“…Different approaches, distinctions and meanings are applied and adhered to by different people in different institutional settings (see De Villiers 2011b:17-22;Koopman 2003Koopman , 2007aKoopman , 2007bKoopman , 2010bSmit 2007), where claims are laid to intradisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary modes of scholarly practice (Koopman 2010b:126-131); to an engagement with different topical foci, such as the economy, health, racism, xenophobia, sexism, crime, ecology, culture, faith and social identity, human dignity and human rights, just peace-building, globalisation and justice, and moral formation and public life (Koopman 2007a(Koopman :189-196, 2007b; to an engagement with and operation from within different locations or 'publics' of public theological practice -the academy, the church and society at large (Koopman 2003(Koopman , 2007a(Koopman :196-204, 2007b; to an identification of different forms of public theology, from a Christological perspective, namely prophetic public theology, priestly public theology and royal servant public theology (Koopman 2008(Koopman :251-253, 2009(Koopman :120, 2012a; to an execution of different tasks of public theology in the areas or spheres of politics, economics, civil society and public opinion (Koopman 2003:9-19); and to a practising of different modes of public theological speaking, namely envisioning of the 'good life' or 'good society', prophetic criticism, story-telling, technical analysis, and policymaking (Koopman 2009(Koopman , 2010a.…”