This panel expands the horizons of Open and Relational Theologies by engaging sources and voices outside its standard canon. Through ecological pneumatology, post-secular eschatology, medieval mysticism, and Jain metaphysics, the panelists challenge ORT to deepen its commitments to relationality, freedom, and divine becoming. One panelist reimagines the Holy Spirit amid planetary extinction, proposing a pneumatology without anthropocentrism. Another draws on Moltmann and Kearney to develop a divine eschatology grounded in possibility rather than self-sufficiency. A third retrieves Mechthild of Magdeburg to extend process theology's mystical lineage. The final panelist explores resonances between Whiteheadean metaphysics and Jain philosophy with regard to interconnectedness, becoming, and the creative unfolding of existence. Together, these papers invite a broader, more ecologically- and interreligiously- attuned vision of open and relational theology.
In Christian theology, the Holy Spirit is described as the Giver of Life. At the same time, in both anecdotal testimony and scriptural record, the Holy Spirit is associated with periods of Kairos. Its presence is felt in extremes of experience. A question arises for the twenty-first century theologian: as the earth enters a great extinction event and Homo sapiens sapiens faces the likelihood of perishing as a species, how do our various historical pneumatological configurations now serve us? In this paper I will ask questions about the Holy Spirit’s role in the process of extinction. I will argue that to maintain a working pneumatology in the Kairos event of the sixth great extinction, the Giver of Life must also be read as inhabiting a paradoxical role as a Giver of Death, an advocate for the cyclical renewal of the Creation, for what is sustainable and “good,” human or otherwise.
Jürgen Moltmann’s understanding of hope includes personal, social, cosmic, and divine eschatology. Although the first three categories are delineated in depth, Moltmann’s discussion of divine eschatology, which he articulates as when God will be “all in all,” would benefit from further exploration. Richard Kearney has proposed a perspective of God as the eschatological God who may be, a future possibility of God who makes the impossible possible. Kearney’s position attempts to overcome the theist-atheist divide to talk about God again. This paper argues that Kearney’s philosophy of the eschatologically possibility of God helps to buttress Moltmann’s proposal of divine eschatology.
Despite being the first person to produce a full-length mystical work in the German vernacular, Mechthild of Magdeburg has been largely overlooked in discussions of dipolar theism’s mystical genealogy, especially compared to Meister Eckhart. This paper argues for her inclusion, both to rectify historical oversight and to enhance the credibility of dipolar theism’s claims to a mystical genealogy. Dipolar theism, rooted in Whiteheadian metaphysics, emphasizes God’s dynamic engagement with the world but has neglected historical figures who embody this concept. Mechthild’s The Flowing Light of the Godhead demonstrates divine responsiveness, making her a crucial figure for process theologians to consider. By engaging with Mechthild’s work, dipolar theism can refine its theological discourse, address critiques of its historical oversights, and deepen its engagement with the mystical tradition. Ultimately, this study calls for a broader and more inclusive exploration of mysticism within process theology.
The Process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead and Jain philosophy converge on their perspectives of interconnectedness and the nature of ultimate reality. Whitehead's Process philosophy views reality as dynamically interrelated, with peace being a process of becoming and an intuition of permanence. This resonates with Jainism's concept of mokṣa (liberation), where the soul attains the permanent state of a siddha, free from karmic material yet undergoing origination and destruction while maintaining permanence. Both philosophies emphasize the dipolar nature of existence—Whitehead’s primordial and consequent nature of God, and Jainism’s dravyārthika (substantial) and paryāyārthika (modal) viewpoints of substances. Furthermore, Whitehead's prehensions and Jain meditation (śukla dhyāna) highlight transformative experiences that foster deeper connectedness to reality. This paper argues that despite differences in their notions of soul and liberation, Process philosophy and Jainism share profound parallels, suggesting a complementary understanding of interconnectedness, the process of becoming, and the creative unfolding of existence.