reason, we will focus in what follows on works that investigate the
notion of recognition in some detail.
Thomas Schmidt has considered the development of Hegel’s phil-
osophy of recognition with an eye on the issues of recognition
observed by Honneth. Schmidt points out that Hegel’s idea of the
self-recognition of the absolute is connected with theological think-
ing. Hegel is indebted to the traditions of mysticism and natural
theology, but he discusses the idea of recognition in a strictly philo-
sophical manner. In the development of Hegel’s philosophical system,
religion has a prominent place as a background to the idea of recog-
nition.^67 The study by Schmidt is valuable in showing that the
Hegelian concept of recognition has important connections with
theological traditions.
Jan-Olav Henriksen associates recognition in Hegel and Levinas
with the more general postmodern trends in current Christology,
arguing that the themes of desire and the other stem from recognition
discussions and need to be accounted for in constructing systematic
Christology.^68 Kevin Hector employs Honneth and other theorists of
recognition in showing how theology can be practised as a linguistic
science that does not need metaphysics. While this project is only
distantly related to the purposes of the present study, Hector makes
some interesting observations concerning the importance of mutual
recognition between Jesus and his disciples in Schleiermacher’s the-
ology.^69 We will return to Schleiermacher and Hegel in 3.3.
Gregory Walter discusses the theological impact of recent
anthropological debates on gift-giving, particularly the notion of the
promise, arguing that promises help to prevent and correct misrec-
ognitions that take place in the exchange of gifts. He claims that
promises create a moral sensibility that allows for recognizing the
other in an appropriate way.^70 While Walter’s discussion remains
brief, the dimension of the promise is an important addition to the
anthropological and theological discussion.
Veronika Hoffmann offers the most thoroughgoing discussion on
the relationship between theories of recognition and systematic the-
ology. While the new English studies mentioned above are primarily
concerned with the adaptation and application of recognition theory
into theology, Hoffmann also considers the inherent potential of
(^67) Schmidt 1997. Cf. section 3.3 in this volume. (^68) Henriksen 2009, 55–69.
(^69) Hector 2011, 86–93. (^70) Walter 2013, 71–4.
Introduction 21