Chris Tessone made me aware of a another site's post concerning the place of Christianity as it engages others. The author of the blog Diaspora writes:
"It seems that Christian convictions require that we refuse to be just one voice among many within a neutral or secular public sphere. We must refuse a rationality or narrative that is prior to or more fundamental than Christianity."
I may be misreading this post but I think there seems to be a collapsing of the "Christian narrative" and Christ or God in Christ. It's a move I don't think that can be made.
First because Christian tradition is a broad thing indeed. It contains any number of reasonings, methods, committments, and conclusions some that work and some that clash with one another. Getting a single narrative out of that seems unlikely.
But even if one could get such a narrative, all we could really be speaking about is how we as Christians have sought to engage the world, have made sense of our own history, etc. It has all the marks of a human creation. Our fingerprints are all over it.
If it's a human creation than a stronger distinction between that and "God's view" seems to in order. Our ways are not God's way. We confess the finite, limited, historical position by which we have spoken of God. But it is not God.
In this way it's possible to affirm that this world and what God may have for it, is wider, has more elements to it than our Christian narrative or any other narrative can be in a position to recognize. Perhaps something of God can be found in engaging others.
But even if one doesn't affirm this, we don't have to appeal to some universal rationality, neither that of the state or of some public square. All we have to do is to recognize the limits, the finitudes of our own vantage point. Humility can help in engaging others.