misleading. The term
'Methodist' does not, of course, in itself imply anything discreditable
or contemptuous; but it was given as a name of contempt, and was
accepted as such by those to whom it was first applied. Moreover, not
only the term, but also the system with which it has become identified
was repudiated by many--perhaps by the majority--of those who would be
included under the title of 'Evangelical.' It was not because they
feared the ridicule and contempt attaching to the term 'Methodist' that
so many disowned its application to themselves, but because they really
disapproved of many things which were supposed to be connoted by the
term. Their adversaries would persist in confounding them with those who
gloried in the title of 'Methodists,' but the line of demarcation is
really very distinct.
Still more misleading is the term 'Puritan.' The 'Evangelicalism' of the
eighteenth century was by no means simply a revival of the system
properly called Puritanism as it existed in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries. There were, of course, certain leading features
which were common to the two schemes. We can recognise a sort of family
likeness in the strictness of life prescribed by both systems, in their
abhorrence of certain kinds of amusement, in their fondness for
Scriptural phraseology, and, above all, in the importance which they
both attached to the distinctive doctrines of Christianity. But the
points of difference between them were at least as marked as the points
of resemblance. In Puritanism, politics were inextricably intermixed
with theology; Evangelicalism stood quite aloof from politics. The
typical Puritan was gloomy and austere; the typical Evangelical was
bright and genial. The Puritan would not be kept _within_ the pale of
the National Church; the Evangelical would not be kept _out_ of it. The
Puritan was dissatisfied with our liturgy, our ceremonies, our
vestments, and our hierarchy; the Evangelical was not only perfectly
contented with every one of these things, but was ready to contend for
them all as heartily as the highest of High Churchmen. The Puritans
produced a very powerful body of theological literature; the
Evangelicals were more conspicuous as good men and stirring preachers
than as profound theologians. On the other hand, if Puritanism was the
more fruitful in theological literature, both devotional and
controversial, Evangelicalism was infinitely more fruitful in works of
piety a
|