Louis M. SAVARY, Teilhard de Chardin on the Eucharist: Envisioning the Body of Christ. Mahway, NJ: Paulist Press, 2021. xi + 199 pages, pb, $24.95. ISBN 978-0-8091-5492-0. Reviewed by Thomas SIMMONS, University of South Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota 57069-2307.

Prior to this monograph, Dr. Savary, had, by my count, already authored six books on Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, the French Jesuit priest/scientist. The topics of those books ranged from Teilhard’s writings on the gospels and love to his works on suffering and spiritual exercises. This one considers the Eucharist.

This book is divided into two parts. The first concerns itself with Teilhard’s Eucharistic theology. The second part articulates a series of reverential preparatory recommendations for Eucharistic prayer and adoration, followed by fourteen carefully crafted contemplative exercises – ways of praying – in no particular order.

Beginning, then, with theology, Dr. Savary sketches basic Teilhardian principles. Next, he proceeds to map Teilhard’s Eucharistic theory as an outgrowth of those principles. Teilhard, as many readers know, proved to be a controversial figure in his own times (1881-1955). Despite his impressive scientific output in the fields of geology and paleontology (taking part in the discovery of Peking Man), some of his Christological assertions ruffled Church feathers (the Vatican placed a monitum on his work in 1962, and renewed it in 1981) while his mysticism turned off many in the scientific crowd.

Even today, Teilhard, despite wider acceptance, is controversial, in part perhaps due to the ambiguity and density of many of assertions. His thought can be opaque, but richly opaque. Here, by way of example, introduction, and orientation, are four key ones, plucked from this book:

1. “Since God created the universe out of love and the universe is full of matter, God must love matter” (15). 
2. Our “universe is not a finished cosmos but a cosmogenesis – a universe in process of becoming what it was meant to be” (26).
3. “Not only do we live in Christ and God at present, but God is also ahead of us in time beckoning us forward” (34).
4. God’s plan for us “was not to set up a test-for-heaven system” but “to make our ‘perfectible’ planet an ever-better place in which to live” (55) (emphasis in original).

From the foregoing bits, the ecological flavor of Teilhard should be clear, and Pope Francis has embraced at least some of the Jesuit’s assertions. Teilhard himself embraced evolution quite wholeheartedly. He perceived that Darwin’s findings called for a re-evaluation of what had been previously perceived as a static universe in theology, just as they had in science. Teilhard re-interpreted Matthew 4:17 (“Repent (metonia, in the Greek), for the kingdom of heaven has come near”) – which had traditionally been read as a call for contrition – as an invitation for “us to enter a higher or on a higher (meta) mindset (noia)” (34). Thus, he perceived an ongoing evolution in biological developments as well as in human consciousness.

Moreover, in perhaps his most unorthodox step, Teilhard asserted that God Himself was also evolving. He thereby directly contradicted Aquinas who reasoned that since God was perfect, He must be unchanging, since any change would mean that He was less (or had once been less) than perfect. Something of absolute perfection must necessarily admit no change. Teilhard also construes God as in some manner dependent on humankind.

Dr. Savary takes note of certain strands of scriptural authority for applying evolutionary concepts to the Godhead. First, Teilhard situates evolutionary precepts with the kingdom of heaven, which is, at least in part, forward looking; an occurrence in the future; ahead of where we are now in time. Consider the Pater Noster: “Your kingdom come (Luke 11:2) (emphasis supplied).

Second, Dr. Savary continues, Saint Paul distinguishes the Christ as man during his time on Earth – the Jesus of Nazareth Christ – and the resurrected Lord; the Christ who is: “[E]ven though we once knew Christ from a human point of view, we know him no longer in that way” 2 Corinthians 5:16. The past Christ (the historical Christ) and the now-Christ (the “Cosmic Christ” which includes members of the faithful as body and Christ as head) must also be supplemented, Teilhard claims, with the future-Christ – “the Christ up ahead, the Christ who is inviting us as a people to evolve in love so that we who are his Body become more and more like him, our Head” (84). Moreover, Dr. Savary explains, the fact that Paul was relatively unconcerned with the biographical details of Jesus (those events would not be transcribed until the synoptics were penned), Paul necessarily considered the Cosmic Christ as distinct Jesus of Nazareth.

With these Teilhardian foundational ideas in mind, Dr. Savary proceeds to explain how Teilhard applied them to the Eucharist. For example, adoration should take account of all of Christ – the historical Christ, the resurrected Christ, and the Christ beckoning us forward. All three manifestations of Christ must be accounted for in the Eucharistic transformation. Simply adoring Jesus of Nazareth is an incomplete exercise. Moreover, individual salvation should be de-emphasized in favor of a more communal project. Indeed, certain aspects of Teilhard’s thought do seem closer to the image and idea of “thy kingdom come” than earning eternal life on an atomized person-by-person basis, one individual at a time.

Despite the difficulty typically associated in any encounter with Teilhard’s works, Dr. Savary precisely outlines Theilhard’s assertions, making them coherent and serviceable, if not always entirely agreeable.