This was a false, libellous attack on Whitefield’s honesty; and Grimshaw, of Haworth, and Benjamin Ingham wished him to answer it. His reply to Grimshaw was as follows:―― “LONDON, _March 17, 1749_. “MY DEAR BROTHER,――What a blessed thing it is that we can write to, when we cannot see one another! By this means we increase our joys, and lessen our sorrows, and, as it were, exchange hearts. “Thanks be to the Lord Jesus, that the work flourishes with you! I am glad your children grow so fast; they become fathers too soon; I wish some may not prove dwarfs at last. A word to the wise is sufficient. I have always found awakening times like spring times; many blossoms, but not always so much fruit. But go on, my dear man, and, in the strength of the Lord, you shall do valiantly. I long to be your way; but I suppose it will be two months first. “Pray tell my dear Mr. Ingham that I cannot now answer the Preston[233] letter, being engaged in answering a virulent pamphlet, entitled, ‘The Enthusiasm of the Methodists and Papists compared,’ supposed to be done by the Bishop of Exeter. Thus it must be. If we will be temple builders, we must have the temple builders’ lot; I mean, hold a sword in one hand, and a trowel in the other. The Lord make us faithful Nehemiahs, for we have many Sanballats to deal with! But, wherefore should we fear? If Christ be for us, who can be against us? ‘_Nil desperandum, Christo duce_,’ is the Christian’s motto. Remember me, in the kindest manner, to honest-hearted Mr. Ingham, and tell him that, in a post or two, I hope he will hear from me.” What Whitefield, for want of time, could not undertake was accomplished by the redoubtable Grimshaw, who, in an 8vo. pamphlet of 98 pages, cudgelled White almost unmercifully.[234] Whitefield was answering Lavington. Notwithstanding the recantation extorted from him by the Countess of Huntingdon, only six months before, the irritable prelate could neither forget nor forgive the publication of the fictitious charge that has been already mentioned; and now he vented his anger by issuing anonymously the first part of “The Enthusiasm of Methodists and Papists compared.” (8vo. 82 pp.) No good end would be served by lengthened quotations from this scolding pamphlet. The Bishop of Exeter was too angry to be polite. Suffice it to say, that, so far as Whitefield is concerned, Lavington’s attacks are founded upon incautious and improper expressions in Whitefield’s publications――expressions most of which Whitefield himself had publicly lamented and withdrawn, or modified. The pith of the bishop’s pamphlet is contained in his last paragraph but one. The _italics_ in the following quotations are his lordship’s own:――