frequently ignored or even denied in Puritan studies. However, what is missing is an
equal sensitivity to the recognition of and appreciation for the importance of heavenly
meditation as an expression of Puritan contemplation. Closely related to this is the
minimal treatment of the visio Dei and the significance of gazing on or beholding
God. Additionally, while recognizing the prevalence of ravishment as an expression
of Puritan enjoyment of God, Williams does not engage in any great depth with the
theology of this critical term. All of these missing or underdeveloped themes will
figure more prominently in this thesis.
Evidence of the Contemplative-Mystical Piety within Puritanism
In Brauer’s pioneering research he distinguished between two forms of Puritan
mysticism that he named “classical Christian mystics” and “Christian Spirit
mystics.”^106 Francis Rous illustrated the first category while John Saltmarsh, William
Dell, William Erbery, Thomas Collier, Walter Craddock, and George Fox
characterized the second.^107 Previously Brauer had asserted that John Everard, Giles
Randall, Peter Sterry, and perhaps Morgan Llwyd “appear to be mystics in the fullest
sense of the term.”^108 What is striking about these names is that apart from Rous, the
remainder of these individuals typically represents the radical stream of Puritanism.
David Como’s research in tracing this stream clarifies the reason for them being
called radical, “in their own day, the ideas and practices in question were regarded by
most contemporaries (both Puritan and non-Puritan) as excessive and disruptive of the
right notions of orthodoxy or order.”^109 Therefore, since this thesis concerns Isaac
(^106) Brauer, “Types of Puritan Piety,” 53. cf. “Francis Rous, Puritan Mystic,” (^23) - 9.
(^107) Brauer, “Types of Puritan Piety,” 53-6. Compare with 18n62. Brauer spells
Crad[d]ock both ways. 108
109 Brauer, “Francis Rouse, Puritan Mystic,” 289. Como, “Radical Puritanism,” 242.