[Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana
Michael Bryson
michael.bryson at csun.edu
Fri Jan 9 15:30:32 EST 2009
Paradise Lost is also deeply "classical" in its
"tone, reference, coloring" (if not theology, though
I would argue even that point, given what I see as a
profound Platonist/Neoplatonist element in the poem
that aligns rather nicely with certain Greek
Orthodox theological ideas--deification being merely
one example off the top of my head; another would be
the idea of the divine that abides within all things
in what the Heyschast tradition refers to as the
energies of God [essentially, the divine as
manifested in creation]), but it is not therefore
simply and reductively a "classical" poem (whatever
that might mean).
My point is merely this: Paradise Lost does, indeed,
contain many "Christian" elements, but the poem is
not contained by those elements. It is larger than
that, much larger than that.
I'll leave the rest unaddressed (accusations of
intellectual perversity and blindness, etc.). But I
must say this: anyone who knows anything of me or my
work, knows that muffling the Bible (or references
thereto in Paradise Lost or any other work) is the
last thing I have any interest in.
Michael Bryson
---- Original message ----
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:23:09 -0600
From: Larry Isitt <isitt at cofo.edu>
Subject: RE: [Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana
To: John Milton Discussion List
<milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
“oppressive fundamentalist cult” So what
are the beliefs from which you fled?
Zoroastrian? Hindu? You’re straining at gnats
and missing the camel. Par Lost is Christian in
tone, reference, coloring,
theology, and whatever other measures one might
use to locate its heart’s
core. You can choose to believe salt is sugar,
that Par Lost is anything but a
Christian poem (as 99% of Milton’s readers then
and now would classify
it), but this is simply perverse thinking that
chooses deliberately to muffle
the literally thousands of Bible references the
poem contains. That must have
been some cult if it blinded you this badly.
Larry Isitt
English Dept
College of the Ozarks
Point Lookout, MO 65726
417-334-6411, x3269
From: milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu
[mailto:milton-l-bounces at lists.richmond.edu] On
Behalf Of Michael Bryson
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:05 PM
To: John Milton Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana
So Paradise Lost "is" a
"Christian" poem?
Good to know there's no debate on that point.
Honestly, this is the kind of
thing that keeps too many students thinking that
Milton is someone they do not
want to read (go check the number of times Milton
is offered as a single-author
course in most English departments--once a year is
on the high side, while
every other year is all too common). I am lucky
enough to be able to teach a
Milton course every semester here at CSUN, but
that is a highly unusual
circumstance. I deal with theology (and philosophy
and history and genre
and...and...and...) quite a bit in that course,
but never do I insist that
students (or colleagues, for that matter) simply
check their judgment at the
door and genuflect before a not-to-be-questioned
pronouncement such as the one
above.
I first read the poem in the Escondido, CA public
library, and I found in it
(at the age of 13) a refuge from the oppressive
fundamentalist cult in which I
had been raised. Does that make the poem
"anti-Christian" (or, more
specifically, "anti-20th-century-American cult"?)
No. Neither does
the experience of reading the poem in the Vatican
make it Catholic, or at
Westminster Abbey make it Anglican, or at Wrigley
Field make it doomed.
Paradise Lost is a poem (a staggeringly great poem
at that) which makes
much use of themes, characters, questions,
dilemmas, cruxes of thought, etc.
that are at work in the various branches of
"Christianity." But it
also engages with many/most of the same things
that are at work in Judaism(s).
Does that make it a "Jewish" poem? There are
points of contact that
can be established between the concerns of
Paradise Lost and those of
Zoroastrianism, and even Hinduism. No one, I
trust, will be pronouncing that
Milton's poem is therefore either Zoroastrian or
Hindu. (Of course, that might
be a rather interesting pronouncement, valuable at
least for its freshness. The
same old gets to be rather, well, same old.)
A poem that deals with "themes" (for want of a
better word) that
appear in "Christianity" (whatever the variation),
is not, due to
that fact, a "Christian" poem. Paradise Lost
deserves better
than to be treated so reductively as one might
treat the kind of garishly
printed (and poorly written) pamphlets that
American door to door evangelists
peddle on weekend mornings. Those are, indeed,
"Christian"
publications. Paradise Lost is not so monumental
and sub-literate a bore
as that.
Michael Bryson
P.S. And what, exactly, is "the religion of
Christ" much less the
"gospel of Christ"? (Let's let the Greek Orthodox
and Roman Catholics
and Anglicans and Southern Baptists and
Presbyterians and Lutherans and Mormons
and Jehovah's Witnesses hash that out for a while,
shall we?) Who,
exactly, was this "Christ" person, anyhow? (Let's
get John Dominick
Crossan and Rick Warren to debate that one...)
These are serious historical
questions, and I think Milton took them seriously.
And precisely what relevance
does "Christ" (whoever that may have been outside
the pages of the
texts, both canonical and non-canonical) have in a
poem where the name does not
appear even once? All too many of us refer to
"Christ" in published
work on Milton, without, it seems, ever bothering
to acknowledge that Milton
seems allergic to the word in his later poetry.
This, among other reasons, is
why I wrote (in the Tyranny of Heaven) that Milton
studies have
often threatened to turn into Milton ministries.
I sincerely apologize to the members of this list
if the polemical tone here is
too much. But this is something I believe is a
crucial point. Academic study of
a poem that engages with theology, mythology,
politics, etc. should not be an
opening to bring one's weekend devotionals (or
lack thereof) into the classroom
(or the journal). But with the study of this
author, and this body of work, the
temptation seems impossible for many of us (on
either end of the spectrum) to
resist. I am not without sin here, and I am not
trying (despite what may appear
in these hastily-written paragraphs) to cast the
first stone. But when does
enough become enough?
</soapbox>
---- Original message ----
Date: Thu, 08 Jan
2009 21:39:35 -0500
From: jonnyangel <junkopardner at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] De Doctrina Christiana
To: John Milton Discussion List
<milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
>
>
>
>On 1/8/09 4:01 PM, "Peter C. Herman"
<herman2 at mail.sdsu.edu> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I wonder if perhaps we could try for more
precise
>> terminology than "Christian," since the
>> definition of that term for Milton (and others)
>> was very much in dispute. Catholicism, for
>> example, is for Milton (and others) "popery,"
and
>> not to be tolerated in the well-regulated
>> commonwealth. And I remember that Calvin's
>> Catholic antagonists called him an "atheist."
To
>> call PL a "Christian" poem, therefore, implies
an
>> ecumenicism that I do not think is warranted by
>> either the times or the text itself.
>>
>> Peter C. Herman
>
>"Christians" are simply those who believe in the
religion of
Christ (just
>like the Catholics). I read "Areopagitica" last
semester and
Milton wasn't
>an ecumenist by a long shot: he left the
Catholics out (not to mention
>supporting regicide, the two handed engine ready
to smite the blind mouths,
>etc).
>
>I guess if one were to define PL as a "Christian"
poem they would
have
>define "Christian" by Milton's views in DDC. I
certainly think
the text of
>PL is supported by Milton's view of the religion
of Christ (Christianity)
>that he expressed in DDC.
>
>I understand what you're saying in reference to
calling PL a
"Christian"
>poem and its implication of ecumenism, but there
has never been (nor will
>ever be) a standard definition of what
"Christian" is because
it's always
>changing. But the one thing Christianity (in all
of its various forms) has
>always shared is the belief in the religion and
gospel of Christ.
>
>For instance, C.S. Lewis was a Trinitarian, and
in his brilliant work
"Mere
>Christianity" he tackles the complexities of the
Trinity with the
genius
>that Milton tackled PL and Einstein tackled
Relativity. And Lewis loved the
>Christian theology of PL, even though there were
some obvious theological
>differences separating Milton and Lewis.
>
>Whatever the differences over the centuries, make
no mistake: PL
"is" a
>Christian poem. After all, I first read it as a
child in a private
Christian
>elementary school that was completely
Trinitarian. I have friends in the
>priesthood (one still at the Vatican) and they
all have read it (and
>continue to read it) and absolutely love it.
>
>Peace Shalom,
>
>Jonny
>
>
>
>
>"Some things are too hot to touch/the human mind
can only stand so
much..."
>-Bob Dylan
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/
>________________
>_______________________________________________
>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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20090109/c0c348af/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Milton-L
mailing list