Personal vs. Social Responsibility

"And the dilemma posed for the pietists who sought to construct the New Jerusalem in America's green and promised land had two sides: first, how do I get myself into harmony with the moral law, and second, how do I translate that law into action without curtailing the freedom of others?  Or, in other words, the dilemma of personal responsibility for purity and social responsibility for order, for transforming myself and my society into that state of perfection which God requires on earth even as it is in heaven" (McLoughlin 165).
      First off, this is an excellent example of two sentences that say the same thing, but one is more clear than the other.  While the first sentence uses more fancy words and seems like it is the better one, it did not make sense to me compared to the second sentence.  The second sentence lays out the author's point more clearly in terms that are more easily understood.
     On a different note, McLoughlin's part about "personal responsibility for purity and social responsibility for order" prompts me to make the connect this not only to religion, but also democracy.  We discussed a "common people" and that the common people reshape society.  Whether it is religion or democracy, it takes this common people to reshape old beliefs into new beliefs, and consequently these new beliefs become more "normal".  In the religious aspect, each individual has the responsibility to hold themselves accountable for their own actions, all the while helping society keep order by reshaping what is accepted as "normal" religious behavior in America.  As far as the democratic aspect of this, each individual has the responsibility to be pure in the sense of honesty and participating in the democracy; each individual has the responsibility to keep social order by participating in the democracy and making their vote count.  So, in a way, religion and democracy have some of the same components that make them work -- make the functionable in a society that is so diverse.