nd benevolence; there was hardly a single missionary or
philanthropic scheme of the day which was not either originated or
warmly taken up by the Evangelical party. The Puritans were frequently
in antagonism with 'the powers that be,' the Evangelicals never; no
amount of ill-treatment could put them out of love with our constitution
both in Church and State.

These points will be further illustrated in the course of this chapter;
they are touched upon here merely to show that neither 'Methodist' nor
'Puritan' would be an adequate description of the great revival whose
course we are now to follow; only it should be noted that in terming it
the 'Evangelical' revival we are applying to it an epithet which was not
applied until many years after its rise. When and by whom the term was
first used to describe the movement it is difficult to say. Towards the
close of the century it is not unusual to find among writers of
different views censures of those 'who have arrogated to themselves the
exclusive title of Evangelical,' as if there were something presumptuous
in the claim, and something uncharitable in the tacit assumption that
none but those so called were worthy of the designation; but it is very
unusual indeed to find the writers of the Evangelical school applying
the title to their own party; and when they do it is generally followed
by some apology, intimating that they only use it because it has become
usual in common parlance. There is not the slightest evidence to show
that the early Evangelicals claimed the title as their own in any spirit
of self-glorification.

Thus much of the name. Let us now turn to the thing itself. How did this
great movement, so fruitful in good to the whole community, first arise?

It is somewhat remarkable that, so far as the revival can be traced to
any one individual, the man to whom the credit belongs was never himself
an Evangelical. '_William Law_' (1686-1761) 'begot Methodism,' wrote
Bishop Warburton; and in one sense the statement was undoubtedly
true,[708] but what a curious paradox it suggests! A distinctly High
Churchman was the originator of what afterwards became the Low Church
party--a Nonjuror, of the most decidedly 'Orange' element in the Church;
a Quietist who scarcely ever quitted his retirement in an obscure
Northamptonshire village, of that party which, above all others, was
distinguished for its activity, bodily no less than spiritual, a
clergyman who rarely preached