Papers by Edmund C. White
The Journal of British Studies, 2011
Prose Studies
Though John Milton would claim retrospectively that his divorce tracts were written in defense of... more Though John Milton would claim retrospectively that his divorce tracts were written in defense of domestic liberty, they often justify their conclusions in terms of national discipline. This essay proposes that the disciplinary rhetoric used in the first and second editions of The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce (1643, 1644) is indicative of Milton's close engagement with contemporary London-based discussions over the settlement of ecclesiastical discipline. Each edition considers and contends with the issues being debated by the divines of the Westminster Assembly and the “Presbyterian” and “Independent” party lines emerging in contemporary printed polemic. This essay argues that Milton's first divorce tract – both versions – articulates its case in a manner acceptable to those for whom national and ecclesiastical discipline was indispensible; yet, at the same time it subtly redefines discipline's meaning by repudiating legal coercion and lauding the virtue of self-restraint as the true basis of disciplined people.
Though John Milton would claim retrospectively that his divorce tracts were written in defense of... more Though John Milton would claim retrospectively that his divorce tracts were written in defense of domestic liberty, they often justify their conclusions in terms of national discipline. This essay proposes that the disciplinary rhetoric used in the first and second editions of The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce (1643, 1644) is indicative of Milton's close engagement with contemporary London-based discussions over the settlement of ecclesiastical discipline. Each edition considers and contends with the issues being debated by the divines of the Westminster Assembly and the “Presbyterian” and “Independent” party lines emerging in contemporary printed polemic. This essay argues that Milton's first divorce tract – both versions – articulates its case in a manner acceptable to those for whom national and ecclesiastical discipline was indispensible; yet, at the same time it subtly redefines discipline's meaning by repudiating legal coercion and lauding the virtue of self-restraint as the true basis of disciplined people.
Doctoral Thesis Abstract by Edmund C. White
Reviews by Edmund C. White
From the review: 'Milton studies continues to be populated by a wide variety of Miltons, and in H... more From the review: 'Milton studies continues to be populated by a wide variety of Miltons, and in Hammond’s and Greteman’s volumes we have gained two more. Milton and the People presents itself as a somewhat polemical corrective to those critics—Greteman included—who refuse to conceive of the poet and polemicist abandoning radical political hopes in his later years. Hammond’s etymological focus does, however, make for salutary reading: Milton’s poly-lingual mastery is a crucial subject with a frontier that is still being explored. Poetics and Politics of Youth in Milton’s England, by contrast, has insight to offer for Miltonists, scholars of theatrical culture, and political historians of Early Modern England alike. The image of Milton as a ‘heroic’ educator working in the face of political reaction is one to which those working in higher education—and, indeed, education more generally—will no doubt warm.'
First paragraph: 'THE twelve essays of Young Milton will prove salutary to those with a general i... more First paragraph: 'THE twelve essays of Young Milton will prove salutary to those with a general interest in seventeenth-century literature and history as well as dedicated Miltonists. Since the 400th anniversary of Milton’s birth in 2008 there has been a concerted effort to re-examine the canon and challenge widely held assumptions about the poet’s life and thought. This endeavour is perhaps most apparent in Oxford University Press’s ongoing publication of the new Complete Works of John Milton. However, Young Milton, stemming from a 2009 conference organized by the volume’s editor Edward Jones, also articulates this revisionary ethos by countering the assumption that ‘Milton’s early career is best gauged and understood by reference to the three long poems of his mature years’ (viii).'
Notes and Queries, Oct 17, 2013
Notes and Queries, Mar 27, 2013
Talks by Edmund C. White
Milton’s second edition of The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce was published on February 2nd, ... more Milton’s second edition of The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce was published on February 2nd, 1644, just one month after An Apologeticall Narration, which controversially called for the accommodation of gathered congregations within the national Church. This paper will argue that Milton’s new preface to the second edition, addressed ‘To the Parlament of England, with the Assembly,’ was partly written in response to An Apologeticall Narration.
Crucially, an examination of the correlations and differences between the two pamphlets throws Milton’s somewhat elusive thought on Church discipline in 1643 and 1644 into relief. The Congregationalist authors of the Narration deemed the matter of ecclesiastical discipline divisive; their rhetoric emphasised instead the doctrinal tenets held in common by most of the divines at Westminster as grounds for unity with those persuaded by Presbyterianism. In contrast, in the new preface of 1644, it was discipline which Milton conceptualized as a means of encouraging the populace to be ‘uniform in virtue’: he defined it as a universal moral imperative, rather than as denoting ecclesiastical governance. Milton’s advocacy of divorce, therefore, cannot be understood in isolation from the storm in the Assembly and in print over the proper settlement of the Church.
The notability of Milton’s call for toleration in Areopagitica is, in part, due to its express ex... more The notability of Milton’s call for toleration in Areopagitica is, in part, due to its express exclusion of ‘Popery and open superstition’ as well as ‘that also which is impious or evil absolutely either against faith or maners’. Although previously unnoticed, an important feature of this passage is that ‘faith or maners’ is a translation of ‘fides et mores’, an ecclesiastical formula laden with extensive connotations in the context of the inter-confessional debates over Scripture and Tradition of which Counter-Reformation history consists.
I propose to deliver a paper to the British Milton Seminar that outlines Milton’s reception of the formula, and concludes by offering an interpretation of his use of it in Areopagitica. First, it will trace uses of the formula from its origins in the epistles of Saint Augustine, through to its use in the edicts of the Council of Trent, and the Protestant-Catholic controversies that these provoked. This will serve to demonstrate that Milton’s phrasing of ‘faith or maners’ specifically invokes the standard vernacular translation of ‘fides et mores’ in works by Reformed English divines engaged in these debates. It may be said, therefore, that the passage of Areopagitica mentioned above is adopting, and adapting, ‘faith or maners’ as a hermeneutic principle with which to assess all forms of Christian practice.
Lectures by Edmund C. White
Written for MASSOLIT (https://www.massolit.io/), which provides online lectures by academics on h... more Written for MASSOLIT (https://www.massolit.io/), which provides online lectures by academics on humanities subjects for sixth-form (17 to 18 year old) students and schools. The course explores the religious and literary background of Paradise Lost. It provides an introduction to the religious culture of seventeenth-century England, and shows how this culture influenced the composition of Milton’s epic poem, Paradise Lost. The course falls into two halves. In the first half: we explore the principal Christian ideas that feature in Milton’s narration of the fall of Adam and Eve; in the second half, we look at the political implications of the religious ideas articulated in Paradise Lost. In both halves, we take examples from key moments of the poem, as well as from other writings by Milton and his seventeenth-century contemporaries.
Uploads
Papers by Edmund C. White
Doctoral Thesis Abstract by Edmund C. White
Reviews by Edmund C. White
Talks by Edmund C. White
Crucially, an examination of the correlations and differences between the two pamphlets throws Milton’s somewhat elusive thought on Church discipline in 1643 and 1644 into relief. The Congregationalist authors of the Narration deemed the matter of ecclesiastical discipline divisive; their rhetoric emphasised instead the doctrinal tenets held in common by most of the divines at Westminster as grounds for unity with those persuaded by Presbyterianism. In contrast, in the new preface of 1644, it was discipline which Milton conceptualized as a means of encouraging the populace to be ‘uniform in virtue’: he defined it as a universal moral imperative, rather than as denoting ecclesiastical governance. Milton’s advocacy of divorce, therefore, cannot be understood in isolation from the storm in the Assembly and in print over the proper settlement of the Church.
I propose to deliver a paper to the British Milton Seminar that outlines Milton’s reception of the formula, and concludes by offering an interpretation of his use of it in Areopagitica. First, it will trace uses of the formula from its origins in the epistles of Saint Augustine, through to its use in the edicts of the Council of Trent, and the Protestant-Catholic controversies that these provoked. This will serve to demonstrate that Milton’s phrasing of ‘faith or maners’ specifically invokes the standard vernacular translation of ‘fides et mores’ in works by Reformed English divines engaged in these debates. It may be said, therefore, that the passage of Areopagitica mentioned above is adopting, and adapting, ‘faith or maners’ as a hermeneutic principle with which to assess all forms of Christian practice.
Lectures by Edmund C. White
Crucially, an examination of the correlations and differences between the two pamphlets throws Milton’s somewhat elusive thought on Church discipline in 1643 and 1644 into relief. The Congregationalist authors of the Narration deemed the matter of ecclesiastical discipline divisive; their rhetoric emphasised instead the doctrinal tenets held in common by most of the divines at Westminster as grounds for unity with those persuaded by Presbyterianism. In contrast, in the new preface of 1644, it was discipline which Milton conceptualized as a means of encouraging the populace to be ‘uniform in virtue’: he defined it as a universal moral imperative, rather than as denoting ecclesiastical governance. Milton’s advocacy of divorce, therefore, cannot be understood in isolation from the storm in the Assembly and in print over the proper settlement of the Church.
I propose to deliver a paper to the British Milton Seminar that outlines Milton’s reception of the formula, and concludes by offering an interpretation of his use of it in Areopagitica. First, it will trace uses of the formula from its origins in the epistles of Saint Augustine, through to its use in the edicts of the Council of Trent, and the Protestant-Catholic controversies that these provoked. This will serve to demonstrate that Milton’s phrasing of ‘faith or maners’ specifically invokes the standard vernacular translation of ‘fides et mores’ in works by Reformed English divines engaged in these debates. It may be said, therefore, that the passage of Areopagitica mentioned above is adopting, and adapting, ‘faith or maners’ as a hermeneutic principle with which to assess all forms of Christian practice.