Introduction

Firstly, in this paper, clarification and definition of the concept well-being in the literature are reflected on within the sphere and perspective of faith. The focus is on holistic well-being experiential patterns of faith placing alternating emphasis on faith experience of God, the human self, other human beings and the physical-organic environment. The purpose of hunting clarification and definition of well-being and wellness from a diverse bulk of literature is an attempt to clarify, explain and to create at least slight accessing and overlapping of people’s God-human-and-world approaches. It is an attempt to draw closer to what many term the ideal of creating common understanding of the word, concept and faith notion well-being being used in the twenty-first century and to clear the mist of confusing well-being as new age religion.

The main focus is directed at the experience of daily sense and meaning in the world of human beings from a perspective of faith in the sense of a foursome rolling pattern of faith experience, of ‘I believe God, I believe myself, I believe my human neighbours and I believe the physical-organic environment’.

Imbalance and dysfunction mean, in terms of a holistic view of human beings, a total lack of skills and know-how of faith, belief, trust and confidence, as well as to a large extent a lack of skills and know-how in other fields of people’s experience. Concepts, terms and indicators such as the achievement and acquisition of equilibrium and homoeostasis in well-being and wellness levels of human beings are not individually investigated in an in-depth way, but are constantly and consistently reflected upon within the realm and ambience of faith, spirituality, belief, trust and confidence of people. Well-being and wellness levels are primarily catered for and looked at from a perspective of faith. Thus, one has to reflect and discuss from a perspective of faith the notions of well-being and wellness of people, thereby demonstrating their life-worlds as interweavement and coherence of different roles and interactional relationships in a meaningful wholeness (Modise 2011:19).

The Approach

The approach followed in this paper emerged and is being developed from an involvement and engagement with the wellness programme as set in direction and relation to human beings, which revolves around the following two premises:

Firstly, in this paper, the problem of the infrastructural setting of human beings’ work places, life-worlds and their everyday time constraints as well as their well-being and wellness levels are being tackled from a holistic African-Christian sense-making God-human-and-world approach. The premise of such an approach is that of a multiplicity of fields and capacities of human experience, interconnectedly geared in a foursome alternating dynamic of experiencing God, the human self, other human beings and the physical-organic environment as partner-like pointers that guide people’s experience in a particular field, mode or dimension of experience.

Secondly, the lack of theoretical and academic studies in the South African and broader African context about skills, needs and capacities of human beings emerging from and corresponding with the broad field of faith, spirituality, belief, trust and confidence is tackled. The lack reveals itself especially within the margins of a widely accepted God-life-and-worldview whereby the experiences of faith, belief, spirituality, trust and confidence are regarded as dispensable soft options which solely concentrate on the ‘experience’ of God and belief in God. Faith, belief, spirituality, et cetera concentrating solely on God with a disregard for faith and belief in the human self, in one’s neighbours as other human beings, and faith and belief in the physical-organic environment around us, are viewed as a spiritualised faith and belief soft option and are easily been discarded as something people can do without in the workplace and everyday life. Thus, it is been forgotten that human beings everywhere are image of God in the world in need of the foursome partner-like pointers of God, the human self, other human beings and the physical-organic environment continuously rolling in and through each field, mode and dimension of people’s experience. Churches and faith communities are the biggest culprits in their disregard for the whole experience of faith by one-sidedly concentrating on belief as belief solely in God (Modise 2011:16). Faith and belief in the human self as self-belief and self-confidence, faith and belief in other human beings and faith and belief in the physical-organic environment are intrinsically part of the field of faith, belief and trust.

Dualist and Tripartite Approaches of Human Beings

The well-known dichotomist (dualist, bipartite) view of human beings comprising of a spiritual soul and body, underscores in a strong materialistic world the idea that faith, spirituality, belief, trust and confidence are soft options in daily life. Approaches in which soul and body are less dualistically set up as holistic balanced unities do not steer clear of the temptation of projecting faith, belief and trust into the work context with the motivation that it is spiritually necessary for employees’ well-being and wellness. What they do not realise is that these forms of faith and spirituality carried from the outside into the workplace operate as irritants to professional managers who simply expect day-to-day tasks and functions to be successfully carried out without the unnecessary intrusion of these forms of add-on faith and spirituality.

The other well-known trichotomist (triadic, tripartite) view of human beings as spirit, soul and body demarcates similarly the experiences of faith, spirituality, et cetera as a soft option that does not really contribute to a professional’s wellness and well-being in the workplace. In a similar fashion, as in the dualist view, the solution is inevitably looked for in a balanced equilibrium of the components of the threesome.

Usually the problem is structured in such a way that in both the approach of the two components of (spiritual) soul and (material) body and the approach of the three components of spirit, soul and body, the components are out of synchronisation with each other due to evil, stress and sin in the world. Therefore as a solution for the acquisition of wellness and well-being, the two or three components have to constitute a state of equilibrium and balance. Obviously, such a solution makes sense if and only if one accepts the twosome or threesome division of the human condition. If, however, one is working with a modern radical integral and differential approach to human beings, the twosome (soul/body) and threesome (soul/spirit/body) types of human beings are hopelessly inadequate for the task of tackling minor human problems, let alone tackling the major interactional problems of human beings.

Thus, the more incisive question, apart from the question as to how one gets to such equilibrium, is whether it is valid to distinguish between such components, essences or substances of a twosome or threesome nature in a human being. The first problem of a list of two or three substantial components in a human being is that a human being is broken into more important and less important components having a very old, complicated and long history and are based on God-life-and-world approaches that are or rather should no longer be, part of our sense-making experience. Philosophically speaking, when the emphasis is more on the spirit/soul and mind side and less on the body and matter side, we usually speak of such an approach as spiritualist/idealist, while materialistic approaches have their basic emphasis solely on the body and the matter side of human beings and nature.

One has to admit that the persistency of the ancient dualistic and trichotomist views in the modern world is remarkable. Many proponents regard the persistency with which these views continue into modern times as a demonstration of their correctness. The popular view that imbalances, disintegration and disjointedness of people is being corrected by establishing homoeostasis and equilibrium of spirit, soul and body, or mind and matter, expresses the old tautology of the ancient anthropological views that components of spirit, soul and body operate simultaneously as tools in establishing homoeostasis and equilibrium. A similar tautology functions in modern anthropological views in which the basic components of being human that is mind and matter operate as tools for the establishment of homoeostasis and equilibrium.

Similar problems, as with the old dualities and trichotomies, seem part of the modern version of the mind and matter duality. The second problem with the twosome and threesome types of approaches is that they do not slot easily into a modern holistic God-life-and-worldview and approach of human beings which in our African setting amounts to a sense-making mixing and fusion of black African and Judaeo-Christian views and approaches. One has to admit that the modern duality of mind and matter broadly applied and widely in use in philosophical, scientific and theological circles has a similar aversion of been slotted into a holistical and differentiated God-life-and-world approach towards human beings.

Modern Continuation of the Duality and Tripartite Schemes of Human Beings

People’s sense-making views about the cluster of God, human and nature shape their philosophies, sciences and anthropological schemes of human beings. In the modern era, three broad sense-making God-human-and-nature perspectives have been taking shape around the duality of mind and matter as the modern expression of the classical duality of soul/spirit and physical body that is still part of many modern people’s jargon.

In reminiscence of the ancient sense-making notions of the dual and triadic views of ‘spirit, soul and body’, three broad trajectories emerged in the modern era.

In the first trajectory of a dualism of ‘matter plus mind or spirit/soul and body’, the emphases are on both the matter and the mind sides of the dualism.

In the second trajectory of a duality in which ‘matter giving rise to mind or material bodiliness determining the spirit/soul’, the emphasis is totally on the matter and material bodily side of the duality.

In the third trajectory of a duality in which ‘mind giving rise to matter or spirit/soul determining the body’, the emphasis is reversed and is placed on the mind, spiritual and soul side of the duality.

Dualism of Mind and Matter; Spirit/Soul and Body

The first broad modern perspective of a dualism between mind and matter (soul and body) is best represented by the seventeenth century philosopher Descartes with a parallel structured biopic view of a thinking soul (mind) and a spatially extended body (matter) (Descartes 1967:42f). The only point where the two parallel substances meet is in the pineal gland (Van Peursen 1966:31). While Descartes’ views were highly controversial amongst some, his new modern approach of viewing the soul as a thinking mind parallel to a spatially extended material body actually transformed the classical soul and body dualism of the majority of Christian churches.

In several sciences in the twentieth century, Descartes’ parallel view of soul (psyche) and body (somatic) made way for a view in which soul and body are been brought into a very close overlapping relationship in which soul/spirit influences the body and the body in turn influences the soul/spirit. The latter two-way direction of the soul/spirit and the body processes influencing each other from both sides is expressed in the literature with the very fashionable dual term of a human being as a psychosomatic being.

Nevid, Rathus and Greene (2006:137) indicate that present day scientists and clinicians are aware of the radical intertwinement of the body and the mind. Psychological factors are simultaneously influencing and are being influenced by functioning of the physical body. In the current scientific world, mental health and physical bodily health are inseparable. It is worth noting that a great deal of present day psychology is moving in the direction of an extreme emphasis of scientific reflection on the neurophysiological fields and spheres of human life. An extreme form is seen in behaviourism which stops short of denying the human mind any operational functionality. Strangely, though body theologians and behaviourists opt for anti-dualistic holistic approaches of human beings, both approaches struggle to get rid of a dualist tag.

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to know that the majority of Christian churches, their members and their accompanying theologies are still stuck in the anthropological dualism of an immortal soul/spirit and mortal body albeit sometimes in a modern transformed Cartesian framework.

Matter Giving Rise to Mind; Material Bodiliness Determines the Spirit/Soul

The second broad modern perspective expressed in the short sentences of matter giving rise to mind and material bodiliness determines the spirit/soul is the widest accepted view amongst scientists from various sciences. The main assumption of this perspective regarding human beings is that the basic stuff of a human being is his or her body which means that the main access avenue for reflection about a human being is his or her bodiliness. Similarly, in the scientific world, the main assumption is expressed as that the basic stuff of the universe is matter-energy and the main access avenue for reflection about the universe is the material, evolving processes in the physical measurable world.

Anthropologically speaking, whatever the conscious mind is, it emerges out of matter (that is the brain) formed in a sufficiently progressed stage of the evolutionary process. Whatever we can learn about the conscious mind must ultimately be reconciled with the kind of knowledge we get from studying the physical brain, for the conscious mind apart from a living physical organism is not only unknown, it is inconceivable (Harman 1988:34).

In the world of Christian theology reflection of what human beings are revolves around the body and the bodiliness of human beings created by God as the main assumption and access avenue for reflection on human beings. Isherwood and Stuart as proponents of a Body Theology take their main cue from a diversified but holistic perspective of the human body. In the twentieth century, the notion of Body Theology especially took shape within feminist circles, mostly of Roman Catholic origin, as an attempt to access dimensions and aspects of human beings in a holistic way from the body and the bodiliness existence of human beings.

The main contribution of body theologians revolves around a diversifying of the wholeness of the human body in roles and relationships towards others. Body theologians reckon by emphasising the wholeness of the human body with its accompanying gender-grid that the traditional and modern dualities, twosomes and binary schemes are satisfactorily tackled. The compilation of essays in the book “The Good News of the Body”: Sexual Theology and Feminism is informative in this regard. Their main reflective cue for various human domains and aspects is taken from the full encapsulation of humanness and being human from the human body and bodiliness. The following aspects drawn from the holistic bodiliness of human beings are examples of such an approach: (1) a physical body, (2) a symbolic body, (3) a political body and (4) a spiritual body (Isherwood and Stuart 1998).

The problem body theologians are facing is that while they diversify different aspects and relationships from the totality of the human body as the main avenue of reflection about human beings, the total bodily existence of a human being expresses and determines the different aspects and relationships within the concrete everyday societal world. Moreover, the theological dimension as an intrinsic part of the twosome of Body Theology, or a theology of the body, is providing the theological reflection on the bodiliness of human beings set within a modern dual Catholic ecclesial perspective of ‘sacramental-sacred and secular-profane’ and a dual theological anthropological perspective of ‘immortal soul…mortal body’.

Isherwood and Stuart (1998:67–68) in their book Introducing Body Theology support the sentiments of various authors indicating that Thomas Aquinas, the late mediaeval Roman Catholic theologian, in his Summa Theologiae asserts that there is an intrinsic substantial unity between body and soul. Thomas Aquinas followed Aristotle to a large degree on the unity of soul and body, but where Aristotle viewed soul and body as one substantial unity of form and matter, Thomas viewed soul and body as two substances (van Peursen 1966:105). To Aristotle both soul and body in death come to an end, except the personal divine spirit which continues to exist after death (Van Peursen 1966:104). Thomas under the influence of a neo-platonic dualist approach viewed the immortal soul and the mortal body as two substances. He emphasised the unity of body and soul: the soul being the substantial form or pattern of the human body which is that part of human nature which is everlasting and which is the ordering and forming agency of the material temporal body. Isherwood and Stuart (1998:68) align themselves in typical Thomistic fashion with the two substances approach of soul and body. In this scheme, the soul is seen as the rational intellect (anima rationalis) which needs the senses of the bodily world to acquire abstract knowledge. In spite of Body theology’s strong emphasis on the holistic character of the bodily existence of a human being, the primordial Thomistic scheme of immortal soul and mortal body caught up with the body theologians.

Concluding, one could state that as long as theological anthropologies, even with the vast improvement on the duality approaches brought by the holistic approach of Body theologians, still work with sense-making anthropological tools and components of the dual and tripartite schemes of human beings that were immensely meaningful within the settings of Plato and Aristotle hundreds of years before the Common Era (BC), real diversification of human fields, modes and aspects of experience cannot be accessed and unlocked.

Mind Giving Rise to Matter; Conscious Spirit/Soul Determines the Body

The third broad modern perspective expressed in the short sentences of mind giving rise to matter and the conscious spirit/soul determines the bodily existence is in an ever increasing sense accepted by different scientists from various sciences. The main assumption of this perspective regarding human beings is that the basic stuff of a human being is his or her consciousness which means that the main access avenue for reflection about a human being is his or her conscious mind. Similarly, in the scientific world, the main assumption finds the basic stuff of the universe to be consciousness. Mind or consciousness is primary, and matter-energy arises in some sense out of the conscious mind. The physical cosmic world is to the greater mind as a dream image is to the individual mind. In the final instance, the collective mega consciousness behind the phenomenal world is contacted, not through the physical senses but through a deep conscious intuition (Harman 1988:34–35). Consciousness is not the end product of material evolution; rather, consciousness was here first in the millions-year-old universe before material energies.

Various approaches are attempting to view the mind, soul or spirit side of a human being as the access avenue of how a human being should be viewed and approached. Within the scheme of the classic duality of mind/soul/spirit and matter/body, the emphasis for the diversification between different modes and aspects of a human being is totally on the mind/soul/spirit side. An example of how a human being is diversified from the mind, soul or spirit side could be presented in the following way: a human being is diversified into (1) a rational being; (2) a religious–metaphysical being; (3) a social being and (4) a physical–biological bodily being whose needs and conditions are driven and carried by the rational, religious–metaphysical and social dimensions (Ipe 1988:3–5).

By locating and emphasising the access avenue of what a human being is on the side of the mind, soul or spirit and not as is the case with proponents of Body Theology on the bodily side of the equation, some versions of this view contribute to greater insight into the holistic nature of human beings but demonstrate simultaneously as being still stuck in the classic dual or tripartite ground scheme of human beings.

Wellness and Well-Being in the Workplace Context

During my research, I have encountered various sets of problems amongst human beings in workplace and life-world. Some of these problems in many instances are being ascribed to imbalances and one-sided emphases experienced in different fields, dimensions and modes of human beings’ experience. Other imbalances could be ascribed to underdevelopment and disempowerment in certain fields regarding work specific skills training and know-how. What is of special and overarching interest to me having been engaged and involved in a faith profession is, on the one hand, the lack of the dimension of faith, belief, trust and confidence—all belonging to the faith realm—in wellness programme. On the other hand, a lack of awareness is detectable amongst human beings that faith, belief, trust and confidence directly impact on and contribute to people’s experience of well-being, wellness and the execution of skills in the workplace and in life.

What one should try to avoid is not to solve the problem of imbalances with the traditional twosome of human spirit and body or mind and matter, which then has to be integrated and balanced. Offered solutions of integration and balancing of spiritual and physical imbalances of well-being and wellness levels of human beings do not provide more than the fact that such offered solutions are being stated on paper. Very little is been offered except suggesting that one has to bring balance back in one’s life. On the other hand, it is just too easy to describe these imbalances as a direct result of stress in human life, let alone bringing evil and sin into play at the wrong time and at the wrong place.

One has firstly to ascertain what sense-making undercarriage we are using for the number of fields, dimensions and modes of experience we are dealing with in the course of this study. Secondly, one has to investigate and reflect on the nature, type and levels of imbalance and dysfunctional experiences against the background of a holistic integral and differential view of human beings and their performances settings in rural and semi-rural areas of South Africa.

Imbalance and dysfunction mean, in terms of a holistic view of human beings, a total lack of skills and know-how of faith, belief, trust and confidence, as well as to a large extent a lack of skills and know-how in other fields of people’s experience. Concepts, terms and indicators such as the achievement and acquisition of equilibrium and homoeostasis in well-being and wellness levels of human beings in life-world are not individually investigated in an in-depth way, but are constantly and consistently reflected upon within the realm and ambience of faith, spirituality, belief, trust and confidence of people.

The dualist approach expresses itself in the following argument, that people in a twenty-first life-world setting though well qualified and trained in the necessary professional skills and knowledge, by lacking explicit experiences of religious faith (=only belief in God) and undervaluing faith, belief and spiritual experience in their work sphere, result in people not reaching meaningful levels of wellness and well-being. The solution presented in then of reaching the meaningful levels is a superficial balancing of the components of spirit, soul and body into equilibrium and homoeostasis.

Through reflection and investigation, it becomes clearer from a differentiated and integrated view of a holistic multiplicity of fields or components of human experience that not one of these is more important than the other. None of these fields or components has more of the Spirit of God or is a greater source of spiritual energy and sparks of well-being and wellness any other.

In the sense-making approach of this paper, a human being comprises a differentiated multiplicity of fields, dimensions, components or facets of experience that are integrated into a holistic creature that experiences God, the human self, other human beings and the natural environment in each field of experience. Any component of a human being is not of more importance than other components. A human being is not to been chopped into different loose features, but is to be approached as a differentiated but integrated holistic singular and irreplaceable human being (Van Niekerk 2008:95). Acquisition and achievement of equilibrium and homoeostasis, and wellness and well-being in terms of the approach of this paper will mainly happen and eventuate through holistic and continuous differentiation and integration of different fields of experience in daily life.

Selected Clustering of Fields of Experience

The following fields of experience are clustered around faith, belief and trust as the main operational networking perspective or reflective sphere of faith in the investigative reflection and unwrapping of the story line of the paper. The symbol F before each indicates that these are in the enveloping of the thrust of the investigation as a faith, spiritual, belief and trust led dynamic networking perspective of faith:

(F1) thinking and conceptualising, (F2) feelings and emotions, (F3) verbalising and (F4) speaking, (F5) producing, (F6) justice and justness as the setting of proportions, (F7) social and relational experience, and (F8) education and training (Van Niekerk 2008).

One of the underlying premises of this paper is that human beings can achieve and maintain wellness and well-being and thus equilibrium and homoeostasis levels through continuous and dynamic differentiation and integration of different experiences in daily life. An imbalanced state of experience and thus a lack of equilibrium are in many instances been seen in phenomena such as the raising of stress levels and in many types and kinds of ill health. In this sense, there is a need for a holistic, integral and differentiated approach towards the wellness and well-being of human beings related to their vocations in the life-world.

Differentiation of Well-Being and Wellness in a Human Being

The converse position of Pavot and Diener mentioned above can be differentially extended and deepened by adding the first angle of this chapter of the foursome rolling pattern of experience comprising of God, oneself, one’s fellow human beings and the physical-organic environment. In every field of experience, the foursome rolling pattern is continuously enacted as the qualitative or spiritual side of the fields of experience of believing, thinking, loving, feeling, socialising, and justice and dignity.

The changing shifts and turns from one experiential role to another, and thus the interchange between fields of experience within the differentiated whole of the human person supplementing each other regarding the experience of well-being in each field of experience. The idea expressed in the last sentence is the most complex part in the description of what human well-being is. Well-being experienced in feelings and emotions is been complemented with well-being of thinking experience, well-being of loving experience or well-being of faith experience. The idea of well-being experienced in an abstract and general sense is highly problematic. One has to distinguish between well-being on different levels, as well as there being different kinds of well-being experience.

The Mixing of Holistic, Dualist and Triadic Approaches

The experience of holistic and differentiated well-being is important in sustaining different levels and different kinds of experiences of well-being and wellness in a single human person. The duality (=spiritual/bodily, mind/matter) and triadic (=spirit/soul/body) views of human beings on the one hand, break up the wholesomeness of a human being into large uneven chunks which are not on the same level of importance. On the other hand, when people are being described in terms of the ancient two or three chunks framework, they do not remotely partake in the many fields and roles of experience in which a modern human being is engaged and involved in. Fortunately, this chopping up into ancient and modern chunks happens, largely in the churches and theology, traditionally embedded in their strong Platonic reading of the Bible. Also in the scientific world, the popular scientific world and the many self-help books with a concentration on the superiority of the spiritual dimension and the mind as non-matter-like entities, the framework of two large chunks of spirit and nature, mind and matter is the easiest way to approach low well-being and wellness levels. Admittedly, the temptation to follow and support a triadic framework when there is talk of different types of well-being such as subjective well-being, psychological well-being and spiritual well-being is always part of the scientific game. Supporters of a holistic African-Christian sense-making approach, are continuously and consistently been confronted and challenged, to translate and transfer meaningful clues and elements of truth from modern and traditional dualist and triadic schemes to holistic approaches in which the experiential four part pattern of God, oneself, other human beings and the physical-organic environment operates in every field of experience (Van Niekerk 2008:121).

The first problem is, however, that of equity and equal weight between the fields of experience and difference, change and interchange between the fields of experience. In church circles following in the footsteps of Plato, the soul–spirit side is always of greater importance than the bodily physical side. Any person who made a choice for the well-known ‘immortal soul/mortal body’ scheme without realising has already made a basic choice for the greater importance of the soul–spirit side of a human being.

The second problem is that the various anthropologies operate simultaneously in many people’s lives. Someone may operate, on the one hand, implicitly with a modern anthropological view of differentiating and interchanging between thinking, feeling, believing, talking, loving and apportioning of justness without being fully aware of distinguishing between different fields of experience, their equity in weight and importance and their contribution to the wholeness of human experience. While, at the same time, on the other hand, modern dual, ancient dual or trichotomist types are playing an explicit and aware role in a person’s life. It is amazing how people nearly in the same breath while talking about human fields and aspects of experience of thinking, believing, feeling, imagining and loving refer to the substances of spirit, soul and body derived from ancient God-human-and-nature views.

The main reason, the second group of anthropologies are alive and well today is to be found in the continuance of long-held theological church and theological traditions and strategies amongst many church people, church theologians and pastors, priests and ministers. The first step of the traditional strategy is to insert without realising ancient Greek philosophical and modern dualist and triadic ideas directly into the text of the Judaeo-Christian Bible, and secondly extracting and unearthing these dual and triadic views from the texts of the Bible through exegesis as God’s own words one cannot differ from. In the majority of churches and their members’ faith experience, what has been put into the Bible by means of ancient and modern dualities and trichotomies is being exegetically extracted as divine God-given dualities and trichotomies. What you put in, you get out in another way (Modise 2011:64).

An African-Christian Sense-Making Approach

The sense-making worlds and backgrounds of the terms, definitions and notions in this article are discussed and reflected on within the ambience of basic assumptions borne out of an African-Christian sense-making God-human-and-world approach. It is worthwhile to recap some of the basic assumptions of such a sense-making approach.

The first assumption is the wholesomeness of a human being, of God and of nature each in its own way, but simultaneously wholesome together in a human being’s experience.

The second is that the wholesome experiential threesome of God, being human and the physical-organic natural environment, is part of every field, mode and dimension of experience of the whole human being.

The third assumption is that all fields, modes and dimensions of experience are of equal importance in their radical connectedness and their root differences in make-up and characteristics.

The fourth assumption is that the awareness of the simultaneous discovery, design and construction of an increasing number of fields of experience in the modern era does not totally discard the ancient and dated dual and triadic schemes with multiple elements of truth. Through multiple negotiatory translation processes, these elements of truth are meaningfully taken up within the realm of a wholesome God-human-and-world approach.

The coherence and correlation between God’s grand acts and human acts in daily life are demonstrated in the emergence of a fivesome awareness as a wholesome person with an awareness of his/her creatureliness (self-actualisation of creatureliness), an awareness of his/her sinful tendencies. This sinful tendencies cause damage to God, oneself, other people and nature, a salvific and reconciliatory enactment of a denial of the sinful self through the power of the cross and an enactment of liberative empowerment through the power of the resurrection, an awareness of being in a continuous renovating process through the renovating and renewal power of the Spirit of Pentecost, carrying and guiding the process of the fivesome awareness in experiences of fragments and moments of meaning in our present life in an anticipatory sense about the consummation of all things in the new heaven and the new earth (Van Niekerk 2008:315–420; Baliah 2007:16–17).

The initial notion emphasised in this article is firstly that each field of experience, including faith, is carried and circumscribed by a foursome process in the African-Christian sense including God, the human self, other human beings and the natural environment by the intersection of two similar, but not identical processes. The first process captures and covers the levels and views of human beings’ states of equilibrium expressed in the experience of well-being and wellness through the interchange of everyday roles in society.

Secondly, the first process is been undergirded by a second process, namely the foursome processual framework of God’s grand acts of creation (creatureliness, we are being there), reconciliation (redemption = cross and resurrection of Jesus), renewal (daily renovation in self- and mutual training) and consummation and fulfilment towards the end (aim and goal). The central question is to what extent are the successive processes of God’s grand acts of creation, reconciliation, renewal, and consummation and fulfilment in correlation with African people’s daily lives and in what way are African people in the twenty-first century involved and engaged with God’s grand acts in daily life. Are these grand acts in which African people are engaged without being aware of their character of realness, not in the majority of instance locked up in churches as doctrines or pie-in-the-sky fairy tales that have no impact on their daily lives?

Thirdly, words, concepts, beliefs and notions of emotions in the literature settings with a positive or negative impact on African people’s professional-working, faith-believing and societal-rural experiential roles are being investigated and reflected on. One-sided orientations which either exclusively concentrate on God, or on human life and the human species or on the cosmic natural world are one of the strongest factors contributing to the incoherent and disjointed experience of roles and fields of experience in African people’s lives. Words, notions of faith, concepts and units of feelings can be acquired from the literature as to how human beings can be made whole or restored to a state of equilibrium, while experiential skills, capacities and competencies are simultaneously acquired from a perspective in which people experience their creatureliness, reconciliation (redemption), renewal and future consummation.

The question may be raised whether a twenty-first century sense-making view of African-Christian making is really corresponding with what Van Niekerk (2008:373–374) defines as the mystery of the simultaneous at-one-ment and the at-other-ment of God, human beings and the physical-organic environment as well as with the radical, integral and differential equity and multiversity of fields, modes and dimensions of human experience. The second leg of the statement espouses the idea that a human being comprises a multiversity of experiential fields, modes and dimensions integrated and differentiated in one human being. This mainly means that a human being comprises the largest possible number of fields, modes and dimensions of experience experientially discovered and constructed in the modern era. The main question of reflection is thus not which of a human being’s fields, modes and dimensions is basic or the most important one, or which one is eternal and which one is temporally worldly but how each field is integrated and differentiated with its own radical characteristic nature in one wholesome human being simultaneously connected and different from God and the physical-organic environment.

In the context of the African-christian approach, it is expected that pastors, faith leaders and faith consultant need to bring faith to people in a practical way. In outline, one has to propose that the work and programmes of faith leaders and faith consultants are to be integrated with the Employee Assistance Progam’s (EAP), thereby directly coherently raising the possibility that the well-being levels and performance management of professionals in societal-rural environments are tackled head on. The last intention is to reflect and discuss from a perspective of faith the notions of well-being and wellness of people, thereby demonstrating their life-worlds as interweavement and coherence of different roles and interactional relationships in a meaningful wholesomeness. From a perspective of faith, strategies, for coping and training of coping skills as well as well-being and wellness levels and performance management, are to be incisively discussed and reflected upon within the realm of a wholesome sense-making approach. The intention of this focal point is to determine the coping strategies to assist professionals to cope and to maintain the state of equilibrium from faith perspective within the margins of a wholesome constructed EAP.

Furthermore for the holistic EAP to function effectively and efficiently, the African principle of Ubuntu needs to be interpreted with the African-Christian approach employed in this article. In regard, to a wholesome and differentiated approach of the social roles of African people, Van Niekerk (2008:37–40) extended Ubuntu principle and the central biblical commandment of love. Van Niekerk extended the traditional Ubuntu principle of a ‘human being is a human being through other human beings’ (motho ke motho ka batho babang (Sotho)—umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu (Nguni). Van Niekerk’s (2008:37) suggestion for an extension of the traditional Ubuntu motto reads as follows:

A human being is a human being –

through other human beings,

through the human self,

through the physical-organic cosmic environment and

through God.

Similarly, Van Niekerk (2008:38f) inclusively extended the biblical commandment ‘to love God above and beyond anything else, and to love your neighbour as yourself’ as follows:

Love God above, and beyond anything else –

love your human neighbours,

love your animal, plant and thing neighbours,

love yourself as a human being.

The Concept Well-Being and Wellness in the Twenty-First Century

Wellness and well-being are being experienced within the margins of the holistic interconnectedness and differentiation of human being’s fields, modes, dimensions and aspects of experiences. The matter-mind and spirit/soul and body distinctions derived from ancient sense-making approaches (old life worldviews) are intrinsically part of each of these modern modes, fields, dimensions and aspects of experiences holistically differentiated in terms of an African/Christian God-human-and-world approach. Mirowsky and Ross (2003:26) define well-being as less distress, while more distress means less well-being. Well-being is in a general sense the enjoyment of life and feeling happy, hopeful about the future and feeling as good as other people. Well-being brings an end to depression and anxiety. There are the same degrees between well-being and distress.

Mirowsky and Ross’ definition of well-being touches on the notion of approximating wholeness in differentiation, but the definition is simultaneously limited because the sole focus is on the emotional and feeling field of experience. In addition, one has to argue that any reflection on the differentiated holistic experience of well-being and wellness levels of humans is been done in the concrete settings of different fields of experience. It is as if one has to add up different experiences of well-being from different fields of experience to be able to talk in general of someone’s experience of well-being and wellness. Therefore, an awareness of the difference and holistic connection of faith, performance, social and emotional well-being and wellness levels are not been evaded in any discussion and reflection.

Raz (2004:269) defines well-being as an unwrapping of the notion of a person experiencing good life. Good life plainly means life been good for the person whose life it is. Well-being includes a fair proportion of any person’s personal aims explaining what kind of life is good for the people whose life is been encapsulated and permeated by well-being. He argues that well-being consists in the whole-hearted and successful pursuit of valuable relationships and goals when we care about people, and when we ought to care about people, what we do or ought to care about is their well-being. In simpler terms, one may argue that holistic and differentiated well-being and wellness levels experienced in good and fulfilling relationships are being effectuated as an expression of the theoretical angle mentioned of the four-angled experiential pattern of the God, oneself, fellow human beings and the physical-organic environment, expressed holistically in believing, thinking, loving, performance producing, feeling, apportioning justness, et cetera.

Viljoen (2001:158) views well-being from the perspective of the therapist as an umbrella concept in which one has to look at social, emotional, physical, stress, developmental and growth factors as forming an integrated whole. Professional therapists should not lose sight of the continuous processes of integration and differentiation of these factors as this involves and affects the interchange of these factors within a single human person, as well as an interaction between human beings. Any reference to balance and equilibrium is not been regarded as static but takes on the form of a fluctuating and appropriate interchange and interaction of different factors and contexts.

Linley and Joseph (2004:720–721) emphasise two categories of well-being, namely subjective well-being and psychological well-being. They define subjective well-being as the sum of satisfaction in life and the affective balance of the positive affect and the minus (negative) affect. Psychological well-being is compatible and is coincidentally arrived at through positive psychological functioning in correlation with human organistic valuing processes. The processes of positive psychological functioning in correlation with human organistic valuing have to operate as the fundamental assumption of positive psychology.

The problem of the definition of Linley and Joseph (2004) is that the notion of well-being of human beings is been reduced to organistic valuing processes with an overemphasis on a human being’s organistic and biotic mode of experience. The latter amounts to a reductionist process in which the organistic and biotic mode of experience is been singled out as the constant theoretical perspective to which human beings and the surrounding natural environment is been reduced to. Holistic and differentiated experience of human well-being and wellness as embracing satisfaction in life reaching equilibrium through differentiation of human fields, modes and dimensions of experience, is in the definition of Linley and Joseph one-sidedly and lopsidedly forced into a reductionist organistic sphere of psychological reflection. The irony is that equilibrium is largely attained through a reductionist model in the sense of what one puts psychologically and reductionistically into the equation one gets psychologically and reductionistically out as result. The researcher admits that in terms of a holistic and differentiated approach what one puts in, in terms of a differentiated set of fields of experience, one holistically and differentially gets out as a result. In the end, scientific differences between scientists boil down to the type of sense-making approach scientists adhere to with their whole heart.

Pavot and Diener (2004:680) define subjective well-being as a broad category of phenomena that comprises humans’ emotional responses, satisfactions and global judgments of life-satisfaction. They also put the converse position on the table, complementing a definition of well-being: subjective well-being alone is not enough for good quality of life. It is conceivable that an individual’s temperament might predispose him or her to the experience of positive emotions, even under circumstances where justice, dignity and other essential qualities (differential roles) of a good life were largely absent. O’Brien (2003:109) supplements the insufficient definition of Pavot and Diener by describing spiritual as the wellness or the health of the totality of the inner resources of humankind, the ultimate concerns around which all other values are focused, the central philosophy of life that guides conduct, and the meaning-giving centre of human life which influences all individual and social behaviour. Spiritual well-being is an integrating aspect of humankind’s wholeness characterised by meaning and hope. O’Brien’s view of spiritual well-being as the integrating aspect is partially, falling back into the trap of the ancient duality viewpoint in which the spiritual body is more important than the physical body. O’Brien’s answer to a question why bodily physical well-being, still seen within the framework of his accepted duality and therefore highly problematical as the integrating aspect would surely been informative.

Concluding Assumptions on Well-Being and Wellness

Firstly, the experiences of well-being and wellness are thus been seen as a holistic differentiated network of experiences which is attained through enactment of the foursome rolling pattern of experience of God, oneself, other human beings and the physical-organic environment within the fields of experience such as believing, thinking, loving, feeling, socialising, performance producing, apportioning justice and evolving. The changing shifts and turns from one experiential role to another, and thus the interchange between fields of experience within the differentiatedness of the human person, supplement and complement the experience of well-being and wellness in another field of experience.

Secondly, the experience of well-being and wellness is being experienced as the intersecting of the experiential foursome rolling pattern of God, oneself, other human beings and the physical-organic environment.