Worldly Politics and Divine Institutions : Contemporary Entanglements of Faith and Government

Worldly Politics and Divine Institutions explores four instances of democratic governments becoming intertwined with religious matters: when the U.K. Supreme Court forced a government-funded faith school (the British JFS School) to change its admission policies; when The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Catholic Church could dismiss religion teachers in Spanish public schools; when the Italian government upheld mandatory crucifixes in all public school classrooms; and the Bladensburg World War I Memorial (the Peace Cross) case in Maryland, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross''s public placement did not violate the U.S. Constitution''s First Amendment.

The institutional entanglement of religion and government takes many forms, including direct governmental funding of religious associations, legal recognition, and governmental endorsement of religious symbols in public spaces. The entanglement of church and state remains contentious in many democratic countries today. In fact, in Europe and North America, there are a growing number of instances of governments becoming entwined with religious matters.Worldly Politics and Divine Institutions explores the entanglement of religion and government in a comparative analysis of four cases within democratic countries: the British Jewish Free School (JFS) case, in which the U.K. Supreme Court forced a government-funded faith school to change its admission policies; The European Court of Human Rights decision in Martinez, in which the Catholic church kept its right to dismiss religion teachers within the Spanish public school system; The Lautsi case, in which the Italian government successfully defended its policy of mandating a crucifix in all public school classrooms - at the European Court of Human Rights; and the case of the Bladensburg World War I Memorial (often called the Peace Cross) in Maryland, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross''s public placement and maintenance funding does not violate the non-establishment clause of the First Amendment. Perez describes how these cases create complex, hybrid religious-statist institutions and outlines a novel framework for understanding these cases.