.jpg)
.jpg)
|
Home
Opinion
Z - Archived Bloggers & Columnists
Brown, Nathan
2012
|
A second look at the One Project
Submitted: Aug 2, 2012
By Nathan Brown
The One Project came to Australia this past weekend (www.the1project.org). Having had the opportunity to participate in the gathering in Seattle in February, I was excited to recommend it to many of my Australian friends and contacts, as well as curious as to how the One Project “formula” might be received in my home country. It also gave me the opportunity for a second look at the One Project, and further reflection and interaction with its impulses—and impulsers.
And they came. Hosted by the Kellyville church in suburban Sydney, 225 people joined in the One Project–Australia from across the nation, particularly coming in large numbers from Sydney, Melbourne and Perth, together with participants from England and the United States.
And it worked. Generally, participants worshipped meaningfully, resonated with and applauded much of the presentations, experienced a “safe” environment for exploration and questioning, engaged in discussions with enthusiasm and a healthy openness that extended beyond the programmed timeslots, and went home with a desire to somehow share what they had experienced with their home churches. Of course, there were both the contrarians and those with legitimate questions to be wrestled with but there seemed a general enthusiasm for the experience and focus that had been shared.
(You can check out my news report of the One Project gathering in Sydney on the website of Record: http://record.net.au/items/jesus-all-at-sydneys-one-project.)
I’m glad it happened. I’m glad it was a success. And I’m glad I was there. If anything, I was more engaged with it second time around—with mostly the same presentations but a different group of participants and discussions. I am impressed by the chord it has struck with such a cross-section of people and the positive direction the One Project is moving in and calling the church toward.
We need more of Jesus. We always need more of Jesus, personally and corporately. And while the leaders and presenters of the One Project do well at raising questions, they also do a good job at shutting up, stopping talking and creating a space for interaction and response, as well as worship and communion.
Yet, while “Jesus. All.” sounds like a worthy motto—and it is in so many ways—the risk is trying to talk about Jesus without a context. Even God couldn’t do that—thus, the incarnation, a particular expression of a real-person Jesus in a specific time, place and culture. Neither can we follow Jesus without a context because it is only in a context that we function as disciples.
A theologically or practically disembodied Jesus is simply a nice albeit amazing story—and risks a disembodied faith. Jesus in a bottle to be admired might still blow our minds and touch our hearts but might do little more. Rather, He needs to be splashed all over our lives, into the darkest corners. As a living Saviour, He needs to be lived and He needs to transform our lives and world. I only follow Jesus by faithfully living life in my family, my work, my church and my community.
As such, acontextual conversations about Jesus are unsustainable and soon become something less than promised. That’s why, in a such a heavily Adventist setting as the One Project gatherings, the default context becomes the church, with a frustrating tendency to feel like a re-hashing of current church issues and past church grievances. (Perhaps it also reflects the few available “safe” gatherings for this kind of collective venting.)
So, given the necessity and inevitability of context, what we need is a bigger context. We become frustrated with our church-ness sometimes getting in the way of our Jesus-following but restrict too much of our conversations about and expressions of Jesus to our church contexts. The incarnated Jesus described a much broader context for who He was and His mission: “For God so loved the world . . .” (John 3:16), encompassing the everyday and mundane of our lives, as well as the planet-sized beauties and tragedies.
The One Project has a context—the Adventist faith community, with its theology, history and culture—and many people have found and served Jesus in that context. But one important way to discover, experience and live more of Jesus is to see and serve Him in other and larger contexts. That’s where most of us live most of our lives—and they’re also contexts in which Jesus calls us to follow Him.
Log In to Post a Comment. Log In | Register
-
Is the One Project primarily a Youth-ish SDA Movement?
-
Is it similar to or have any connection to GYC (or in some ways is it a somewhat opposite movement theologically and philosophically)?
And I do like the idea. We forget that history in the centre of everything. The Bible itself is not even really the Word or the Truth but only word and truth (lower case). The Bible itself tells us in John 1 that it is Jesus who is the Word and ultimate Truth (capitals), and everything else points to Him and is fulfilled in Him. A Christ-centered theological and practical movement is something the SDA Church well needs, as we can otherwise become focused in orthopraxy.I had been hoping that some more One Project-connected folks might have a go at answering some of these questions but I can offer some responses based on my understanding.
In an official sense, the One Project is a ministry of Andrews University that brings together among its leaders a group of pastors, chaplains and others, many of whom are based on Adventist campuses. So while not intentionally or specifically youth-focused, it has some leanings toward youth because of its campus originas and the "day jobs" of many of those who are involved.
The two web links above give more of a background.
I have looked at both websites, including the expanded philsophy by Japhet De Oliveira. The more good-natured side of me says One Project is exactly what the SDA Church needs. The spectical part of me thinks that One Project is indeed motivated by the growing success of the conservative GYC, which again has gone from the fringes to the mainstream by having a powerful patron in Pres Wilson, and that this might be a counter-cultural attempt to replicate GYC's sucess on the more liberal wing of the Church.
In what ways is the the One Project "much closer to where the church is in Australia"?
Moreover, isn't having two youth revival movements a potential waste of resources and efforts, and wouldn't it be better to have one? What would happen if someone tried to start an alternative clone of Pathfinders, with the line, 'There is room for two youth outdoor movements'?
You can spin it all you like in PR and Church propaganda speak, but some in GYC/AYC are going to see 1P as a threat. They are going to see the emphasis on 'Christ-centred' in 1P as a dig as if GYC supposedly wasn't Christ-focused. The discussion between prbigkev and Kevin, after Kevin said "One Project much closer to where the church is in Australia" is case in point.
We could see AYC as representing the 'conservative' tradition, and the One Project representing 'progressive' Adventism, and choose our sides accordingly. Or we could see both groups as having needed correctives for the SDA community and listen to both and take whatever action we see as necessary after that. There is no reason why they have to be in 'competition', and I doubt most of the leaders of either want it to be like that. After all, an emphasis on a relationship with Jesus is not in any way in conflict with taking either our mission or our message seriously. Nor is the message as presented by either group the only way to view the SDA message. It may be good for the church to both listen to and embrace both, while knowing that one will more easily reach some people, and the other more easily reach others.
At my 'young adults' SS class last week, someone came back from 1P held in Sydney. They ended up having an argument with the presenter of the lesson (who is more conservative), who had just come from a different Church planting course. It was like GYC and 1P going head-to-head right then and there.
The presenter argued that we should not waste too much time on just making friends, but must spread the Gospel first, and then make friends with those who are more receptive to the Gospel. The person who had just come back from 1P said the exact opposite, saying such an approach from not Christ-centred.
Again, I hope I am wrong, but I guess watch this space... It has only been like 1 week, and I have already personally witnessed disagreement between 1P and GYC supporters.
I recall that two or three years ago a Australian Union Conference youth/training initiative was cancelled because of lack of support. Whereas the AYC attracted record numbers. It seems to me that AYC (and by extension GYC) was/is offering a program that is attractive to their respective target audience.
What you describe about the One Project is exciting. Still, I have a couple questions.
First, the other reports I've read indicate there is a considerable amount of study from the writings of Ellen White, who specifically instructed us to use the Bible and the Bible only. Has there been any consideration of following that admonition in the studies done at the conference?
Second, what emphasis is there on connecting with the Holy Spirit and discovering the ministries God wants us to be doing in the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit? That was the source of all guidance and power in the ministry of Jesus. He connected his disciples with that power. He commanded his followers through all time to seek and find that connection. Is that emphasis anywhere in the One Project?