A crucial question here concerns whether freedom of religion, which may be a constitutional guarantee, means the freedom of a whole community to pursue its traditional way of life or whether it only means the freedom of individuals to associate freely for clearly circumscribed religious purposes. Institutional forms highlight the rights of the institution but also the rights of individuals as members of that institution. However, they still seek governmental preferences and privileges, especially in matters of education, social service, and family. The question here, as with communal forms, is whether the religious institution's claims on its members clash with their individual citizenship rights. In addition, we have to ask whether government support may inevitably carry with it discrimination against religions that cannot qualify for such support.
Associational forms highlight the individuals who are members of the association.
Democratic constitutions tend to foster associational forms of religion. These religious associations, while protected from governmental control, are basically treated like other voluntary associations. The problem here is whether in doing so democratic constitutions force religion into a private sphere of individual interest and cut religious organisations off from public life altogether. These three forms may exist on a continuum, with one blending into another as the social or cultural setting changes. Or they may exist together, as contradictory tendencies within a single tradition.