listened to Michael White, they no longer tried to solve problems. Rather they became interested in bringing forth and 'thicken' (with reference to Geertz [1978]) stories that did not support or sustain problems. On this account AI and narrative therapy has the same intention, and therefore the same intention as a facilitative approach regarding practical theology. A facilitative approach in, and to, practical theology (with reference to its narrative accent) also relates to the following aspects that some emphasise in facilitation. It resonates with Miki Kashtan's ideas behind the art of transparent facilitation (2005); with Mike Brown (2002, 2003, 2004) on the masking of power and social order; with regard to neutrality, with those who contest it, such as Cheryl Estes (2004), Phil Kirk and Mike Broussine (2000); and with reference to epistemology, Cheryl Estes (2004); with Roger Schwarz (2002) on different hats to be worn deemed necessary in facilitation; and with James Troxel (2005) regarding affirmative facilitation and process consultation. The dimensions of education in facilitator training that Thomas (2008:169) discusses are also useful in plotting oneself within the genre of facilitation.It is important to note that little of the initial literature review, including those genres that Thomas mentions (2008), relate overtly and adequately to what postfoundational, social constructionist, and narrative dimensions entail. Therefore, this is what a facilitative approach regarding practical theology will contribute to the duet. It is the acknowledgement and reliance on particular accents in one's own tradition that imbue the interdisciplinary dialogue with a sense of agency. To illustrate: for the facilitative consulting role (that is part of practical theological facilitation), one might draw from larger conceptual frameworks of practical theology that underscore different approaches in one design. See, for example, De Roest (1998:25) who mentions Browning, Mette, Van der Ven; Heitink (1993:223-226); Dingemans (1996) and Osmer (2008, 2011). Then, as referred to earlier, the discipline's current DNA, that of action or practice and an interpretive turn, contribute significantly to the dialogue with facilitation. Lastly, as it relates to certain traditions within the broad DNA, one might rely on post-structural accents such as social constructionism, postfoundationalism and narrative practice. For example, there was not only an interpretive turn (i.e. part of the current practical theological DNA) but in that, a further narrative turn in practical theology (cf. Demasure & Muller 2006). These are accentuations that are particularly helpful. Closing remarksA facilitative approach as it pertains to practical theology invites us to look again through both the microscope and the telescope; though, in the case of the prior not with its 17th century connotation of scientific reductionism (Midgley 2004).It brings under the microscope a focus on the individual (with reference to being inscribed, unavoidably influential, opting for a decentred position), and individual life stories with tremendous potential for intersubjectivity and verisimilitude. The reference to the individual incorporates the narrated life of the practical theologian as facilitator and the ways that he or she is inscribed. It entails a shift in focus from that of practical theology to the practical theologian. If the person then becomes important, it is