: the sinful side of kind, that is, being transformed by the workings of mercy and grace." If we remove the two commas, the definition makes more sense. But I question whether Julian sees our "sensuality" (our sense-knowledge of ourselves, I think she means) as the sinful side of our nature (kind = nature, as in mankind.) Sensual knowledge is inadequate, true; but to read "sinful" into it, after all she has said about God not seeing sin in us, strikes me as wrong. This term "sensuality" is significant in understanding her work, so I would ask other readers to consider for yourself what she means by it. But I cannot end this review on a negative note, so I will end by quoting her own conclusion: "I often desired to know our Lord's meaning (in giving me these showings. ) And fifteen years and more after, I was answered in spiritual understanding, with this saying: 'Would you know your Lord's meaning in this thing? Know it well:love was his meaning. Who showed you? Love. What did he show you? Love. Wherefore did he show it you? For love. Hold yourself therein and you shall know and learn more in the same; but you will never know nor learn another thing therein without end.' Thus was I taught that love was our Lord's meaning. And I saw full surely in this and in all that before God made us he loved us; which love was never slaked, nor never shall be." |
The Christian Goddess Network: We are a community who celebrate the awareness of the divine feminine side of God.
