ABSTRACT
Few things were so important to John Lilburne as religious toleration. He adhered to this principle in its most radical and unqualified form, despite the reservations held by many of the Levellers' supporters among the separatist and sectarian religious groups, and in the face of opposition from the leaders of the Independent congregations in London. When he attempted a compromise on the issue, in the run-up to the debates in the Army Council at Whitehall in December 1648, it led only to political disaster. Lilburne's response was not further compromise but a return to the unqualified principle. The conduct of the Leveller speakers in the debate was far from disruptive. Lilburne himself said very little after his initial statement, identifying failure to define the magistrates' powers as the cause of England's civil wars, was contested by Ireton. Ireton soon made his attitude to the Levellers very clear, despite what has been seen as his recent radicalisation.
