radically. At the same time, theirrecognitio aims to refresh the
memory of the faithful, rediscovering the deeper understanding of
these mysteries. In this sense,recognitiois not merely a legal or
technical process but a process of appropriating and‘acknowledging’
the sacrament more deeply.
Given this, Vatican II embraces both the long tradition ofagnitio
veritatisand the Augustinian–Platonic tradition of recapturing one’s
own deeper origins. The second tradition is relevant for the ecumen-
ical movement, as the ecumenical task is often concerned with rein-
terpreting old texts and doctrines. The option ofrecognitio,an
insightful revised reading, has obvious areas of application in ecu-
menism. Simplifying the issues, one could summarize the concepts of
Vatican II as follows: whileagnitio veritatisprovides an immediate
encounter with the other, the process ofrecognitioenables a careful
scrutiny that leads to deeper insights regarding the received body
of wisdom.
Given the rich texts of Vatican II as well as the Protestant heritage of
Barth and Bultmann, one would expect that the notion of religious
recognition would remain significant after 1965. As the new theological
currents of the 1960s take Hegel, Marx, social sciences, and human
rights seriously, this expectation is even stronger. However, one seeks
discussions of recognition in liberation theology or in the political
theology of the 1960s and 1970s in vain. As we have seen in thefirst
chapter, the heritage of Schleiermacher and Bultmann continues to be
apparent in authors like Gerhard von Rad or Eberhard Jüngel. The new
contextual theologies do not, however, consider this heritage.
Generally speaking, recognition does not belong to the themes of
the progressive social sciences during this period. Its introduction by
Charles Taylor and Axel Honneth has only taken place since the end
of the cold war period. It may be, as Nancy Fraser claims (see section
1.2), that recognition is too psychological a notion to address the
issues of political liberation effectively. The social theory of promin-
ent theologians of liberation does not proceed from the psychological
considerations of identity. However, as the theological concept of
recognition is elaborated by Vatican II, Bultmann, and Barth, its
absence in contemporary theology is somewhat surprising.
A new theological reflection on recognition starts with the recep-
tion of Taylor, Honneth, and Ricoeur in the 1990s (cf. section 1.3).
This reflection does not, however, show awareness of the long trad-
ition sketched in the present study; nor does it use the resources of
172 Recognition and Religion