Massachusetts

In 1685 Massachusetts Legalized Christmas to Samuel Sewall’s Dismay

In 1685, a tolerant wind blew briefly through England when James II ascended to the throne. He ordered greater freedom for Roman Catholics and people of other faiths. In his colonies, he ordered the reform of discriminatory laws. Samuel Sewall was not pleased.

Samuel Sewall was a judge, businessman and printer who left voluminous diaries that document his undying dislike of the Christmas celebration. In Puritan times, the celebration was viewed as obnoxious and sacrilegious.

Samuel Sewall

Samuel Sewall

Massachusetts complied with the king’s wishes for liberal reform by annulling two laws on the books. The first was a death penalty statute for  Quakers returning to the colony after being banished. The second outlawed the ‘keeping of Christmas.’

Further rubbing salt in the wound, Samuel Sewall had to oversee printing of the new laws. In his diary, Sewall happily noted that Christmas in 1685 was less popular than ever despite the new laws.

 

The Diary of Samuel Sewall

Dec. 25. Friday. Carts come to Town and Shops open as is usual. Some somehow observe the day; but are vexed I believe that the Body of the People profane it, and blessed be God no Authority yet to compel them to keep it. A great Snow fell last night so this day and night very cold.

Several days later, Samuel Sewall wrote his cousin agreed with him: [there] was less Christmas-keeping than last year, fewer Shops Shut up.

Twelve years later, Sewall continued his anti-Christmas crusade. On Dec. 25, 1697, he wrote: Snowy day: Shops are open, and Carts and sleds come to Town with Wood and Fagots as formerly, save what abatement may be allowed on account of the weather. This morning we read in course the 14, 15, and 16 Psalms . . . I took occasion to dehort mine from Christmas-keeping, and charged them to forbear.

Snubbed

Sewall’s Grinch-like view of Christmas did cost him politically. In 1698, Samuel Sewall noted the lieutenant governor invited most of the legislature to his home for dinner on Christmas. However, he “knew nothing of it,” uninvited most likely because he so hated the celebration.

In 1722, Samuel Sewall hinted he might soften his position. He had changed his mind before, having years earlier apologized for his role in the Salem witch trials. He accepted both “blame and shame” for serving as one of the judges at the trials.

By then, Gov. Samuel Shute had appointed Samuel Shute as chief justice of the Superior Court of Judicature.

But in the end, Samuel Sewall held fast on Christmas. His diary tells of his tug-of-war with Shute and the General Court over whether the body should adjourn for a Christmas holiday:

Dec. 19. His Excellency took me aside to the Southeast Window of the Council Chamber, to speak to me about adjourning the General Court to Monday next because of Christmas. I told his Excellency I would consider of it.

Put It to a Vote

Dec. 20. I invited Dr. [Cotton] Mather to Dine with me, not knowing that he preached. After Diner I consulted with him about the Adjournment of the Court. We agreed, that it would be expedient to take a vote of the Council and Representatives for it.

So Samuel Sewall made the suggestion to the governor.

Friday, Dec 21. The Governor took me to the window again looking eastward, next Mrs. Phillips's, and spoke to me again about adjourning the Court to next Wednesday. I spoke against it; and propounded that the Governor would take a Vote for it; that he would hold the Balance even between the Church and us. His Excellency went to the Board again, and said much for this adjourning; All kept Christmas but we; I suggested King James I to Mr. Dudley, how he boasted what a pure church he had; and they did not keep Yule nor Pasch (Easter).

Mr. Dudley asked if the Scots kept Christmas. His Excellency protested, he believed they did not. Governor said they adjourned for the Commencement and Artillery. But then it is by agreement. Col. Taylor spoke so loud and boisterously for adjourning that it was hard for any to put in a word; Col. Townsend seconded me, and Col. Partridge; because this would prolong the Sessions.

The Debate Rages

samuel-sewall-old-statehouse

Where Samuel Sewall and the Governor's Council argued about adjourning for Christmas.

Sewall argued that the Puritans had come a long way for their freedom to worship, and now the Church of England had its freedom. But, he argued, the Anglicans insisted on putting down the Puritans.

Mr. Davenport stood up and gave it as his opinion that it would not be convenient for the Governor to be present in Court that day; and therefore was for adjourning. But the Governor is often absent; and yet the Council and Representatives go on. Now the Governor has told us, that he would go away for a week; and then returned and if he liked what we had done, He would Consent to it. The Governor mentioned how it would appear to have votes passed on December 25. But his Excellency need not have been present nor signed any bill that day. I said the dissenters came a great way for their Liberties and now the church had theirs, yet they could not be contented, except they might tread all others down...

Saturday Dec. 22. About a quarter of an hour before 12 the Governor adjourned the Court to Wednesday morning at 10 o’clock and sent Mr. Secretary into the House of Deputies to do it there.

Victory in Defeat

Sewall had lost the battle over the General Court, but he happily noted in his diary on the 25th that many people didn't keep Christmas:

Tuesday, Dec. 25 …. The Shops were open, and carts came to town with wood, hoop-poles, hay, etc. as at other Times. Being a pleasant day, the street was filled with carts and horses.

This story about Samuel Sewall and Christmas was updated in 2018.

7 Comments

7 Comments

  1. Don Matheson

    November 29, 2016 at 9:45 am

    Grinch

  2. Eugene Rossi

    November 29, 2016 at 11:01 am

    “Muh Theonomy!”

  3. Mike MacDonnell

    November 29, 2016 at 7:13 pm

    Always like to see my ancestors mentioned in some your articles. Dudley and Mather, this time!

  4. Scott Turner

    November 29, 2016 at 8:16 pm

    Amanda May

  5. Eugene Rossi

    November 30, 2016 at 9:02 am

    The earliest people who thought Christmas should be banned were conservative Christians? #Mindblown

  6. Pingback: Charles Dickens Brings 'A Christmas Carol' to Boston - New England Historical Society

  7. Pingback: Charles Dickens Brings 'A Christmas Carol' - and Christmas - to Boston - New England Historical Society

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top