Building the Basileia: Moving the Church into the 22nd Century (Ulrick Dam) - A Review.

BUILDING THE BASILEIA: Moving the Church into the 22^nd Century. By Ulrick Dam. Nampa, ID: Sacra Sage Publications, 2023. Xvi + 176 pages.

What is the church? Is it a building? A people? The academic label for the quest to answer this question is ecclesiology. As with most theological labels, it covers a lot of territory, and answers to this question are often influenced by denominational specifics. Is it episcopal, congregational, presbyterial, etc.? So. when it comes to Open and Relational Theology, does it have an ecclesiology or at least ecclesial implications? That fact is what we’ll call for the rest of the review ORT lacks an ecclesiology. This fact opens the question of whether such a thing is possible for a movement that is rather broad in orientation and tends to focus on questions of theodicy.

The Open and Relational Theology movement is quite broad in scope running from Open Theism, which is largely evangelical in orientation, focusing on free will and is often Wesleyan in background, to Process Theology, which is more philosophical and tends to be more liberal theologically.  Both submovements espouse forms of free will and often seek to answer the question of theodicy, that is, reconciling the premise that God is good and loving (is love) with the reality that evil exists. When it comes to answering that question Open Theists and Process theologians offer different perspectives. Open Theists tend to draw from the Bible, focus on free will, and assume that the necessary space for free will result from God’s decision to self-limit God’s power. Process theologians tend to answer the question more ontologically, such that the reason evil is present is that God lacks coercive power to prevent its existence. In response, Process Theology suggests that God responds by influencing us, luring us toward the good. However, in the end, God is unable to coerce behavior.

Because Open and Relational folks are spread across a wide expanse of denominational traditions from nondenominational Protestants to Roman Catholics, with a bunch of Wesleyans somewhere in the mix, all of whom approach ecclesial matters differently. Despite the challenges in developing an ORT ecclesiology, Ulrick Dam has attempted to lay the groundwork for a discussion that has yet to develop within the larger movement in his book Building the Basileia: Moving the Church into the 22nd Century. Dam is a Danish Christian who vocationally lives in the business world, as well as attempting to assist congregations deal with their leadership structures. This book is based on a seminary master's thesis. It draws on both his understanding of Open and Relational Theology and his experiences in leadership development in the business world. He recognizes that to this point Open and Relational Theology essentially lacks an ecclesiology, something he seeks to rectify with this book. He wants to invite folks within the ORT movement to engage in a conversation about how we understand and structure churches as we move toward the twenty-second century.

Being that I’m sixty-five, it’s unlikely I’ll make it to the twenty-second century, but it’s always good to plan ahead. The question about what an ORT ecclesiology might look like is one I’ve contemplated as well, so when I saw his book, I decided to check it out. As for my own place in the conversation, I live within the ORT movement, though I find myself actively engaged but often on the fringe. That is because I’m not Wesleyan, I’m no longer evangelical, and I’m not Process. But I do believe that if we are truly to possess free will, then the future must be to some degree open. I also believe that God is relational and therefore God’s people should be relational in their orientation.

Building the Basileia is divided into three parts. In Part One, Ulrick Dam asks what an ecclesiology might look like, making use of Avery Dulles’ models of the church along with Jürgen Moltmann's writings on ecclesiology. From there he moves in Part Two to a lengthy discussion of Open and Relational Theology, drawing primarily from the work of Thomas Jay Oord, a person with feet in both Process and Open Theist camps. Part Three dives more deeply into the construction of an Open and Relational ecclesiology. I want to focus my attention on Part Three because I believe that it is the heart of the book. As for Part Two, I felt that it was too lengthy and covered too much territory that is tangential to the primary topic. I would recommend simply offering a summation of Open and Relational Theology, focusing on those elements, such as the primacy of love, that might contribute to the development of an Open and Relational ecclesiology.

When it comes to Part Three and its discussion of an Open and Relational Ecclesiology, Dam suggests that it is important that an ORT ecclesiology must make sense of one's theology and lived experience. It also must be coherent. He writes that an "ORE should rightly frame how we can live a communal life as co-creators of the Creator's masterpiece and be practical enough for us to put it into action" (p. 97). With that in mind, he asks us to consider the purpose of a congregation. Why does it exist and how might ORT speak to that question of purpose? His starting point is the question of the nature of the Basileia and how a congregation might participate with God in building God’s Basileia (kingdom/realm). He speaks in both present and future terms. He also draws on Avery Dulles’ five models of the church, suggesting that an ORT ecclesiology would envision the church fitting the role of the servant.  

While Dulles provides the models of ecclesiology, Dam turns to Moltmann’s writings, primarily his The Church inthe Power of the Spirit, along with Catherine Keller's On the Mystery: Discerning Divinity in Process to flesh out his vision of the church. As one who finds Moltmann extremely helpful when it comes to ecclesiology, and who places him within the Open and Relational movement even if he has not explicitly done so, I agree that he provides an excellent starting point for the conversation. What I found odd was that while Moltmann’s theology is certainly Christocentric, I was surprised at how little attention Ulrick Dam gave to Moltmann's pneumatology in developing his ecclesiology. I will come back to that in a moment, but first I want to take note of Dam’s two foundational theological points. First, he suggests that the church is in the world but not of the world. Secondly, he speaks of the call to continual co-creation. Here the focus is on the partnership with God (might we call this synergism?), a mutuality necessary to create the realm of God now and into the future.

With this theological foundation, Dam offers three "practical outputs." In many ways, ecclesiology must have practical implications. The first output is the role the church plays as co-creators with God of the realm/Basileia. In other words, the church as people are the hands and feet of God, and thus a creative force. Secondly, there is the need for relational leadership. Here the author draws both on his experience in the business world as a consultant and ORT. He affirms the need for leadership in the church but insists that it must be relational and not authoritarian. It is a leadership style that emphasizes people. Therefore, love, especially divinely empowered love, must be part of the package. He writes that "the relational leader seeks to lead with purpose through inclusiveness, empowerment, and ethics, all the while respecting the process" (p. 138). Such forms of leadership draw on the love of God for humanity and creation, which leads to love of neighbor. The third component or output is "radical inclusiveness." The message here is that everyone is welcome. It's a message I embrace (I am in the process of writing a book about the fully open eucharistic table). While I welcome this message, I would like to see the author develop this idea more fully, and perhaps more clearly. The question the church that welcomes everyone must face is whether people end up staying the same as they were when they entered the fold. This is the question that remains unanswered, such that we are reminded that God loves us but doesn’t say what might happen to us when we encounter God’s love. In other words, what are the ethical components of this radically inclusive community Ulrick Dan envisions?

I should note here that this is a very small book that doesn’t offer all the answers but does raise some important questions for us to consider. In his conclusion, Ulrick Dam acknowledges that this is only a first step in such a work. He invites others to join him in following up on this task. As I read his book, which I believe provides us with a good starting point, some questions came to mind that might facilitate this conversation going forward. The first question is whether ORT lends itself to ecclesiology. Unlike, for example, the missional movement or the emergent church movement, reform and renewal of the church is not or at least has not been a primary concern.  As I noted, the movement is rather broad. While many of its adherents are Wesleyan and tend to be "anti-Calvinist," at least some Process Theologians fall within the Reformed Tradition. In addition, ORT sees itself as encompassing a world beyond Christianity. If that is true, then where does a Jesus-centered ecclesiology fit? Perhaps there are implications for communities that lie beyond Christianity, but for our purposes, we might want to keep the conversation for now within the boundaries of Christianity.

With these questions in mind, here are a few suggested directions that Dam and others who want to pursue the conversation might go.  First, I found it interesting that he did not refer to 1 Corinthians 12-14, with its discussion of the church as the body of Christ as well as spiritual gifts. With that in mind, besides Moltmann's books, I would point Dam to my book Unfettered Spirit: Spiritual Gifts for the New Great Awakening (Second Expanded Edition). I believe that there are important connections between what Dam is envisioning and what I seek to do in my book. Then there is the question of sacraments, something that Dam does not mention in the book. So, questions as to how the Lord's Table and Baptism fit into an ORT ecclesiology would be worth exploring. While he addresses this to some degree, I would like to see more engagement with the relational part of the conversation, especially when it comes to the Table and perhaps leadership styles. As the author notes in the very beginning, he offers Building the Basileia as a starting point not an end point in a conversation about whether it is possible to develop an ecclesiology that reflects Open and Relational Theology. Let the conversation begin.