Church and State

A new letter to the editor has just been sent:

I believe that John Kass, in a column that ran in Saturday's WSJ, has unintentionally demonstrated the reason for and value of separation of Church and State.  He refers to a "stridently secular big-government West that regards Christianity as a competitor, an obstacle to overcome, if not an outright threat to squash."  Actually, there is no competition between them, as the two institutions have different missions.  

The Church's primary mission is to prepare its members to be judged by 'God,' at the end of their worldly lives.  The State's is to establish justice in THIS world.  Hence the Church's willingness to not punish members of its clergy apparently guilty of some of society's most heinous crimes, preferring to let 'God' punish or forgive as 'He' sees fit.  And the State's (usual) insistence on holding perpetrators to account.  

There is only 'competition' when one institution attempts to usurp the role of the other.  Nobody thinks the State should serve a religious purpose.  Why do some evidently think that religion should serve a governmental purpose?  There is no need to 'squash' Christianity, only to remind various people of its mission, and its proper role in a democratic society.

History

Still reading Eric Foner's Reconstruction.  As often happens when I read history books, I am struck by the similarities between then and now.  Issues between capital and labor, voting rights, the role of the federal government, it's almost eerie.  I'll do a good long post soon.  ;  )