to transplant or create a neo-Puritan culture in the twenty first-century. However, as
one approaches the respective cultures with sensitivity are there principles and themes
that emerge from the writings of Isaac Ambrose that can address similar concerns and
needs today? Or to borrow William Harmless’ language, “why mystics matter”^216
why does Isaac Ambrose matter? One factor that assists in this hermeneutical process
is the common tradition and continuity in theological foundation between Ambrose
and contemporary Reformed believers.
Therefore, the challenge is to retrieve the contemplative-mystical piety of
Isaac Ambrose that has the qualities of a “classic text.” In reality this is a two-step
process. Many readers may not need to take the first step, but some members of the
Reformed tradition may respond similarly to Charles Hodge (1797-1878) who when
asked to review John Williamson Nevin’s (1803-1866) The Mystical Presence: A
Vindication of the Calvinistic Doctrine of the Eucharist resisted for two years.^217
Hodge was shocked that his former student’s theology was so divergent from Calvin.
However, many Reformed theologians would now agree that Nevin’s theology was
more representative of Calvin than Hodge who was more Zwinglian in his
understanding. Possibly some readers may approach the contemplative-mystical piety
of Ambrose with a hermeneutic of suspicion fearing it to be unreformed. Yet no one
has ever challenged Ambrose’s theology or piety. Moreover, if it strikes readers as
being unreformed that fear probably says more about them than it does about the
integrity of Ambrose’s theology. Moreover, a careful reading of Ambrose will reveal
a faithful confirmation of all of the major tenants of Reformed theology including a
belief in a Triune God who is powerful and transcendent and personal and immanent.
216
(^217) Cornick, Harmless, Letting God Be GodMystics, 264.^ , 134-5. cf. Hageman, “Reformed Spirituality,” 74-5.