Wilhelm Herrmann and Karl Barth (section 3.4) who interpret reli-
gion as entirely non-philosophical submission and dependence on
God. Such emphasis does not, however, apply much to issues of
equality. First, the ecumenical movement gives more weight to the
idea of regarding different partners as equals in spite of existing
differences. Generally speaking, however, the modern paradigm of
recognition as existential attachment manages to highlight issues of
otherness and plurality more strongly than the premodern paradigms.
This does not mean that issues of otherness are entirely absent
from premodern texts. The LatinRecognitionsunderlines the non-
philosophical nature of religious knowledge and recognition. In reli-
gion, we are dealing with a truth that needs to be approached in terms
of conversion and transformation of one’s own identity. Luther and
Calvin preserve this non-philosophical trend, showing how religious
conviction differs from our ordinary perception of the world. While
this sense of otherness is developed and preserved in the long history
of upward recognition, it is not extended to horizontal relationships
before modernity. Religious recognition thus remains ambivalent
in this regard, teaching the importance of approaching otherness
and changing one’s own values, but not automatically promoting
horizontal toleration.
In this manner, we have some differentiated affirmations of equal
respect and individual esteem in our history of religious recognition.
This is not, however, the primary aim of religious recognition.
Generally speaking, this recognition aims to produce religious per-
sonhood that is relational and constitutes itself as well as its object in
the network of social bonds, enabling an existential attachment to
a‘higher’reality. In this process, religious recognition may have con-
tributed to the emergence of the modern, Hegelian view of equal and
mutual recognition. At the same time, the secular view of recognition
has its own strengths, in particular the idea of equality, that the
religious view has not consistently produced from its own premises.
4.5.7. Distinctive AimsGiven this, what are the distinctive aims of religious recognition? The
present study has argued that producing a self-definition and self-
preservation of the recognizer are significant aims that have been
neglected in previous scholarship. While modern secular theories of
Recognition in Religion 251