For last 20 years, Jürgen Habermas has been engaged in the question about religion in the public sphere. His postmetaphysical thinking from 1980s and the postsecularization theory form the premise of this argument. In the late 80s, he has already stated that religion has the source of meaning which needs to be translated for the mutual discourse.
Habermas considers the relationship between the secular and religion as a process of mutual translation. He finds this process in the history of western philosophy.
According to Habermas, religious language is based on the particular religious community. In the public sphere, religious language must be generalized and translated into the secular common language. On this point, Charles Taylor criticizes Habermas. Religious language is not narrow and special, though it is based on the experience. Taylor focuses on the direct encounter of different languages (including not only religious but also philosophic) rather than a generalization. Taylor pays attention to the creative power of religious language itself.
For followers of the Enlightenment, rational language must be distinguished from religious sources. In this case, the translation means a mere secular mediation. The opposition claims that translation belongs to the essence of religion. Religious resource and its language cannot be separated.
