[Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana

[John Hale]

Interesting strand.
Best wishes, Roy, and tell us please why you think that comparing  
"works" better than contrasting.
What is meant by "working" in this connection?
John


On 3/01/2009, at 6:53 AM, FLANNAGAN, ROY wrote:

>
> The starting place, as ever, would be in Maurice Kelley's This  
> Great Argument, which matches the epic against the treatise point  
> by theological point.  Sometimes Kelley makes the treatise into a  
> kind of Procrustean bed, but what he wrote still seems well- 
> organized and concise.  That book made Kelley's academic  
> reputation, and it might have assured him a home at Princeton.
>
> Michael Bauman might speak best for the differences between epic  
> and treatise, but I think comparing the two works with each other  
> works better than contrasting them with each other.
>
> Roy Flannagan
> From: milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu on behalf of Michael Gillum
> Sent: Fri 1/2/2009 11:41 AM
> To: milton-l
> Subject: Re: [Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana
>
> Extending Hannibal Hamlin’s question, could I ask people to say  
> what they think are  important differences between ideas stated in  
> DDC and ideas stated or clearly implied in PL (as you interpret it)?
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> On 1/2/09 11:18 AM, "Hannibal Hamlin" <hamlin.hannibal at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
> A further question that is more hermeneutic than bibliographic --  
> to what extent can Paradise Lost (say) be legitimately interpreted  
> in light of De Doctrina?  This seems to have become common  
> practice, for the obvious reason that the theological positions  
> stated in De Doctrina are considerably easier to determine than  
> those in PL.  But De Doctrina isn't really a handbook to the  
> theology of PL, is it?  If the same man wrote both works, that's  
> certainly interesting, but can we assume that both works express  
> the same ideas, or that their author was of the same mind when he  
> wrote both works?  We might even ask about the relationship about  
> theological ideas to the (written) linguistic expression of them:  
> i.e., is it possible that language can generate ideas as much as  
> the reverse, and even that different kinds of writing (dramatic  
> fictional English verse, say, as opposed to expository Latin prose)  
> might tend to generate different ideas?
>
> Hannibal
>
>
> On 1/2/09, Thomas Corns <els009 at bangor.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> May I suggest reading at least the last chapter of Gordon Campbell,  
> Thomas
> N. Corns, John K. Hale, and Fiona Tweedie, JOHN MILTON AND THE  
> MANUSCRIPT OF
> DE DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)?
>
> If time is more pressing, then go with Michael Bauman: yes.
>
> DE DOCTRINA CHRISTIANA is being edited for the new Oxford Complete  
> Works of
> John Milton; John Hale is the volume editor for that volume.
>
> Best
> Tom Corns
>
>
>
>
> --
> Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi,
> gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig
> gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y
> neges e-bost hon trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar
> unwaith a dilëwch y neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi,
> rhaid i chi beidio â defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a
> gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i
> hanfonodd yn unig  ac nid yw o anghenraid yn cynrychioli barn
> Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu
> bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu
> 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn
> nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract
> rhwymol - mae rhestr o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa
> Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.  www.bangor.ac.uk <http://www.bangor.ac.uk>
>
> This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and
> is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s).  If you have
> received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately
> and delete this email.  If you are not the intended recipient(s), you
> must not use, retain or disclose any information contained in this
> email.  Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do
> not necessarily represent those of the Bangor University.
> Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or
> any attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure.  Unless
> expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this email is
> not intended to form a binding contract - a list of authorised
> signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance
> Office.  www.bangor.ac.uk <http://www.bangor.ac.uk>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at http:// 
> lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>
> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/
>
>
>
> <ATT00001.txt>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20090103/292cfb4a/attachment-0001.html