This thesis intends to approach the theory of religion of the German philosopher and sociologist Jurgen Habermas (1929 –) in a society considered post-secular in which the state is neutral, that is, secular and plural before the different world views. Habermas starts from the twentieth-century pragmatic, post-metaphysical linguistic turn, of L. Wittgenstein s late language games and the semiotic transformation of Kant s philosophy into the a priori of transcendental community of communication of K. O. Apel, going through on the way to language, by M. Heidegger, through the hermeneutics of H.G. Gadamer and the theory of speech acts from J. Austin. Heir to this theoretical framework, Habermas joins the discourse ethics, from universal pragmatics with the theory of communicative action. The principles of morality and universalization of discourse ethics are rethought in the discursive theory of law and democracy, based on the normative models of liberalism and republicanism, in which human rights and popular sovereignty are understood as co-originating in the model of deliberative or procedural democracy. Now, it is in this model of a liberal state, and thus secular, that the life of a post-secular society is normalized, where religion persists despite its secular surroundings. In order that religion exists in its secular environment, believers and non-believers must engage in a tolerant dialogue of mutual learning. But what role can religion still play in this society? How can philosophy think about God today? The defense made here, mainly from Habermas last work – Postmetaphysical Thinking II – is that of a philosophy, with an agnostic and methodologically atheist position, which, based on Kant, dialogues with contemporary theology. t is reconstructed by Habermas, a philosophy of religion by Kant, based on the moral contribution that philosophy and theology can leave for the concept of a modern society and anamnestic solidarity. This philosophy of religion, which is present in Habermas thought, is not based on ontological or cosmological proofs of the existence of God, but on the grounds of the requirement of moral duty, a moral faith, a philosophy of religion of good conduct of life, in the words of G. Sala and J. A. Estrada. Only then, we could call Habermas a philosopher of religion.