Chapter 1.
Introduction

If bumper stickers on carriages had been popular in his day, John Milton may have seen some with the following words: "IF YOU LIKE A COUNTRY RULED BY RELIGION GO TO ROME OR TURKEY." Many angry Anglo Saxon Protestants in England in the 17th century were eager to vent their displeasure at a dominant and dogmatic religion united with a tyrannical government. They looked at the past, and they looked around them, and they did not like what they saw.

In the 17th century people were not far from the end of the Middle Ages, when Jews, Muslims and "heretics," or followers of small religious "sects," were routinely persecuted for their faith. For 150 years after the Reformation the newly-established Protestant State Churches harassed and persecuted the nonconformist Protestant sects along with Roman Catholics. Religious toleration and freedom came very slowly before the 18th century.

Many modern people tend to scorn the past. This is very foolish. We can learn much from studying what happened in the past and where we came from. How we got to where we are today and mistakes previous generations made along the way should be very important to us. What did they do right and nobly? How did our present actions, beliefs, and way of life develop? Asking and answering these questions can teach us as much as years of college study.

This is especially true concerning our ideas of freedom. Great men and women of past generations and cultures have always prized their freedom, but they have not always developed it wisely. Nor have they applied it equally or preserved it carefully.

During the 17th century in England and in the American Colonies, concerned citizens formulated and debated many of our fundamental ideas of freedom. Wise people sometimes militantly faced many of the same struggles with complex issues. They often courageously and successfully handled such problems. At other times for the sake of a perceived unity, peace, and preservation of an accustomed way of life, they compromised and settled for less freedom than they desired.

Burning Issues and Flaming Passions

John Milton's extraordinary intellectual ability, literary genius, and patriotic passion combined to serve well the cause of liberty in his beloved England. He was traveling in Italy when he heard that the fires of civil war had broken out in his homeland. Like many of his fellow citizens Milton had decided before he heard these "melancholy tidings" that their king was a tyrant. Milton believed that James I was denying his subjects the liberty they had for at least four hundred years claimed as free citizens. Out of a sincere sense of patriotism Milton said "I thought it base that I should be traveling … abroad while my fellow-citizens were fighting for liberty at home" (The Second Defense of the People of England, Hughes ed., Milton's Complete Poems and Maior Prose 817-838). We can imagine how George Washington might have felt had he been enjoying an extended vacation on the French Riviera when he heard the news that the Revolutionary War had broken out in New England.

Milton and many of his contemporaries felt justified in taking up arms against an unjust and tyrannical ruler. This was the same attitude of the American Colonists in the 1770's who revolted against another tyrannical British King who disregarded the voice of free English citizens in the New World.

Milton's first talents lay in the literary arena, not in the political arena. We have evidence from his own writings that he only reluctantly, and out of a sense of patriotic duty, joined the republican cause in England as a member of Cromwell's cabinet. Milton felt that he should temporarily lay aside his love for poetry and write prose to support the cause of parliamentary government and to represent that Commonwealth before Foreign States.

In John Milton, Oliver Cromwell gained an extremely well educated and intelligent Foreign Secretary. He could read and write in several languages, including the biblical Hebrew and Greek and also Latin and several modern languages. He became the Latin Secretary for the Commonwealth Council in 1649 and efficiently communicated with other European nations. In the mid-1650's his approaching blindness hindered his official duties in this capacity, but he continued until the time of the Restoration (1660). He wrote on several aspects of liberty and freedom because he believed passionately in freedom. Milton remained with the Commonwealth government because he saw it as the greatest hope for achieving real freedom for his day.

All Americans who care deeply for freedom should inform themselves about John Milton's efforts, writing, and sacrifices for freedom and liberty. Many, if not most, of our American ideas of freedom and liberty, were born and enunciated during the lifetime of John Milton (1608-1674). It was one of Milton's contemporaries and a fellow Cambridge University student, Roger Williams (1603-1683), who migrated to Colonial America and refined the lessons on liberty he learned at Cambridge. Williams no doubt listened to many of the same professors and speakers and read many of the same books that Milton read in his student days.

John Milton struggled with many burning issues of freedom of the press, censorship, the separation of church and state, academic freedom, religious freedom, and political and civil liberty that the early American colonists and founders of the nation faced. Today we still grapple with the same problems. The threats he wrestled with are just as real and divisive today as they were then, and this book, as you will see, explains why.

Milton's Three Kinds of Freedom

To John Milton there were "three species of liberty without which it is scarcely possible to pass any life with comfort" (Second Defense of the People of Enqiand, in Hughes ed., John Milton: Complete Poems and Major Prose 830-31). These three main divisions of the general subject of liberty he specified as (1) ecclesiastical or religious liberty, (2) domestic or private liberty, and (3) civil liberty. He said that he had already written on the subject of religious liberty, and the magistrates were "diligently employed" about civil or political liberty. He would, therefore, discuss in his Second Defense of the People of England some domestic or private liberties, such as the freedom of the press, divorce, and academic or educational freedom. He also included in certain writings both before and after this Second Defense a continuing consideration of civil or political freedom and the proper basis of government. Although Milton concentrated on these "domestic or personal freedoms," he also wrote a considerable amount of prose about other categories of liberty, many of which are applicable to our times.

We must be careful, however, about quoting single passages from Milton's writings on liberty without remembering two things. First, his ideas of freedom changed during his lifetime. What he wrote in his early or middle life may or may not be what he finally accepted with greater conviction and informed judgment toward the end of his life. Second, we must remember that it is deceptively easy to apply too precisely to our modern times Milton's positions on liberty as he saw it in 17th century England. Those were the early days of society's developing ideas on key aspects and implications of liberty. Society had not yet formulated the Enlightenment concepts that came along with the French and American Revolutions in the next century.

Arthur Barker wisely reminded all of us that during the revolution Milton's thinking

was constantly in process of transformation. In 1641 he accepted certain principles without considering their implications, and expressed them with an assurance that represents absence rather than coherence of thought. Events between 1641 and 1660 forced him continually to reconsider, to readjust, to develop, to enlarge his opinions.

Some of Milton's opinions on liberty and freedom changed remarkably between his first association with the Commonwealth government (1649) and the decade following the Restoration of Charles II in 1660. It is unwise to quote an isolated statement in the midst of this evolution and development, and to assume that it is the final word on Milton's thought about a particular subject. Like all thinking men Milton grew in his intellectual capacities and in his ability to adjust his reasoning and conclusions in view of additional information, insight, and experience. Anyone who grows intellectually will, of course, change some of his or her opinions and attitudes. We do not ordinarily agree with the stubborn man who says, "My mind is made up. Don't try to confuse me with the facts!"

Milton's Thought Versus his Literary Style

Many literature students have concentrated so much on John Milton's great poetry and literary style that they have neglected his thought, especially his thought on freedom or liberty, which was often expressed most clearly in his prose. Milton is rightly studied and widely read and acclaimed for his poetic epics Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained. Several of his shorter poems and sonnets are great literary achievements. Milton, however, also wrote some magnificent prose. His prose writings are properly not so highly regarded as great literature as his greatest poetry, but his prose does not deserve the unceremonious burial that some critics have given it.

Why have critics slighted Milton's prose writings? There are several reasons. First, many critics of Milton's generation, and of the generations immediately following his death, were prejudiced for political reasons against the positions of Milton's prose writings. Some of those critics were strong Tories who favored the Monarchy and opposed anyone that supported parliamentary government and would limit the power of the King. Second, others were avid champions of the established Church of England. They refused to recognize the greatness of anyone who opposed the power of the Anglican dignitaries. The Prelates enjoyed their ability to influence the government in civil actions.

Third, others opposed Milton's pamphlets because they simply did not agree intellectually with the positions that Milton took or with his methods of reasoning and conclusions. Usually they could not refute his logic and reasoning from the classics, philosophy, and scripture, but they nevertheless dismissed his writing as beneath their serious consideration. Fourth, many had financial and economic reasons for remaining with the Stuart Monarchy and the established Anglican Church. They felt they could not afford to give any aid to Milton and others who threatened their economic security. Moreover, some of Milton's prose pamphlets are not of high literary value, or are not very creative, or are not well conceived or expressed. Most of them, however, are worthy of retention, further study and analysis, and are well done in the prevalent literary prose style of 17th century England.

Balancing Thought and Style

It is quite proper for literary critics to examine a writer's thought and also the style of writing or literary artistry. It is a serious mistake for anyone to become so enamored with an orator's style that the message is not seriously questioned. It is equally wrong to dismiss the message simply because of some prejudice against the writer's style or philosophical assumptions. The selected "facts" could be completely wrong, and the reasoning processes leading to a murky conclusion could be very unsound.

Consider, for example, the kind of books that are published in a totalitarian country where no academic freedom exists and all professors are required to submit course plans, articles, and books to higher government officials for approval before publication. What kind of books or communication of free ideas can one expect under those circumstances? All readers should consider the kinds of controls applied to all books in their thought content and permissible conclusions. Industries, political bodies, churches, and government agencies often commission writings and reports required to come to a certain conclusion in the interest of the sponsoring group. Note, for example, the charge that tobacco companies for years funded and directed studies destined from the beginning to reach certain "conclusions" and "findings" favorable to the companies.

It's time to take a new look at Milton's thought as distinguished from his style of writing. Much written in the past on this subject dealt only with Milton's religious or theological thought. Milton has not fared well in this arena. Now it is time to renew our attention to Milton as a thinker, and in particular as a thinker about freedom of religion, of the press, of speech, of conscience, and academic freedom in education.

Milton's Philosophical Thought About Freedom

Milton has been given little credit for his philosophical thought regarding freedom, love of country, democracy, parliamentary government, and other non-theological ideas, of which he wrote often and with great clarity and conviction. James Thorpe, former professor of English at Princeton University, has written that

During the first quarter of the nineteenth century Milton began to gain attention as a conscious literary artist. Simultaneously, Milton began to lose the force of religious authority. Practically no one had yet attempted anything more than a theological interpretation of Milton's thought. The diminishing respect for theology undercut one traditional reason for the exaltation of Milton as a "divine poet" (Milton Criticism 8-9).

One purpose of this book is to make a non-theological interpretation of Milton's thought regarding freedom. Too many critics have rejected Milton's puritanism and theology and have unfortunately failed to consider his thought regarding freedom. Milton was not a superb and creative political thinker, as John Locke, for example, was in his day. On the other hand, Locke was not as deeply immersed in the rich classical and renaissance background as Milton. Political science was not Milton's greatest claim to fame, but to this science, as to epic poetry, he made a substantial contribution.

James Thorpe in his survey of Milton criticism pointed out that some twentieth century American scholars and literary critics such as Greenlaw and Hanford have

tried to establish Milton as a Renaissance thinker by restudying his thought from a nontheological point of view by connecting it with Renaissance thought.… During this period some continental scholars such as Saurat and Liljegren reassessed Milton's thought in a way that made Milton appear a daring and original thinker.… Their conclusions made Milton look like a rationalistic antitheologian" (15-16).

Such efforts to defend Milton appear quite unnecessary and inappropriate if we adopt the viewpoint suggested in this book. That is, Milton is an exceptionally gifted and talented literary figure in his own right; he is a genius in his native "right-handed" poetic epic genre; he is a shining example of the Reformation spirit, a product of the classics, the Renaissance, and the Reformation; he is also a man of his times who quickened at his country's call to take up the quill and write the logical and chronological preamble to his nation's Bill of Rights.

The Complexity of Milton

Literary critics have not known where to place Milton or how to characterize him either as a man or as a literary figure. In many ways he appears obviously to be a Puritan and an advocate of typical Puritan principles and ideas. Puritans in his day, however, were not all of one kind. Some were conservative and some were radical. Some were radical in some ways but not so in other ways. Many Puritans wanted to stay and work within the Anglican Church, while others wanted a complete separation and radical reformation of the doctrine, ritual, and liturgy of the Church.

In other ways Milton appears a humanist or rationalist. He is also an idealist and a man of profound faith. Some would like to claim him as a new version of Erasmus and renaissance humanism. Milton would feel comfortable with some aspects of this characterization, but he would be very uncomfortable with other aspects. He is open to some new science and philosophy. Yet he often prefers the old Ptolemaic view of the universe, rather than the Copernican view, as promoted by Galileo (1564-1642), Kepler (1571-1630), Francis Bacon (1561-1642).

The same complexity is noted in Milton's political views and opinions. He belonged to no particular political party or organized religious church or denomination. Milton had his own brand of politics and religious faith. At times he called for a radical kind of democracy; then again he did not trust uneducated commoners with the power of the ballot or with sufficient wisdom and virtue to serve in parliament. Although he spoke out powerfully against the greed and corruption of the Anglican clergy, at other times he might be willing to accept some aspects of an established church—provided it stays out of politics and purifies and reforms itself spiritually. He would have been savagely critical of the television evangelists and immoral preachers and priests during our generation who disgrace their churches and followers by their reprehensible conduct.

Milton railed at the tyranny of the king, preferring "Queen Truth to King Charles," but as Arthur Barker points out, he accepted and defended the dictatorship of Cromwell (Milton and the Puritan Dilemma xiv). During his lifetime he moved

• from the Puritan right to the moderate left,
• from optimism to disillusionment,
• from favoring Presbyterian church government to congregationalism,
• from limited tolerance toward greater tolerance,
• from opposition to an established church toward a pragmatic acquiescence in the will of the people for some form of religious establishment,
• from an expectation for almost complete freedom immediately to a recognition that political change comes slowly, with gradually changing laws, and with a changed society.

For many years before he wrote the famous ending of Paradise Lost, Milton had believed in "real and substantial liberty" which was "rather to be sought from within than from without" (Second Defense of the English People, published in 1654, see Hughes ed., Complete Poetry and Major Prose 830). He accepted (and apparently preferred) that "paradise within" which is the native possibility for every individual who will discipline himself or herself to enjoy it. The fact that true religion was inward was the driving force of Milton's fierce conflict with any state church. He cherished the precarious but uncompromising confidence that the solitary person of faith could be a competent priest before his God. Milton was outraged that the church would attempt to force faith or religious practice upon an unconvinced conscience.

When Church and State are Unequally Yoked Together

As former senator Warren Rudman reminds us, to see what happens in modern times when politics and the state are united, we should look at countries like Iran, Ireland, and Bosnia. Not many Americans, Canadians, or Englishmen would want to have religion-dominated political parties like those countries, and positively not a government where such parties are in power.

Anthony Lewis challenged us about the Christian Coalition's pervasive influence in a major American political party ("The Rise of a Religion-based Party," St. Petersburg Times, Aug. 11, 1996, 7A). The Christian Coalition engages in strategy, policy development, platform decisions, and legislative agenda in ways that affect the lives and well-being of all Americans and the nature of our government and future of our country. Damage would be just as great, and the warning just as appropriate, if it were the other major political party or another religious organization.

To sound a warning about such political activity and intolerance is not to imply that these people have no rights to their beliefs or opinions. This is not the point. Like everyone else, they have their legitimate rights, but they have no right to deny others their rights and liberties to believe and act as their consciences dictate. Disaster lurks at the door when extremist religious groups form their own political parties or capture existing parties with the avowed aim of promoting strife and violence to prevail over the entire society with their religious views and practices.

Those with strong religious opinions have a right to participate in all aspects of American life, including politics, as Mr. Lewis states. "But," he continues, "it is quite different to have a single religious outlook—one that tends to see everything in rigid terms of right-wrong, good-evil—dominating a major party." Such an attitude creates such difficulties, and rules out accommodation to such an extent, that effective government in a pluralistic society becomes virtually impossible.

When Church and State are united, one will eventually dominate the other. If the state is the protector and defender of the church, then the church will be obligated to the state, and the church's supreme allegiance to God will accordingly be diminished. If the state funds the church, the state will eventually claim the right to have some oversight about how those funds are spent. Over against this, if the church controls the state, then the state will be limited in its ability to act in civil and political affairs for the good of the nation and all the citizens. In either case, the union of church and state ultimately proves to be bad for both church and state. Both John Milton and Roger Williams understood this clearly. Such organizations as the Christian Coalition and religious/political parties running foreign governments do not understand it at all.

The Plan of this Book

Like Milton's thought development from theoretical toward pragmatic, the plan of this book proceeds from theoretical freedom toward liberty in practical life today. To make it easier for the reader to anticipate and follow the plan of this book, the following outline or summary of coming chapters is offered here. Beyond this introductory chapter this book contains five chapters as follows:

Chapter 2, "Overview of 17th Century Thought on Liberty and Individualism," outlines the democratic trends toward individualism and religious and civil liberty in England and the American Colonies in the 17th century. It also locates John Milton in the spectrum of contending forces in this environment.

Chapter 3, "Milton's Writings on Liberty," surveys some of Milton's prose writings (except Areopagitica, which will be considered in chapter 4) and part of Paradise Lost to discover Milton's thought on religious liberty, personal liberty, and civil or political liberty.

The theme of chapter 4 is Milton on the freedom of the press—Areopagitica. This chapter analyzes Milton's Areopagitica to discover his thought in his greatest prose work on the freedom of the press, freedom of conscience, and freedom of speech and discussion, toleration, and censorship.

The purpose of chapter 5, "A Comparison of John Milton and Roger Williams on Freedom, Toleration, Censorship, and Separation of Church and State," is to compare the work of Milton and the views of his colonial contemporary, Roger Williams. It will show that Milton was far ahead of most of his peers in England during the Civil War and Restoration period. Nevertheless, he was not as far advanced as was Roger Williams in willingness to grant full religious freedom to all, including Roman Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and atheists. Neither did he go as far as Roger Williams in calling for the near-total separation of church and state. Milton, however, was as much opposed to a Presbyterian established religion of ruling Elders as he was to an Anglican establishment of ruling Prelates. He believed in parliamentary rule, but not a parliament that was dominated by either king or church.

Chapter 6, "Conclusion," answers the question "What does all this say to us in our practical life situation today?" In his syndicated editorial Anthony Lewis wrote of the danger of a religion-based political party. Mr. Lewis said that

The days leading up to the Republican Convention in San Diego [1996] exposed an exceptional fact. For the first time in modern United States history, religion drives a major political party. It is highly significant that now we have a religion-based party that examines all issues through the lens of a narrow interpretation of the Bible.… Thomas Jefferson knew the danger of having a single religious view tied to politics. The most passionate effort of his life was to disestablish the Anglican Church in Virginia and assure religious liberty for all.