The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-12-15
For THE CENTRAL PRESBYTERIAN.
CHRISTMAS.

CHRISTMAS
As it is taken for granted by many thai
the day which We call Christmas is the ami.
versary of the Saviour's birth, none will cal
in question the propriety of investigating the
grounds of this belief What proof have we
then, that the Saviour was born on the 25th
of December? The New Testament is 81
lent as to the month Or the day. We are
only told that it was while Shepherds were
abiding in the field, keeping watch over
their flock by night. From all that we
know of the climate of Palestine, it is very
improbable that focks would be out at pas
ture late in December; or that Shepherds
would be abiding by night in the field.
The early Christians did not profess to
SaaEusb.ss,tilQe, !, Gl4sgeut, of AlsyaI'ariaasst
aths close ST the 2nd Century, says; "Some
curious persons assign not only the year but
the day of our Saviour snativity, which they
say wasin the 28th year of Augustus, and
on the 25th of the Egyptian month Pachon J;
but some say he was born on the 24th or
25th of the month Parmuthi. - Bing gham,
in mis- antiquities says: "Pachon answered
to our May, and Parmuthi to our March.
But Clement does not speak of it as being
then a Christian festival"
0rigen, in the middle of the 3rd century,
proposes to give list of all the festivals of
his time, but he makes no mention of Christ
mas. From this fact, "Sir Peter King,
Lord Chancellor of England, in his In
quiry into the constitution and worship Of
the Primitive Church, justly inferS that
no such festival was then observed; and
adds, cit seems improbable that they should
celebrate Christ's nativity, when they disa-
greed about the month and day when he was
born.
Among the learned Antiquarians who
have attempted to settle the time of the
Saviour's birth. Waginseil placed it in Feb
ruary; Bochart, in March; Lightfoot, in
September; Scalager and Casaubon in Oc-
tober, and Dr. Gill in September. Conse-
quently it has been truly said that there is
scarcely month in the year which has not
been fixed upon as the probable time of that
event.
Sir Isaac Newton, in his work on Daniel
and the Apocalypse, chapter IA, gives the
following reason for its being settled upon
the .25th of December, which is, no doubt,
the true one. His words are as follows :;
" As the idolatofs took delight in the feasts
of their gods, and were unwilling to be de-
prived of them when they embraced Christi
entity, Gregory, the Pcps Of Rcre, took ocj
casion, that he might the more readily draw,
them over to the Christian Church, to apN
point annual fast days in memory of saints
and martyrs. Hence it came to pass that
the principal festivals of the Christians were
instituted in the room of the exploded festi
walls of the idols; as for example, the cele-
bration of Christ's nativity, with ivy and
revelries, with plays and jokes, in the place
of the Bachanalia and the Saturnalia. AS
Sir Isaac wrote in Latin-I shall give the
last sentence in his own words" EGemph
qratsa, natalium Christi cum hedera ct comes
satiOni6Us, ct lUdis, jOcisque, IN lOcum Bach
anazum, Sataunaliumque.
The learned John Selden, in his Table
Talk says, "Christmas succeeds the Satur-
MALTA" The truth is, no one at all acquaint-
ed with ecclesiastical history will attempt to
prove that the 25th of December was the
day on which the Saviour was born. The
fact that Pope Gregory 18th, in 1882, re-
trenched ten days, in order to bring back
the vernal equinox to the same day as at
the time of the Council of Nice, A. d. 325,
which reformation of the calendar was adopt
ed by the British Parliament in 1851, by
which act eleven days in September 1852
were retrenched, thus making the third day
of that month to be called the fourteenth,
must convince any one that what we now re-
gard as Christmas is not the same day of
the month which was so regarded little
more than a century back.
From all these considerations it is evident
that it was not intended that any memorial
of the day should be kept. The appoint
ment of it was a mere human institution,
and had its origin in the times when Ember
weeks, Shrovetide, Ash-W Wednesday, Maun-
day Thursday, and Good Friday came into
use. The very name shows its origin
Johnson and Webster give its derivation as
Chr58t's mass day.! The Lord has appoint
ed one day in seven to be sacred to himself,
and only one. ALI attempts to institute
others should be regarded as teaching for
doctrines the commandments of men, and
only tending to diminish from the honor and
sacredness of that blessed day.
i. j.. 4.
Is Jesus in It?