Julian of Norwich's Showings is yet another indispensable volume in "The Classics of Western Spirituality" series. It contains the sixteen visions given to Julian who lived alone as an Anchoress in late 14th-early 15th century England.

This volume contains both the short and long text of Julian's visions. Julian writes with a lucid depth of feeling rarely encountered in descriptions of God's love. Julian's love for Christ is clearly felt in these pages. The preface and introduction give ample justification for claiming a place of importance for Julian's writings in the pantheon of mystical and spiritual writers.

This is valuable reading for everyone who wants to know the love of God more.

Julian of Norwich is only one of the medieval mystics who attempted to record the unspeakable, that without words, the mystical experience. This book is a record of what she dictated of her experiences, her "showings" of Christ and her relationshp with Him. It gives us insight into the workings of a medieval woman's mind and soul, and into the nature of mysticism itself, something beyond what words can measure.

Unlike Aquinas and some other medievals who had one or, at most, a few mystical experiences, and unlike those who seem to have thrived on flaunting their closeness to God, such as Marjorie Kemp, Julian is a quiet soul. She herself doesn't know what to make of her experiences, doesn't feel worthy of them. Yet they are intrinsically a part of her and her religiosity.

This is a must-read for students of Western mysticism, for those who want to understand the experience of the truly religious in the Middle Ages, and those who also seek to know Christ first-hand. Not a "how to" guide -- any such would be suspect in Julian's world because she does not control her experiences -- it is more of a guide to "what happens when your soul is in this particular state". Her very inability to explain that perfectly is, I think, proof that her experience was very real.

All that's known about Julian of Norwich was that in 1373 a woman lay, at age 30, on her deathbed. The woman did not die, but instead received a series of visions of Christ's passion. These visions are what is recorded in this book in both short (written more closely after the incident) and long (written much later, after more contemplation) versions. She then became an anchoress living as a recluse in a cell attached to the churchyard of St. Julian in Norwich.

Julian's visions, even in translation, are luminous and joyful. She received the assurance that God will, in the end, make all well. The meaning of it all, as she says, is Love. This is one of the most vivid constructions of the medieval image of Christ as mother and is (justly) famous as such. The showings are moving and beautiful.

The Paulist Press/Colledge translation is almost comical in its padding. Featuring a preface, forward, and introduction, the actual short text does not begin until page 125.

I found this book to closely tie in with Dame Julian of Norwich's "Revelations of Divine Love". It has wonderful insights for each day, and helps one to understand "Revelations" from a different prespective. I started the 30 days during a family vacation at the beach and continued on until I had read the entire booklet. Afterwards, I had noticed that I had just about filled my journal with insights into God and how God relates to us. A wonderful meditaional guide for those of us on a journey.

This is the third book from the Ave Maria Press "30 days with a spiritual teacher" I've purchased. Each one has been extraordinary (Teresa of Avila and Catherine of Siena were the others). These books are well thought out with a brief introduction to the author sprinkled with significant aspects that help the reader feel a little closer to the "teacher". Also included is a "how to pray this book" section that gives some helpful points with the last one being the important "or do whatever feels right". The book is well named, for Julian's theology (that is focused on in this book) can be boiled down to "All Will Be Well". It is insightful and hopeful. Each day is broken down into a small bit to read and a thought to carry through the day. At the end of the day are questions to provoke thought and then a closing thought/prayer. These aren't meant to be inclusive works, what they are is a great introduction to an inspirational teacher.

This wonderful little book of historical fiction is a great introduction to Julian of Norwich, the 14th century anchorite mystic. After acknowledging in the introduction that much of the story is imagined based on what is known of Julian, Ralph Milton draws you in with his well honed story telling skills. He creates for the reader a Julian who is fully human, yet delightfully divine. Despite the fictional nature of the work, it is nevertheless true to the spirit of Julian that is revealed in her writings, which are quoted throughout the book. In an age when the Church largely portrayed humans as "loathsome worms, totally undeserving of God's love and mercy," Julian proclaimed "the human creature is a treasure in the heart of God" (p.11) What is remarkable about Julian is that her theology is so refreshingly contemporary more than 600 years later.
The greatest compliment I can give any book, and which I fully give this one, is the sadness I felt in turning the final page - Julian had become an old friend, a sister, to whom I did not wish to say goodbye. But, as those familiar with Julian might expect, Milton has as her final words to the reader, "All shall be well. And all shall be well. And all manner of things shall be well." And all is well with Milton's well crafted story.

Ralph Milton has produced an impressive novel outlining the history of the fourteenth century English anchoress Julian Of Norwich. Though I have no knowledge about whether the book is historically accurate, it is a clear story and very logically written.

We see how Julian (known as Katherine or Kate before she became an anchoress in Norwich church) was affected by the outbreaks of bubonic plague which killed both her young children and her husband when she was very young. We then see that she had doubts whether becoming an anchoress was what God intended for her, but that she did overcome what was the most difficult decision of her life to enter into a life of prayer.

All through, we notice how emotional Julian and the people around her are, despite the theological view of anger as sinful. This is especially true when it becomes known (late in the book) that England is at a war with France only for the needs of the king. We also see that Julian overcomes her psychological problems to write down the visions she has very clearly - and the fact that a large number of people actually visited her in the anchorhold.

In addition to the war with France, the novel contains some information about the Lollards in its later passages. We see Julian as someone willing, in fact, to think respectfully about issues in the outside world.

A very interesting tale - easy to read for those who would never get through a theological work.

At the time she wrote, Julian's "showings" were not considered completely compatible with Church doctrine. However, she was not censured by the people of Norwich or the Church. She is famous for her audacity, in that she claimed her writings were as inspired as the Bible. Moreover for her specific doctrine that God is our Mother as much as he is our Father. Meaning only that his character transcends the way we think of gender and especially the roles we have attribute to it. Julian also stated that in God there is no wrath. I recommend this book to anyone reading for fun, for theological insight, or for any combination of feminist or spiritual curiosity. She was an amazing woman whose work is perpetually relevant as a religious and as a feminist text.

Julian's work is a rich combination of ascetic, sacramental, and doctrinal theology, presented with a haunting simplicity and charm. Through referring entirely to her revelations, apparently a singular incident, Julian, with obviously burning love, manages to set forth truths with great understanding and depth. Readers will miss much of this, if they read it solely as a feminist statement - her treatment of God as Mother, for example, includes references to numerous doctrinal and sacramental implications.

Superb work for anyone interested in Christian mysticism at its best.

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!

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.

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."

an absolutely charming little treasure. amusing correspondance with the witty and snide illustrations of quentin blake.

What a funny little book. Being a collector of Twelve Days of Christmas books this one really is a little treasure. The story is so funny, showing us the thank you letters from a young lady to her unseen admirer from the 1st till the 12th day of Christmas. First she is so thankful for her gifts she hardly don't know what to say, but as the days passes she gets more and more trouble when her fabulous gifts arrives. It will brighten any cold Christmas day when you sit reading in front of the fire.

And the wonderful illustrations by Quentin Blake makes to book into something very special, a book you can "read" over and over.

Britt Arnhild Lindland

This book had me in fits of laughter from the start. I'm not sure why no one thought of this before - what would the recipient do with the partridge in the pear tree by the 12th day? And the question poses itself, would the recipient really be happy with the gift giver by day 6 much less by day 12? This is a fun read! Especially in a time that often lends itself to stress rather than laughter.

While clearly not written for specialists on Byzantium, nor for specialists in warfare during this period, the book (the first of 3) is an enjoyable read nonetheless. Covering the rise of Constantine the Great through the rise of Charlemagne in the West, Norwich does a very good job of creating a readable story of the confusing nature of alliances and political double dealing that was the essence of the Byzantine Empire.

Speaking from a military perspective, I would have like to have seen greater depth in the battles, which shaped the empire (along with some better maps), but I still enjoyed Norwich's humor and ability to create a gripping narrative.

If you are looking for something more serious and scholarly, look elsewhere. But if you are looking for an enjoyable history of a complex political dynamic and era, this is the book for you.

A sumptuous historical bon-bon from an unreconstructed Orientalist, "A History of Byzantium" is armchair travel, history, and royal chicanery at its finest. A prevoius reader likens the book's breakneck pace to the Blitkrieg, but I'm not sure this--or the lack of an overview of "everyday life in Byzantine"--is a detriment to Norwich's smitten non-specialist's approach. Instead, we encounter a dizying number of palace intruigues, administrations, wars, battles, regicides and mutilations, all undertaken by deftly sketched charcters. Norwich has a veddy veddy British style--upper crust without being stuffy, grand yet humorous. Churchillian perhaps. He's great company, and a wonderful tourist guide. Reading Norwich is not unlike visiting with a long lost but friendly relative from the landed gentry. Based on the other books readers of this book have bought, he seems to be habit-forming.

Certainly Norwich is susceptible to criticism: he's not an expert and is more rewardingly read for his narrative and style than his insight, but these are reproaches about the book that this isn't rather than than the book it is--a richly entertaining, fast-paced, overview of the trials and tribulations of the Byzantine emporers told by a tremendously engaging, enthusiastic companion.

Mr. Norwich is of the school of Historians that are more interested in the stories of History rather than serving detailed studies of what really did go on in those times. Of course this has a clear objective: make today's short attention span reader care a little bit about ancient times by serving them a novel like book. On this basis he must be judged for this trilogy on the Byzantine Empire. And he succeeds quite well, in particular in the first book of the saga where semi mythical emperors and empresses come to live. The main fault is that perhaps Mr. Norwich is a little bit too casual, and, as many a British school historian, a little bit too much interested in some prurient aspects of the story. Yet the narrative flows, our interest is maintained and we come to care for these people who although almost totally alien to our way of thinking still show us that human nature is human nature. I am not sure if this type of narration is to everybody's taste since Mr. Norwich is keen in showing the folly of his characters, regardless of their faith, role in national myths etc... I suppose that if you are a man of deep faith, or a Greek nationalist you might not like some of the zingers that pepper the text of these books. It would be a pity to reject the work on such points. What is at stake here is to bring back to us the story of a millennial Empire that for better or for worse we owe so much to.

Julian of Norwich, an anchoress from 14th century England who is best known for this theological tract, sets out an interesting belief system in which she concentrates on the womanly nature of Christ and God. Julian had sixteen visions which she referred to as "showings" while she was suffering an illness. These showings revealed divine messages from God that Julian then set to paper through scribes.

In my opinion, most of her revelations are tiresome to slog through, and she is a master of reptition. Also, her descriptions of the crucifixition are pretty gory and unsettling, which might bother some readers. This book is probably best read in very short bursts so that it's easier to absorb the material and ponder what Julian is trying to say.

There are certainly good things to say about this book. Her parable about man falling in sin is excellent and fun to read. I'll probably read this section again and again. I'm also glad I read this as part of a class on the Middle Ages. The background I learned in this class makes some of the text a bit clearer. It's important to understand that Europe was being rocked by the Black Death and that the Church was wrapped up in a schism while Julian was pondering her visions. The upsetting descriptions of Christ's suffering and his motherly attention to man makes more sense when the reader understands that half of Europe was dying and faith was being seriously challenged. Be sure and look at the appendices, because there is a reprint of a brief selection of the Revelations written in Middle English. It's neat to read it as it was written and try and make sense of the words.

I won't read the whole book again, but I would say that it should be read once, especially for those studying European history or theological systems.

Julian's utter devotion to God amazes me. Sure, the medieval imagery, symbols, and style of writing take a little getting used to--but her intense desire for intimacy with her Lord is inspiring.

As a devout (mostly Protestant) Christian, I highly recommend this work. Read it and you'll understand why people have been drawn closer to Him through Julian's writing.

I really liked her book. She made me feel good inside and she made me smile. I like to smile. My mom says everyone should read her book. Mommy's also helping me write this letter. I like her book and I wish everyone could read it.

Kristy

I was prepared to like this book, and really had no problems with the earlier chapters. However, the latter sections concerning the wars of the roses, and Richard III in particular, are nonsense from a historical perspective. Norwich must have flipped through a few scholarly works and decided that including footnotes and cititions would be adequate. The problem is that he tends to ignore the credibility of the sources he cites, perhaps feeling that anybody living within a couple of hundred years of the events in question would be a credible and objective source. In the case of Richard the 3rd, many other people have made the same mistakes (i.e. taking Thomas More and John Morton as reliable sources of information). However, most of these people don't embarrass themselves by writing a book that uses such sources and citiations.

Looks like Poor Richard is never going to get a break!

This book tells the story - long, confusing, but connected - of the English kings of the late Middle Ages, from the downfall and death of Edward II in 1327 and the accession of his son Edward III. His successor Richard II was deposed and killed by the Lancastrian Henry IV. Then followed his son Henry V and a great time for England against France in their ongoing Hundred-Years War. His son Henry VI was so ineffectual he set off the long bizarre dynastic scuffle called the Wars of the Roses, from which the Yorkist Edward IV finally emerged. He had his own middle brother, George, killed, but his youngest brother, the infamous Richard of Gloucester, slaughtered his way to the throne, holding it for a tenuous two years as Richard III, until the resurgent Lancastrians finally got rid of him and the whole bloody Middle Ages, and put Henry VII (the first Tudor) on the throne in 1485 - the first decent ruler poor England had seen in a century and a half.

This was the period that Shakespeare chose for his history plays. To the Elizabethans these events were still reasonably current (as our Civil War is to us), and yet enough removed - and of a different dynasty - to be safe in the playing. (Not quite: Elizabeth's (former) favorite Essex paid for a special performance of Richard II, which concerns the deposing of a legitimate monarch, and soon after he was proclaimed a traitor.) The politically savvy playwright wanted to walk the fine line between telling the ripping good yarn of these brutal yet colorful fellows, while somehow not tarnishing the gloss of the monarchy itself.

But Shakespeare was no historian. He has modified the story to suit political and dramatic exigencies, and often, it appears, by mistake. The dynastic interweavings are confusing, and his sources had gaps and contradictions, so sometimes he misplaces characters and events. More often, though, he has to tell a long story in a short time, and give it some push. Thus the compression and conflation of events, the exaggeration of character.

Ok, so maybe watching the plays is not the best way to learn English history. Certainly, Norwich brings this home. He gently but relentlessly documents Will's departures from the actual history, and they are legion. Every once in a while, in this book, he devotes a chapter to the particular play that "covers" the material he has discussed to that point. Basically, each of these chapters goes through the play at hand - I Henry IV, say - and shows how it deviates from or hews to the truth. After a few of these chapters, I just skipped them: the tale Norwich tells in his history sections is great fun, but the Shakespeare chapters simply drive home the point that the plays are at best approximations to the actual. Fair enough: I'm convinced. I still want to watch the plays: they contain cultural and emotional truth after all, besides being, many of them, great plays.

So, read this book for the history, rather than the Shakespeare criticism. And though the plays are not good history, reading a good popular history is not irrelevant to enjoying them: after all, they were written for a public that already had a better than nodding acquaintance with the events they portray. And so should you.

I was recently fortunate enough to attend the Stratford Festival of Canada where I saw, among other Shakespearean plays, the two parts of Henry IV and Henry V. It was a wonderful experience but I began thinking about the events depicted in these plays; namely, how historically accurate was what I saw? This theme of historical accuracy in plays and movies has become rather popular lately, inspiring a number of books and documentaries. In an attempt to answer this question for Shakespeare's history plays, I read this book, Shakespeare's Kings, by John Julius Norwich and I'm glad I did.

This is a very well-written and informative book. In chapters alternating between history and the corresponding Shakespearean play, Norwich covers the period from Edward III through Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V, Henry VI, Edward IV, Edward V to Richard III. The history chapters are clear and concise considering the large number of people that populate them, and how they are often executed, banished and losing and gaining lands and titles. Norwich is also quite good at offering different views on the period before settling on the view he feels is most substantiated. He then follows the history with an examination of the appropriate play, explaining how events are telescoped and rearranged, how characters are sometimes mistaken and invented and how even history must suffer if drama is to be maintained. I am particularly fond of the fact that Norwich doesn't let historical inaccuracies interfere with his appreciation of what a dramatist like Shakespeare needs to accomplish for a successful play. History and drama are not the same.

I was also interested to see a discussion of the play Edward III which, according to some scholars, is a recent addition to the Shakespearean canon. I had not heard of this play before nor its attribution of authorship to Shakespeare but it is listed as part new edition of the New Cambridge Shakespeare, for one. I was very glad to discover this so I could look into the matter. It is nice to see an author comment on the most current scholarship, however we might ultimately feel about the conclusions.

A final note worth mentioning to the interested reader: this book only deals with the history of the two major tetralogies. It does not cover the "fictional" histories (like King Lear, Macbeth, etc.) nor with the English histories out of sequence (King John, King Henry VIII). For what it does cover, however, it is an invaluable tool. Particularly for those who, like myself, enjoy these Shakespearean histories.