Program Officer indication that it was the time for religions to evaluate themselves, think of a relevant life within the society, as well as serve society's Institute of Interfaith Dialogue
in Indonesia (Interfidei) has already celebrated its 10 year establishing an institutio n, which up to this moment has d evelo ped as an inter-faith dialogue institution.
It could be said that Interfidei is the first inter-faith d i a l o g u e i n s t i t u t i o n i n
Chairman: Eka Darmaputra, Ph.D., Vice Chairman: Dr. Djohan Effendi, Daniel Dhakidae, PH.D., Secretary: Dr. Th. Sumartana, Treasure: Zulkifli Lubis, Pelaksana Harian: Dr. Th. Sumartana (Director);Elga Sarapung (Program Officer); Zuli Qodir, Wayan Suweta (Discusion/Seminar); Samuel A. Bless, Noegroho Agoeng, Haryandi, Sarnuji
the context of society pluralism and the p luralism o f religio ns existing in
1 Indonesia.
This edition of Interfidei's newsletter is sp ecial in w elco ming the 10 (ten) y ears anniversary of Interfidei. Therefore the form, content, and thickness is different from the usual edition. The content of this edition is as follows : First, on the MISSION and VISION of Interfidei, written by Dr. Th. Sumartana (The Director of Interfidei), the speech of Rev. Eka Darmaputera in the establishing of this institute, August 10 1992. Second, a number of OPINIONS with different themes connected to dialogues and inter-religion relations. Each is on the issue of GENDER, by Mr. Wahid Hasyim (Rifka Annisa-Jogjakarta); ISLAM by Mr. Hairus Salim (LKIS-Jogjakarta); POLITICS by Mr. A.A. GN. Ari Dwipayana (Faculty of Social-P o l i t i c s , G a d j a h M a d a U n i v e r s i t y ) ; PROTESTANT, by Mr. Gerrit Singgih (Faculty of Theology, Christian University of Duta Wacana); CATHOLICS by Father Budi Subanar (Faculty of Theology, Sanata Dharma University), RELIGION and HUMAN RIGHTS by Dr. Th. Sumartana. Third, MESSAGES and IMPRESSIONS from the colleagues, acquaintances, and comrades in the revolution, each is Bhikkhu Sri Pannyavaro Mahathera (MENDUT TEMPLE), Josien Folbert (Netherlands), Chandra Setiawan (MATAKIN, Jakarta), Tommy Bahl (SIKH, Jakarta), Lusi Margiyani (LSPPA, Jogjakarta), Machasin (IAIN-Sunan Kalijaga, Jogjakarta), Ibu Gedong Bagoes Oka (The Leader of Ashram Gandhi, Candi Dasa, Karangasem, Bali); Supriyanto (has been working at Interfidei for 6 years as a driver).Forth, THE NARRATION of THE TEN YEAR'S ACTIVITY of IN STITUT DIA N / IN TERFIDEI, o leh Elg a Sarapung (Program Officer-Interfidei). Besides, the content of this edition is also completed with the pictures of Interfidei's activities for 10 (ten) years, as w ell as a part o f the planning development of the DIALOGUE CENTER of Interfidei in Jogjakarta.
We are very thankful, first of all to The Asia Foundation (TAF) for their willingness to help in
the publishing of this special edition. Our gratitud e also go es to all o ur co lleagues, acquaintances, as well as our brothers and sisters in this revolution who are willing to contribute to the content and meaning of this newsletter, through the writings prepared. Also to all the crews, the working team preparing this special edition, since the beginning till the end.
Of course, the journey for ten years is not a smooth and easy journey. Experience has taught us all to be always realistic, among the existing hopes and dreams; to realize the capabilities as w ell as limitations ow ned; to comprehend critically and distinguish the text and context, the theory and practice. Challenges will always be there, but the hope to stay alive for a reality in the future, that what is done is for all, for the sake of everybody and mutual interests.
Therefore we greatly thank to everybody, o ur co lleagues, friends, acquaintances, o ur brothers and sisters in this revolution, institutions, whether they are close or far, domestic as well as foreign, for all of their concerns, material as well as moral contributions and supports, ideas, spirit, warmth, directly or indirectly, through friendship and brotherhood, formally as well as informally. We admit that there were times of thrill, but at times there were times of laugh and high sense of humor; at times there were arguing and conflicts, but they could always be faced and overcome together. All of these have contributed such a profound meaning and promise a better collective future.
Hopefully the next journey will be even more enriched by all the experiences, all the learning processes that have taken place for these ten years. Our dreams, our goals, our hopes are the dreams, goals, as well as the hopes of you all. Hopefully the awareness to mutual appreciation toward variety among people would grow.
We present this Newsletter for all of you, the readers. Had there been any wrongs or mistakes, please do not hesitant to criticizes or convey it to us. We would be glad to accept your critics! HAPPY READING!
Editor
1
Interfidei ( Institute for Inter-faith Dialogue in Indonesia ) started its activity in the middle of 1991, and just acquired its legal acknowledgement as an Institution on December 20 1991. On August 10 1992, it was announced officially in a course of program in Jogjakarta. Since then, this institute has maintained its position in Jogjakarta.
The choosing of Jogjakarta as the center of activities is not without any reason. Some other cities in Central Java were also included in the nomination, among others were Magelang, Solo, Salatiga, Ungaran, Ambarawa, and Semarang. However, in the end, Jogjakarta was chosen for it is a city of pluralism motive, a city of sufficient age, and a city of experience in dealing with the plurality of its society. However, a more definitive reason would be that Jogja is widely known as a city that has serious concern toward young generation. This city is known as one of the centers of educational activities in Indonesia. It has been thought since the beginning that Interfidei would work mainly among youth, especially college students, students, the youth, and young activists who are generally working at some Non Governmental Organizations. The models for dialogues could be developed from such environment. Interfidei holds the view that the spread of the idea of inter-faith dialogue should have a strong stepping among the youth, for only with this way would inter-faith dialogue have a future.
Taking a little bit look backward, the embryo of the idea of establishing Interfidei had started since the second half of the 1960s. In those years, in the arena of theological discourses in the international level had appeared a new trend of thinking on the meaning of pluralism that then was widely spread all over the world. At those times also, a lot of new roles were undergone by the young generation, especially to seek some new horizon of new thoughts that went over the limits of established cultural and religious thinking structures. Dialogues could be considered as the latest model for new theological scholars to find a way out of the dead end of old theological paradigm and assumptions that were trapped in the stagnation, conflicts and hostility among religions. It seems that the movement of the youth in 1960s could not be considered as trivial. They merged into all aspects of life and were really
critical to every joint of life that was not open to reformation.
Nearly at the same time as the World Council of Churches whose headquarter is in Geneva, the office of The Pope in Vatican had as well started holding internal meetings to define the meaning, scopes, as well as the purposes of interreligious dialogues, This dialogue program was held spirit fully, entering a very productive process of dialogue. The World Church Council started a new department in order to encourage Protestant churches all over the world to enter the era of interreligious dialogue as the foundation of peace for all humanity. A more realistic step, even a more dramatic one, was taken by the Vatican by declaring a church document then known as the Vatican Council II. This document is a historical document whose echoes went through further ahead. This Council opened the closed and jammed communication among religious communities, with new and pretty sympathetic attitude toward non-Christian religions. The declaration of this Council was indeed a very historical event, for in the time before it was extremely difficult to find such an explicit thought over appreciation among religions as found in the first half of the 1960s. Before those years, interreligious relations was trapped in the situation of suspicion, prejudice, vengeance, resentment, hate, even hostility from one religion to another.
Actually far before that, in the time after the World War II had appeared the seeds of new thinking on interreligious relationship over the ruins of this post war. The bitter experience of the international disorder had destroyed the whole culture and civilizations of human being terribly. This experience had brought a new awareness to the religious scholars to find a new way for religions as a power of peace, that had the power of anticipation, prevention, as well as a curative ability to overcome the wounds and face the conflicts of social-politics happening in the society. After the World War II, the religion leaders started working out a relationship by meeting and discussing with new situation and motive encouragement. At that time they gathered informally in small rooms in houses referred as “leer hues”. These meetings were generally attended by the Jews and the Christians. From this continuous discussion process, a close relationship and theological
* Director Institut DIAN / Interfidei
A Brief History
The Vision and Mission of Interfidei
findings upon the perception of the scriptures of the Old as well as the New Testaments appeared. The reinterpretation of these scriptures had become a meeting point, in which prejudice could be overcome and misunderstanding be corrected.
Whereas in Indonesia, the college students in the middle of 1960s also took part as the openness process that had become the spirit of the time. They, the members of young generation who had had their first hand on the experience of interdisciplinary education (of religions, enriched by other social sciences), had been capable of absorbing and capturing the spirits of the time. Since then, a lot of gatherings occurred among college students going to different religious education centers. The contacts among these college students, whether it was external or internal from various religions as well as political affiliations occurred lively. The students of The State Institute for Islamic Studies (IAIN), The Theology College (STT), and The College of Philosophy/ Theology Driyarkara had often met and held collective activities. So had other college student institutions such as HMI, GMKI, PMKRI, PMII, and many others that often held meetings discussing religion-related issues. The NGOs that sprouted out like mushrooms in the rainy seasons also showed their attention to the matter of inter-religion dialogue, especially those that were realized in the fields of the service and work field of each and every organization. This whole development strengthened the social basis for inter religion dialogue in the society.
There are many other factors that also embellished the awareness as well as the practice on the inter-religion dialogue. One (of many other things) that is important is the positive role conducted by Prof. Mukti Ali as the Indonesian Minister of Religious Affair. As we all aware, Mukti Ali is a professor with authority in the field of religion comparison science who has a big role in taking the initiative and spreading the idea of interreligious dialogue. From the above description it could be stated that the age of inter religious dialogue conducted with awareness and good plan is still young, only about three decades old. Taking into consideration the reality that even though many things have been accomplished in the dialogue process, but since the problems faced are so big and accumulating, it gives the image that the result of the process has not had any real impact. Social conflicts with religion motives are growing and spreading to almost all regions in Indonesia, whether in Java, or (especially) out of Java. The reality of the emergence of conflicts and violence with religion motives often cause skepticism toward dialogues. This should be understood
wisely by the activists of peace.
On the riots and conflicts with the motive of religions, of course religion is not the only single factor, it was merely one of other factors that are so complex and related to each other. Therefore, interreligious dialogues could not be isolated as a factor of its own, but it should be connected to other realities existing in the society; such as the reality of social, politics, economy, technological development, culture, education, etc. Therefore the reference of the life of religions should also be developed and completed with various disciplines that could enrich the perception on social-humanity problems within the society. Religions could be the supportive factors of the society's resistance power toward conflict provocations from other sectors in life. Since the beginning, Interfidei has had the motive of “interfaith”, it does not belong to merely one religion. Interfidei concentrated itself on the “faith”, and not “religion” in order not to be trapped in an approach toward religion institutionally. For Interfidei, faith is the essence of religion. This institute gives as much room and space as possible for the freedom of thinking, as well as all discourses on faith that are expressed openly. Interfidei crosses the line of definition on “religion” given by the State.
readers and annotation makers. This book had just been able to be published in the month of July 1998. Meanwhile the management of Interfidei institution was structured: Rev. Dr. Eka Darmaputera was the appointed chief, Dr. Djohan Effendy and Dr. Daniel Dakhidae were appointed vice presidents, Th. Sumartana was appointed the Secretary of Interfidei Institution (as well as the Director of Interfidei), and Zulkifli Lubis was the appointed treasurer. We should also not forget the role as well as the intercourse with spiritual figures such as Bhikku Sri Pannyavaro Mahathera and Ibu Gedong Bagoes Oka, as well as Haksu Thjie Tjai Ing and a few figures from Javanese spiritualism that have greatly influenced the form, matter, vision, as well as the mission of Interfidei. In the early stage, full support from Rev. Jaspert Slob of Hervormed Church and from a few colleagues of Gereformeered Church in the Netherlands had been the starting life power of this institution.
Activities after activities, year after year Interfidei has developed according to the existing challenges. This development has also been simultaneous with the life of the NGOs in Indonesia that has been getting more complex and extensive in the society. At first the activities of Interfidei were mainly held in Jogjakarta or Java in general. The development in the second half of the decade of 1990s started spreading outside of Java, by conducting seminars/ workshops, and also involvement in various areas of conflicts (such as : M a l u k u , M a k a s s a r, M a t a r a m , M a n a d o , P a l a n g k a r a y a , P o n t i a n a k , B a n j a r m a s i n , Bengkulu, Kupang, Ende, Jayapura, Lampung, and other cities). These workshop series were focused mainly on the campaign of peace to support the resources of the local region in order to empower itself as the power of peace. In this stage, the staffs of Interfidei were also enriched by the joining of Wiwin Siti Aminah, Father Agoeng, Samuel Asse Bless, Syafa'atun Almirzanah, Heru Susanto, Wayan Suweta, etc of different educational backgrounds, faith, and ethnic. The experiences in those regions really delivered a new refreshing awareness of Indonesia as a society of true pluralism, with different challenges from one region to another. These experiences demanded a frame of thought as well as new activities. This also affected Interfidei's self-understanding ; how to manage plans, priorities, as well as activity programs to step ahead to the next ten years.
Based on the experience for about ten years in the field of “interfaith dialogue” as depicted above, while strengthening its vision and mission, Interfidei feels that it is necessary to develop itself to be always responsive to the calling of the new
spirit of the time. Therefore, there are at least three things to be mentioned :
(a). Faith Dialogues. The profound, open, and comprehensive understanding of faith as the essence of religion. Therefore we need to complete ourselves with a sufficient knowledge of “living faiths” in the society, also to improve inter-faith and inter-disciplinary thinking abilities. The working programs are focused on the reconciliation, peace, appreciation, cooperation, freedom of thinking, fighting against prejudice, correcting misunderstanding, as the democratic basis toward a civil society.
(b). The requirements to the future that should be completed with the abilities of management, development of institution, qualifications of staffs and working equipment, quality of service, scholarships, and the building of n e t w o r k s e i t h e r l o c a l l y, n a t i o n a l l y, o r internationally. In this relationship then “institutional building” becomes an urgent need. The idea on self-development in the next 10 years is based on the experience of this passing 10 years. The idea on the understanding of Interfidei to the future has its source from the plan to build a dialogue center.
Taking into account the life of the people in Indonesia since a long time ago, we could see the unique roles as well as positions of religions. It is not only a reality that most of the society in Indonesia are faithful embracers, but religions have also formed patterns of mind, giving a basis for the meaningful dimension of the aspects of life as well as also delivered that aspirations and the image of the society's future in a whole. This, among others, could be seen in the life order of the society, nation, and the government of Indonesia.
From the treasury of the life of the nations in Asia, religions have also performed as a spiritual power, as the source that keep and develop certain civilizations. Religions interact with each other and form layers of trust that absorb each other and give spices to the perception on the meaning of life of human being, work, nature, and even arrange social relationships within the society. This variety of traditions undergoes similar functions, i.e. the functions of maintaining, developing, as well as the function of rescuing for the members of the society. Therefore, even though those religions are
different, because the society demands the same service from those religions, the functions and characteristics of the religions seem not far too different. The similarity lies on the functions they undergo to fulfill the needs of the society. This same society is then given the spice by different religions as a unity.
th
The beginning of the 20 century was the beginning of the rise of the nations in Asia. The struggle of religions against colonialism in Asia was so unique that the rise of these Asian nations could take place at the exact time as the rise of religions. Religions had played their social-politic roles through quo-colonial status that sought to maintain the exploitative relationship between the Westerners and the Easterners. In this region religions have been an emancipators power for the people to create internation relationship that is more civilized as well as human. However, it should be admitted that the roles of these religions was still limited to the tasks of uniting and making people aware, they have not yet been able to bring the society to the substance of modernity that serves as the key of the development of the society in the future. However, the roles undergone by those
Pdt. Eka Darmaputera
**The title was given by editor. The original one was the script of speech addressed in the opening ceremony of Interfidei in Indonesia, August 1992 in Jogjakarta.
The Chairman of Institut DIAN/ Interfidei.
*
**
religions have a great historical value, for with this break-through, Asian nations are placed in the historical awareness equal to the positions of the modern Western nations, as the nations that are independent, have identities and self confidence to determine their own fates, and have the intentions to be responsible of their own histories.
In the present time, and to the further future, religions are estimated to keep on having a vital role in giving the morality frame, especially in the fields of life concerning a lot of people such as in politics, social, culture, and economy. In these very fields do the religions hold the integrative functions for the groups of society, give awareness of the values to the society as well as determine the understanding toward collective humanitarian problems with their offer of solutions altogether. It is at this point could we talk about the role of prophecy from these religions, that has been an essential and inherent contribution within the faith life of every religion. This prophetic function is prominent especially when the society is tripped into a hard problem where a lot of its members are involved in the crisis and lost their hold of life. There, religions function as the guides that are critical and do not stop giving hope. The prophetic calling of every religion always voices justice and solidarity, especially from the side of the abandoned and the lost ones from the society. Religions will not allow any harassment toward human being without any checking and warning. In reference with the prophetic calling and the functions of religions freeing, we could not close our eyes also toward the reality (especially in the contemporary history) that religions sometimes loses their prophetic spirit and then slip into the trap of destructive power game and oppressing political structures. In such situations, religions could be depicted as a hen that sits on some rotten eggs, eggs that would not hatch newborn lives. Therefore, criticism toward religions should still be conducted.
The levels of ability and thinking of the religions existing in Indonesia could not indeed be separated from the general reality that the majority of the people in Indonesia are still poor and have relatively low education. With such conditions, religions often reflect the capability of their communities that have not improved a lot, so that opinions are often heard that religions become burdens and serve as the power of anti reformation and anti development. Religions often contain the potential of problems rather than perform as the potential to solve those problems. However, such reality shall not be made reason to ignore religions in the effort of developing the nation, for if the development is really thought as the development
by, from, and for the people, then it will never be able to be conducted without counting religions in. The problem is how to make religions still open toward criticism, from within itself as well as from the external side so that they could really serve as creative power that could be expected as the power of reformation in the society.
Interfidei was established to study continuously the image of the position as well as the roles of religions in the middle of the society. This effort of study is to be conducted on the basis of open and critical cooperation, along with its scientific norms. This is to underline the reality of interdependency between religions and the society, that religions affect the life of the society, and on the contrary, the development of the society also affect the motives of religious life. With this understanding, there is no meaning to approach religions “neutrally”, on the other hand, we realize the roots of theological faith of the religions to have the opportunity to see how far those religions really pay attention to humanitarian problems. Also how religions would give a more serious meaning toward the efforts of other religions to face these humanitarian problems. Next, further opportunity will also be open for understanding how religions play their roles to formulate and answer the problems of human beings in the future.
In relations with pluralism, Interfidei holds the view that we do need a creative interpretation toward the motto of “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika”, i.e. giving an insurance to variety, but on the other hand also giving an insurance for a critical and positive interaction for the sake of collective need. In this connection, the Institute believes that interreligious dialogue and cooperation is a creative understanding toward the problem of pluralism where an open and appreciative interaction process takes place. With this perception could this interreligious dialogue be viewed as a part of seeking models for inter group relations within the society, that supports the process of emancipation and democracy in all levels of the society. So far pluralism tends to empty into doctrine and missionary competition in order to gain as many followers as possible, where one religion is made an object for another religion. How often do we witness that religion turns out to be a source of disbelief; a belief not to believe of others' faith ! Faith of a religion is formulated into a category to refuse the existence of another religion. With open and humble hearts we also need to admit that such realities still stick to the ways we hold our religions at the moment.
to the religions they embrace. This variety of problems is faced to the totality of similar problems. Problems such as environment reservation, demography, labor, political structures, economic system, social order, educational tasks, healing tasks and many more appear with the form as a whole and interreligious. These challenges appear as challenges for the life and death of all members of the society. In such a situation, then the internal and inter religion contradictions will be a luxus, an action of waste.
It is more realized that not a single religion could offer a solving concept for all of the problems faced at the moment. The same awareness appear when we are not able to face this problem by ignoring the roles and existence of other religions. In the present time, interreligious togetherness is a must, since the existing problems have to be categorized as collective human problems. A relevant answer toward these humanity problems are expected to be delivered collectively in a continuous dialogue among all groups of the society.
Since the beginning this Institute has been the realization of cooperative and interreligious dialogue spirits. This institute does not work over one exclusive institutional interest or religion denomination. On the contrary, it is an institute that could be taken advantage of by all men of faith. This institute opens a dialogue forum for all the parties agreeing to conduct a dialogue. This institute does not step on a certain theological view, except for the theology that is able to perceive and not to decline interfaith dialogues: it is that faith could be discussed together from a more collective profound understanding, in a free and open situation without any hidden agenda. In relation with the aforementioned understanding, it is then appropriate to name this institute The Institute for Inter faith Dialogue (Interfidei). This institute was established as an effort to link the missions of religions in relation with the challenges of the society's problems that are faced together. Moreover, since every religion has its universal side, this institute is also open toward experiences as well as thoughts of all religious communities all over the world. This concept covering the whole world is an acknowledgement that all religious traditions belong to the human kind. It is a spiritual reservoir that carries an unlimited spiritual wealth to be a source of inspiration for the human kind all over the world and in all ages.
Interfidei is meant as a forum in which the ideas of faith are conveyed in a collective dialogue in order to stimulate each other and to grow as an effort to realize the collective responsibilities toward humanitarian problems for the safety of the
society as a whole. The dynamics of religious life always bring about internal conversations among the religious communities with the teachings they embrace. Here, we face the dialogic structure of each religion. In order to conduct a productive dialogue task, three scopes need to be cleared away. First, dialogues of the same religion embracers. This first level dialogue is important according to the faith life dynamics as mentioned above. However, the main concern of Interfidei lies on the second and third level dialogues, i.e. inter religion dialogues and dialogues between religions and the society. These dialogues also cover theological dialogues. With these theological dialogues, there is a sign that the cooperation expected by this institute are not merely a practical or pragmatic cooperation, for every theological understanding will give a more profound awareness and will prevent merely practical and pragmatic cooperation.
Therefore, then dialogues are conducted by achieving the most profound meanings of each and every religion by appreciating the diversity of the view of every religion with a critical attitude with no distortion toward all forms of religion teachings. Dialogues do not have the aim to terminate differences, moreover with dishonest and rude ways. However, it needs to be clarified that this institute is not in the position as a judge to the truth of faith, not in the position to determine the measurement of truth for religions. These all will go back to the subjective faith of each religion embracer. One purpose of this institute is to discuss openly the similarities and differences among faiths in a dialogic attitude, in a situation of no force. The institute realizes that the result of a dialogue can not be made sure before the process of dialogue itself is conducted and experienced.
Such dialogues will in turn determine their own results, equal to the quality of the dialogue conducted, for every process of dialogue among people, no matter how difficult it is, will bring about a form of new, more mature, and more meaningful togetherness and humanity commitments. However, we should take notes that dialogues are no miracle means that will automatically provide solutions to all relationships among people and interreligious relationships in specific, instead, dialogues are able to create a more honest, open, critical relationship conditions, either internally or toward other people. It is these joints of relationships that serve as hopes to improve intergroup relationships in the future. In this relationship, the institute directs its view forward to the effort of conducting an anticipation toward the development of the society's thinking.
study as well as researches on various actual religious issues without any discrimination toward all important religious phenomena in the society. With open arms the institute wishes to have cooperation with similar institutions, whether from the private as well as from the state circles, and it is also open for any cooperation with similar institutions abroad. Besides, as the equipment of work, the institute will hold a documentation, a library, and also publish journals in the field of interreligious dialogue study field.
In the end, as a closing, we expect this institute to be one of the centers for the communication for religion thinking in Indonesia, and also support the religious spirit that is directed to the improvement of religion involvement to formulate as well as to answer humanity problems within the society. With these efforts to formulate and answer the humanitarian problems, then we have basically touched the transcendental sides from religions, in the extent that this institute tries to place all efforts of inter religion dialogue as a bridge toward a whole understanding on the future, as well as in the meaning of the whole majesty and perfection of the dignity and values of human beings as a creation of God.
Hereby I would also like to express my hope that this institute could give its contribution toward the society as well as toward all religious communities.
Thank You
Jogjakarta, August 10 1992
“
Interfidei has to be a little humble, is it true that people need Interfidei? What if They Don’t”
[ Mohammad Sobary, The Chirman Of Antara]
LIBERAL ISLAM : SOME COMMON QUESTIONS
Hairus Salim HS*
In this recent time, Islamic discourses are idea such as liberal Islam is not new in Indonesia. enlivened by the idea on “ liberal Islam” as an Its pieces had long appeared as uncovered in alternative “ to be Islam” in the middle of a various thoughts from Ahmad Wahib, Djohan pluralistic society and developing technology. The Effendy, Abdurrahman Wahid, and Nurcholis
Madjid as had been explored by Greg Barton in his modernity (for example, electronic technologies)
study. in the name of the past”.
The trend now lies on how this new line of
educated Moslems thinkers that they have found In the last couple of centuries, contests the appropriate term, “Liberal Islam” to name their has been taking place among these three movement and thoughts, and stay under this flag traditions, more between revivalist Islam and to spread and campaign the movements of “liberal customary Islam in specific. In the mean time, Islam”. The concepts to be developed further was liberal Islam still occupies the suburban, and lately encouraged after Charles Kurzman published a has played the role more as victims. It is important compilation of the thinking of Moslem intellectuals to notice that liberal Islam takes its root in the
th
all over the world whom he believes to have liberal custom of the revivalist Islam of the 19 century.
th
ideas in an anthology that he edited and Before and at the beginning of the 19 century, the introduced, Islam Liberal : A. Sourcebook (Oxford difference between the revivalist and liberal Islam University Press, 1998), that now has also been had not been significant. The separation took translated into Indonesian. place after the liberal Islam could differentiate Even though the exponents of Liberal clearly and assertively the ijtihad and the taklid, Islam (in Indonesia) do not agree entirely with the authority of religion and the authority of what Kurzman had put forward and in several politics. In the institutional level, they succeeded other things, and the thinking and mapping of their in developing strong infrastructure in the fields of own might have exceeded what Kurzman had education, journalism, and intellectual networks. assumed, this essay will focus on these concepts These three customs are, according to of Kurzman. There are at least two reasons for this Kurzman, not homogeneous. Each has its own matter. First, the discussions on liberal Islam in variant. Liberal Islam itself has three different Indonesia that are getting warmer lately, seen variants, i.e. Liberal Shariah, Silent Shariah, and from their web sites, the articles in Tempo, Jawa Interpreted Shariah. The first is the belief of liberal Pos Minggu papers, and some other media, are Islam that shariah is liberal if understood still on the surface and in search. The assessment precisely. The example put forward for this might be quite in a rush. Second, however, argumentation is the Certificate of Madinah, that Kurzman's writings had shown a clear map, and shows how Islam has ruled the pluralistic life of the much more important thing is the real ideological society long before. This example shows how this background of what he called as liberal Islam. liberalism of shariah long precedes the liberalism Kurzman brought forward the three of the West. The second believes that shariah “traditions” that could overlap one another, related does not arrange and give answers to certain and connected, i.e. what he called “Customary problems. Because of the “silence”, there are two Islam, Revivalist Islam, and Liberal Islam”. possibilities, first, the allowance to be followed, Customary Islam is Islamic practices combined and second, the Moslems formulated their options and mixed with the local habits and customs. creatively according to the context of time and Revivalist Islam, that is also usually called place. The example for this is about the form of the Islamism, fundamentalism, or wahabism, is an state. For it is believed not to be mentioned alternative toward the Customary Islam. This specifically, it may (or can) be formulated by the tradition attacks the interpretation of Customary Moslems by themselves. Third, the belief that Islam that does not pay attention to the essence of shariah is mediated by interpretation. Shariah is the Islam doctrines, and therefore do a lot of spiritual, yet its interpretation is human, and deviations. Revivalist Islam emphasizes the need therefore will invite differences and variety. The of the returning of the “pureness” of Islam emphasis on the difference of interpretation is
teaching. important and legal.
Shahrour), “non-Moslem's rights” (Humayun Kabir, limitations. By merely taking a look at the spiritual-Chandra Muzaffar, Muhammad Talbi, Ali Bulac, religious aspects, an embracer of “customary” Rusmir Mahmutcehajic), “freedom of thinking” (Ali Islam is believed as someone irrational and left Syari'ati, Yusuf Qardawi, Mohamed Arkoun, behind. This is a cliché sylogism that is buried in a Abdullah Ahmed Na'im, Abdul Karim Soroush), dan positivistic view toward “culture”. More importantly, “ideas on improvements” (Muhammad Iqbal, “customs” are viewed as something stagnant, not Mahmud Muhammaed Thaha, Nurcholis Madjid, developing, and could be reinterpreted. This Mamadiou Dia, Fazlur Rahman, Shabir Akhtar). obviously is a mistake, and without any serious It is indeed not very clear, what are the examination on “Customary Islam” itself. Toward cathegories of those figures to be included as this matter, liberal Islam could be called insensitive liberal Islam scholars. Is it because of their views toward multiculturality.
on “customs”, on “improvements”, the patterns of Last, that probably is quite basic, since the interpretation, agenda, and program, or merely beginning liberal Islam has believed that - along because they “talk about” these big themes. So the with revivalist Islam - to put forward “the earliest final question would be how could a number of Islam customs” to emphasize the illegality of the figures such as Qardawi or Natsir be included in the religious practices at the present. Thus, liberal cathegory of liberal Islam? However, apart from Islam obviously has the thought and imagination on this question, attention will be more focused on the “the pure Islam”. This “earliest customs of Islam” image of liberal Islam itself. itself is considered as something that has existed If we pay close attention to the theme as and true by itself. It is ignored here that what has the center of attention, I am reminded of the thesis been imagined as “the pure Islam” is the of Fukuyama on “the ending of history”, i.e. the construction of a certain time and place toward the ending of the consestancesof the world's ideology understanding of Islam, that is closely related to the by the victory of liberal democracy. These themes relations of power. Liberal Islam is still caged within for most of the (Moslem) society of the third world the “classical instinct”. It is not weird indeed, for it is are obviously felt as elitical and borjuistic. It seems a part
of the agenda of ideology.
to have lost from the agenda of Islam here a movement and action more oriented to people. Along with that, a critical reflection toward “the ideologies of development” that has become a basis of liberal democracy is also gone. Therefore, it has been a question of many friends, is liberal Islam a part of the big frame of the liberal democracy program ?
The dream of the liberal Islam as the idea of the “unifier” and “universal”, is also a special characteristic of liberal democracy's dream. Customary Islam is set aside, not merely because it is suspected as having the spirit of “left behind”, but also as having the attitude of its particularity as well as its locality. It could not be a unifying phenomenon, for every Islam region has its own customs and habits.
Trapped in Contradiction : Buildings as The Symbol of Service
to Religion or to The Society?
E.G. Singgih*
Observing a contradiction is Christian University Duta Wacana, where I teach). If it is so, then the above statement needs some sort of explanation. Well, the explanation is I was asked by my colleagues from
that public needs do not necessarily eliminate Interfidei to write on “Christianity and inter religion
specific needs. A Christian hospital or university is dialogue”. If I only write in general and in abstract,
established in order to serve Christian needs, that then any writing from any side on interreligious
is expressed religiously as the means of Christian dialogue will be just the same. Therefore, I try to
testimony to the world around it, that is love as the use a phenomenology approach, i.e. looking at the
basis of Christian religion and the source of this buildings and trying to touch the meaning of these
love, that is Lord Jesus the Christ who is buildings for those who built them.
acknowledged as the Savior of the world. Christian Since the 80's, when all parties in
hospital or university would of course serve sick Indonesia started to suggest inter religion
Christians or those wishing to study at universities. dialogues in Indonesian context that was more
It does not mean that non-Christians will not be acknowledged as comprising religious plurality, the
accepted in a Christian university. It is just that non-welcoming from the Protestants was never warm.
Christians have to be willing to receive Christian Only a few showed different attitude, and it was
service and education, which practically means even limited to the intellectuals among the
following Christian ways of praising, at a minimum, religionists only. Most felt that inter religion
prayers preached in a Christian way (I believe the dialogue was something superfluous. Had not
situation in Islam hospital and university is more Christians and other people of different religions,
and less the same). especially of Islam, been living together as
I have ever listened to the comment of Prof. Ibrahim Indonesian citizens in the Republic of Indonesia
Aburrabi, an Islam scholar from Nazareth, with the basis of Pancasila? Had not there been “a
Palestine, when asked of his opinion about dialogue” as a concrete intercourse and
Christian private schools. Prof. Aburrabi said ,”It's cooperation among the Christians and the
O.k. I myself am a graduate of a Christian school in Moslems in offices, at schools, in markets, in sport
Palestine. However, my purpose is studying fields, as well as tourist attractions? It was not the
knowledge, not a religion”. But I have never heard religions that need to be brought forward in a
(perhaps there are) any Christians studying at an dialogue, but collective needs of the members of
Islam school with the same motivation. It could be the society that happened to be of Islam and
that the purpose of Prof. Aburrabi is not the same Christian religions, that were what need to be
as the purpose of the establishment of the Christian brought into dialogues. So, for example, if there is a
private school in Nazareth, that is so that all Arabic citizen of Islam or Christian religion, and needs a
Moslem children in Nazareth will eventually health service in a hospital, then what needed is not
convert to Christian. However, Aburrabi does not establishing an Islam or Christian hospital, but a
tell that there is such an impression in him. public hospital that could serve the needs of both
parties.
Understanding the Contradictory
In reality there have never been any Christians or Moslems who raise fund collectively
to establish a public hospital. What happen is the If the Protestant is consequent with the first establishment of Christian and Islam hospitals understanding above, all social institutions with everywhere. Not merely Christian or Islam Christian label should be transformed as public hospitals, but also various social institutions until institutions. Sometimes it does happen, for various Christian or Islam universities (one of them
example the change of the status of “Labuang suggestion of a giant theologist of Calvinist Baji”hospital in Makassar, from an institution Protestant, Karl Barth. Faith is good, religion is belonging to a zending turned to a state-owned bad. Of course we could question Karl Barth where institution in 1960. However, the motivation was the limit of religion and faith. Barth has answered : not of a social one as mentioned above, but more to NEIN (no), for there is no such thing as religion. So, practical reason. After the independence, the even though the language is a secular language, it zending began resigning from social activities. is in this secular language exists the content of However, the churches in South Sulawesi seemed faith.
not to be ready to carry on the work that had been How could it happen, that secular done by the zending, while this hospital had long language in incognito comprise the content of faith been subsidized by the government. Even a lot of ? For aside the first current that is the “secular the doctors, nurses, and administrative employees current”, there is also another current in a were government officials. It was this incapability of Christian, i.e. the current of evangelization or paying these employees that resulted in the “testimony”. For many Christians, faith serves as submission of the whole hospital to the testimony. If one does not testify or does not government, and seeing its fast development, preach, like Paul, he will feel damned. “And how more and less 41 years later, I feel that this decision terrible it would be for me if I did not preach the is correct, and it is not something that cause loss to gospel!”(1 Corinthians 9:16c). The context of the Christian interest in general and to the church in Paul's words was nice. He emphasized to the
particular. congregation that a preacher of the gospel
crash into each other due to the differences among anymore after the World War II. Second example : them that could not be solved. Indeed it is true, but Israel was formed in 1948 as the determination of it surely is also worthy to think that both of them the Israelis not to be terrorized and determined by often crash into each other because their thinking other nations. “Never again!” However, in the structures are exactly the same. So if close to the present we see Israeli soldiers terrorize and want entrance gate to Kaliurang at km 23 there is Duta to determine the fate of the Palestinians, also after Wacana Guest House, then beside it there is a the peace agreement in Oslo a couple of years similar building that belongs to Muhammadiyah. ago. Human beings never forget what have Each of them has its own way, but the strange thing happened to them, but they often forget that what is that if coincidently the number of participants of a they are doing to other people now is what program at Duta Wacana guest house exceeds the happened to them in the past. Why ? Because we capacity, the rooms in Muhamaddiyah building are never try to understand others' feelings. We can used, and vice versa. It seems that the “dialogue” understand the feelings of fellow Indonesian runs in a practical principle, i.e. mutual benefit. The citizens, but we cannot understand the feelings of worries of Christians in seeing fewer and fewer fellow Indonesian citizens whose religions or number of those who are interested in BOPKRI ideologies are different from ours. Understanding schools in the hinterland of Jogjakarta is other people is the massage of Moses' scripture : understandable, for this could cause the closing Remember, that you were slaves in Egypt”. Do not and selling of these schools. They are suspicious oppress or force other people, for you were that this decreasing number of the people oppressed or forced by people then. By trying to interested in the schools are of external and not if imagine to put oneself in the opponent's side, internal cause. The slogans installed in several peace is not guaranteed to be obtained, but at the corners in Jogjakarta some time ago, that call out minimum an understanding to the reason as to why for Moslems not to let their children to go to private other people conduct a certain act is expected to schools that do not apply Islam faith, strengthen have.
the belief of this external factor. Second, the reference to the method above mentioned, is not meant to ask the Christian and Islam sides to manage the education in
How to overcome this contradiction ?
Indonesia to count on the third party that will conduct a mediation in term of conflict-mediation We need to realize that this contradiction,
and resolution (actually this idea is not irrelevant at whether realized or not, has been strongly buried
all, is it? But this is not the place to look into the within Christians. Therefore it would not be easy to
possibility). What needs to be examined is the handle this contradiction. However, I would like to
forcing motive above in the discussion context of try to propose two things :
Christian buildings, either hospitals or universities. First, what we could do is try the method
Above we have seen the reasons of the that has been applied by various
conflict-establishments of the buildings, i.e. to serve mediation/resolution teams : try to place yourself to
Christian's needs. In this reason there is an your opponent's side, and try to understand their
assumption that public buildings do not serve (or feelings, e.g. on the matter of forcing another
not enough in serving) the needs of Christians. It is person to do something. Forcing other people,
often heard the complaint that in public buildings, moreover if those people are in trouble, is not true,
especially in certain buildings of Islam, Christians and is not good morally. Now try to place ourselves
experience a forcing to betray their faith to Lord in the side of the forced one, and place the forced
Jesus. Of course this forcing is not conducted ones in the side of the forcing one. How do you feel
openly. In this extent, we also hear its relation with now? Would the side who was forced remember
the human right. The forcing violates human right, that feeling when they have the power to force us in
and those experiencing this violation are return? Experience shows that many people do not
Christians. All is good and well, but in term of remember. For example : the Dutch of course
learning to imagine to put oneself in other people's remember how terrible it was to be in the
place, has it ever occurred to us that we, too, force colonialization of the German in World War II
others and therefore we also violate the human (1939-1945). They call the end of this
right? How about non-Christians in Christian colonialization of the German “the Liberation” (De
buildings, don't they ever feel forced to be there? Bevrijding) with the big L. However, this big “L”
In the colonial time, the means of best does not stop them from making the first and
medic and education were Christian buildings (and second political actions toward the Indonesians
some Christian prayers first, then they could be actually essentially we are of no difference with served. At the present time we see it in church various parties in Islam that also hold the same view buildings, when the churches respond to the and demand that it is made mandatory for every Indonesian economic crisis by applying the Moslem, no matter where he is, including if he program of “Lunch from God”. Before the visitors happens (or has) to be in a Christian building. They have their lunch, they are first asked to pray in a will feel damned also, if they do not conduct the Christian way. They do not seem to be forced, for Islam faith. Therefore here it is proposed that they do not protest and after the prayer is finished, Christians take the other side, i.e. the one that see they eat with all their heart content. But, is it religions as the freedom of the conscience. It because they are not in an advantageous situation: means that practically we try to leave behind the they are hungry, and therefore, they follow the current of “testimony” above that demands an request to pray in a Christian way? Were non- obligation for Christians to spread their religion Christian college students given Christian religion verbally in terms of teaching the religion to other subject, would they not feel forced to follow this people, especially those who are in Christian subject because he or his parents/guardian had buildings. Considering that “testimony” is still signed a statement not to mind following Christian interpreted as the preaching of gospel, then a re-religion subject, or because he is forced to do that to interpretation of the meaning of this “testimony” achieve his purpose, i.e. to learn the knowledge that could be conducted to be wider, for instance by could be provided by the university? A number of making a distance between social services and Christian/Catholic institutions have realized this their means with the testimony or the preaching of mistake by replacing the exclusive Christian gospel. Social services are not identical with religion subject with the inclusive one (Christian preaching. If we take care of a sick Moslem and religion is taught with the emphasis on behavior educate Moslem students, we should do it without ethics and interreligious life in harmony as well as expecting anything in return, without the target of avoiding judgment toward other religions), or making him a Christian or a Christian sympathizer. teaching the phenomenology of religion as well (the We “merely”(!) help him, but therefore approach toward the phenomenon/material that paradoxically, we have realized the concrete appears, and not of the normative/dogmatic side). Christian testimony, the one that does need to be The real problem is more profound than that, i.e. the added by any verbal details. We no longer need to reality that religion teaching subject is an obligatory provide Christian buildings with the main reason to in the national education curriculum. In the serve the needs of Christians or those who discourse of national education, religions are not potentially could be Christians only, but to serve the the matter of the freedom of conscience, but is a needs of all, Christian or non Christian. Therefore matter of obligation. Religions are seen as rights, indeed we leave the opinion of Paul above, but it but the rights that are closely related to obligations, does not necessarily mean that we have and therefore is fought to be learnt by all or those abandoned fully the opinion of Paul, or that we are who are in the scope of our buildings at the not “biblical” anymore. In the bible there are still a minimum. It is just that on the other side religions number of opinions of Paul and of other figures (for are never seen as the matter of the freedom of instance, Jesus who hit people who tried with every conscience, and therefore it is never mulled that way to force other people to be in their religious every person has the right not to follow the religion group see Matthew 23:15! Why is it in practice,
subject. Paul bore more authority than Jesus whom we
acknowledged as God?) that are relevant and contextual. It's just that his one opinion, that on him
Conclusion
was fine, is the one thing that is not relevant and contextual with our situation.
Third and the last, do the matters of
By emphasizing that the act of helping itself religions and education considered as the matters
indeed has been a Christian testimony in its of education and freedom of the conscience, then
concrete form, it means we have left the other the question would be which side or position we the
current, i.e. the “secular” current. We do not serve Christians are. Have the Christian buildings been
public needs merely as citizens, but also as means for the testimony, then the consequence is
Christians who establish Christian buildings to we should follow religion understanding as an
serve all citizens without regard to obligation, as an order that should be obeyed
any differences. Inside of Christian buildings we do existentially: ”And how terrible it would be for me if I
not demand or force other people to follow the did not preach the gospel!” said Paul as quoted
gospel, but we eliminate the obligation of religion teaching, either it is Christian or non-Christian. However, it does not mean that we become “secular”, for the building is still Christian building and the management is still of Christian religion! If the biggest hinder to overcome this contradiction comes from the national education system that makes the religion education obligatory, then the way out undergone by our colleagues of Catholic Rome could also be undergone, i.e. teaching religion from its phenomenological side, without applying the testimonial or preaching factors in it. The phenomenology of religion approaches every religion from the existing phenomenon, and then asks why this phenomenon happens, how the development of the understanding on this phenomenon in the history and what the relevance is for the present. We could give the phenomenology of Christian religion that could be followed by non-Christians, for the phenomenology of Christian is not a part of preaching, but a part of a scientific study on Christian religion. This has also be tried out in the post graduate program of Comparative Religious Studies at Gadjah Mada University with quite a good result. Of the 23 students, there are only 3 Christians, the rest are Moslems and most of them are graduates of The Institute of Islamic Studies. They followed a course on “Introduction to Christianity” that was given by a Christian lecturers, father Dr. J.B. Banawiratma SJ and me myself. It would not harm that similar approach is modified and tried out to the undergraduate program and high school, in Christian buildings.
“Labuang Baji” Guesthouse, Bener
Jogjakarta September
7,
2001
“The dialogue developed by Interfidei is not series of monologues, but dialogues in their real
meaning”
Talks on interreligious dialogue in the post considered sensitive. In these emancipator authoritarianism in May 1998 have been faced by dialogues, the basis should be that of openness, two of the most basic questions. First, how to equality, freedom, and not filled by what often called
4
rebuild the “mutual trust” in the interaction among as prejudice and stereotype . Third, mutual trust will religious communities. Second, how to place the be able to raise if there is a “collective project” in the position of religion as the opponent of the state. future to be realized. In the period of independence These two questions are becoming more relevant revolution, various religious communities could in the middle of the stronger of the use of identity unite due to the fact that they had to realize a nation-politics in various conflicts in the transitional period state that is free of colonialism, then at the present lately, as what happen in the events in Ambon, religious communities should unite in overcoming Ketapang, and Kupang. the problems of humanity that need immediate
Mutual trust as a force to realize a solutions.
humanistic community which in Putnam Language In the matter of relationships between is called civic community, experiences a pretty bad Religion and the State, There are two perspectives declining when the New Order Regime then on that can be used: The first perspective, to treat the behalf of religion variety then limited the freedom of State and policy maker institutions as an arena of civil and the freedom to engage in politics. The the contestance of intern and interreligious. As an authoritative power also built what then is called the arena, then the State should be neutral, so that the ideology of “ethnic, religion, and race”, so that the final result of the policy issued will be the result of running of the political control over this variety the political encounter taking place. The policy of made the capability of the community to create a religion is the product of the power game among democratic life through: agreements, political religious institutions. Therefore, the relationships equality, solidarity, trust, tolerance and a taking place internally as well as inter religious cooperative social structure among the citizens communities are in the contestance form. The fade and replaced by the role of the State in all contestance developing in these internal as well as sectors of life. Of course there was a pretty difficult interrelationships are present in various arenas and question after that : how to restore the mutual trust by many medias. The arena could be in the domain that was shaken as the result of the dominant role of of politics, economics, cultural domination, in the the State and the dispute among religious land of the state, etc. In the end, religion politics communities? As for me, the answer to that existing in the contestance relationship is present in question is everything but easy. However, there are a multi-face: either in the everyday politics, or in a number of efforts that could be built to rebuild the formal politics (that concerns the main political mutual trust among religious communities. First, institutions).
returning the mutual trust depends on our capability In everyday politics, contestance could to take apart in reconciliation. This reconciliation is take its source from: First, the difference of culture. closely related to the process of “remembering” and On the matter of ceremonial meal, on reading in “forgetting” the past, so that in order to build this prayers, on properties, on the way of prayers, on mutual trust among religious communities, the the lifestyle, etc. Second, on the matter of statistics. willingness to “forget” bad relationships (disputes) Increasing population is viewed as a “threat” from in the past, and even the willingness of apologizing other religious communities. Third, theological for the mistakes conducted in the history are interpretation that is different on the matter of the
3
needed . This process of forgetting should also be existence of other communities. The terms “infidel”, followed by the process of “remembering” the “non-Christian”, “atheist”, etc. The result ate above harmonious relationships happening in the history, raise what then is called ready to war culture from either seen from the similarity of the origin, relative, each religion. There is the term friend or opponent. or culture. Second, mutual trust will be raised have However, it could be that this tension is triggered there been emancipator dialogues among the not by religion domain, but religion as a means of religious communities on a number of issues political or economic interests. The power of politics
1
POST AUTHORITARIANISM DIALOGUE
2AA.G.N. Ari Dwipayana
* a p a rt o f the c o nte nt o f this w riting is ta ke n fro m a p a p e r o f the w rite r in the se m ina r ‘ ‘ Re lig io n, Plura lism a nd p e a c e ’ in Be ng kulu, o n Se p te m b e r 6 2001
and economics are often improved by using the constitutionalism democracy. The origin of this ”label” of religion to expand the power one has. constitutionalism democracy maybe could be If this first perspective is the one chosen, tracked from the thinking of the social contract then one of the first and main agendas is to build an theories starting from Rosseau, Montesque, and agreement of the opposing groups to use John Locke. Constitutionalism democracy is democratic ways in solving problems, for centered on the system of parliementarianism and democracy as a system of competition and acknowledgement of the civil liberties. Civil instituted conflicts need reliable ways to manage liberties is the institutionalization of the human conflicts peacefully and constitutionally, by keeping rights as well as civil rights. The introduction on the the limits of ethics, orderliness, and certain control. citizenship in this context eliminates the loyalty
5
based on religion (internationalist congregation) to Robert Dahl emphasizes the importance of
t h e l o y a l t y e n d e d o n n a t i o n - s t a t e . accommodative and moderate practice and
Acknowledgement of the rights of the citizens is a understanding of an institution and elite group in
transformation of the model of “slave” and developing a “ reciprocal security” that guarantees
“congregation”. Based on the axis of master a minimum degree of protection for the basic needs
(noblemen)-slave, and institution(clerics)-of every main political competitor, so that losing
congregation, to a model of a citizen based on the does not mean to be set exiled totally and
principle of equality. permanently from power and resources. Such
Other options could probably be the form of profound mutual trust among political competitors
Artatukism in Turkey or Indian model. Some latest is very important to guarantee the condition for a
news from Turkey inform the existence of stable democracy.
resistance toward the process of Secularization These minimum agreements also could
conducted by the State, even though the form the institutionalization of conflicts through
opposition party was finally dispersed by the Turk traditional institutions such as customs (Pella
Supreme Court because they were considered Gandong) as well as the forming of neutral zones,
violating the Turk constitution that is loyal in the such as markets and other public needs. The
secular current. As in India, state political institutionalization of conflicts through the present
secularization is also conducted along with the institutions are questioned when the credibility of
British democracy legacy. It is also due to the the institution declines in front of the public.
heterogenity of the religion-based society. Now, Bureaucracy, Military, Court, and even institutions
which way should we choose? experience legitimacy and credibility crisis. So do
the neutral zones; they are decreasing due to the existence of markets formed based on religions.
While the second perspective, placing the State as the separated actor of religious plurality. In this second perspective, the State and the formal politics try to be separated from the religion contestance. Even the experience of a number of religions show that with the reason of ethnic and religious plurality, the State acts authonomically and irresponsively toward the nature of religion interests. Such a format delivers an authoritative regime. As conveyed by Philipe Scmitter and O' Donnel, authoritarian regime often raises as the cause of heterogenity in the society. One of the ways to conquer “religion” is by developing a development ideology and cooperative strategy. Besides developing obedience and dependence, the State could also use a domination strategy through repressive and punitive powers, so that violence projects conducted by the State in order to build political stability to support capital accumulation have been something phenomenal.
