Richard Baxter's juxtaposition of the ‘old common moderate sort’ with those he elsewhere dubbed ‘New Prelatical Divines’ inevitably relied on a certain amount of caricature. However, Baxter also highlighted an important trend during the Interregnum, which has been largely overlooked. Revisionist historiography has concentrated its efforts on demonstrating the subversive and radical nature of early Stuart Laudianism in the build up to the Civil War. As Anthony Milton argues, this has resulted in the largely untested assumption that once Archbishop Laud was executed and his bishops sequestered, a post-Laudian ‘Anglicanism’ arose with an innocent commitment to Prayer Book liturgy, the Thirty-Nine Articles and a moderate style that was ‘theologically prudent, socially defer-ential and liturgically restrained’. However, Baxter was alarmed by the rise of an even more vociferous episcopal-style anti-Calvinism, which insisted on jure divino ordination and instigated a wholesale attack on the Reformed heritage of the Church of England. In short, ‘These men in Doctrine were such as are called Arminians’. To date, the theological commitments of this new breed of episcopalians in the 1650s have received limited attention. As McElligott notes, ‘In the vast scholarly literature on the English Revolution, more has been written about the 1640s than about the 1650s, and more attention has been given to the Parliamentarians than to the Royalists’. In his recent work, Anthony Milton has provided a signif-icant corrective. This chapter builds on his work to highlight the important role Arminian theology played as anti-Calvinist episcopal divines battled to gain control of the Church of England during the 1650s. Highlighting this doctrinal contest will further underscore the problematic nature of ‘Anglicanism’ as a stable concept before the Restoration. Though Spurr may be right to conclude that the English church ‘emerged from the 1640s and 50s with a distinct doctrinal, ecclesiological and spiritual identity’, the more significant point would seem to be that this was not the ‘Restoration’ of a Laudian status quo.