Abstract

This part of a two part essay claims that Christians, who affirm a distinctive ethic based in part on theological beliefs that others reject, confront a dilemma when they attempt to justify and advocate policies which determine the distribution of society's benefits and burdens. How are they to balance faithfulness to their distinctive beliefs and ethics with respect for the liberty of those who do not share their beliefs? I maintain that John Rawls's idea of justice as fairness can resolve this dilemma because it bases a conception of justice on general beliefs which can be shared by persons whose particular beliefs and ethics differ in part.