written by: J.B. Heru Prakosa S.J.

"... Gereja seyogyanya mengembangkan dialog antar agama, sebagaimana yang pernah disampaikan Aloysius Pieris, bukan semata untuk menghargai kepercayaan orang lain agar masyarakat menjadi harmonis, tetapi untuk mengembangkan transofmasi sosial..."

..."Dalam hal ini, kita ingat apa yang telah disampaikan James Fowler berkaitan dengan tahap-tahap perkembangan spiritual (eng:faith development). Sebagai seorang pastor Metodhis yang sekaligus theolog dan psikolog, beliau menandaskan bahwa di 2 tahap tertinggi perkembangan spiritual, seseorang telah memiliki hubungan pribadi dengan Tuhan, sehingga dapat berjalan dari kenyamanan diri terhadap apa yang dianggapnya kebenaran mutlak menuju pada kepercayaan orang lain, sehingga orang itu memulai pencariannya terhadap nilai-nilai universal..."

Indonesia is characterized by great diversity, in terms of religion, ethnicity, race, culture, language, etc. According to the Indonesian Central Statistic Bureau (2000), it is reported that, in terms of religion, 88.22 percent of the population label themselves as Muslims, 5.87 percent as Protestants, 3.05 percent as Catholics, 1.81 percent as Hindus, 0.84 percent as Buddhists, and 0.2 percent as ‘others’, including traditional-indigenous believers.

“Catholics in Asia are a ‘small flock’.... [In a] context that is multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural, one in which Christianity is often perceived as foreign, dialogue is typical of the life of the Church in Asia,” says John Paul II in his exhortation to the members of the post-Synod Council of the General Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops for the Special Assembly for Asia.[1] This must be valid for Catholics in Indonesia as well. In this regard, I would argue that, as such, interreligious dialogue should be promoted not merely to avoid conflicts. In addition, by raising the awareness of being survivors, Catholics in Indonesia should also take into account local wisdom.

Complexity of Coexistence among Believers in Indonesia

On January 2008, circa twelve students and two professors coming from the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley (JSTB) spent three weeks in Indonesia to do an immersion programme related to Islamic studies. In doing so, they were accompanied by some students and staff members from the Faculty of Theology of Sanata Dharma University. They found many interesting experiences, one of which is the time when they visited and stayed in two pesantren-s around the city of Magelang, in central Java.

The first pesantren is located at Kapuhan and called al-Tauhid al-Islami. Here, our fellows from JSTB had a difficult moment, since the Kyai and students of the pesantren, along with hundreds of Muslims from other places, bombarded them with many questions in the direction of a theological debate. Indeed, the situation was not conducive to have a friendly encounter. Instead of entering into a religious discourse with an apologetic polemic goal, some fellows from JSTB preferred to give witness about the cooperation they found among the people from various religious and cultural backgrounds around Sumber.

Then, in the following day, our fellows from JSTB visited the pesantren located in Pabelan whose distance, roughly speaking, can be reached, from al-Tauhid al-Islami, only in 15 minutes by car. The Pabelan pesantren is well-known, not only for the Indonesians, but also for the foreigners, as a prestigious school providing innovative education to 700 junior and senior high school students. In fact, in this second pesantren, they found a totally different situation. They received a warm welcome from the staff members and the students of the pesantren, in such a manner that they could get together and share each other peacefully. “It was so different, like the earth and the sky,” they said regarding their experience in al-Tauhid al-Islami and Pabelan pesantren.

What was undergone by our fellows from JSTB clearly reflects the complication and the complexity of religious encounter in Indonesia. This corresponds with the fact that, in 1999-2000, Muslims and Christians murdered one another in Molucca islands, but at the same time many people also made efforts by collecting humanitarian aid for both sides. One could remember, too, Riyanto, a 25-year-old Muslim fellow who was killed during his attempt to protect a church in Mojokerto, East Java, from a bombing attack related to an Islamic fundamentalist group.[2] Indeed, it is not hard to hit upon an unpleasant dialogue, and yet it is not difficult as well to find a fruitful religious encounter in Indonesia.

External and Internal Rationales for Interreligious Dialogue

Interreligious dialogue is often practiced just as a reactive effort in dealing with other believers in a certain context. Thus, in the case of Indonesia, dialogue is said to be important because pluralism is part of the reality in the country. Dialogue is also said to be necessary in Indonesia due the fact that it could keep away from the disintegration of the nation. The pooling conducted by a national daily news, Kompas, for 1540 holders of the telephone in some big cities in Indonesia, in relation to the problems needed to take into consideration by the country, for example, shows that 40,1 % of the respondents worried about the conflict among religions; 27 % about the conflict among the etnics; 8,8 % about the conflict among the suppoters of the politic parties; 7,7 % about the conflict between the poor and the rich; 5,9 % about the conflict between regions; and the rests said nothing to worry about.[3]

The arguments on the importance of the dialogue in Indonesia, as pointed above, are indeed reasonable. Those are, however, valuable as external rationales only. There must be some internal rationale for interreligious dialogue regardless of what the context is. In this matter, one could call to mind what James Fowler says with regard to the stages of faith development.[4] As a Methodist pastor who was at once theologian and psychologist, he argues that, in the two highest stages, believers have personal relationship with God, in such a manner that they move from self preoccupation with fixed truths to the opennes of others’ belief, and thus begin to search for universal values.

On that point, the parameter is not based on a certain cultural and religious background, but on universal values, such as love or justice. This could call to mind, for example, the story about Jesus in dealing with His disciples and the Samaritans.[5] In light of Fowler’s theory, one could say that interreligious dialogue, in which respect and opennes to other believers are imperative, is necessary because it is part of the consequence of his or her faith development. By referring to universal values, one is called for maturing his or her faith to the point that he or she would not limit his or her concern just to those who share the same religion with him or her. In this perspective, a believer would engage in interreligious dialogue with full of awareness, rather than just incorporate tolerance on demand.

Socio-Cultural Approach to Interreligious Dialogue: Learning from Sumber

The Church should promote interreligious dialogue, as Aloysius Pieris points out, not only in the sense of respect to other believers for establishing social harmony, but also for the sake of social transformation.[6] This becomes more urgent due to the fact that the locus of the Church in Asia, including in Indonesia, is characterized by various crisis situations, in terms of ecology, economy, and social.

Interreligious dialogue has been promoted in Indonesia in many forms, part of which took place in 1967, with Suharto’s programme called Musyawarah Antar Agama (Interreligious Dialogue).[7] And yet, it was carried out under government cooptation to find consensus for the sake of national stability. In some cases, interreligious dialogue was also promoted just as a means to support the agenda of the regime, such as how to deal with religious mission or to protect against proselytism. By this, interreligious dialogue is promoted to serve the interest of religion only. The awareness of a paradigm shift has just come up in 1980-s with a movement sponsored by Paramadina Foundation, and in 1990-s with the attempts made by INTERFIDEI (Interfaith Dialogue in Indonesia) or MADIA (Masyarakat Dialog antar Agama: Society for Interreligious Dialogue), and in 2000-s by IMPULSE (Institute for Multiculturalism and Pluralism Studies). These groups have made efforts to promote interreligious dialogue as social critique in a way that can fight against poverty, injustice and fundamentalism.

The same idea has also been developed by Fr. Kirjito and the Catholics in his parish, along with other believers around Sumber. It is noteworthy that the Catholics there are small in number. The majority of the people embrace Islam as their religion. As Muslims, however, they do not practice their religion rigorously. They believe in God, the prophets and the messenger Muhammad; but at the same time they also believe in spirits or supernatural powers.[8] They neither pray five times a day nor fast during the month of Ramadhan. They are more properly called the practitioners of Javanese Islam, about which Geertz identifies as the heterodox abangan-s. [9]

In the spirit of openness, the Catholics in Sumber have worked together with other believers. Through a grassroots movement called Edukasi Gubug Selo Merapi (Education of the Stone Hut of Merapi), they raise awareness of environmental disaster. In addition, they also point out the benefit of water in the western slope of the Mount Merapi. It should be noticed that, for people around Merapi, this 2.968-meter mountain has two sides of a coin. On the one hand, the eruption of the Mountain of Fire, as Merapi means, can cause great disasters, as it occurred recently in 2006. On the other hand, Merapi is regarded as part of the wonder of nature and becomes a blessing to the people, due to which they could enjoy fertile lands with abundant natural resources or minerals, and particularly water.

Through Gerakan Masyarakat Cinta Air – that is to say the social movement to take care of water –people around Merapi, no matter what faith they embrace, collaborate in an explorative, creative and integrative way to highlight the significance of water. In this matter, they made many actions by taking into consideration a cultural aspect. This corresponds to the fact that some people still think of Merapi in relation to cultural myths.[10] Thus, some believe that an imaginary line runs between Merapi in the north, Yogyakarta Palace in the centre, and the Pacific Ocean in the south. Some others consider that the mountain is guarded by spirits whose names can vary from one region to another. Some more others believe that Merapi is personified as a living figure, called Simbah or Eyang, meaning ‘grandfather’. By this, people think that Merapi can make interaction with the surrounding communities in accordance with the way human beings behave. Indeed, people around the mountain are convinced that they know about the behaviour of Merapi more than anyone from outside the region.[11] They are also aware that, if they treat it appropriately, it will behave friendly to them, and vice-versa.

One should not forget the cosmological belief of ‘Kebatinan’ or ‘Kejawen’ held by the abangan-s in Sumber. The belief itself has been developed by Romo Yoso Sudarmo (1885-1990), an artist and a charismatic figure who then becomes the patron of the region.[12] He professed himself as a Muslim, although one could plainly notice that his tomb goes in the direction to East-West, not to North-South as usually Muslims are buried. By pointing up the creation of a cosmic order, he has encouraged the people in Sumber to strife for the establishment of a synchronized interaction between micro-cosmos and macro-cosmos. In this matter, through his cultural centre ‘Cipto Budaya’ (Creation of Culture) – that still survives nowadays with the support of his sons – Romo Yoso has promoted the spirit of non-violence, in the awareness that self, as one of the elements of the micro-cosmos, will affect family and society; and this will, in turn, have an effect on universe. The values emphasized here are, therefore, the well-balanced relationship between human beings, nature and the Almighty God.

Interreligious Dialogue and Local Wisdom: Implication in Terms of Methodology

The interreligious movement developed by people in Sumber points out the significance of local wisdom. As such, local wisdom would refer, as John Haba argues, to ‘any cultural enrichment that grows and develops in a society; it is known, believed, and acknowledged as important elements that can reinforce social cohesion among the people’.[13] Local wisdom can serve as the signifier of the identity of a society. At the same time local wisdom can also work for changing a way of thinking and a way of proceeding, for the establishment of brotherhood or sisterhood on the basis of common ground.

There are undeniably some positive points that can be derived from local wisdom with regard to interreligious dialogue. Indeed, local wisdom would elevate the role of the believers who live in a certain society to the point that they consider themselves as survivors. It would help them, as local people, to raise their awareness of being the main agents who make survival efforts to pursue interreligious dialogue in accordance with their customs and traditions. Consequently, it would also make possible for them to deal with the problems that arise among them ‘from within’.

As the term implies, ‘local wisdom’ would take the starting point ‘from below’ instead of ‘from above’. On this point, in one of the seminars, Fr. Kirjito put his movement in relation to the methodology of contextual theology as elaborated in the Faculty of Theology of Sanata Dharma University. He said clearly that his socio-cultural approach in dealing with interreligious dialogue has developed as a result of what he learnt from his study on theology, especially in the classes of ‘Theology of Hope’, ‘Theology of Salvation’, and ‘Theology of Work’. The core of this contextual theology is the attempt to do theological reflection with local resources.[14]

According to Banawiratma and Tom Jacobs, local resources mean people’s experiences, their life, their concerns, their traditions.[15] As such, experiences include personal, social, historical, cultural as well as religious dimensions. This attempt is made with full respect to the principle that is based on the process of going on from experience to experience through the communication with Christian traditions. It is also important to note that doing theology with local resources should take an interdisciplinary approach. Thus, it needs help from other disciplines, such as anthropology, sociology, psychology, history, etc.

The four moments needed to be taken into account for doing theology with local resources are experience, faith-concern, theological synthesis and pastoral planning. In the learning process, those four moments are subdivided furthermore into some steps.[16] With reference to experience, it would constitute the process of collecting data, formulating the experience, examining from different disciplines, and focusing the attention. Concerning faith-concern, it would cover moral and religious act, as well as faith-act. Then, with regard to theological synthesis, it would consist of the process to employ doctrinal traditions, to confront them with practice, to deal with non-Christian traditions, and to prepare a theological thesis. Finally, in relation to pastoral planning, it would comprise pastoral care and pastoral programme.

In terms of interreligious reflection, one should bear in mind the idea of ‘language game’ and ‘family resemblance’ as proposed by Wittgenstein.[17] In this matter, one should understand other religious traditions from the perspectives of those who hold those traditions, and thus not from his or her own points of view. After all, the main point of the methodology as illustrated above is to build a dialectical process between action, reflection and praxis.

Concluding Remarks

The socio-cultural approach to interreligious dialogue as promoted by the Catholics in Sumber indicates the commitment of the Church in Indonesia to take into consideration FABC’s triple dialogue: with poor people, cultures and religions. But then, what face of Christ the Church in Indonesia will witness in engaging interreligious dialogue?

One could remember, here, what John the Evangelist says in his Gospel on the question raised by Jude Thaddeus to Jesus.[18] Jude asked Jesus, “Master, how does it come about that you will reveal yourself to us and not to the world?” and Jesus replied, “Whoever loves me will keep my word, and my Father will love him; and we will come back to him and make our dwelling with him.” In this matter, Fedou puts emphasis on the idea of kenosis. He argues, “This passage first of all indicates that the revelation of the unique Christ is given to some, but not to all; of course one cannot use this particularity as a pretext for saying that Christ is not really unique, however, the fact remains that only the disciples – and more broadly speaking the members of the Christian community – received this revelation.”[19] And yet, one should keep aware of his or her responsiblity to love Christ and follow His Word.

Like a grain of wheat fallen to the ground, Jesus neither attempted to impose Himself nor attempted to be seen by all! This kenosis of Jesus would suggest that the necessity for ‘the third grade of humility’ [20] must come first. Accordingly, in the context of the Church in Indonesia in general, the spirit that should be more developed is the willingness ‘to learn from the others’ rather than ‘to teach the others’.

---

[1] http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=1942

[2] It is noteworthy that one could find the name of Riyanto in the liturgical calender, on December 10, 2002, in one of the Dioceses in Spain. It is griten: ‘MÁRTIR MUSULMÁN: El gesto heroico de Riyanto, un joven musulmán Indonesia, que dio su vida por salvar la de otros conciudadanos católicos, sucedió en la pequeña aldea de Mojokerto, en la parte oriental de la isla de Java’.

[3] Kompas, August 16, 1999.

[4] Fowler, James, Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning, San Fransisco, Harper & Row, 1981.

[5] Luke 9: 53-54; 10: 25-37; 17: 11-19.

[6] Cf. Pieris, Aloysius, An Asian Theology of Liberation, Edinburg, Clark, 1988, pp. 61-62.

[7] See, the speech delivered by Suharto on November 30, 1967, in Hasyim, Umar, Toleransi dan Kemerdekaan Beragama dalam Islam, Surabaya, Bina Ilmu, 1991, p. 393.

[8] Geertz, Clifford, The Religion of Java, London, The Free Press of Glencoe, 1980, pp. 16-29; Hefner, Robert, Hindu Javanese: Tengger Tradition and Islam, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1985, pp. 69-76. Woodward, Mark, Islam in Java, Tucson, The University of Arizona Press, 1989, pp. 166-170.

[9] Abangan would mean ‘red’; and it is contrasted to putihan – meaning ‘white’ – that is to say santri or the orthodox trainee religious scholar. Geertz, Clifford, The Religion of Java, London, The Free Press of Glencoe, 1980, pp. 121-130. Woodward, Mark, Islam in Java, Tucson, The University of Arizona Press, 1989, pp. 142-143.

[10] Woodward, Mark, Islam in Java, Tucson, The University of Arizona Press, 1989, pp. 199-214. Ghozali, Ikhsan, “Paguyuban Sabuk Gunung Merapi: Kebijakan Lokal Managemen Bencana”, in Abdullah et al., Agama dan Kearifan Lokal dalam Tantangan Global, Yogyakarta, Pustaka Pelajar, 2008, pp. 117-118.

[11] Ghozali, Ikhsan, “Paguyuban Sabuk Gunung Merapi: Kebijakan Lokal Managemen Bencana”, in Abdullah et al., Agama dan Kearifan Lokal dalam Tantangan Global, Yogyakarta, Pustaka Pelajar, 2008, pp. 117-118.

[12] Baidhowi, Mohammad, “Kearifan Lokal Kosmologi Kejawen: Studi Poskolonial Pandangan Kosmologi Romo Yoso dan Implikasinya bagi Warga Tutup Ngisor, Magelang”, in Abdullah et al., Agama dan Kearifan Lokal dalam Tantangan Global, Yogyakarta, Pustaka Pelajar, 2008, pp. 15-47.

[13] Haba, John, Revitalisasi Kearifan Lokal: Studi Resolusi Konflik di Kalimantan Barat, Maluku, dan Poso, Jakarta, ICPI dan European Commission, 2007. Cf. Geertz, Clifford, Local Knowledge, New York, Basic Books, 1983, pp. 167-234.

[14] Banawiratma & Tom Jacobs, “Doing Theology with Local Resources; An Indonesian Experiment”, in East Asian Pastoral Review, XXVI-1, 1989, pp. 51-72.

[15] Banawiratma & Tom Jacobs, “Doing Theology with Local Resources; An Indonesian Experiment”, in East Asian Pastoral Review, XXVI-1, 1989, pp. 52.

[16] Banawiratma & Tom Jacobs, “Doing Theology with Local Resources; An Indonesian Experiment”, in East Asian Pastoral Review, XXVI-1, 1989, pp. 55-70.

[17] Hick, John, An Interpretation of Religion, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004 (1-st published 1989), pp. 3-4; Ward, Keith, Religion and Revelation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1994, pp. 9-10, 53-54.

[18] John 14: 22-23.

[19] Fedou, Michel, “The Development of Interreligious Dialogue after the Second Vatican Council: A Theological Reflection”, in Pro Dialogo, 116-117/2-3, 2004, pp. 181-194.

[20] Cf. Ignace of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, No. 167.

(Penterjemahan beberapa kalimat di paragraf 7 dan 9 ke Bahasa Indonesia oleh aku, pemilik blog.)

Klik ini untuk kelanjutannya