The Figures or Types of Christ, Typological category 25

The Figures or Types of Christ · Typological category 25

p. 577THE MANIFOLD SINFULNESS OF THE POPISH HOLY DAYS, Diſcovered in ſundry Reaſons againſt them, and the moſt material Objections anſwered.

AMongſt the ſeveral ways wherein the Superſtition of the hearts of men works out and vents it ſelf, this is one, the obſerving of Days and Times, wherein the Church of Rome hath abounded, filling the Kalender with ſuperſtitious Holy days, many of which are ſtill retained and continued by the Church of England. But let theſe Reaſons againſt them be conſidered.

Reaſon 1.

Nothing can be holy to the Lord, which is not made holy by the Lord: but God the Lord of time hath not ſanctified nor ſet apart theſe times. We find indeed before the Ceremonial Law was inſtituted, yea before the Fall of Man, that God bleſſed the ſeventh day and ſanctified it, Gen. 2.2, 3. and therefore the Obſervation of a weekly Sabbath one day in ſeven is moral and perpetual. But other Holy days are things which the Lord never commanded, and which never came into his heart, and of which p. 578he will ſay at the great Day, who required theſe things at your hands. The ſtrength of which argument will appear the more, if we conſider what miſerable poor ſhifts it puts the Patrons of theſe Holy days to, when they go about to grapple with it.

1. Sometimes they are ſo confounded in themſelves, as to deny, that they place Holineſs in theſe days: the Church keeps them (they ſay) not as more holy and ſacred then other days and parts of divine Worſhip, but only for Order and Policy. So Biſhop Lindſey, Perth. Aſſ part. 3. p. 5. But the reſt of his Fellows have dealt more truly and more ſincerely then he in this particular: for not only Bellarmine (tom. 2. de Cultu Sanctorum, lib. 3. cap. 10. prop. 2.) aſſerteth, Feſta Chriſtianorum non ſolum ratione Ordinis & Politiae, ſed etiam ratione myſterii celebrantur, ſuntque dies feſti vere aliis ſanctiores ſacratiores & pars quaedam divini cultus. But Hooker (Eccleſ. Pol. lib. 5. ſect. 69. pag 375.) alſo ſaith they ought to be, with all men that honour God, more holy then other days. Downham (in Praec. 4.) refers them to the fourth Commandment, and will have them conſecrated as Sabbaths to the Lord. Biſhop Andrews (in his Holiday Sermons on Luke 4.18. on Matth. 12.39, 40. apud Gilleſp. Eng. Pop. Cerem. part. 3. cap. 1. pag. 15.) hath found out many profound myſteries in them, yea in the very order of them, and diſtances of time between them: as, there be fifty days between Eaſter and Pentecoſt, becauſe fifty is the number of the Jubile; one day between Eaſter and the Reſurrection, becauſe Jonas was but one day in the Whales belly; with many other pretty tales, which are not worth tranſcribing. And the thing it ſelf ſpeaks: for why do they call them Holy days, if they put no holineſs in them? nay, why do they prefer them above the Sabbaths of God?

2. Sometimes they labour to eſcape in the miſt of blind diſtinctions: ſo when Biſhop Lindſey (Perth. Aſſ. part. 3. pag. 28.) ſaith, that the Holy dayes are not conſecrated to holy myſtical uſes, but to holy political uſes. Wherein, as Mr. Gilleſpy (Eng. Pop. Cer. part. 3. cap. 1. pag. 7.) well obſerveth, he doth but labour to plaiſter over his Superſtition with the untempered mortar of this quidditative diſtinction and uncouth ſpeculation, of which, I dare ſay, the Biſhop himſelf comprehendeth it not.

p. 5793. Sometimes they ſay God hath ſanctified them, by the great works he hath done upon them. Thus Bellarmine (de Cult. Sanct. lib. 3. cap. 10.) Chriſtus naſcens conſecravit locum, id eſt, praeſepe, moriens conſecravit Crucem, reſurgens conſecravit Tuntulum unde exivit; cur non etiam conſecravit Tempus, id eſt, Dies illos quibus natus, vel paſſus, vel rediturus fuit nobis devictâ morte? Which his Diſciple Rich. Hooker, a moſt Papiſtical Writer, borrows from him, and thus expreſſeth it, (Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. § 69. p. 375.) No doubt, as Gods extraordinary preſence hath hallowed and ſanctified certain Places: ſo they are his extraordinary works that have truly and worthily advanced certain Times, for which cauſe they ought to be, with all men that honour God, more holy then other days. Thus he.

But it is not meerly the extraordinary works of God that will ſanctifie a day, for then all the ſix days of the week ſhould be holy: for God created the World in ſix days; ſo that there is not one day of the week wherein there was not ſome work of wonder wrought. It is rather the Lords reſting from his works, then his working that ſanctifieth Time and makes it holy; as Gen. 2.2, 3. Exod 20.11. Upon this ground the ſeventh day was ſanctified in old time, becauſe on that day God reſted from the work of Creation; and upon the ſame ground the firſt day of the week, being the Reſt-day of the Lord our God from the great work of Redemption, his former Reſt being diſturbed and ſpoiled by the Fall and Sin of Man, is our Chriſtian Sabbath. But theſe Popiſh Holy days are not the Lords reſting days, nor is any ſuch thing pretended.

4. They commonly put it upon the Church, and ſay, the Church hath ſet apart theſe times; but this is not enough to make them holy: for all that the Church can do towards the ſanctifying of any time or thing, is only to preſent it and offer it to the Lord; but if the Lord do not accept them, but refuſe ſuch Preſents, and caſt them down as dung in their faces, they are not Holineſs to the Lord, but an abomination to him. As ſuppoſe the Church of the Jews had offered Swines fleſh unto God, would this have made Swines Fleſh holy? no verily, becauſe the Lord not did not accept it. So here, the Church dedicates theſe p. 580days to the Lord, but there muſt be ſome Word of God to evidence his acceptance of them, or elſe they are not indeed holy times, but ſuperſtitious times, of which the Lord will ſay at the great day, who required theſe things at your hands? whatſoever is not of Faith is ſin. Iſai. 1.12. Rom. 14.23.

Reaſon 2.

There is not only no warrant in the Scripture for them, but clear and ſharp reproofs and teſtimonies againſt them. It was one part of the Superſtition of the Phariſees in our Saviours time, to faſt twice a week, Luke 18.12. Thoſe old Papiſts the Phariſees, and our new Phariſees the Papiſts, being men of the ſame Spirit, and acted by the ſame Principle, and walking in the ſame ways of Superſtition. And it was the brand ſet upon Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12.33. that he ordained a Feaſt unto the Children of Iſrael upon the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even the month which he had deviſed of his own heart, which he had lyed or feigned, as the word ſignifies, aſher bada millibbo, quem mentitus eſt de corde ſuo: And though it was like unto the Feaſt that was in Judah, v. 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, v. 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 hath deviſed of his own heart?

And the Pope had them from the Jews and from the Pagans; for what is Chriſtmas but the old heatheniſh Bacchanalia? It is kept at the ſame time of the year, and after the ſame profane manner, only the Pope hath varniſhed it with a new name. But how ill it becomes a Chriſtian to keep the Pagan Feſtivals, hear what Tertullian (de Idol. cap. 14.) ſaith. Nobis (ſaith he) quibus Sabbata extranea ſunt & neomenia & feriae aliquando à Deo dilectae, Saturnalia & Januariae & Brumae & matronales frequentantur, munera commeant, ſtrenae conſonant, luſus convivia conſtrepunt? and is not this as lively a deſcription of Chriſtmas, as if it had been purpoſely p. 581intended for it? but thus he inveighs againſt them; O melior fides nationum in ſuam ſectam, quae nullam ſolennitatem Chriſtianorum ſibi vendicat, non Dominicum diem, non Pentecoſten, etiam ſi noſſent nobiſcum non communicâſſent, timerent enim ne Chriſtiani viderentur, nos ne Ethnici pronunciemur, non veremur. We that do not own nor obſerve the New Moons, and other Jewiſh Feſtivals appointed of old by God himſelf, do we keep the Heatheniſh Bacchanalia, and other Winter and Summer Feaſts of theirs, feaſting and revelling, and making merry as the Heathens do? O how, much more true are they to their Religion, then we to ours; For they do not obſerve any day that Chriſtians obſerve, as Pentecoſt or the Lords day; for they would be afraid leſt they ſhould ſeem to bee Chriſtians in ſo doing: but we are not afraid leſt we be pronounced to be Heathens. Thus he. It is true, he alloweth Pentecoſt as a Feaſt obſerved by Chriſtians in thoſe times; but how this can be defended, and all the reſt of the Jewiſh Feaſts caſhiered, let the Chriſtian Reader judge.

The Apoſtle makes no difference, but condemns the obſervation of all the Jewiſh Feſtivals alike, one as much another. Col. 2.16. Let no man judge you in meat or drink, or in reſpect of an holy day, or of the New Moon, or of the Sabbaths, which are a ſhadow of things to come. Judicare hic ſignificat culpae reum facere, vel Religionem injicere ita ut amplius liberi non ſimus, ſaith Calvin in Col. 2.16. Such weak and rudimentary Inſtructions were fit for thoſe darker and weaker times of the Churches nonage, when under the Tutorage and Pedagogy of Moſes before the coming of Chriſt. But now after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye back to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye deſire again to be in bondage? ye obſerve days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, leſt I have beſtowed upon you. labour in vain. Gal. 4.9, 10, 11. It is a ſign the preaching of the Goſpel hath had but ſmall ſucceſs in ſuch a place, and in the hearts of ſuch a people. And whereas it is objected both by Papiſts and Prelates, that the Apoſtle ſpeaks here only againſt the Jewiſh Feſtivals, loqui ibi Apoſtolorum de Judaeorum tantum feſtis: ſo Bellarmine de Cultu Sanct. c. 10. the Rhemiſts Annot. in Gal. 4.10. p. 582and Biſhop Lindſey Perth. Aſſ. part. 3. pag. 43. This will not take off the force of theſe Texts. For,

1. The Armory of Chriſtians againſt Hereſies and Errors ſhould be quickly empty, i… the Weapons which are hung up in the Scriptures ſhould ſerve only for the perſons, places and times wherein and againſt which they were uſed of the Prophets and Apoſtles: and therefore your ſhift, that the Apoſtle ſpeaks only againſt the Jewiſh Feaſts and Faſts is vain, ſaith Mr. Cartwright in Col. 2.16.

2. Some of the Popiſh Feaſts are originally Jewiſh, yea, which is worſe, Paganiſh.

3. Theſe Texts do condemn the Popiſh Feaſts as much, and in ſome reſpects more then the Jewiſh, as Hoſpinian obſerves againſt Bellarmine; and Mr. Cartwright (in Gal. 4.10. and in Rom. 14.5.) gives the ſame anſwer to the Rhemiſts. If Paul (ſaith he) condemn the Galatians for obſerving the Feaſts which God himſelf inſtituted, and that for his own Honour only, and not for the Honour of any Creature; the Papiſts are much more laid open to this Condemnation, which preſs the Obſervation of Feaſts of Mens deviſing, and to the Honour of Men. For do you think it likely that God ſhould by Chriſt diſcharge his people of the yoke of the Law of Moſes, to bring in another yoke of Mans Ordinances? and is there any likelihood that he ſhould abrogate the Feſtival days conſecrated to himſelf and to his own Majeſty, to bring in thoſe that are conſecrated and ſet apart to the Honour of Saints? and that the Lord ſhould eaſe his people of the burthen of a few Feſtival days, to lay upon them an heavier burthen by a greater number of them? So that we ſee the Scripture doth abundantly and clearly condemn and teſtifie againſt theſe ſuperſtitious obſervations of days and times.

Reaſon 3.

Conſider further the deep diſhonour that is done to God by theſe days every manner of way. The common pretenſe is, that p. 583they do it for the Honor of Chriſt; but it is not good Intentions that will excuſe bad Actions. Jeroboam pretended very good Intentions, 1 Kings 12.28. ſo did they in Exod. 32.5. they proclaimed an Holy day to Jehovah, though they kept it in a rude manner: but what ſaith 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. He will not regard their vain pretenſes; for the truth is, theſe days are celebrated rather in diſhonour, and as it were in deſpite of Chriſt, then for any Glory to him. For,

1. They are a diſhonour to his Holineſs, as if Chriſt were a God that delighted in Profaneneſs and Wickedneſs: for he is diſhonoured (as ſome have well obſerved) by letting the reins looſe to all manner of Profaneneſs, as much in the twelve days, and in ſome reſpects more, then in all the twelve months of the year beſide. Hence Mr. Perkins moſt truly and juſtly complains, that the Feaſt of Chriſts Nativity, commonly ſo called, is not ſpent in praiſing the Name of God, but in Revelling, Dicing, Carding, …, Mumming, and in all licentious liberty for the moſt part, as … it were ſome Heathen Feaſt of Ceres or Bacchus. Perk … Creed Art. of Chriſts Birth, apud Gilleſp. Engl. Pop. Cerem. p. … cap. 9. page 48.

2. It is an unſpeakable diſhonouour to his bleſſed Sabbaths, for men to ſet their Days by his Days, their Poſts by his Poſts, their Altars by his Altars, as Jeroboam deviſed a Feaſt of his own heart, like unto the Feaſt that was in Judah, 1 Kings 12.32. yea, as Dr. Ames obſerves, they were from their firſt uſe not only equalled unto, but extolled above the Lords day. Freſh Suit, part 2. p. 84. Thoſe Prelates, ſaith Mr. Gilleſpy, that will not abaſe themſelves to preach upon ordinary Sabbaths, think the high Holy days worthy of their Sermons. Engl. Pop. Cerem. part. 3. cap. 1 pag. 13. Yea they can write Books againſt the Sabbath, as Heylin, White, Pocklinton and others have done, to pluck away that Crown of Glory and Preeminence, which God hath ſet upon that day which he hath choſen, and they ſet up their own deviſed days in ſtead thereof. Common experience proveth (ſaith Reverend Mr. Dod on p. 584the ſecond Commandment, p. 68.) that all they which ſtand moſt for ſuperſtitious Holy days, are greateſt profaners of the Lords Sabbath, and contemners of his Word.

3. They do diſhonour the Wiſdom and Word of Chriſt: for Chriſt the Lord of Time and the Lord of the Sabbath hath 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 that have been already done? as Eccleſ. 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 hath done for us, in everlaſting remembrance in the hearts of his Saints, but the Devil and the Pope muſt help it out. It is therefore in plain terms a profane ſpeech of Dr. Hammond, that when the Feſtivals are turned out of the Church, it will not be in the power of weekly Sermons on ſome head of Religion to keep up the knowledge of Chriſt in mens hearts. View of Direct. and Vindic. of Liturg. pag. 31. What are not the Inſtitutions of Chriſt powerful to attain his own bleſſed ends, unleſs they be pieced out with the additions of mens Inventions? ſurely there is no Chriſtian that hath found the experience of the ſaving Power and Bleſſing of Gods Ordinances to his own Soul, but will deteſt and abhor to entertain ſuch baſe and vile thoughts of them, unleſs he hath forgotten that he was purged by them from his old ſins.

4. Theſe ſuperſtitious Holy days introduced and brought in many other corruptions along with them, as bad or worſe then themſelves, like the unclean Spirit with ſeven Devils more, ſundry whereof are thus expreſſed by Dr. Ames, Freſh Suit againſt Cerem. part. 2. pag. 84. They were (ſaith he) from their firſt riſe not only equalled unto, but alſo extolled above the Lords day: Eaſter brought in a ſuperſtitious Lent to attend upon it, made Baptiſm wait for her Moon, and conformed our Lords Supper to the Jewiſh Paſſover in unleavened Bread. It was the firſt Apple of p. 585Contention amongst Chriſtians. (The Latin and Greek Churches ſtriving & contending fiercely about the time of it, and Victor Bp. of Rome deſperately excommunicated thoſe that were not of his opinion in this frivolous Queſtion. So that) it was the firſt Weapon wherewith the Biſhop of Rome played his Prizes againſt other Churches, and after ſlew ſo many Britains with, by Auſtin the Monk. Holy days deviſed by men in honour of Chriſt invited and drew on Holy days to Saints, with many other miſchiefs more then can be now numbred up. And therefore upon all accounts God is diſhonoured by them. And ſo much for that third Reaſon.

Reaſon 4.

The true yearly time for the Celebration of theſe Feſtivals is not certainly known, but much diſputed among Chronologers and Divines: ſo that Holiday-keepers cannot affirm that they do commemorate opus diei in die ſuo, the Lord having hid it, as he did the Body of Moſes, to prevent Idolatry.

The fierce contention for the ſpace of two hundred years or thereabout between the Greek and Latin Churches, about the time of celebrating Eaſter is famous in Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory: the Eaſtern Churches kept it on the fourteenth day of the firſt month, when the Jews kept their Paſſover; from whence they were called quarto-decimani. But the Weſtern Churches kept it upon the Chriſtian Sabbath in commemoration of Chriſts Reſurrection, who roſe upon the firſt day: and both ſides pretended Apoſtolical Tradition for their different practice. The difference grew ſo hot, that Victor Boſhop of Rome, being full of the ſpirit of Antichriſt, excommunicated all the Aſian Churches, as being Fourteeners, and as Judaizers. Afterwards Conſtantine the Great called the Council of Nice to compoſe theſe differences in the Churches, who thought it beſt to keep it upon the day of Chriſts Reſurrection; but they had done better, if they had utterly aboliſhed it; as the great reforming Parliament did in England. But thus we ſee what a bone of Contention Eaſter hath been.

And as for Chriſtmas, it hath been clearly evinced by many p. 586learned men, that there is a wide miſtake in the common account, which placeth the Birth of Chriſt upon the five and twentieth of December. Mr. Allin (Chain of Scripture Chronology, Period. 7. Num. 60. pag. 233.) gives theſe Reaſons againſt it. 1. Becauſe it is not probable that the Shepherds were abroad all night long, keeping of their Flocks in the very deep of Winter. Luke 2.8. 2. Neither is it like that Auguſtus would by his Decree enjoin all his Subjects to travel at that time of the year to their chief City to be taxed. Luk. 2.1. Nor 3. is it probable that John did go into the River Jordan with the People that were baptized of him in the very coldeſt part of the year; for he baptized in Jordan when Jeſus was entring upon his thirtieth year. Luke 3.23. It is therefore much more probable that the Birth of Chriſt was in the month of September. So Scaliger (de Emend. tempor.) conceives, for which he reaſons from the Conception of John the Baptiſt. And Mr. Allin alſo is of the ſame Judgment, which he gathers from the half week which the Angel, Dan. 9.27. ſeems to hold out to be between the Baptiſm of Chriſt and his Death: for if there was juſt ſo much between them, his Death being juſt at the Paſſover, which was about the end of our firſt month, called March; then his Baptiſm muſt needs be about the latter end of September. Thus Mr. Allen, ubi ſupra. Which argument indeed to me is very ſatisfying, being grounded upon ſuch clear Teſtimonies of Scripture. For that Chriſt was baptized and entred upon his Miniſtry at thirty years old, we find recorded, Luke 3.23. and that he preached three years and an half; beſides other arguments may be gathered from that in Dan. 9.27. in the midſt of the week ſhall the Meſſiah be cut off; which is meant of a Prophetical week containing ſeven years: therefore there muſt be half a week, that is, half a year above the three and thirtieth: whereas the common account makes but a quarter of a year between the Nativity and Eaſter. Of which much more might be ſaid; but this is enough to ſhew that the Feſtivals are grounded upon a very miſtaken and uncertain foundation, which is a further evidence that they are not of God.

p. 587Reaſon 5.

It is a great infringement of our Chriſtian Liberty, when God hath given us ſix days wherein to ſerve him in our Callings; Six days ſhalt thou labour; for men to contradict the Lord, and ſay, thou ſhalt not labour ſix days. Why may they not as well controll the other part of the Command, and ſay, thou ſhalt not reſt upon the Sabbath day? For, as Mr. Cartwright (Firſt Reply, p. 152.) hath well obſerved; If the Church may reſtrain the Liberty that God hath given us, it may take away the yoke alſo that God hath put upon us. But as it is profaneneſs to call that common, which God hath ſanctified and made holy: ſo on the other ſide it is tyrannical Superſtition and Preſumption, to make that holy, which God hath made common. And this is one of the Apoſtles arguments in this very caſe, Col. 2.16, 20. Let no man judge you in reſpect of an Holy day, if you be dead with Chriſt from the Rudiments of the world, why as though living in the world are ye ſubject to Ordinances? ſo likewiſe Gal. 4.9, 10. ye deſire again to be in bondage, ye obſerve days and months and times and years.

Si quiſquam mortalium (ſaith Calvin in Col. 2.17.) judicis officium hâc in parte ſibi uſurpet, ne obſequamur, quum Chriſtus legitimus Judex nos abſolvat. It tendeth to no good policy, nor wealth of the people, or preſervation of good order, that there ſhould be ſo many days wherein men ſhould ceaſe from work, being a thing that breedeth idleneſs, and conſequently poverty, beſides other diſorders and vices which always go in company with idleneſs, ſaith Mr. Cartwright (Firſt Reply, p. 155.) And upon this account King Henry the Eighth did abrogate ſundry of them, as Mr. Fox ſheweth in the Book of Martyrs. Act & Mon. vol. 2. p. 386.

Obj. But then days of Humiliation and Thanksgiving, as alſo week-day Sermons and Lectures are unlawful.

Anſw. It followeth not; for there is clear Scripture ground and Warrant for occaſional days of Humiliation or Thankſgiving, when there is any preſent emergency of Providence calling thereunto: For Jehoſophat proclaimed a Faſt, 2 Chron. 20.3. ſo did p. 588the King of Nineveh, Jonah 3.7. Joel 1.14. and 2.15. From whence ſome have not unaptly ſaid, that God hath left as it were a Warrant dormant with the Magiſtrate and with the Church for ſuch days: neither indeed could all the particular cauſes and occaſions and times thereof be particularly ſet down in the Scripture, becauſe they are infinite. And Chriſt allows alſo private Faſts, Matth. 6.17, 18. and ſo the Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 7.5. but there is no colourable conſequence from ſuch occaſional days, to theſe annual ſtated Popiſh Feſtivals, for which we have neither a general Warrant in the Scripture, nor a particular Call of Providence. And as for week-day Lectures, they are moſt impertinently objected, ſeeing as ſome have well obſerved, (Re-exam. Art. of Perth, pag. 144.) Theſe are not hours ſanctified or conſecrated to Gods 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 Gods People, and not Gods People made to ſerve the Time, or to ſerve God becauſe it is an holy time. Miniſters do not then preach with any reſpect at all to the time, as more holy then other times; that were ſuperſtitious. The work is not done for the times ſake, but the time appointed for the works ſake: They do not preach with reſpect to any ſuppoſed holineſs of the time; but appoint the time ſo as may be moſt convenient for doing the work

Obj. 2. Some object the days of Purim, which were anniverſary Feſtivals. Eſth. 9.

Anſ. This hath been 700 years ſince objected by Papiſts unto the Waldenſes, as Ameſius (Freſh Suit, part. 2. p. 315.) obſerves, 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 thoſe days of Purim were religious Feaſts. Junius (in Bell. de Cultu Sanct. lib. 3. cap. 10.) ſaith, Praeceptum fuit politicum, they were only days of civil rejoycing, and, as another learned Writer (Re-exam. Art. Perth, p. 589pag. 191.) obſerves, They are only called 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 & Joy, and ſending of portions to one another. The Reſt mentioned, Eſth. 9. was only from their enemies: ſo much Work as might ſtand with a Feaſting day was not forbidden. Biſhop Andrews (Serm. on Eſth. 9.31.) his Arguments to prove that they were holy days, and not days of civil joy and Solemnity only, are fully anſwered by Mr. Gilleſpy, (Engl. Pop. Cerem. part. 3. c. 6. p. 99, 100) who ſhews, that the moſt of them are meerly grounded upon the Corruptions of the vulgar Latin Tranſlation, which the Biſhop chooſeth to follow. And for that one argument from the Hebrew, that they took it in animas, verſ. 31. from whence the Biſhop infers, they made a Soul matter of it, the Hebrew word nepheſh hath no ſuch emphaſis, but ſignifies corpus animatum as well as anima, and is commonly taken not for our ſouls, but for our ſelves; as Gen 46.26. all the ſouls that came with Jacob, that is, all the perſons. Yea, that it may appear how far the word is from any ſuch emphaſis as the Biſhop would put upon it, it is often uſed even for a dead carkaſs, as in Numb. 9.6. Hagg. 2.13. and in ſundry other places.

2. Neither can it be evinced that this Feaſt of Purim was meerly of human Inſtitution, if we ſuppoſe it to be a religious Feaſt. Mordecai did it, ſaith Dr. Whitaker, (de Sacram. p. 206.) God inſpiring him, and peradventure by order from ſome Prophet; as we find in Zech. 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 expreſly, that the Lord gave Commandment to them by any of his Prophets for this Feaſt of Purim; yet foraſmuch as it ſtands approved in Scripture, there is no doubt, ſaith Mr. Cartwright, but it was done by warrant from God. Reſt of ſecond Reply, pag. 193, 194.

Obj. 3. The Feaſt of Dedication, Joh. 10.22, 23.

Anſw. This alſo hath been objected from the time of the Waldenſes. But.

p. 5901. It is not certainly known what Feaſt of Dedication this was, and whether meerly of human Inſtitution: ſome take it for that which Solomon appointed, others aſcribe it to Ezra, others to the Maccabees. See Ames Freſh Suit. part. 2. p. 318. And it is obſerved by learned men concerning thoſe declining times, that the latter Jews appointed many Faſts and Feaſts, as may be ſeen in their Kalender, which they had no warrant for out of the Word of God. So Mr. Weems, vol. 1. concern, the Scripture Prolegom. cap. 3. pag. 60.

2. Neither is there any evidence that Chriſt approved this Feaſt of Dedication. The Text only ſaith, that he walked then in Solomons Porch, which he might do without obſerving or approving the Feaſt. Thoſe circumſtances of time and place being noted by the Evangeliſt for evidence to the Story, as Mr. Gilleſpy (Engl. Pop. Cerem. par. 3. cap. 6. p. 103.) well obſerveth, and not for any myſtery. If this Feaſt 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.

Object. 4. The Apoſtle (ſay ſome) ſeems to ſpeak of it, as a thing indifferent and lawful to regard a Day to the Lord. Rom. 14.5, 6.

Anſw. The ſcope of that place is not to aſſert the truth of their Opinion, who made a difference of Days and Meats: (for it is evident from many Scriptures, that they were in an error;) but to forbid and reprove an unbrotherly ſpirit one againſt another, for ſuch differences of Opinion; which Reproof falls heavy upon the greateſt Patrons and Aſſertors of theſe Popiſh Holy days; for they have uſed much unbrotherly Violence againſt Diſſenters. Moreover, there was a greater latitude of Chriſtian Charity and Indulgence due to the weak Jews in their adherence for a time to Moſes, then can be claimed by ſuch as adhere to the Church of Rome.

Object. 5. Some diſtinguiſh between the Superſtition and the Hoſpitality of Chriſtmas, and the ſuperſtitious part they condemn, but plead hard for the hoſpitable part, as they call it.

Anſw. The Feaſting and Sporting is an appendix to the Worſhip, p. 591or 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 Cor. 10.7. neither be ye Idolaters, as were ſome of them, as it is written, the people ſate down to eat and drink, and roſe up to play. And if we read the Story of that Idolatry of the Calf, Exod. 32. we ſhall 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 Peace-offerings: ſo that it ſeems they went to Church and ſaid their Prayers moſt devoutly in the morning, and then they ſate down to eat and drink, and roſe up to play, v. 6. and there was ſhouting, and ſinging, and dancing, and a great deal of mad mirth amongſt them, v. 18, 19. Sober mirth, and the temperate uſe of the good Creatures of God, is lawful at any time of the year, and there never was any Miniſter that preached or ſpake againſt that. But to have better cheer upon a Popiſh Holy day then at another time, meerly upon this account, becauſe, forſooth, it is an Holy day, this is ſuperſtitious. And the revelling and rioting and luxury, which is uſual at thoſe times, is every way an hinderance 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 miſpent and laviſhe'd away in vain prodigality and luxury.

Obj. 6. I meet with one who diſallows thoſe days that are dedicated to Chriſt, but hath a better opinion of the Saints days. His words are theſe; Nor for my part (ſaith he) do I make any ſcruple to keep a day in remembrance of any eminent Servant of Chriſt or Martyr, to praiſe God for their Doctrine or Example, and honour their memorial: but the hardeſt part of the queſtion is, whether it be lawful to keep days as holy, in celebrating the memorial of Chriſts Nativity, Circumciſion, Faſting, Transfiguration, Aſcenſion, and ſuch like. Mr. Ric. Baxt. of Ch. Gov. and Worſ. diſp. 5. p. 413.

Anſw. This learned man is very ſingular in this Opinion, as well as in many others, and it is contrary even to the common Senſe and Reaſon of moſt Chriſtians, yea of moſt men, to think the days dedicated to Saints more allowable then thoſe in remembrance p. 592of the actions of Chriſt himſelf. Our Divines againſt the Papiſts condemn the Saints days, as much more intolerable & inexcuſable then the other. Si pium & bonum eſſet (ſaith judicious Ames Bell. Enerv. tom. 2. l. 6. c. 10. theſ. 12.) inſtituere dies feſt…s, tota haec pietas melius collocaretur in tot commemorationibus factorum Chriſti quot Eccleſia ferre poſſet, quam ut ad Sanctos iretur Dicare diem Deo in memoriam hominis, ne Judaei quidem in ſuâ paedagogiâ docebantur, ne dum convenit ſpirituali cultui novi Teſtamenti. If it were (ſaith he) a good and pious thing to appoint Holy days; this Piety were better imployed in ſo many Commemorations of the actions of Chriſt, as the Church could bear, then in turning aſide to the Saints. To dedicate a day unto God in remembrance of a man, is a thing which the very Jews were never taught to do in thoſe weak and childiſh times, much leſs doth it agree to the ſpiritual Worſhip of the New Teſtament. And though it were lawful (ſaith Mr. Cartwright Firſt Reply p. 153.) for the Church to ordain Holy days to our Saviour Chriſt, or the bleſſed Trinity; yet it is not therefore lawful to inſtitute Holy days to the Apoſtles and other Saints, or to their remembrance.

As to that pretenſe of honouring their memorial, I remember this is alledged by Bellarmine for the keeping of Reliques, and Dr. Ames (Bellarm Enerv. tom. 2. l. 6. c. 6. theſ. 25.) his anſwer to him, De iſtiuſmodi conſervatione nihil traditur in Scripturâ, ubi tamen omne genus honoris virtuti defertur, may be applied here; this is ſuch a way of honouring the memorial of Saints departed, as the Scripture knows not, wherein yet all due honour is given to virtue and holineſs. For as we reaſon againſt the Popiſh Purgatory (ſaith Mr. Cartwright, Firſt Reply p. 153.) that it is therefore nought, foraſmuch as neither in the Old Teſtament, nor in the New, there is any mention of Prayer at any time for the Dead: ſo may it be reaſoned againſt theſe Holy days ordained for the remembrance of the Saints; that foraſmuch as the old people did never keep any Feaſt, or Holy day, for the remembrance either of Moſes, or Daniel, or Job, or Abraham, or David, or any other, how holy or excellent ſoever they were. Nor the Apoſtles nor the Churches in their time never inſtituted p. 593any, neither to keep the remembrance of Stephen, or of the Virgin Mary, or of John Baptiſt, or of any other notable & rare perſonage: that the inſtituting and erecting of them now, and this attempt by the Churches which followed, is not without ſome note of preſumption; for that it undertaketh thoſe things which the primitive Church in the Apoſtles times, having greater gifts of the Spirit of God, durſt not venture upon.

And what though ſome of theſe Corruptions crept in ſome what early? they are but old ſins, and grey-headed errors.

That Antichriſtian violence of Victor Biſhop of Rome for Eaſter was about the year of Chriſt one hundred ninety eight, but Chriſtmas is not ſo ancient. Pezelius refers the firſt eſtabliſhment of it to the Council of Conſtantinople in the year of Chriſt five hundred fifty three. Celebrata eſt (ſaith he) Conſtantinopoli Synodus Oecumenica quinta circa annum Chriſti 553. In eadem Synodo dies natalis Chriſti & dies Purificationis Mariae primum ſunt inſtituti ut ſolenniter quotannis celebrarentur. Pezel Mellific. Hiſt. par. 2. Juſtinian. 1. pag. 326. But be their antiquity more or leſs, they have been abundantly teſtified againſt by the faithful Servants of Chriſt both in former and later times.

Socrates, who wrote the Hiſtory of the Church above twelve hundred years ago, hath a whole Chapter concerning Eaſter, wherein he hath many notable arguments againſt thoſe that contend ſo much for it. He ſaith, that as many other things crept in of cuſtom in ſundry places, ſo the Feaſt of Eaſter prevailed amongſt all people of a certain private cuſtom and obſervation, ſeeing not one of the Apoſtles hath any where preſcribed any thing about it.

He ſheweth alſo that the Apoſtles have ſet the Churches free from the yoke of bondage, by their Letters to them, Acts 15. But ſome neglecting theſe things, account of Fornication, as a thing indifferent; yet they contend about Holy days as it were for life and death, they deſpiſe the Commandments of God, and eſtabliſh them Canons of their own, they ſet at nought, they make no account of the Law publiſhed by the Apoſtles, but raiſe a foul ſtir about Days and Months, &c. p. 594Thus Socrates Hiſt. lib. 5. cap. 22. Which Teſtimony of his is ſo plain and punctual, that Bellarmine knew not how to rid his hands of it, but by flying out upon Socrates, and calling him a Novatian Heretick, (Bell. de Cultu Sanct. l. 3. c. 10.) which is but a poor ſhift, inſtead of anſwering his Arguments, to reproach his Perſon. But the Book he hath written, I mean his Eccleſiaſtical Hiſtory, is evidence enough for him, that he was a man of an excellent ſpirit.

It was one of the Articles held and owned by the Waldenſes, as Mr. Fox ſheweth, five hundred years ago, Conſtrained and prefixed Faſts bound to days and times, difference of Meats ſuperfluous Holy days, and all the rabblement of Rites and Ceremonies brought in by Man, to be aboliſhed. Fox Acts and Mon. vol. 1. p. 300. art. 6.

It was Luthers deſire no leſs then ſeven ſcore years ago, in his Book de Bonis Operibus ſet forth anno 1520. that there were no other Feſtival days amongst Chriſtians, but only the Lords day. Beza ſaith, Superſtitioſum eſſe docemus, arbitrari unum aliquem diem altero ſanctiorem, Bez. Confeſ. c. 5. art. 41. And Reverend Mr. Dod condemns it as Idolatry againſt the ſecond Commandment, either to pray unto the Saints, or to ſwear by them, or to dedicate ſet days and times to the honour of them, either by Faſting or Feaſting. Dod on the ſecond Commandm. p. 67, 68.

In Scotland they were laid aſide in the firſt Reformation, and have been witneſſed againſt by the Godly there ever ſince. They were revived indeed by thoſe backſliders in the Aſſembly of Perth in the year 1618. For one of the five Articles of that Aſſembly was concerning Feſtival days; but they found little acceptance with ſuch as adhered to the Reformation of Religion, as appears by the Books and Writings of many godly learned men againſt the Acts of that Aſſembly. Yea, King James himſelf before his Apoſtaſie bore witneſs againſt them. Right excellent was that Speech of his to a National Aſſembly in Scotland anno 1590. He praiſed God that he was King in the ſincereſt Church in the world, ſincerer then the Church of England, for their Service was an ill ſaid Maſs in Engliſh; ſincerer then Geneva it ſelf, for they obſerved Paſche and Yoole, that is, Eaſter and Chriſtmas; and what p. 595warrant, ſaid he, have they for that. I find this Speech of his recorded in Didoclavius his Altare Damaſcenum, pag. 666. and in the Book intituled Perth Aſſembly, the Proceedings, the Nullity thereof, &c. printed 1619. pag. 64. and in the Re-examination of the five Articles of Perth, printed 1636. pag. 340. How far he did ſin againſt theſe enlightenings and convictions, and how the Biſhops did poyſon him, and pervert his Spirit in his declining times, it is needleſs here to diſcourſe. But theſe were his Principles in his firſt, which were his beſt times.

In England, beſides the frequent Teſtimonies of the Martyrs againſt them, Authority hath ſmitten them once and again, the Lord uſually carrying on the work of Reformation by degrees. The firſt blow they received by publick Authority was by the Injunctions of King Henry the eighth, in the year 1536. in the Preface whereto, he reaſons thus againſt them; Foraſmuch as the number of Holy days is ſo exceſſively grown, and yet daily more and more by mans devotion, yea rather Superſtition, was like further to increaſe, that the ſame was and ſhould be not only prejudicial to the Commonwealth, by reaſon that it is occaſion as well of much ſloth and idleneſs, the very Nurſe of Theeves, Vagabonds, and divers other unthriftineſs and inconveniences, as of decay of good Myſteries and Arts profitable and neceſſary for the Commonwealth, and loſs of mans food many times, being clean deſtroyed through the ſuperſtitious obſervance of the ſaid Holy days, in not taking the opportunity of good and ſerene weather offered upon the ſame in the time of Harveſt; but alſo pernicious to the Souls of many men, which being inticed by the licentious vacation and liberty of theſe Holy days, do upon the ſame commonly uſe and practiſe more exceſs, riot, and ſuperfluity then upon any other days, &c. See Mr. Fox Acts and Monum. vol. 2. pag. 386. whereupon he abrogates a number of them, and eſpecially ſuch as ſell in the Harveſt time. And thus the work was begun.

But the total extirpation of them was a work and honour reſerved by God for the great Parliament, who in their Directory pag. ult. have declared, that Feſtival days vulgarly called Holy days, having no warrant in the Word of God, are not to be continued. And in their Ordinance of June 8. 1647. they do utterly aboliſh p. 596them in theſe words; Foraſmuch as the Feaſts of the Nativity of Chriſt, Eaſter and Whitſuntide, and other Feſtivals commonly called Holy days, have been heretofore ſuperſtitiouſly uſed and obſerved, be it ordained by the Lords and Commons aſſembled in Parliament, that the ſaid Feaſt of the Nativity of Chriſt, Eaſter and Whitſuntide, and all other Feſtival days, commonly called Holy days, be no longer obſerved as Feſtivals or Holy days within the Kingdom of England and Dominion of Wales. Any Law, Statute, Cuſtom, Conſtitution, or Canon to the contrary in any wiſe notwithſtanding. See Mr. Scobels Collection anno 1644. cap. 5…. and anno 1647. cap. 81.

And now to ſee theſe and other abominations by the Prelatick party conjured up again from the Grave, and from the bottom of Hell, after ſuch a Funeral, he ſaid well, who ſaid it is almoſt as prodigious and as ghaſtly a ſight, as to ſee a dead Ghoſt walking up and down with his winding-ſheet about him; but God will ſhortly bury them again, and ſeal the Tomb-ſtone upon them, never to riſe more: For he hath ſaid, I hate, I deſpiſe your Feaſt-days, See Calv in Amos 5.21.Amos 5:21I will not ſmell your Holy days, Amos 5.21. wherein, as the moſt judicious Interpreters obſerve, he doth not only reprove their Hypocriſie in reference to his own bleſſed days, but alſo their Idolatry and Superſtition in obſerving days of their own. Oh! that God would ſet home this Text by the power of his Spirit upon the Conſciences of Holiday-keepers to convince and humble them. How dreadful are theſe words! I hate, I deſpiſe your Feaſt-days, I will not ſmell your Holy days; that is, I will never accept them.