The author has written other works to introduce the Enneagram and many of its core concepts (to which she refers liberally in this work), yet believes the Enneagram is not sufficient in and of itself.

The author situates the Enneagram in a greater whole she describes as “The Drawing.” In “The Drawing,” the Enneagram is imagined as reflecting the “adapted self,” our personality type and behaviors rooted in our fears and how we have compensated for them. She encourages movement from this “adapted self” toward the “authentic self,” in which a person gets beyond the negative voices and accusations and values and recognizes one’s inherent worth and standing. The “authentic self” is able to be well connected into the life and love of the Triune God.

She speaks of this transformation process in terms of a set of stages and a movement from “what I am” to “who I am,” from reactive to responsive, from bondage to freedom, from wounded to whole, from shakable to unshakable, from burdened to rested, and from glory to glory.

A lot of the substance here generally aligns with other frameworks in understanding the process of being made holy, sanctification, or entering more fully into the life of God; to that end it is mostly unobjectionable. I would be interested in knowing how well other students and specialists in Enneagram studies have received this proposal and its understanding of the Enneagram in the grand scheme of things.

How much and thoroughly can one move beyond one’s tendencies manifest in the Enneagram. It is healthy to grow and mature beyond one’s anxieties and fears, but at the same time, a lot of our growth in Christ comes from experiences which have caused us grief and distress. Are our positions in the Enneagram something from which we need to move, or are they our tendencies of which we must be aware and can be redeemed?

It will be interesting to see how the field continues to advance and explore such things. ( )