# Baxter on the Failure of the Westminster Assembly



## NaphtaliPress (Oct 14, 2019)

Richard Baxter wrote regarding the failure of the goal of the Westminster Assembly in settling of a unified church in England:
O! What may not pride do? and what miscarriages will not false principles and faction hide? One would think that if their opinions had been certainly true (the Independents at the Westminster Assembly), and their church order good, yet the interest of Christ and the souls of men and of greater truths, should have been so regarded by the dividers in England as that the safety of all these should have been preferred, and not all ruined rather than their way should want {lack} its carnal arm and liberty; and that they should not tear the garment of Christ all to pieces, rather than it should want their lace.”​_Reliquiæ Baxterianæ: or, Mr. Richard Baxter's narrative of the most memorable passages of his life and times_ (1696), 103.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Oct 14, 2019)

Is he saying that the Independents, despite the truths of the Gospel being maintained by the assembly, thwarted a unified church because it wouldn't have been ordered the way they wanted?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 14, 2019)

Another reference from the same work: Richard Baxter on the Westminster Assembly.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Oct 14, 2019)

In 17th century English; yes.


alexandermsmith said:


> Is he saying that the Independents, despite the truths of the Gospel being maintained by the assembly, thwarted a unified church because it wouldn't have been ordered the way they wanted?

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Oct 14, 2019)

Presbyterians: It's YOUR fault that we didn't get a Presbyterian state church!
Congregationalists: .... good???? Thanks???


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Oct 14, 2019)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> Presbyterians: It's YOUR fault that we didn't get a Presbyterian state church!
> Congregationalists: .... good???? Thanks???



I think that Richard Baxter argued for a mixed system. Something like a reduced episcopacy within a presbyterial system. Something like Prescopalianism or Presidential Presbyterianism, perhaps? Someone with greater knowledge of Baxter can correct me if I am wrong and point to some of his writings on the subject. Still, I think that I agree with your basic point that the fault was not wholly on one side of the argument.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Oct 14, 2019)

The goal of the Presbyterians was a unified church; the Independent's goal was delay. _The Grand Debate _(both sides' debate papers and the largest work of the WA) bears out this unworthy behavior. So while there was politics on all sides, including an Erastian parliament, I think Baxter's harsh assessment placing most of the blame as far as the assembly is concerned on the Independents is spot on.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

