Helfand on the Florida "Sharia" case

Here's law prof, Michael Helfand (Pepperdine) on an arbitration case out of the Florida that was the subject of some blogosphereic and talk-radio conversation:

For those still interested in this case from Florida, the judge issued an "opinion" today, which actually is intended just to give explain the facts and the procedural history giving rise to his original order: http://www.fljud13.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Gou70XZCgII%3d&tabid=667&mid=1031. 

It seems to me that there is a confusion in the opinion between two issues: (1) cases implicating the church autonomy doctrine and the constitutional protections afforded religious institutions to govern themselves and (2) religious arbitration cases where the parties have signed an arbitration agreement, thereby depriving a court of jurisdiction over a particular dispute (while still leaving a more limited role for the court in evaluating the arbitration on particular grounds).  The two issues can intersect in interesting ways (e.g. the Establishment Clause may be implicated in both) but the two issues do not work in the same way.