Postliberale teologie as teologiese raamwerk vir die kerk se korporatiewe identiteit

Abstract

<strong>Postliberal theology as theological reference for the church’s corporate identity</strong><p>This article seeks to show the importance of culture and symbols, as in the business sector in terms of corporate culture and image, so too <em>mutatis mutandis</em> in the church. The post liberal theology would be a basis of such an argument. A short exposition of the theology of George Lindbeck is given in order to indicate that his categories should be interpreted dynamically which means that the one-way direction of influence in the cultural-linguistic model gets dialectical, once this relation has been established. In a time of identity crises for established churches, corporate symbols are of utmost importance. Therefore, this process should be managed and exploited. Recognition of the particular has its place in the post liberal theology without abolishing ecumenism or, in the words of Lindbeck, “reconciliation without capitulation”.</p&gt

Integral ecology

“…However, I fully acknowledge that humans do not live only in nature but also in language and story. Therefore, I endorsed the socio-linguistic approach of the Postliberal Theology of the Yale School at the time (Buitendag 2002;. In an interdisciplinary dialogue of scientists and theologians, the participants representing various science and humanities disciplines must cope with linguistic differences regarding concepts, rules, shades of meaning and ambiguity, among others.…”

Teologie as werklikheidsverstaan – anders dink, anders doen: Aantekeninge oor die teologie van Johan Buitendag

“…In 'n resente artikel, getitel 'Die noodsaaklikheid van habitat in ons definisie van menswees: Op soek na 'n eko-teologiese verstaan van menslike lewe' (Buitendag 2012c) argumenteer hy dat George Lindbeck se beskrywing van die mens se 'sosiolinguistiese nis' tekortkominge het as dit by 'n holistiese verstaan van die menslike persoon kom. In ander artikels kry hierdie aspek implisiet of eksplisiet aandag (Buitendag 2002c(Buitendag , 2003a(Buitendag , 2003c(Buitendag , 2004a(Buitendag , 2005a(Buitendag , 2009a(Buitendag , 2009b Die vraag of mense gekloon kan (mag) word, is dus die verkeerde vraag, want mens kan nie gekloon word nie (Buitendag 2004a:418). Tog moet die aangeleentheid (net soos stamselnavorsing) nie deur die teologie geïgnoreer word nie.…”