A fellow journalist and I were discussing world history last week when she put an interesting question to me.
"If you had to live in some other era," she said, "where would you feel most at home?"
Had she asked a week earlier, I wouldn't have had a clue. But she happened to ask me the day after I began reading J.I. Packer's book, "A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life."
I told her I thought I'd fit pretty snugly into the early American Puritan colonies.
In fact, I think most Mormons would.
For three centuries the Puritans were portrayed as a joyless lot. People saw them as dour, self-righteous souls who hated fun and loved to poke their noses into each other's business. In the past 30 years, however, historians — like Packer — have been revising the record. Packer and others have unearthed a hidden cache of Puritan virtues. They did enjoy life, it seems. It's just their pleasures were simple and understated. Husbands and wives enjoyed intimacy. In fact, it was encouraged. They enjoyed wearing colors and only wore black on special occasions. Packer sees Puritans as "persons of principle — devoted, determined and disciplined, excelling in the domestic virtues." They were "visionary and practical," he says. "Great believers. Great hopers. And great doers."
In short, they were a lot like the folks on my block.
Even Puritan history has a familiar ring about it. Their story sounds eerily familiar.
In England, the Puritans were persecuted, so they went "west" to seek religious freedom. They were led by a dynamic leader — a bold, humble man who seemed born to govern. They were never the "freaky, religious fanatics" detractors made them out to be, writes Packer, but were "sober, conscientious and cultured citizens."
They prized education, founding a religious college where they could teach "eternal life."
And according to Jenny Pulsipher of the Brigham Young University history department, the similarities don't end there.
"The Puritans referred to themselves as 'saints'," she says, "and they saw parallels between themselves and the early Children of Israel."
Of course there was that "busy body" downside.
"Privacy wasn't an issue with them," says Pulsipher, "so people thought nothing of sticking their heads in each other's door and lecturing about how to behave. We have less of that. I'd like to think people today aren't quite that bad."
They're not.
At least on my block they're not.
I'm also sure my rosy vision of early Massachusetts comes from my eternal search for Shangri-la — a genetic trait passed down to me, I bet, by all those early Mormons and their quest for a United Order and such. I know Puritan life had its dark side; that nasty business in Salem, for openers.
And I have a feeling my penchant for ladling out nicknames for both friends and strangers would meet with a raised eyebrow and a lowered voice.
"Still," I told Pulsipher, "I think I could fit in with the Puritans. It might even be fun to try."
"For you it might be fun," she said, "but not for me. You're a man. As a woman I'd get in a lot of trouble because I'm so out-spoken."
It's nice to know that's one area where we've actually improved on the Puritan ethic.
Nice to know we've changed.
Haven't we?
E-mail: jerjohn@desnews.com