All doctrinal development and debate occurs against the background of Christian practice and worship. By attending to what Christians have done in the eucharist, Kimberly Belcher provides a new perspective on the history of eucharistic doctrine and Christian divisions today. Stepping back from the metaphysical approaches that divide the churches, she focuses on a phenomenological approach to the eucharist and a retrieval of forgotten elements in Ambrose's and Augustine's work. The core of the eucharist is the act of giving thanks to the Father – for the covenant and for the world. This unitive core allows for significant diversity on questions about presence, sacrifice, ecclesiology, and ministry. Belcher shows that the key is humility about what we know and what we do not, which gives us a willingness to receive differences in Christian teachings as gifts that will allow us to move forward in a new way.

A liturgical phenomenology of Roman Catholic priesthood based on the experience of images of priests and people in scripture and liturgy lends itself to a renewed appropriation of Vatican II and post-conciliar approaches to priesthood. The authors interpret the relational dynamics of Christ’s own priesthood using the pericope of Christ’s anointing at Bethany (Mark 14:1–9), followed by a phenomenological examination of the dialogical introduction to the Eucharistic Prayer or anaphora in the Roman and Byzantine Eucharistic rites. The way ordained ministry is exercised in dialogical and symbolic fashions then provides the impetus for a new look at the significance of prostration in the context of Good Friday and of the Roman Catholic ordination rite. The trinitarian implications of the unified but differentiated priesthood of the Church are the theme of the final section.

Ambrose’s interpretation of his eucharistic prayer played a foundational role in the developing theology of consecration in the West. Medieval commentators conflated Ambrose’s prayer and ritual context with the later Roman Canon and the mass. By reconsidering the relationship between the eucharistic portions of De sacramentiis and De mysteriis and the structural differences between Ambrose’s prayer and the earliest sacramentary versions of the Roman Canon, one can base a Western theology of the “sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving” on the Western eucharistic prayer family’s chiastic references to offering and acceptance. Ambrose’s witness overcomes ecumenical impasses on sacrifice, because the indigenous Western European theology of the Eucharistic Prayer includes the local community’s participation in Christ’s cosmic and ecclesial thanksgiving to God the Father; by this participation they bind themselves to do God’s work; what is sacrificed is the greed by which they formerly sought their own interests. To constrain Roman Catholic theologies of the Roman Canon with this theology is also to respect Luther’s testamentary theology of eucharistic liturgy and show a way for ecumenical convergence.

Contemporary sacramental theology construes the sacraments as a symbolic gift exchange between God and humanity; God initiates in the ministry of Jesus Christ, and human beings acknowledge and respond to God’s gift. The gratuity of that initial gift is ensured not only by reference to God’s all-sufficient nature, but also in many cases by excising economic value and economic exchange from the symbolic realm within which the sacramental gift exchange proceeds. This poses an intellectual and a practical problem. Intellectually, economic exchange is fundamentally symbolic and even ritualistic, so that the division between them is difficult to define and maintain. Practically, economic behavior is morally relevant, and the sacraments ought to give some purchase on marketplace behavior. In this essay, anthropological and economic work on “consumption rituals,” based on the work of Mary Douglas and Baron Isherwood, is brought to bear on defining the relationship between sacraments and economic exchange and articulating the sociological preconditions for experiencing market exchange as an extension of sacramental gift exchange.

No abstract