As a linguist by training and a lover of words by practice, I try to be as precise as I can about word usage. But we just don’t have a common vocabulary to work from in the Kingdom. So … I see that I need to add holistic to my Glossary page to-do list. Here’s a short version:

For me, being holistic has more to do with being as “biblically comprehensive” as possible in my perspectives, my categories for thinking, and how those categories relate to one another, than with the isshy-squissshy subjectivism we tend to associate with New Age-y wholism. (Although, I suppose my opinion of what constitutes “biblical comprehensive” / perspectives / categories / inter-relationships is subjective. Still, learning and living out that kind of holistic framework is nevertheless a major objective of mine!)

To be continued …

Again, thanks for dropping in, and hope you find other material that helps you learn and discern.

Nice to see you here, Janet and Penney…our TFW tribe travels far and wide, eh?

Penney, thanks for sharing about the importance of putting your trust in God/Christ alone…and I love the idea of trusting the Christ that is in another. That is a powerful image…one that speaks to the power of covenant/cHesed.

Blessings, all!

I see covenant and trust the same way I see Jesus. In Jesus I see the Father the One thing I trust and have given my life to. When I see that in a leader, that leader gains my trust even if we do not always agree. Simply because I begin to see them as God does. The problem with some of my leaders is I don’t see Jesus, I see their agenda or an image of God created by themselves, whereby I can not trust. So even with the same leader I may trust Him in one area because God has spoken to me through that leader, I will not trust that leader in another area.

A very basic example: My former pastor is awesome! A restorationist scholar and historian. Taught me alot on worship and the Hebrew Bible. He sucks at counseling though.

When my brother as a new christian stumbled this created disapointment for my pastor. In his humanity my pastor was trusting in what he could see not in God. It was an attitude of hopelessness. I knew in that moment I couldn’t trust him I needed to trust Jesus. This meant that I would someday see my brother again because I knew he had Christ. Infact, I couldn’t even trust myself or my own personal experience with my brother. I trusted in God alone and 2 weeks later my brother showed up alive. Because I trusted in the Christ in my brother it has encouraged him to become stronger in God. Now he’s very strong in ministry. If I would have trusted in my pastor I would have given up hope or even not have helped him again.

Weird but I tell my husband all the time not to put his trust in me. I tell him to put his trust in God and our covenant because when trials come, which they do, my husband can still see me as God does, and than instead of giving up we can work through the trial.

Within the West there’s seems so little loyalty in workplaces to staff, in marriages to spouses, in families, in networks of relationships… it’s like a sign of the kingdom where we see covenantal faithfulness.

Leadership that fails to empower others isn’t leadership at all… it’s just use of power.

I see this post not only as insightful about the future, but also as deeply grounded in profound theological themes.

I wonder if all of us tend to stay children spiritually if we don’t have things structured in ways that challenge us to move through spiritual adolescence to maturity. In God’s design, we’re supposed to move from milk to meat. We’re supposed to go from knowing the Father’s love as babes, to overcoming the Evil One as young adults, to knowing the Father’s love from the beginning as mature disciples.

Yes, catch and release … we cannot choose for others to move forward, but we should not simply baby everyone and accommodate all their needs (wants?), unless we expect ‘em to remain babies.

Rob – I think you’re relatively close. I’d say the paradigm system from which I analyze culture stuff is “organic” in at least a couple of ways. First, I work hard to become increasingly more holistic in my paradigm: to have all the parts (be comprehensive), to have all the parts interconnect (be integrative), and to have the whole be vital (there is “spirit” to it, not just sterile details). We reproduce what we are, so the more comprehensive, integrative, and Spirit-infused we are, then that’s what the fruits of our labors are.

Second, and this may actually sound almost the same, I work hard to have a holistic set of systems and processes that are comprehensive, interconnected, and vital. For instance, I don’t think worldview is the main thing to look at; there is stuff even deeper. Those deeper-level assumptions and values affect what we select as our worldview elements, how we integrate the aspects of what we think, what kinds of theologies and philosophies and processes emerge out of them, and subsequently, what kinds of strategies, structures, methodological models, and practices “emerge.” All this comes from the DNA in the root, not from the bark on the surface.

Actually, now that I think of it, everyone’s system is “organic” in the sense that what’s at the root predetermines the fruit. I’m trying to study and reflect on my own experiences and processing in ways that hopefully helps me expand the biblical content in my paradigm and ensure I integrate elements to more carefully align to what I am perceiving (Hi Peggy!) God’s values/heart to be.

I think this helps explain why there is such upheaval over Willow Creek’s REVEAL study. By the evidence of some level of blight in the long-term fruit, we can DECONSTRUCT that there was some degree of blight in the founding assumptions/DNA … and then the whole set of systems followed suit.

How much better it would be to make intentional efforts to CONSTRUCT a hugely holistic paradigm and set of systems from the outset in a new Kingdom enterprise …

Great post — extremely informative and enlightening. Like Peggy I appreciate your sharing this. I going to post your link to this post on my blog. If I’m hearing you correctly and there is much to digest, but it sounds “organic” or what I perceive that type of ecclesial form to be. How close am I?

You said a lot of this, but sometimes I get a better understanding by imagining a visual picture. That goes back to the 3D vennography discussion earlier.

When I look at the Great Commission which in reality is what we are talking about succeeding at, one of the things I see is basically a catch and release attitude. We are supposed to have a transitional attitude about those we minister to. We get them for a time, but they are not ours. Just like children, and not any easier to give up control of either. But, in order to fulfill the commission, we must. And that, first of all, as you say takes trust. Not only of them, that they will do the right things and continue the processes that God has allowed us to plant the seeds of, but also (punch line here), of God when He tells us to let go.

When we do managerial stuff, and face it, most church structures and attitudes are managing, we cannot be entrepreneurial (hope my spelling holds up). God is calling His church, the WHOLE body, to be catching and releasing. That is the picture that helps me let go when I do not want to.