few words, and leave the allies together, a very rational society no doubt!

But we must quit the alliance to deal with some of its other members. No sooner was it declared by Mr. Ketley that he had renounced his Unitarian sentiments, than those worshippers of human reason, who had so long used his reason as the interpreter of the gospel, acted the part of most consistent followers, by circulating a report that their late leader was deranged. This, however, the congregation have denied: but to prevent the possibility of mistake, the news of Mr. Ketley's madness is issued from the Manchester press, in the third article at the head of this chapter. This precious sample of consistency and brotherly feeling sets out with telling us that Mr. Ketley was supposed to be mad when at Hull, and this upon the inquiry of an anonymous writer in the Manchester Courier, who merely asks a question respecting Mr. K.'s identity. But mad Ketley was, is, and shall be, without any mistake, these generous fellows are determined.

Pity him we do, blame him we cannot. Nor will we omit to express the regard we feel towards him, and pray that a gracious Providence may soon scatter the clouds which oppress, and remove the agitations which disturb, his mind.-P. 3.

After quoting a passage in Mr. K.'s sermon, where he alludes to the crucifixion, the anonymous reviewer of Manchester goes on:

Enough-though we have quoted only from two pages. These may be merely the technicalities of his new system ;-and if so, certainly the neophyte made rapid progress in a short time; but to us they appear either the aberrations of a diseased mind, or, at the best, a fine volley of words.' For their pertinency to any subject, Mr. Ketley himself must undertake to answer. We believe, but will not affirm, that they have to do with an article in the writer's newly-discovered creed. They are certainly introduced in connexion with Mr. Ketley's version of the doctrine of original sin. That version, gentle reader, is, that man has a bias towards evil.' This your reasoners in religion, Mr. Ketley assumes, will not allow; and hence his virtuous indignation. Far be it from us to question, more than the record compels us to do, the fulness and accuracy of the writer's knowledge respecting his suddenly adopted system. We must, however, be permitted to doubt if that person ever understood Unitarian Christianity who makes so much ado about nothing,' that is denied by Unitarian Christians. The good old full-grown doctrine of original sin,' that man cannot think a good thought, nor do a good deed,'' all mankind by their fall lost communion with God, are under his wrath and curse, and so made liable to all miseries in this life, to death itself, and to the pains of hell for ever,' -this substance being attenuated to a shadow, in a bias towards evil,' Mr. Ketley, with the zeal of a new convert, points to his discovery, and pronounces dire penalties on every unfortunate unbeliever. These terrors, however, affright not us. We confess the bias towards evil, as well as maintain a power of good; and if Mr. Ketley preached not to his former congregation on the assumption of this bias, he proclaimed not the gospel, but another gospel.' This is his affair, not ours. We are glad that light has come at last; so that now at least he can preach the doctrine of repentance unto sinners, one great topic of preaching with Christ and his apostles; and only regret that he should find a cause of quarrel' with his old associates, in what has the appearance of a deficiency, not in them, but himself.-P. 5.

Now in this passage the writer contradicts not only Scripture respecting a power of good," but also his own creed, which does not allow either "pains of hell for ever," or in short any other doctrine imputed to those connected with it. There is something particularly insidious and ungenerous in what follows, because it is utterly false, that the 'at-onement,' as it is called, is what Christians believe by the word Atonement. In an atonement, he, however, avows his belief. We do the same. Where is the difference? He that can learn it from Mr. Ketley's discourse has more penetration than we can claim. It was a real atonement for the sin of man,' (p. 31.) Granted-but what is a real atonement? The deponent saith not. An atonement is an at-one-ment; and if Mr. Ketley is a believer in the scriptural doctrine that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing unto them their trespasses,'-we are agreed, and see no reason for all this flourish of arms and words. As, however, Mr. Ketley is still in the way of receiving light, we may expect to have from him, ere long, a definition of what it is he requires us to believe.-Pp. 5, 6.

Leaving Mr. Ketley to fill up the fulness of his yet mere skeleton creed, let us advert for a moment to the avowed causes of his change. And, at the outset, we are met by one, of the genuineness of which the convert must, we grant, be himself the best judge, yet one which, we cannot help remarking, fanatics of every school have laid claim to. It is, reader, no other than Divine assistance.-P. 6.

Now, reader, we must leave you to make of this what you can; we confess ourselves at fault. The way is not miraculous, but a way usual with believers.' With believers in what? The negation is clear; what does the affirmation affirm? Believers in the bias-towards-sin-and-real-atonement-system— in Ketleyism? or in good old substantial orthodoxy?

Surely He, with whom there is no variableness, nor the shadow of a turning,' does not by an effectual operation,' convert one man to Ketleyism, and another to Trinitarianism; or if there is this diversity of operation, nothing can hence be concluded in favour of the truth of any views of religion asserted to be of Divine origin.-P. 6.

It appears, however, that this effectual operation' was not, after all, effectual. Aid was had, and aid, we may, therefore, suppose, was needed, for Mr. Ketley does not remark that this operation was, as are all the operations of Deity, by secondary instrumentality;-no, such a remark would have taken away the ground of the claim to something special-but next to that Being there have been subordinate agencies at work,' (p. 27.)—P. 7.

After a great deal more of the same kind, we stumble upon a passage which puts to flight all the pretence amongst Unitarians, of their being free from those sinister motives they so readily tax upon the Church Clergy. Let the following words show what credence is to be given to persons who in their printed publications proclaim, that "all creeds are the same to them;" that with Unitarians, there is no sectarian bigotry," &c.

66

As it is, the step Mr. Ketley has taken is of a nature to throw many impediments in the way of a return, even should arguments, which now appear strong, prove to his mind as weak as they proved formerly.-P. 9.

Connected with this review of what the writer calls Mr. Ketley's Relapse there is also what he calls" the Countervail," which consists in an account of the secession of several dissenting preachers from Trini

tarianism to Unitarianism-ending with Blanco White, who, in spite of all the Unitarian contempt for titles, &c. has all his tail on, even to the "observations on heresy and orthodoxy," &c. Mr. White's unfortunate fall into "heresy" may be attributed to this cause, we think. The doctrines he had so long preached as a Romanist were so mixed up with error, that his mind, notwithstanding his better views in his first secession from Rome, became so tinctured with doubt when he began to doubt, that he doubted finally every thing that Rome rightly holds, as well as wrongly; and we conceive, that the natural end of a Romanist, who flies from Romanist superstition with horror, unless guided by the Spirit of grace, must be infidelity, and we have said so before. Infidelity is the natural daughter of Romanism. Ask France-ask Belgium -ask Spain-ask Italy! They will all tell you so, by examples as strong as Blanco White's. We hope, however, now Unitarians CLAIM White, the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge will no longer issue his books as hers.

But we must draw these remarks to a close. Let, then, our readers peruse the following from the letter of The Reverend John Taylor, on his secession from the Leicester Independents, to his old congregation.

"In conclusion, and in reference to yourselves, my christian friends 'suffer the word of exhortation.' You will now have to choose another pastor. Be prayerful, cautious, and united. God will provide you with a pastor. He never forsakes those who are anxious to learn of him, however mysterious his dispensations may sometimes be. Do not begin, on any account, to sow the seeds of strife, or to quarrel with each other. It will say little for your piety, if, after all your experience, you should not be amicably settled with another minister. Let each one remember his own imperfections, let each remember the unity of the Church—and, I have no doubt, you will find some one better adapted to preach to you according to your own tastes and views than I have been. The God of peace

be with you.

"I have only further to observe, in reference to my successor, whoever he may be, hear him candidly in all things,-do not be too scrupulous in reference to your own particular opinions,-believe practically that good men may differ from you,-above all, take constant care not to complain of your minister unnecessarily, and never to discourage his mind. Farewell, you will soon forget me."-P. 17.

We will only add, that the person who, about to leave his congregration on account of conscientious scruples about doctrines, could recommend those doctrines, and then prate about the Unity of the Church, &c. &c., must be either more mad than poor Joseph Ketley, or more sinfully inconsistent than a man who tells us in round terms, that the "Bible is a lie."

There is but one other allusion we shall make. It is to a book recently published by a Theudas amongst the Unitarians, one W. J. Fox, who has been preaching some moral lectures at the chapel in Finsbury, the last work on our list.

as it may be open

Our intention is not to analyse this book now; but, ing the eyes of those who are willing to shut them against the real nature

of sectarian hostility to the Church, we shall possibly at a future time make a few extracts from the Lecture, headed " Clerical Morality," in order to show the recklessness with which such persons invent and circulate their abominable falsehoods against the Clergy, amongst the ragged rabble who frequent their places of concourse: and to the score of falsehoods which Mr. Fox has had the assurance to print, we purpose to add a score of answers.

LITERARY REPORT.

* See our Obituary, CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER, February, 1836.