Abstract
In this article it is argued that theology must be practical to have meaning. The author of this article attempts to determine whether 'practical theology’ and 'diaconiology' are the same discipline or whether they are different disciplines within the science of theology. It is alleged that diaconiology differs intrinsically from practical theology when the point of departure, prepositions and theological positions are taken into account. Practical theology is based on the empirical church and its actions. Diaconiology should take as its point of departure the kingship (kingdom) of God in this world. It is conceded that the reformed diaconiological tradition got stuck in formal ministries. The article propagates the development of diaconiology, inter alia by means of a critical investigation of the process by which God encounters man and church. It is concluded that an empirical analysis of the official ministries may be necessary to establish whether the kingdom of God is indeed actualized in practice.
Highlights
In this article it is argued that theology must be practical to have meaning
Verder is vroeër al gewys op die neiging om prak tiese teologie as ’n ‘altematiewe teologie’ te ontwerp en die gevaar dat die vak sodoende kan opgaan in ’n antropologiese “godsdienswetenskap” wat teenoor die ander teologiese dissiplines te staan kom
Ook word aanvaar dat die wetenskaplike grondslae in ’n duidelike verskil in wetenskaplike opset tussen praktiese teologie en diakoniologie behoort te manifesteer
Summary
Oor diakoniologie as sodanig word - in teenstelling met praktiese teologie - tans baie min gepubliseer. Is Praktiese Teologie en Diakoniologie net twee name vir dieselfde vak (Spoelstra, 1991:214, Louw, 1992:125) o f het ons hier met twee verskillende wetenskaplike benaderinge, miskien selfs verskillende ‘teologieë’ te doen?. Tog is die onderskeid tussen diakoniologie en ‘praktiese teologie’ nie duidelik nie, selfs nie wanneer Venter (1992:30-34) sê: “Die diens van die kerk is die besondere gerigtheid in die diakoniologiese denke” ’n Mens sou ook kon verwag dat Dijk se beroep op Calvyn (1952:15) die werk (‘kommunikatiewe handelinge’?) van Christus en nie die kerk nie as “die besondere gerigtheid in die diako niologiese denke” sou uitwys. Verwarrende en selfs botsende begrippe soos kerk, amp, diens en die relasie tot God bemoeilik ’n analise van diakoniologie en praktiese teologie
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
