CNN on Puritans

Status
Not open for further replies.
The commentator praises the Puritans for their work ethic and commitment to invest in the future and to accept delayed gratification. But he also passes along common misconceptions, mentioning how "dour" they always were and how quick to stomp on anyone who seemed happy.

This is all the more reason for us on this board, who have co-opted the Puritan name, to show that it is not so—to remain cheerful in Christ and full of kindness.
 
You mean that Mencken wasn't correct when he famously declared: "Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."
:hunter:

My guess is that most of what we "know" about the Puritans has to do with Hawthorne's 1850 foray into early mass produced fiction (falsely describing so very much about the Puritans in his Scarlet Letter, Arthur Miller's 1953 allegory to McCarthyism set in Puritan New England (The Crucible), and Harvard's agnostic intellectual historian, Perry Miller (at least Miller was somewhat emphathetic despite his viewing them as humorless).

Hey, you humorless uptight fundy on the PB. You mean that you seriously think that a bunch of humorless, repressed, sexually phobic, abstemious cretins from the 16th and early 17th centuries are to be taken as having ANYthing to say to us today?!? Shocking. Shocking I say.
 
It has become freeing to understand that this media entity really cannot be depended on as a source of information. It may have other value, but not as an authoritative source for coming to an understanding or conclusion about topics generally.

Not from the standpoint of factual accuracy, context, or attempted neutral presentation of information.

There are many authoritative sources from which might learn about this topic, including the writings of the Puritans themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top