The divine economy theory does not differ with Austrian economics unless, for some reason, Austrian economics is considered as finished. Just like Austrian economics has basically nothing to do with the economy of Austria, Austrian economics encompasses the advancement of economic science and praxeology beyond the remnant links (their students) to Mises and Rothbard. Of course there are criteria that can be used to determine if the advancements are true to the Austrian tradition and the tradition of classical liberalism.
If there is a noticeable difference between Austrian economics and the divine economy theory it has to do with the removal of religious prejudice and the creeping of atheism into 'science.' Some who contribute to Austrian economics have an exclusionary attitude that is not complementary with an attitude of comparative religion. Some who contribute to Austrian economics think that atheism is an expression of wertfrei and cannot fathom the harmony of sciene and religion. Let's be fair and measure these contributors with the existent criteria of what is Austrian and what is classical liberalism. I am up to the challenge. Are others?
Regardless, as an Austrian economist I continually test what is being developed as part of the divine economy theory and so far it meets the tests. As far as I am concerned the divine economy theory is merely a specialized study within the Austrian economics tradition and the classical liberalism tradition.
Follow me on Twitter @DivineEconomy
If you know of anyone interested in ethics and
or liberty and justice, please send them this