applied to Puritanism are willing to acknowledge a mystical element in them.^87
However, there were Puritan scholars prior to McGinn’s broader definition who
employed the language of “mystical element”^88 or “mystical piety”^89 or “deeply
mystical tone”^90 or “mystical material” and “mystical tendencies”^91 that today reflect
McGinn’s scholarship. Nevertheless, no one has intentionally employed McGinn’s
broader understanding of “mysticism” in a consistent and sustained manner in
studying the Puritans. Therefore, by employing McGinn’s description it can now be
asked whether there was a “mystical element” or what this thesis will call the
“contemplative-mystical piety” within Puritanism?^
There are a number of reasons for making this substitution. While the broader
term mystical element is a helpful improvement over the confusion-riddled language
of mysticism there are no doubt numerous vestiges of Reformed suspicion still
lingering. Moreover this is a thesis about Isaac Ambrose and certainly he would be
alarmed to be called a mystic while he frequently spoke of contemplation. The term
contemplation has had a better history within many parts of the Reformed tradition
and therefore serves as a gentler introduction to the mystical element. Wakefield
suggests that the word contemplation is “a more satisfactory term to apply” than
mystical^92 and de Certeau notes that contemplation was the word of choice for most of
(^87) Dever, Richard Sibbes (^) , 158; Cook, “Thomas Goodwin (^) - Mystic?” 47, 48; Andrew
Davies, “Holy Spirit in Puritan Experience,” 29; and Coffey above, 22n85. 88
Brauer, “Francis Rous, Puritan Mystic,” 14, 281, 288, 299; Stoeffler, Rise of
Evangelical Pietism, 131; Dewey Wallace, Spirituality of Later Puritans, xvii; and
Willi 89 ams, “Puritan Enjoyment of God,” 2.
90 McGiffert, God’s Plot, 29, cf. 26-7.^
91 Stoeffler, Rise of Evangelical Pietism, 84.^
92 Nuttall, “Puritan and Quaker Mysticism,” 527. Wakefield, Puritan Devotion, 90.