metaphor-informed way to pursue practical theology), and in what might be referred to as practical theological facilitation (predominantly practice and role-informed, as in professional facilitation). With Van Huyssteen, situated in the discipline of systematic theology2, his use of facilitation pertains particularly to the academic interdisciplinary dialogue between theology and science and specifically so with reference to postfoundational rationality. As such, the word facilitation is used as a verb3 and not as we understand it also, a role. To illustrate Van Huyssteen's (1999) use as a verb: Rationality thus clearly entails an unavoidable investment in the interest of others. Because our epistemic communities never exist in complete isolation from one another, it will be important to realize that an adequately contextualized notion of rationality is necessary to facilitate intersubjective, cross-disciplinary conversation. (p. 153)Our view encapsulates that of Van Huyssteen, but as practical theologians, facilitation serves to engage not only academia (in the said cross-disciplinary conversation) - as one of Tracy's audiences of practical theology (1998) - but also the ministry context and then especially the public dimension of society as an audience.Although we will need to comment more elsewhere, rationality also lies close to the heart of facilitation since the facilitator will have diverse rationalities to account for in facilitation. One has to view rationality in a wider framework to clarify what we see as part of the task of the facilitator. A broader understanding might include Browning's (1991) views on practical reasoning, renowned creative thought leader, De Bono's (n.d.) work on Lateral Thinking (1973) and Six Thinking Hats (1999) and any means by which a person or organisation makes sense of the world, particularly in respect of its everyday living where decisions are made and our narratives are performed. When acknowledging different rationalities and in view of the actual professional practice (i.e. role) of facilitation, the use of the word facilitation cannot just be used colloquially.Secondly, in respect of the professional facilitation role, as with Bens (2005): the understanding of the facilitative role can be interpreted wider than Bens' description of professional facilitation. It could include a consulting role (particularly a facilitative-consulting role). Consequently, in underscoring facilitative practice in the context of consulting, it resonates with the gist of what practitioner facilitation and narrative practice are about. Furthermore, following the differentiation of Kiiti and Nielsen (1999) between facilitation and advocacy, we connect narrative ideas to a facilitative approach whilst advocative voices relate more to conventional consulting practice. Widening the conceptual framework could therefore involve that facilitation has a role to play in a broader context of advocacy. Yet advocating in the context of facilitation is more contentious.The idea of consulting also implies that the kind of dialogue that seeks facilitation is not restricted to in-the-moment dialogue; in this sense the conceptual framework is also widened. It takes into account ecological, political, social and other dialogues that take shape on an elaborate scale and different platforms. Relating to these platforms, dialogue might also account for the influence of media such as television, newspapers and so forth as part of the voices or texts