"Sacramental ontology": The history of a phrase

So, after writing my previous post and feeling like some folks may have ... concerns ... about my use of terms, I decided to do a little research into the history of the operative phrase of this society: i.e., "sacramental ontology." What I found was very interesting.

So, after writing my previous post and feeling like some folks may have ... concerns ... about my use of terms, I decided to do a little research into the history of the operative phrase of this society: i.e., "sacramental ontology." What I found was very interesting.*

I have often used Google's very fun Ngram Viewer tool to see how different words have changed or trends in word use have shifted over the last two hundred years. It is a riot, believe me. I realized that I could use this handy-dandy tool to get a bit of insight into the appearance of "sacramental ontology" across the archives of Google Books. Here is what I found:

As you judge correctly, there is a significant leap at the end of the first decade of the 2000s, which sees the publication of several of Dr. Boersma's works (and responses to these). There is also some reference to this term in Jamie Smith's book about Radical Orthodoxy published in the middle of that decade. 

I am eager to dig deep and drink from these wells and am excited to see the rapid explosion in uses of the term up to today; however, I am also struck by the interesting blip we can see in 1980s! Just what can this be? 

At first glance, there doesn't appear to be a common link between the documents that a Google Books search of this period uncover. There is a name that comes up several times though alongside descriptions of a "sacramental ontology": Karl Rahner.

I know nothing about Rahner -- and I know basically nothing about Boersma's articulation of "sacramental ontology." Yet a cursory scan of material that might link the two brought up an interesting chapter from a book on the ressourcement of the nouvelle theologie (a crucially important movement for Boersma). The chapter is titled: "Theology of Karl Rahner: An Alternative to the Ressourcement?"

The abstract for the chapter opens with the following:

The theologians of the ressourcement are often contrasted with Karl Rahner: the former based their work on biblical and patristic sources; Rahner focused on re‐receiving Thomism, via a dialogue with modern philosophy and culture.

I'm going to wrap things up for now, but I think this may merit some more digging to understand what Rahner is about and whether there is any overlap with the more recent, exciting stuff coming out of Nasthotah House and elsewhere.

* I'll admit up front that my research methodology is about as slapdash and non-scientific as my use of terms. I'm sorry (#notsorry), but this is the Internet, so take it for what it is.