Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…

125. Some say that the Law since the fall obligeth us both to obey and to suffer, and not to one only; else a Sinner bound to suffer, should not be bound to obey. Therefore Christ must do both for us: But this is too gross for any man to utter that ever knew what Law and Government is. Do they mean that as to the same Act and time, the Law bindeth us to obey and suffer? or for divers acts and instants of time? Do they mean that the Law bound man both to perfection and suffering for perfection, or to suffering for sin? No man doubts but when one sin is committed, and punishment deserved, the Law is still the Law, and bindeth men still to obey or suffer more the next moment, and again to obey or suffer more the next moment. But this concerneth not our question. Did the Law bind Adam to obey and to suffer before he sinned? Did it bind him both to obey and suffer for his new sin the next instant? It's true it bound him to suffer for his old sin? but not for the next before it is committed. And the obligation to duty goeth before the obligation to punishment for that same action; because the action cometh between; and the first is an act of Gods antecedent Will, and the second of his consequent Will, that is, of the Retributive, and not the Preceptive part of the Law.

And they note not that the question is not, what obedience a man is bound to, but what he performeth or must be reputed to have performed. If they will speak so unaptly as to say that the Law commandeth ⟨p. 61⟩Lapsed man, not to have sin, or imperfect man to have been perfect; that is, that the Command to day bindeth Adam ad praeteritum not to have sinned yesterday, or bindeth to Impossibility in nature, that existent sin should not be existent, (in all which I leave them to their liberty of words) yet it is certain that no man hath perfectly obeyed for one year or day. And therefore if Christ's perfect obedience and •oliness be imputed to them from their first being, then they are re•uted not-lapsed, nor-sinners from the beginning and, so not pardonable. But if it be only for the time after sin that Christ's perfection is theirs, after what sin must it be? If after Adam's, then we need no pardon of any but Adam's sin. If after conversion, then we need no pardon for sins after Conversion. If after our last sin, then Christ's perfection is not imputed to us till after death.