No anger in God
The Church taught her that sinners deserve blame and anger, and in the showings she saw God blame no one. Can both be true, and what would have to be the case if they are?
Julian calls them two judgments, the higher one shown by God and the lower one learned in Holy Church, and refuses to drop either. The only answer given her is a picture. A servant runs to do his lord's will, falls into a hollow and cannot rise, and the lord sees no fault in him, only eagerness. Almost twenty years later she reads the servant as Adam and Christ in one figure, so that the Father can blame humankind no more than his own Son.
- sin
- mercy
- grace
- redemption
- repentance
- humility
- self-knowledge
- human nature
- incarnation
- christology
- virtue
Enter a dialogue
- A servant running his lord's errand falls into a hollow and lies hurt, and the lord finds no fault in him. Whose fall is this?
- You were taught that sinners deserve blame and God's anger, and you saw no anger in God. Why did you refuse to give up either?
- Worst of all, the fallen servant cannot turn to see his lord nearby, full of pity. What does someone sunk in self-blame miss?
- Nearly twenty years passed before you could read the picture of the fallen servant. What did you have to notice that you had missed?
- In every soul that will be saved, you say, there is a will that never agreed to sin. How does that fit what people actually do?