The Christian living in two worlds?

摘要

This article discusses the possibilities for and the point of using religious and moral arguments in current public, political discourse. A solution building upon the concept of overlapping consensus is critically analyzed. The author finds that this Rawlsian idea fails to see the close relation between justifying arguments and the conclusions reached. It also emphasizes justifying reasoning too much. The article points at a need to start in concrete social practice. Related to that, a discussion between Jeffrey Stout and Stanley Hauerwas concerning the relation between religion, ethics and democratic life is analyzed. The final section of the article deals with some implications of the main arguments for an understanding of Nordic Lutheran social ethics today.