THE Kitchenmaids ANSWER TO THE London Apprentice's WORD TO THE Wavering Levite, etc. BEING A Vindication of the Reverend Dr. Sherlock, from the Malicious Aspersions he casts upon him, for his taking the Oaths.  Psalm CXX. 3. 
What Reward shall be given or done unto thee, thou False Tongue: Even mighty and sharp Arrows, with hot burning Coals.  
LONDON, Printed for W. Rayner, 1691.   

THE Kitchenmaids Answer TO THE London Apprentices Word to a Wavering Levite.  
MEETING with a Paper Entitled, A Word to a Wavering Levite, by a London Apprentice of the Church of England, it incited my Curiosity to read it over at spare Hours; and having perused it, the very Name of a Apprentice, with whom I have had several Bouts at Fisticuffs, and not a few Verbal Controversies, has made me long to have an Encounter with him at Paper-War, which I found myself under a necessity to satisfy, unless I would be at War with myself. And whether this our Apprentice be a Raw, Half-witted, Disaffected Levite (for whatever he pretends, some Passages here and there through his Paper, plainly discover his Cloven Foot) or a Laic Apprentice, 'tis no great matter, (and I will treat him as such, since he owns that Name) he has more Sauce than Meat, to abuse so great a Man as the Doctor is, and I think but a very young Apprentice to the Church of England; for it seems he has not yet learned his Catechism by heart, which teaches us to submit to (not defame and misrepresent) all our Teachers, Spiritual Pastors, etc. Were he of the Church and Principles he pretends to, I cannot see why he would vent his Choler so much at that worthy Doctor's taking the Oaths; methinks he should rather have rejoiced, that so Learned a Doctor, who has done as great Service for our Church as any other whosoever, against all its Adversaries, who was laid aside as useless, and forced to hide his Candle under a B●shel, by reason of some Scraples that wounded his Conscience, had now at last got them fully answered, and seen the Unsufficiency of them (which were, no doubt, greatned by that Gentleman, whose Spirit he shows himself so much acted by in his long-winded Word, that the Church might be deprived of so understanding Guides, as he and too many other Reverend, Pious and Learned Divines, that still labour under the same Scruples) and again rendered himself useful to serve his Church and Country. But lest I should seem to have got too much of the Tongue, as our Sex lies generally under that Slander, I shall briefly enter the Lists with my old Antagonist, and dispatch him in as few words as possible.  
AND first, Brother Apprentice, I must tell you, that you Paraphrase at a strange rate; were the Scriptures thus commented upon, as I am afraid they would, were you the Commentator, what Horrid Blasphemies would they speak? By your thus doing, you have more exposed your own Malice, than the Doctor. And truly your Paraphrase is so ungenuous, that I should not give myself the Trouble of tracing you further, were it not that the same Itch of Scribbling that possessed you, has inflamed me.  
In your first Answer to the Doctor, you discover how young an Apprentice you are to our Church, by your Prodigious Uncharitableness. For it is not possible for Malice itself to put a worse Construction upon the Doctor's Words, than you there do. To give you one Scripture for another you gave the Doctor, Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in Ashkelon, lest the Daughters of the Uncircumcised rejoice, that a Lay-Member of the Church of England should show such Rancour towards his Ghostly Father, and yet pretend highly to her, when she above all other Churches, so much enjoins Charity to all, even Jews, Mahometans and Heathens, much more to the Household of Faith. And you Maliciously Insinuate, that the Doctor has taken the Oaths merely to keep his Benefice, or at the Instigations of his W—fe. But the Traps you lay to catch him in are easily destroyed, viz. If the Oaths were Law●●● 〈◊〉 did you not take them before? And if the Oaths were not Lawful, why did you take them now? Brother, you should have said, If you judged the Oaths were Lawful then, and if you judge them Unlawful now, etc. and this would have cut the Throat of your Argument. Now that we are to be acted by our own Judgement (Erroneous or not) is acknowledged by all that ever I heard; I am sure I have heard many Worthy Divines say so in the Pulpit. And if this be true, then when we think we may lawfully take an Oath, it is our duty to take it, and we incur Gild if we do not, even though the Matter be Unlawful: And on the contrary, when we believe an Oath to be unlawful, we Sin in taking it, if it were the most Lawful Oath in the World. But it will not hence follow, that if one judged an Oath Unlawful, a Year or two ago, that therefore he must needs judge it so now, and consequently that one cannot alter his Judgement, unless upon some Selfish end, which you plainly affirm, while you impute the Doctor's taking the Oaths wholly to his desire after Preferment, or his W—fes Instigation. As to the Enforcement of your Argument, that he had so long time, and was so Learned a Man, etc. it has as little strength in it as the rest. For when any Opinion is firmly rooted in a Man, be he never so Learned, 'tis not so easy to get clear of it; even though that Opinion be contrary to common Sense: This we may see plainly in the Learnedest Papists (and many of them Honest too) who notwithstanding their great Learning, cannot free themselves of those False and Idolatrous Principles, that they had sucked in with their Mother's Milk (ye know where I had this Sweet Expression, therefore pray remember how far he was from any such uncharitable Expressions, and follow so great an Example.) And since it is so in the case of Papists, where the Tenets are contrary to Religion, Reason and Sense, 'tis no great Wonder if the Doctor, and a great many more, who had for a long time been confirmed in such Principles, the Arguments to prove which seemed to be deduced from Primitive Simplicity, (though I am afraid a Jesuit was at the bottom of it, especially considering what our two last Kings were) it is no wonder, if any Man that had been so long Rooted in those Principles should scruple an Oath, the taking whereof, seemed so diametrically opposite to them; and therefore it is rationally to be supposed, that 'twould be no easy matter for him, or any other, who had been fully confirmed in those Principles, to rid themselves of those Scruples, unless we should suppose them Men acted merely by Interest. And when he has got over such a Scruple, we are not to imagine that his Conscience was more tender than than it is now, or now than it was then) but that he then judged it not Lawful to take the Oaths; but upon further search into the Matter, he found that his Scruples, how strong Arguments soever they seemed to him for some time, yet after a full search into them, they had no real ground, and therefore thought he might lawfully take them. And this I am sure all good Christians ought to conclude, till they certainly know the contrary. I dare say you dare not Swear that the Doctor had no other end in taking the Oaths, than you allege; which shows how void of Charity you are, to charge so eminent a Divine with the highest Crime, which yet you durst not Swear he is guilty of. And if you should say you durst Swear it, every Body that should hear it, must needs say that you are a Person that makes no Conscience of an Oath, since it is plain, that no Body can know what is in the Heart, but only God.  
And what you charge the Doctor with, in the end of this Answer, is levelled as much against many of our Worthy Clergy as against the Doctor, since not a few of them preached the same Doctrine the Doctor did: Nay, the same Argument might be stretched as far against those that still scruple the Oaths, since 'twould be no hard matter, to prove even them to have acted contrary (more or less) to what they preached and maintained some years ago; if it were no more but this, that about the time of his present Majesty's coming over, very few of them were heard to preach up Nonresistance: Nor did any of them mind the People to stand by King James; besides that, even they who were for the continuing of King James, were yet for tying up his Hands, which if we look back but a few Years, we shall find to have been ranked by them amongst the most heinous Sins. So that one may see how true a Son of the Church of England you are, to start an Argument against the Doctor, which might (if concluding) be stretched against most of the Divines of the Church of England. I am afraid you are a Churchman bred up in Mr. Lobb's or Father Peter's School.  
From your next Answer we may shrewdly guess (whatever you pretend) that you are for the Man's having his Mare again (as you use to Cant in your Cabals.) For you are pleased to compare Dr. Sh—'s Case to no other than a Servant taking an Oath to keep his Master's Secrets, which he is always obliged to do, and which he can have no plausible Pretence for the breaking of; and you are pleased to discant upon it at large. But your Comparison is so wide of the purpose, that 'tis obvious to any that can but read, and therefore I shall say no more of it.  
In your next Answer you say, How can their Majesties confide in such a Man, that has a pair of Consciences, one to take the Oaths, and the other to let them alone. I wonder any Man should pester the World with such Nonsense! Because a Man Scruples a thing for some time, and afterwards sees his Scruples have not such weight in them, as he at first apprehended they had, therefore he must have a pair of Consciences. It would not have been amiss, if thou, in stead of that Poor Maid in Woodstreet, hadst met with such a Whipping Mistress, that she might either have whipped thy puny Soul out of the World, and beat out thy insipid Brains, or beat more into thee. For if we seriously consider the Matter, their Majesties have more reason to believe that Dr. Sherlock is fitter to be trusted, than some that took the Oaths hand over head, and will be as ready, it may be, to break them, whenever occasion serves; since he would not take them till he satisfied all his Scruples, which 'tis a question whether some of them did, and whether they have acted accordingly since they took them.  
What you say in answer next, is of the same Bran; for it is one thing to be engaged in a Faction, that is to say, to endeavour to carry on a Faction with all Eagerness and Industry, by Word and Writing, etc. and another thing when one is asked his Opinion, and at the Importunity of the Asker declares it. The former is Properly said to make Proselytes, who (as the Jews are said by our Saviour to do) compass Sea and Land to do it; that is to say in plain Terms, go from place to place, from one Company to another, to delude simple People, amongst whom I may reckon you our London Apprentice (as many of our Jacobite Levites have done, some of whom have had the Law inflicted upon them, though in the opinion of many Honest Men, with too great a Mixture of Lenity, which has rendered others too Malapert, and occasioned not a few's being led aside with their Dissimulation.) And not the latter, since they do not go about to promote a Faction, but only if any scrupulous Person comes to them for Advice, barely deliver what their present Sentiments are, which yet, if they are not strangely puffed up beyond what is becoming, they dare not assert will always be so.  
Your Ignorance next makes you believe it a strange Paradox, that the Doctor seemed so concerned at some Persons taking the Oaths, and yet at the same time believed them to be Honest Men. Why Goodman Fool, this is not so strange a Paradox as your weak Brains fancy. There is no doubt to be made, but many Honest Men do many things, and mean honestly, which yet are not justifiable at the same time. I suppose Mr. Apprentice, you will not deny but St. Peter was an Honest Man, when he did those things for which he was reproved by St. Paul, though there was something of Humane Frailty in the case. Nay, St. Paul himself declares, that when he persecuted the Christians, he did it in Sincerity, thinking that he did God good Service. All good Churchmen are heartily concerned for the Dissenters going off from the Church and yet at the same time, 'twould be very uncharitable, to conclude that none of them were Honest Men. Not to say more, to show how unreasonably you concluded this so strange a Paradox.  
You next question the Doctor, since he thought it Lawful to pray for their Majesty's King William and Queen Mary; Why not as lawful to take the Oaths then as now? John Sheep, because the Doctor thought it not so Lawful, which was sufficient for him, since he was endeavouring all he could to satisfy himself in this Point. Nor can he be blamed, with Reason, for Praying for their Majesties, though he at the same time scrupled the Oaths to them, since there was an Act passed in the late Convention, declaring them King and Queen, and so he could lawfully pray for them as such, since they had not any ways sought after it, but 'twas the voluntary Act of the People of England, done by their Representatives, and was universally approved, which cannot be said of Usurpers. But because of the former Principles, which by reason of their being so much for some Years inculcated in our Church, and which the Doctor at that time was so strongly possessed with, he thought it not Lawful to take the Oaths: And for this you may blame and vomit out your Gall against others than the Doctor; for you cannot say that he was the first Broacher of Nonresistance, the Divine Right of Succession, with all the other precious Stuff with which our Church has been pestered these many Years, to the no small Grief of many Worthy Divines and Gentlemen of her Communion. And if he has at last discovered the Falsity of these Tenets, which not only he, but the major part of the Clergy of the Nation have been infected with, and now retracts them, and to show that he is in earnest in so doing, takes the Oaths to their Majesties, why should any rational Man question the Honesty of his Design in so doing? And why this uncharitable Censure that 'twas because K. James being now fled, he must either take the Oaths or lose his Living? This manner of Judging was more becoming a Dissenter from our Church, many of whom are ready to construe our actions in the worst Sense (in which I must ingenuously confess, we are not much behind with them, though at the same time I must say, that 'tis long of that sort of Men that are now Jacobites, that Differences betwixt us and them have been so far widened) or a Tory Jacobite; and I make no doubt but all Understanding Readers will take you for no other than one in Masquerade: So that Jesuit-like, you can put on a William's Face, when the Devil and Lewis are at your Heart, on purpose that so far as your shallow Wit can reach (and Fools commonly are most confident they can do great things) you may deter other Persons from taking the Oaths; though they must be as Silly as yourself, that will be Bugbeared with what you lay to the Doctor's Charge.  
As for what follows of your Pamphlet, 'tis much the same with what has been taken notice of, and therefore I pass it. Any Reader may easily see, that 'tis a Dissatisfaction to their Majesty's Government, that raises your Spleen against Dr. Sh—k, however cunningly you pretend to be of another Temper. And this is plain enough, if we consider, that whereas all others that have meddled with the Doctor, seem only offended at his not vindicating their Majesty's Government, or retaining some Principles which they think are diametrically opposite to his taking the Oaths, but you are downright Angry for his taking of them, and your Bait to delude the Simple is, Why he took them not sooner, as if you were angry that he did it no sooner, whereas, had he been acted by your Principles, 'tis obvious enough he had never taken them.  
Thus you have a little Touch, what Improvement I have made in Politics: A Science never so common as it has been within these three Years, which is all owing to Gentlemen of your Kidny, who have compassed Sea and Land, gone from House to House to Proselyte People unto Slavery, that when you had done so, you might make them sevenfold more the Children of the Devil or the Pope than yourselves; or if you could not do that, that you might have Power to send them to the other World in a Fiery Chariot. You should have had a taste of my skill in Poetry too, but that you know I must wait on my Mistress' as you on your Master's Affairs. But a few spare Hours may possibly furnish you with an Elogium in Rhyme according to your Merit, till which time I must bid you Adieu.