Religion and government, following the influence of Locke and Madison are often considered two different institutions. As such, they function under different sets of rules. We argue that the ‘two institutions’ image and institutional reality are increasingly untenable. Rather, religion and government are intertwined in many democratic countries, including, growingly, in the US, that it would be more accurate to speak of the new norm of governmental–religious hybridity. Advances in data collected regarding religion–state relations, and the accumulation of court decisions in the US bring to the fore a new norm of religious–governmental hybridity. Such hybrid institutions are typically functionally religious associations; however, their funding is sourced in the government to create ‘public private religious partnerships’. If such a re-classification is justified, then norms of public law should apply to such religious associations. This bears substantial implications vis-a-vis central concepts used in political and legal circles regarding religious freedom; furthermore, this reclassification also bears upon an ongoing intellectual debate between scholars such as Chiara Cordelli—advocating democratization of religion, and Michael W. McConnell who advocated an opposing view: a strong version of church autonomy. So, this reclassification bears important implications for both scholarly debates and political issues.

中文翻译：

---

公私宗教伙伴关系的兴起：公共资助宗教时代的教会自治争论

受洛克和麦迪逊的影响，宗教和政府通常被认为是两个不同的机构。因此，它们在不同的规则下运作。我们认为，“两个机构”的形象和制度现实越来越站不住脚。相反，宗教和政府在许多民主国家（包括日益增长的美国）交织在一起，因此更准确的说法是政府与宗教混合的新规范。关于宗教与国家关系的数据收集的进展以及美国法院判决的积累使宗教与政府混合的新规范脱颖而出。这种混合机构通常是功能上的宗教协会；然而，他们的资金来自政府，用于建立“公私宗教伙伴关系”。如果这种重新分类是合理的，那么公法规范应适用于此类宗教协会。这对于政治和法律界使用的有关宗教自由的中心概念具有重大影响；此外，这种重新分类还引发了学者之间持续不断的学术争论，例如主张宗教民主化的基亚拉·科代利(Chiara Cordelli)和主张相反观点的迈克尔·W·麦康奈尔(Michael W. McConnell)：强硬版本的教会自治。因此，这种重新分类对学术辩论和政治问题都具有重要影响。