This doctoral thesis examines and compares the positions of legal subjects in paradigmatic protestant and catholic theological concepts of legal ethics of the last twenty years. All of the approaches have in common that they try to outline a system of legal ethics which treats the plurality of ethical convictions within an ideologically neutral state sensitively. Denominational differences can be particularly found concerning legal foundation. The catholic approaches are informed by jusnaturalistic thinking, whereas protestant approaches are close to legal positivism, Martin Luthers two kingdoms doctrine and the protestant doctrine of justification being the theological background. The guiding perspective in this analysis is one of individual ethics, leading to another denominational difference. For the protestant authors, a legal subject is primarily subjected to law. They tend to see each subject obliged to be faithful to the law and ask, if necessary, for the prerequisites of legitimate resistance. Catholic authors, on the other hand, ask for the prerequisites for the proper shaping of the law by the subject and therefore emphasize the subject's responsibility for legal development both implicitly and explicitly. These two differences, which are based on different denominational focuses, do not necessarily make the concepts contradictory. Rather, all the discussed behaviors (loyalty, shared responsibility, resistance) are significant from the individual's perspective of legal ethics. This leads me to formulating the proposition that a differentiated consensus within legal ethics is possible, which is a continuation of ecumenical convergence as designed in context with the Joint Declaration concerning the Doctrine of Justification in 1999.