“Against... the Bishops” 1639–1642dangerously at the most eminent vices among the greatest persons,” citing Langland’s
Piers Plowman as example (916). He justifies “throwing out indignation, or scorn
upon an object that deserves it” (899) by the precepts of Aristotle, Cicero, and
Quintilian, by Luther’s use of tart rhetoric in the church’s cause, and by biblical and
classical examples (Elijah, Solomon, Horace, Cicero, Seneca). His chief authority is
Christ, who used all styles of teaching: “sometimes by a milde and familiar con-
verse, sometimes with plaine and impartiall home-speaking... otherwhiles with
bitter and irefull rebukes if not teaching yet leaving excuselesse those his wilfull
impugners” (899–900). Some of Christ’s followers “were indu’d with a staid mod-
eration, and soundnesse of argument to teach and convince the rationall and sober-
minded” (900), but others employed a “sanctifi’d bitternesse” (901) against the
corrupt and carnal. Even the Spirit of God in scripture uses and thereby licenses
obscenities and immodest terms for such purposes. Such zeal convicts the prelates’
calls for moderation as reprehensible lukewarmness (868–9) and welcomes fierce
polemic battle. At the highest pitch Milton links satire of that sort to the role of
poet–prophet:
([If] I may have leave to soare a while as the Poets use) then Zeale whose substance is
ethereal, arming in compleat diamond ascends his fiery Chariot drawn with two blaz-
ing Meteors figur’d like beasts, but of a higher breed then any the Zodiack yeilds,
resembling two of those four which Ezechiel and S. John saw, the one visag’d like a
Lion to express power, high autority and indignation, the other of count’nance like a
man to cast derision and scorne upon perverse and fraudulent seducers; with these the
invincible warriour Zeale shaking loosely the slack reins drives over the heads of
Scarlet Prelats, and such as are insolent to maintaine traditions, bruising their stiffe
necks under his flaming wheels. Thus did the true Prophets of old combat with the
false. (900)Alternatively, he lavishes praises on parliament – termed “the high and sovran
Court of Parliament” – to encourage it to enact the Root and Branch legislation.^79
He describes members of parliament as the founders and leaders of an aristocratic
republic: some are nobles, most are of a “knowne and well-reputed ancestry, which
is a great advantage toward virtue,” and they have happily overcome the empty and
superstitious education they received at the universities (923). They are “publick
benefactors” who act from “mature wisdome, deliberat vertue, and deere affection
to the publick good” (922); they were chosen by “God and man” to be “both the
great reformers of the Church, and the restorers of the Common-wealth”; and so
they merit recognition as “Fathers of their countrey.”^80 He praises them especially
for their openness to all petitioners: “the meanest artizans and labourers, at other
times also women, and often the younger sort of servants” (926) – all those who
recently agitated for Root and Branch. Though no democrat, Milton identifies
with the agitators fanning the flames of reform, noting proudly that he himself
joined “in petition with good men” (878). This was probably the Root and Branch