Content provided in partnership with
The Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri de Lubac and John Zizioulas in Dialogue. - book reviews
Ecumenical Review, The, Jan, 1994 by Mark E. Chapman
Paul McPartlan, Edinburgh, T&T Clark, 1993, 368pp., 24.95 [pounds].
Paul McPartlan's fine work of comparative theology can be read profitably and enjoyably on several levels. The first is that which the author himself intends: as a contribution to the ecumenical discussion on unity as communion/koinonia. But the book is also an excellent introduction to the thought of two of the twentieth century's premier theologians: Henri de Lubac, whose theology contributed to much of the ecclesiology of Vatican II; and John Zizioulas, who is one of the current leading voices in ecumenical theology, especially in the dialogue between Orthodoxy and Catholicism. The Eucharist Makes the Church is also simply a fine piece of sacramental theology and ecclesiology, a worthy addition to the library of anyone interested in those subjects.
- More Articles of Interest
- John D. Zizioulas, Eucharist, Bishop, Church: the Unity of the Church in the...
- Sacrament of Salvation: An Introduction to Eucharistic Ecclesiology. - book...
- Sacramentum unitatis ecclesiasticae: The eucharistic ecclesiology of Henri de...
- The Oriental Orthodox churches
- Living Orthodoxy in the Modern World: Orthodox Christianity and Society
The format of the book is simple and straightforward: a section on Henri de Lubac; a section on John Zizioulas; a constructive section of comparisons and criticisms. What makes the book so enriching is that McPartlan clearly is sympathetic to both de Lubac and Zizioulas, and treats both with fairness and devotion. The aim of his comparative theological enterprise is not to have one "triumph" over the other, but rather to show how the ground-breaking foundations in eucharistic ecclesiology laid by Henri de Lubac are built and improved upon by the continuation of that same line of thinking in John Zizioulas. While, in the end, McPartlan does betray a partiality to Zizioulas, that is possible only because McPartlan himself stands on the foundation laid by de Lubac.
McPartlan argues that both de Lubac and Zizioulas base their theology on the fundamental principle that "the eucharist makes the church and the church makes the eucharist". Both, then, are reacting against the notion that the church is a social institution that, as one of its "activities", holds celebrations called the "eucharist". They proceed by locating the church itself in the celebration of the eucharist. It is the mystery of the eucharist that calls the church into being, and the church has, as its fundamental identity, that it is this eucharistic mystery. This was a far more revolutionary position for de Lubac and his compatriots in the resourcement theologie movement in the decades before Vatican II, than for Zizioulas in the post-vatican II ecumenical climate. But that is precisely McPartlan's point: the hard and often difficult work of de Lubac has born such rich fruit that Zizioulas has the freedom now to harvest the bounty and go beyond it.
The great distinction that McPartlan posits between de Lubac and Zizoulas comes to light in Zizioulas's theology of the "corporate personality" of Christ. By seeing Christ as the "corporate personality" of the eucharistic koinonia of the church, Zizioulas probes potential weaknesses in, and notes possible disagreements with, de Lubac's position. Fundamentally, the difference is this: for de Lubac, Christ becomes corporate by his eucharistic indwelling of individual Christians; for Zizioulas, Christ is constitutionally corporate, as the living centre of the eucharistic church itself. Symbolically, this difference appears in de Lubac's focusing the eucharistic communion of the church on the sacramental elements and their priestly consecration, while for Zizioulas, the eucharistic koinonia is focused on the community of believers gathered around the bishop.
McPartlan then seeks to demonstrate how Zizioulas "fills in the gaps" in eschatology and pneumatology left open by de Lubac's Christological and ecclesiological interpretation. This attention to the realm of eschatology and pneumatology (which de Lubac himself admitted were deficient areas in his thinking) sets the question in the context of the presence of Christ, i.e. how Christ comes to the eucharist to effect the communion/ koinonia of the church in and through the eucharist. For de Lubac it is the Christ of the cross who comes from the past event of the cross as the living one to indwell and reconcile all people to himself. For Zizioulas it is the Christ of the parousia who comes from the future kingdom of God to become himself the unity at the centre of diversity. Christ is the one who holds in critical unity-in-multiplicity the Many, the icon of which is the bishop at the centre of the communion of believers, which itself is an icon of the Holy Trinity in which this communion participates.
Two important features arise from this difference. For de Lubac, the key interpretative element is the mystery of divine grace. For Zizioulas, that element is the Orthodox theology and piety of the icon. McPartlan does a splendid job in untangling the arguments over "pure nature" which focused de Lubac's theological development in the mystery of grace, and presents this as a shaping element in his eucharist ecclesiology. McPartlan also makes clear the connection of the Orthodox concept of icons and iconography as a deeply powerful "spirituality as being" at the heart of Zizioulas's ecclesiology.
Find Research Guides for:
Find Featured Titles for: Home & Garden
Most Popular Articles in Reference
- The importance of understanding organizational culture
- Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
- What factors attract foreign direct investment?
- Libraries Need Relationship Marketing - mutual interest marketing concept, ...
- How to set performance goals: employee reviews are more than annual critiques
- More »