In his Second Letter, Mr. Hill takes up the doctrine of free-will, and pronounces Fletcher’s statements, in support of the free agency of man, to be “as totally void of solid scriptural argument, as they are replete with calumny, gross perversions, and equivocations.” In his Third Letter, Mr. Hill discusses what he is pleased to call _Sinless_ Perfection,—a doctrine which neither Wesley nor Fletcher ever taught. _Christian_ Perfection[265] they enforced and defended; but _Sinless_ Perfection, using the word in its strict and literal sense, was not a dogma of theirs, but a verbal invention, adopted from Whitefield and others, by Mr. Hill and his angry friends, who desired to make their opponents the target of ridicule and scorn. Footnote 265: The reader who wishes to know what is meant by this is strongly recommended to read Wesley’s invaluable treatise, entitled, “A Plain Account of Christian Perfection;” his equally important and scriptural sermon on “Christian Perfection,” and his other irrefutable sermons on the same subject. Mr. Hill begins with several revolting anecdotes respecting people who professed themselves to be _perfect_ Christians,—stories which probably were true; but stories concerning _perfect_ fanatics whom Wesley and Fletcher would have condemned as strongly as Mr. Hill. His Letter terminates with a series of the same sort of nauseous anecdotes. In a certain sense, it is smart, and Mr. Hill thought it so; for, in concluding it, he remarks:— “Now, my dear Sir, I have given you a little in your own way; but, notwithstanding you have set me the example in this manner of writing, I shall be glad to set you the example of mutual forgiveness. By cutting and slashing, we shall never convince each other of our errors; and the end of our controversy will be, that the world will laugh at you for taking the sword of banter, the shield of perversion, the helmet of prejudice, and the breastplate of acrimony, in order to fight for the doctrine of sinless perfection; and I myself shall be laughed at, in my turn, for losing so much precious time in answering you.” Mr. Hill’s fourth letter is a brief one, and is devoted to what he calls Fletcher’s “heavy bombs of bitter sneer and cutting sarcasm,” hurled at the doctrine of “_the finished salvation of Christ_.” The fifth and sixth letters, and also the postscript, are not theological, but simply abusive. Fletcher is said to “have traduced all the most celebrated ministers of the Gospel” of that day; and to have “thrown stumbling-blocks into the way of thousands.” A “wretched spirit of low sarcasm and slanderous banter runs throughout” his whole writings. Wesley and Fletcher had “adopted a scheme of religion gathered out of Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism, Popery, Mysticism, and Quakerism.”