involved. While space does not permit a detailed treatment of the causes of this
unfortunate gap a few brief comments are in order. The demise of scholasticism and
the expanding pervasiveness of the Enlightenment certainly contributed to this
discontinuity. The decline of scholasticism encouraged less emphasis upon patristic
and medieval texts, the very sources most widely used by the Puritans. Additionally,
the Enlightenment increased the priority of rationalism while marginalizing
enthusiasm, thus decreasing the importance of mystery. Interestingly Wesley did not
include Bernard in his Christian Library. Significantly as a result of rationalism both
Roman Catholic and Protestant historians disapproved of Bernard.^221 With the turn of
the century and the advance of romanticism there was “an idolizing of the Middle
Ages” and an “interest in this medieval saint [i.e. Bernard] was rekindled.”^222 This
coincides with the renewed receptivity among nineteenth-century Reformed writers of
Western Catholic sources.
Therefore, just as there are theological principles to guide readers in being able
to retrieve Ambrose’s piety there are also theological principles to retrieve his sources
as well. This is a significant step and ultimately achieves two important outcomes:
the concerned reader can be assured of maintaining faithfulness to a Reformed
identity and also a hermeneutics of consent allows the interested persons to benefit
from the robust nature of Ambrose’s contemplative-mystical piety. For the sake of
demonstration Bernard will be used, though these theological principles are also
applicable to other medieval sources. Mark Noll summarizes Bernard’s popularity
declaring that he was a “defender of orthodoxy.”^223 Significantly, Bernard’s solid
221
222 Bredero, Bernard of Clairvaux, 176-9.^
223 Bredero, Noll, Turning Points,Bernard of Clairvaux 102. , 180.^