Great article--says the main thing that has moved me from conservative Presbyterian circles to conservative Anglican ones.
It isn't mentioned by name, but the "Puritan regulative principle" a hot topic still amoung PCA (Presbyterian Church in America, the largest conservative Presby. body) OPC (Orthodox Presbyterian Church), the ARP (Associate Reformed Presbyterians (oldest of the Presbyterian bodies, mainly in the Southeast) is this idea that nothing can be done in worship without specific sanction given it in the Bible.
This contra the Lutheran and Anglican (and more moderate Reformed) idea, stated in this article, that in worship, as in all of life, one is open to new things, but nothing may be in contradition to the scriptures.
In my opinion, the Puritan regulative principle is where we get modern baptist ideas (since you cannot (directly) find infant (or sprinkling) baptism in the bible--hence they say we cannot do it). Better for magisterial Protestants, is we cannot find prohibition for infant baptism--and it does fit in the pattern of Old Covenant circumcision...so we allow it.
Speaking as one yet Reformed in theology, but changing denominations to Anglican, I appreciate and agree with the Suprema Scriptura position (perhaps a more understandable term than Sola Scriptura, and how the magisterial reformers understood that phrase...), and the Lutheran/Anglcian take on the regulative principle in worship. The Puritans were still fighting wars with the Catholics (literally) and you cannot prove a Puritan regulative principle from scripture, or supporting (and lower in authority) traditions.
***It isn't mentioned by name, but the "Puritan regulative principle" a hot topic still amoung PCA***
I'm overseas so I'm not seeing a lot about the regulative principle. Is it a denomination wide debate or more of a local issue? From where I am it seems that the hot issue right now is the New Perspectives on Paul.