I've heard that Churches were locked on Christmas. That it was basically wrong to celebrate.

Do you think this was due to the pagan/roman influence on Christmas traditions? Anyone understand this?

At least according to Calvinist traditions, specifically English Puritans and Presbyterians, the idea was that they used the Bible as a guide to recreate the 1st century church as closely as they could. So if it wasn't mentioned in the Bible, it was seen as a later imposition made by humans, often due to incorporating pagan beliefs and rituals. Christmas certainly fit that description, and Christmas activities in the early modern era were much more adult and less family oriented. Samuel Seward, a Puritan leader in Boston who kept a regular diary wrote about two brightly colored men accosting each other and engaging in a duel by sword on Christmas during the period of the Dominion of New England under James II when Puritan authority in Massachusetts was diminished.

It's my impression that Zobel is right - that Christ's birth was most likely somewhere around Christmas and was recognized and celebrated as such by the early church.

Sapper is also correct, I think, in that the Puritans objected to that celebration since it is not in the Bible. They were also most likely ignorant about the historicity of the celebration and the date of Christmas.

Thanks for posting that. I was not aware of that additional reason. Makes a lot of sense.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

At least according to Calvinist traditions, specifically English Puritans and Presbyterians, the idea was that they used the Bible as a guide to recreate the 1st century church as closely as they could. So if it wasn't mentioned in the Bible, it was seen as a later imposition made by humans, often due to incorporating pagan beliefs and rituals. Christmas certainly fit that description, and Christmas activities in the early modern era were much more adult and less family oriented. Samuel Seward, a Puritan leader in Boston who kept a regular diary wrote about two brightly colored men accosting each other and engaging in a duel by sword on Christmas during the period of the Dominion of New England under James II when Puritan authority in Massachusetts was diminished.

---

Calvinist suck…they should be belligerently disregarded at every opportunity as whackadoodles.

---

Many calvinists are doing the best they can. Calvinism may have severe flaws, but let's not throw all calvinists/reformed under the bus

The Banned said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Sapper Redux said:

---

At least according to Calvinist traditions, specifically English Puritans and Presbyterians, the idea was that they used the Bible as a guide to recreate the 1st century church as closely as they could. So if it wasn't mentioned in the Bible, it was seen as a later imposition made by humans, often due to incorporating pagan beliefs and rituals. Christmas certainly fit that description, and Christmas activities in the early modern era were much more adult and less family oriented. Samuel Seward, a Puritan leader in Boston who kept a regular diary wrote about two brightly colored men accosting each other and engaging in a duel by sword on Christmas during the period of the Dominion of New England under James II when Puritan authority in Massachusetts was diminished.

---

Calvinist suck…they should be belligerently disregarded at every opportunity as whackadoodles.

---

Many calvinists are doing the best they can. Calvinism may have severe flaws, but let's not throw all calvinists/reformed under the bus

---

I agree. They are our brothers and sisters in Christ and have done many wonderful things in the name of Christ. Also, like most sects and denominations, the majority of people attending Reformed churches do not necessarily strictly adhere to all of the most extreme points of their group's doctrines.