The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-07-06
MEANS MIXING OF
 CHURCH AND STATE
DIR. DICKINSON DEFENDS HIS AT. TITUDE AGAINST THE APPRO- TAXATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS TO SEcTARlAN INSTITUTIONS.
To the Editor of The Ago-Herald.

To the Editor of The Age Herald
 Your criticism of me and my article In the issue of today calls for just n word or two in response. Your represen- tatlon of my putting into a controversy between yourself and Dr. Mccormick lmputes a tinge or offieiousness on my part which calls for word of personal explanation. When Dr. Mccormick brought thls matter before the public at tn Pastors conference. he. himself, moved that 1t be referred to commit tee witt power to act, and suggested that l act as chairman of that committee. This is how I got butted into the con- troversy and now l am likely to stay In until we remedy the law and lncor- porate the principe of the separation of church and state Into the organic law of Alabama. l think you are right In contendng that there Is no law forbid ding an ecclesiastical institution taking charge of a branch of the civil service, and it is perfectly lawful for the Bap- tlsts t) institute poor house, and get an appropriation for it from the Board of Revenue, But my attorney does not see 1t us l do, and holds that the principle involved is abundantly provided for in the instrument as 1t stands, and that recovery of funds to sectarian institutions is feasible under the law as it now is. The only way to settle the question is by a suit taken to the supreme court, an. the committee is likely to take that course. There are several lines of public service which many ecclesiastical insti- tutions feel themselves much more com potent to operate than the civic bodies nov in charge. l ( l sure the First Bap- tis: church could run the county jail and save money to the county. Since there Is no law against farming out civic fune- lIons. 1t might be well for some of us to petition the county authorities on this matter You will see, MT. Editor that there Is a serious defect in the law if this sort of mixing matters of church anl state Is to be permitted. If the funds already given to these institutions are not recoverable, then there is no wa to keep trustees of public funds from such appropriations in the future, and the next election may be a struggle be- tween the many ecclesiastical bodies in the county for the privileges of getting the COT tracts of the county. I want to have the Baptist folks and their sympa- thiZers in line, if this is to be the future policy of the community that we may get the credit of doing much charity at the expense of the public. No, MT. Editor I ought not to say charity, but "vicarious service" 1 want this community to get acquainted with that term. It is not d theological term, at all. but a well known sociological one, which clears up the na- ture of much which is enormously brand ed as charit. Charity is only when one renders a vicarious service at his own expense, and is not compensated by an- other ] hold that St. Vincent, to the ex- tent that it has been compensated by the county is not rendering charity but only ''yicarious service' It is true that all vioarious service implies charity in some e; but that one is not necessarily the party who renders the service; but the charity is to be credited to him at whose expense the service Is rendered We preachers do vcarious services; but our churches, who pay us, are to be credited with the charity involved. So St Vincent did the vearious service but the taxpay CTS of the county are to be credited with the chartableness of that service. We also desire to know if these two in- stituticns thus in the employ of the Board of County Commissioners rendered any accounting for the funds intrusted to them for charitable work? There is a big and vitally important question involved in this appropriation, and all good citizens arei interested in it. and should help to a solution In behalf of the committee, thank you for the light you are throw ing on it. Very truly yours.