All of the major religious confessions existing today have outlasted every single secular ruling regime known in human history. That observation poses an interesting puzzle for social scientists interested in institutional durability. If religions can be seen as governance institutions that organize and coordinate people’s lives, why have they outlasted secular states? Despite claims regarding the inevitability of secularization, religious institutions refuse to fade from the social landscape and in many places are thriving and expanding. I argue that the durability of religious institutions relative to secular governing regimes is related to the unique ability of religions to avoid the public choice “paradox of government” as laid out by James Buchanan. More precisely, religious institutions are more resilient because they effectively provide vital public goods, involve “citizens” in the process of governance at the local level, and provide a credible neutral arbitrator for violations of the governing covenant. A further argument is made for the efficiency of religious institutions relative to states based on the smaller deadweight losses associated with participatory governance. Finally, state-sponsored confessions expose themselves to the paradox of government and become less effective in pursuing their missions.

今天存在的所有主要宗教信仰都比人类历史上已知的每一个世俗统治政权都更持久。这一观察结果为对制度持久性感兴趣的社会科学家提出了一个有趣的难题。如果宗教可以被视为组织和协调人们生活的治理机构，为什么它们比世俗国家更持久？尽管声称世俗化不可避免，但宗教机构拒绝从社会景观中消失，并且在许多地方正在蓬勃发展和扩张。我认为，宗教机构相对于世俗统治体制的持久性与宗教避免詹姆斯·布坎南 (James Buchanan) 提出的公共选择“政府悖论”的独特能力有关。更确切地说，宗教机构更具弹性，因为它们有效地提供了重要的公共产品，让“公民”参与地方一级的治理过程，并为违反治理公约的行为提供了可信的中立仲裁员。基于与参与式治理相关的较小的无谓损失，宗教机构相对于国家的效率提出了进一步的论点。最后，国家资助的认罪将自己暴露在政府的悖论中，并且在执行任务时变得不那么有效。基于与参与式治理相关的较小的无谓损失，宗教机构相对于国家的效率提出了进一步的论点。最后，国家资助的认罪将自己暴露在政府的悖论中，并且在执行任务时变得不那么有效。基于与参与式治理相关的较小的无谓损失，宗教机构相对于国家的效率提出了进一步的论点。最后，国家资助的认罪将自己暴露在政府的悖论中，并且在执行任务时变得不那么有效。