Gospel.”^8 To summarize his primary concern, Ambrose declares, “the testimony of
Gods Spirit is ever agreeable to the Word.”^9 Therefore, one of his primary reasons for
rejecting the mysticism and enthusiasm of the Quakers was that they had failed to
maintain the critical balance of Word and Spirit.^10 Instead the Spirit became
excessively prominent and eventually this created an even stronger inner
subjectivism. John Owen also criticized Quakerism because their understanding of
the “Spirit rendered the written Word of no value” not because of their teaching of
direct contact with the Spirit.^11 Ambrose also condemned the Antinomians,
specifically Tobias Crisp, because his theology paralleled the Quaker tendency of
disrupting the proper balance between Word and Spirit.^12 While Ambrose was irenic
and resisted polemics, Rutherford often engaged in them and frequently criticized
Crisp.^13
Ambrose does not direct any criticism against Roman Catholic expressions of
mysticism or contemplative prayer though other Puritans did. John Owen wrote a
detailed critique of contemplative or mental prayer in response to the Benedictine
Dom Serenus de Cressy.^14 No doubt part of Owen’s rebuke of Cressy was due to his
(^8) Ambrose, Ultima (^) in Prima, Media, Ultima (^) (1654), 197. Ambrose specifically
names Quakers as “dreamers.” 9 Looking Unto Jesus, 1157.
10 Ambrose, Cornick, Letting God Be GodUltima in Prima, Media, Ultima, 93. (1654), 199.^
(^11) King, “Affective Spirituality of John Owen,” 226n25.
(^12) Ambrose, Media (1657), 199-200, cf. Looking Unto Jesus, 888. On the connection
between Antinomianism and Quakers see Mack, 13 Visionary Women, 155, 157, 277.
Rutherford, Christ Dying, 24, 104-6, 165, 247, 257, 319-22, 499 (incorrectly
numbered 463), 507-13 (incorrectly number 471-7), 537 (incorrectly numbered 501),
548 (incorrectly numbered 512) and Survey of the Spiritual Anitchrist, 193 (Part I),
234 (Pa (^14) Owen, rt II).Holy Spirit in Prayer (^) , 328-38.