"Many sincere Christians dislike controversy, and so far from engaging in it themselves can scarcely allow that others should. An enlarged view of the history of the Christian Church might serve to convince such persons that all along it has been like a beleaguered city, sometimes in danger from the assaults of its enemies without, still more frequently perhaps from carelessness or treachery within; and that at no era has the truth been more gloriously displayed, or achieved nobler triumphs, than when dangers have called forth a vigorous and manly defence. From the militant state of the Church as a public witness-bearer for God and His truth, in a world which revolts from both, the continuance of controversy might have been expected; but that it is appointed, and that, too, within the visible Church itself, for wise reasons, we have the highest authority for believing. There 'must be heresies' (1Co 11:19) or divisions among you, that they who are approved may be made manifest."

Our own day has furnished abundant illustrations of the general truth, thus so well stated, although the worst is probably yet to come. The point of attack from time to time is varied, but the struggle continues unabated. When Christian men have got somewhat accustomed to defend one true position, the assault is directed to another, and perhaps from a new quarter. Although we shall not venture to apportion the relative importance of great principles, it may safely be affirmed that nothing can be more important than questions connected with the acceptable worship of God. The question of the king of Moab must ever be regarded with deep interest by true Christians, "Wherewithal shall I come before God, and bow myself before the Most High." At one time, this question engaged serious attention in Scotland. For two centuries, it has been held to be practically settled in the Presbyterian Church. But it is now manifestly raised again from an unexpected quarter, and must be settled anew. Our object at present is to discuss it on its essential merits— 1. In connection with Scripture; and 2. In connection with the constitution of the Presbyterian Church and the vows of its office-bearers....

  _From the 48 page pamphlet by: James Begg, D.D. 1875

PCA minister, Andrew Webb, asks a good question:
Why Do Presbyterians Observe Holy Days? (Offsite on PCANews)
"Puritans desired that only those elements directly instituted by God were present in their worship."

See our Ecclesiology & Worship section.

In the name of Truth, I make a challenge to you gainsayers of the older ways to defend your new ways by denouncing theirs. Knox and Calvin, Rutherford and Gillespie, the Westminster divines in general and the Scottish Church in particular, etc., must be denounced by name for the heretics they were. For if they were wrong, they were very wrong. The worth of their extraordinary body of work on worship must be repudiated. There is no middle ground— their view excludes yours. You cannot accept their legitimacy for they deny yours. Long in the grave, they are subject only to posthumous censure; but if you were teaching the new ways in their day, real censures would fall on your heads. They would excommunicate you.

---

Return to Archives Index