What do you think?
Rate this book
Building the Basileia: Moving the Church into the 22nd century
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 4, 2024
What is the church? Is it a building? A people? The academic label for the quest for an answer to this question of what is the church is ecclesiology. As with most labels, it covers a lot of territory, and answers to the question are often influenced by denominational specifics. Is it episcopal, congregational, presbyterial, etc.? When it comes to Open and Relational Theology, it has been observed that it lacks an ecclesiology. That opens the question of whether such a thing is possible for a movement that is broad and tends to focus on questions of theodicy.
The Open and Relational Theology movement is a broad category that includes both Open Theism, a largely evangelical movement that focuses on free will and is often Wesleyan, together with Process Theology, which is more philosophical and tends to be more liberal theologically. Both submovements are focused on answering the question of reconciling the premise that God is good/loving and that evil exists. Open Theists tend to draw from the Bible and place the focus on free will, with God self-limiting to give space for such freedom. Process theologians tend to answer the question more ontologically, such that God can't prevent evil because God lacks coercive power. God influences us, lures us, toward the good but can't force us to the good. So, in many ways, it's all about how God interacts with the universe.
So, where might ecclesiology come into play? That is the question taken up by Ulrick Dam 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, but who is engaged in conversation with congregations regarding leadership structures. This book is based on a seminary master's thesis. It draws on Open and Relational Theology and his experiences in leadership development. He recognizes that to this point Open and Relational Theology lacks an ecclesiology. With this book, he seeks to open the conversation, inviting others within the movement to engage in conversation about developing an ecclesiology. I believe that Ulrick Dam is correct about the lack of an ecclesiology. It's a question I've asked as well as one who has participated in conversations within the movement, though in some ways I live on the fringe since I'm not Process and sometimes find Open Theism too rooted in evangelicalism. That being said, I believe that God is relational and that the future is, at least to some degree, open. Thus, my place in the movement.
Ulrick Dam has divided his book into three parts. Part One asks the question of what is ecclesiology, and he uses Avery Dulles' five models of the church, as well as Jurgen Moltmann's writings on ecclesiology as a starting point. 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 such an ecclesiology make sense of one's theology and lived experience, and is coherent. He writes that "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). He asks the question of the point of a congregation. Why does it exist and how might ORT speak to that question of purpose? He speaks here in terms of the congregation's role in building the kingdom or realm of God (the Basilea) both in the present and in the future. Drawing from Dulles' five models of the church, Dam suggests that an ORE would fit the idea of the church as servant.
As he builds his ecclesiology he draws primarily from Jurgen Moltmann's The Church in the Power of the Spirit, as well as Catherine Keller's On the Mystery: Discerning Divinity in Process. As one who has found Moltmann extremely helpful and would place him within the Open and Relational category, though it's not something he has identified with, I would agree that his ecclesiology would fit well here. While his ecclesiology is certainly Christocentric, I was surprised at how little attention Dam gave to Moltmann's pneumatology. I will come back to that in a moment. Dam places his focus on two foundational theological points. First, 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, a mutuality necessary to create the realm of God now and into the future.
With this theological foundation, he offers three "practical outputs." The first is the role of the church as co-creators with God of the realm. 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 and thus love, especially divinely empowered love. 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 is all are welcome. It's a message I embrace, but I wonder if Dam could define this more clearly. While are welcome as they are, does being part of the community leave them where they started? This is the question that remains unanswered. Yes God loves us, but where does that leave us going forward? I would like to see this developed more fully. What are the ethical components of a radically inclusive community?
This small book offers a starting point for a conversation about developing an ecclesiology influenced by ORT. In his conclusion, Ulrick Dam recognizes that this is only a first step in such a work, inviting others to follow up. As I ponder his book, which provides a good starting point, there are points that I think can be raised. The first question has to do with whether ORT lends itself to an ecclesiology. Unlike, for example, the missional movement or the emergent church movement, reform and renewal of the church are not primary. The movement is rather broad, though many of its adherents are Wesleyan and tend to be "anti-Calvinist," though at least some Process Theologians fall within the Reformed Tradition. In addition, ORT sees itself as existing beyond Christianity, so in that case, Jesus and ecclesiology might not fit. But for our purposes, let's keep the conversation within the boundaries of Christianity. What else might be added to the conversation?
Here are a few elements I will lift up. I found it interesting that Dam 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 own book Unfettered Spirit: Spiritual Gifts for the New Great Awakening. Second Expanded Edition. I believe that it fits well into the conversation and I attempt to lay out an ecclesiology. Then there is the question of sacraments, which Dam does not mention. How might the Lord's Table and Baptism fit into this conversation? Regarding the Table, how might it be an open space for divine encounters? That is a question I've been exploring and again I think it fits the conversation. More elements might be explored beyond these which I've mentioned that might build on what Dam has already noted.
The Open and Relational Theology movement is a broad category that includes both Open Theism, a largely evangelical movement that focuses on free will and is often Wesleyan, together with Process Theology, which is more philosophical and tends to be more liberal theologically. Both submovements are focused on answering the question of reconciling the premise that God is good/loving and that evil exists. Open Theists tend to draw from the Bible and place the focus on free will, with God self-limiting to give space for such freedom. Process theologians tend to answer the question more ontologically, such that God can't prevent evil because God lacks coercive power. God influences us, lures us, toward the good but can't force us to the good. So, in many ways, it's all about how God interacts with the universe.
So, where might ecclesiology come into play? That is the question taken up by Ulrick Dam 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, but who is engaged in conversation with congregations regarding leadership structures. This book is based on a seminary master's thesis. It draws on Open and Relational Theology and his experiences in leadership development. He recognizes that to this point Open and Relational Theology lacks an ecclesiology. With this book, he seeks to open the conversation, inviting others within the movement to engage in conversation about developing an ecclesiology. I believe that Ulrick Dam is correct about the lack of an ecclesiology. It's a question I've asked as well as one who has participated in conversations within the movement, though in some ways I live on the fringe since I'm not Process and sometimes find Open Theism too rooted in evangelicalism. That being said, I believe that God is relational and that the future is, at least to some degree, open. Thus, my place in the movement.
Ulrick Dam has divided his book into three parts. Part One asks the question of what is ecclesiology, and he uses Avery Dulles' five models of the church, as well as Jurgen Moltmann's writings on ecclesiology as a starting point. 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 such an ecclesiology make sense of one's theology and lived experience, and is coherent. He writes that "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). He asks the question of the point of a congregation. Why does it exist and how might ORT speak to that question of purpose? He speaks here in terms of the congregation's role in building the kingdom or realm of God (the Basilea) both in the present and in the future. Drawing from Dulles' five models of the church, Dam suggests that an ORE would fit the idea of the church as servant.
As he builds his ecclesiology he draws primarily from Jurgen Moltmann's The Church in the Power of the Spirit, as well as Catherine Keller's On the Mystery: Discerning Divinity in Process. As one who has found Moltmann extremely helpful and would place him within the Open and Relational category, though it's not something he has identified with, I would agree that his ecclesiology would fit well here. While his ecclesiology is certainly Christocentric, I was surprised at how little attention Dam gave to Moltmann's pneumatology. I will come back to that in a moment. Dam places his focus on two foundational theological points. First, 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, a mutuality necessary to create the realm of God now and into the future.
With this theological foundation, he offers three "practical outputs." The first is the role of the church as co-creators with God of the realm. 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 and thus love, especially divinely empowered love. 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 is all are welcome. It's a message I embrace, but I wonder if Dam could define this more clearly. While are welcome as they are, does being part of the community leave them where they started? This is the question that remains unanswered. Yes God loves us, but where does that leave us going forward? I would like to see this developed more fully. What are the ethical components of a radically inclusive community?
This small book offers a starting point for a conversation about developing an ecclesiology influenced by ORT. In his conclusion, Ulrick Dam recognizes that this is only a first step in such a work, inviting others to follow up. As I ponder his book, which provides a good starting point, there are points that I think can be raised. The first question has to do with whether ORT lends itself to an ecclesiology. Unlike, for example, the missional movement or the emergent church movement, reform and renewal of the church are not primary. The movement is rather broad, though many of its adherents are Wesleyan and tend to be "anti-Calvinist," though at least some Process Theologians fall within the Reformed Tradition. In addition, ORT sees itself as existing beyond Christianity, so in that case, Jesus and ecclesiology might not fit. But for our purposes, let's keep the conversation within the boundaries of Christianity. What else might be added to the conversation?
Here are a few elements I will lift up. I found it interesting that Dam 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 own book Unfettered Spirit: Spiritual Gifts for the New Great Awakening. Second Expanded Edition. I believe that it fits well into the conversation and I attempt to lay out an ecclesiology. Then there is the question of sacraments, which Dam does not mention. How might the Lord's Table and Baptism fit into this conversation? Regarding the Table, how might it be an open space for divine encounters? That is a question I've been exploring and again I think it fits the conversation. More elements might be explored beyond these which I've mentioned that might build on what Dam has already noted.
December 30, 2024
A great introduction to a healthier, more relational, theologically sound way to think about and practice church.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews