6. Popish Holy Days

VI. Popish Holy Dayes.

These are another idol of the Church of England. For nothing can be holy to the Lord, which is not made holy by the Lord. It was a part of the Pharisees' superstition to fast twice a week (Luke 18:12), and it was the brand set upon Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:33), that he ordained a feast to the children of Israel, upon the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even the month which he had devised of his own heart. And though it was like to the feast that was in Judah (ver. 32), and though he pretended the glory and worship of that God that brought them up out of the land of Egypt, as well as the ease and accommodation of the people (ver. 28), yet all this would not excuse him. And what is Christmas and Easter, and all the rest of them, but days, which the Jeroboam of Rome has devised of his own heart? And the people had them from the Pagans, for Christmas is nothing else but the old heathenish Bacchanalia, it is kept at the same time of the year, and after the same profane manner, only the Pope has christened it with a new name.

The Apostle condemns the observation of the Jewish festivals, because they were a shadow of good things to come (Colossians 2:16); such weak and rudimentary instructions were fit for those darker and weaker times of the Church's nonage, when under the tutorage and pedagogy of Moses, before the coming of Christ. But after that you have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn you again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto you desire again to be in bondage, you observe days and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain (Galatians 4:9, 10, 11). It is a sign the preaching of the Gospel has had but small success in such a place, and in the hearts of such a people, and if the Apostle said it concerning Jewish days, surely it is much more true concerning Popish days, for there was more reason to retain those which were appointed at first by God himself, than to observe those which were invented by the Pope, and which have done so much mischief to the churches of Christ. For as Doctor Ames observes, they were from their first rise not only equalled to, but also extolled above the Lord's day. Easter brought in a superstitious Lent to attend upon it, made Baptism wait for her moon, and conformed our Lord's Supper to the Jewish Passover in unleavened bread. It was the first apple of contention among Christians, the Latin and Greek churches striving and contending fiercely about the time of it, de lanâ caprinâ, and Victor Bishop of Rome desperately excommunicating those that were not of his opinion in the thing, so that it was the first weapon wherewith the Bishop of Rome played his prizes against other churches, and after slew so many persons with, by Augustine the monk. Holy days devised by men in honor of Christ, invited and drew on holy days to saints. Though indeed it is but a vain pretence to say, they do it in honor of Christ, for it is not good intentions that will excuse bad actions. Jeroboam pretended very good intentions; the Israelites pretended a holy day to Jehovah (Exodus 32:5), though they kept it in a rude manner, but what says the Lord to them, even after all the prayers of Moses for them (ver. 34): in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them.

These days are rather celebrated in dishonor, and as it were in despite of Christ, as if Christ were a God that delighted in profaneness and wickedness: for he is dishonored by letting the reins loose to all manner of profaneness, as much in the twelve days, and in some respects more, than in all the twelve months of the year beside. And it is a dishonor to his Sabbath, for men to set their posts by his posts, and their altars by his altars, as Jeroboam devised a feast of his own heart, like to the feast that was in Judah. Suppose the Church might sanctify a day where the Lord has not done it, yet it is needless and superfluous, yes presumptuous to do it, where the Lord has made other provision, for it is to charge God with folly. But Christ the Lord of Time, and the Lord of the Sabbath, has sanctified and instituted the first day of the week, whereon he arose from the dead, for the commemoration of the great work of our redemption by him. And what can the man do that comes after the King? and in those things which have been already done? (Ecclesiastes 2:12). It is a bold and deep reflection upon the wisdom of Christ, to add thus to his appointments, as if the Lord Jesus Christ himself were not wise enough, to appoint days and times sufficient to keep his own nativity, death, resurrection, ascension, and all the great things he has done for us, in everlasting remembrance in the hearts of his saints, but the Devil and the Pope must help it out. Neither is the yearly time certainly known, but much disputed among chronologers and divines, so that holy-day keepers cannot say that they do commemorate opus diti in die suo, the Lord having hid it, as he did the body of Moses, to prevent idolatry.

And it is a great infringement of our Christian liberty, when God has given us six days wherein to serve him in our callings, Six days shall you labor. As it is profaneness to call that common which God has sanctified and made holy; so it is tyrannical superstition and presumption to make that holy which God has made common. Occasional days of humiliation and thanksgiving, when God by his Providence calls thereunto, there is Scripture-ground and warrant for: for, Jehoshaphat proclaimed a fast (2 Chronicles 20:3), and so did the King of Nineveh (Jonah 3:7); see also Joel 1:14 & 2:15. From where some have not unaptly said, that the magistrate and the church has as it were a warrant dormant for such days. Neither indeed could all the particular causes, and occasions, and times thereof be particularly determined in the Scripture, because they are infinite, and Christ allows also private fasts (Matthew 6:17, 18); but here there is only an occasional designation of a time, upon a present emergency of Providence calling thereunto. But in those anniversary Popish festivals time is dedicated and sanctified to a holy use in a stated way, which is more than the Scripture empowers men to do. So for week-day lectures, they are most impertinently objected, for these are not hours sanctified or consecrated to God's service, but only the most convenient times when most may resort to the hearing of sermons. So that time is only designed occasionally, not dedicate or sanctified. Time is made to serve God's people, and not God's people made to serve the time, or to serve God because it is a holy time.

And whereas some have seemed to condemn the superstitious part of Christmas, but plead hard for the hospitable part, as they call it: the answer is, that the feasting and sporting is an appendix to the worship, or rather to the superstition, and therefore stands or falls together with it. The Apostle therefore calls them idolaters, even for their feasting and sporting (1 Corinthians 10:7): "Neither be you idolaters, as were some of them: as it is written, The people sat down to eat, and drink, and rose up to play." And if you read the story of that idolatry of the calf (Exodus 32), you will find that it was celebrated much after the same manner that Christmas is, or rather somewhat better; for they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt-offerings, and brought peace-offerings: so that it seems they went to church, and said their prayers most devoutly in the morning, and then they sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play (ver. 6), and there was shouting, and singing, and dancing among them (ver. 18, 19). Sober mirth, and the moderate use of the good creatures of God, is lawful at any time of the year, and there never was any minister that preached or spoke against that; but to have better cheer upon a Popish holy-day than at another time, merely upon this account, because forsooth it is a holy-day, this is superstitious: and the revelling, and rioting, and luxury which is usual at those times, is every way a hindrance to hospitality, and not a furtherance to it, that which might and ought to be bestowed in a way of liberality to the poor, being misspent and lavished away in vain prodigality and luxury.

The days of Purim (Esther 9) were seven hundred years since objected by Papists to the Waldenses, and since by all Papists that have written against Protestants about ceremonies, as Gregorius de Valentia, Bellarmine, Suarez; and we need not seek for new answers about it, for that which our divines have answered to the Papists, is sufficient in two words. 1. That it cannot be evinced, that these days of Purim were religious feasts. Junius says, Praeceptum fuit Politicum, they were only days of civil rejoicing, they are called only the days of Purim, not the holy days of Purim. They are not called Chaggim, no peculiar sacrifice was appointed, nor any holy convocation of the people enjoined. The ordinance required but feasting and joy, and sending of portions to one another: the rest mentioned (Esther 9) was only from their enemies; so much work as might stand with a feasting-day was not forbidden. 2. Upon supposition of a religious feast instituted by Mordecai, he did it, says Doctor Whitaker, God inspiring him, and peradventure by order from some prophet. As Zechariah 8, they changed their fasts into feasts by the mouth of the Lord, by the ministry of the prophet. And though we do not read expressly, that either God or any prophet did require this feast of Purim, yet forasmuch as it stands approved in Scripture, there is no doubt but it was done by warrant from God.

The feast of dedication (John 10:22, 23) has also been objected from the time of the Waldenses, but it is not certainly known what feast of dedication this was, and whether merely of human institution. Some take it for that which Solomon appointed, others ascribe it to Ezra, others to the Maccabees; neither is there any evidence that [illegible] approved it. The text only says, that he walked then in [illegible] Porch, which he might do without observing or approving [illegible]; if it was nothing but a tradition of the elders, we may be sure that Christ who testified against other inventions of men, did never observe this.

It was Luther's desire no less than seven-score years ago, in his book de Bonis Operibus, set forth Anno 1520, that there were no other festival days among Christians, but only the Lord's Day. And right excellent was that speech of King James to a National Assembly in Scotland, Anno 1590. He praised God that he was king in the sincerest church in the world; sincerer than the Church of England, for their service was an ill-said Mass in English; sincerer than Geneva itself, for they observed Pasche and Yoole, that is, Easter and Christmas, and what warrant (said he) have they for that?