Religious pluralism in Indonesia Muslim-Christian discourse

Fuad, Zainul. 2007. Religious pluralism in Indonesia Muslim-Christian discourse. University, Diss., 2005--Hamburg. http://deposit.d-nb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=983757372.

This study has shown how these scholars – Nurcholish Madjid, Abdurrahman Wahid, Quraish Shihab, J.B. Banawiratma, Eka Darmaputera and Franz Magnis Suseno – deal with the problem of religious pluralism and interreligious relations in Indonesia. It has shown various approaches and aspects of their ideas, which would be relevant in building mutual understanding between religious groups in particular between Muslims and Christians in Indonesia. Learning from the various approaches and aspects of the ideas of these scholars, I would like to remark some important points as follows.

In dealing with religious plurality, it is highly important that one preserves a tolerant attitude toward other religions and beliefs, not only due to socio-political consideration, but most importantly, due to religious consideration as well.

In the context of religious diversity, interreligious dialogue is obviously important, but also becomes a necessity. It is an effective tool to wipe out misunderstandings or negative constructions about other religions. Dialogue should be based on mutual respect. It should not be used for a theological debate to prove religious truth at the expense of the other. With this perspective, genuine dialogue implies a recognition of, and respect for, differences. Dialogue is not restricted only in the form of conversation. Dialogue is a way of living out the faith commitment in relation to each other. Banawiratma’s concept of dialogue needs to be reaffirmed.

In the context of religious difference, a common ground needs to be affirmed. Muslims and Christians could meet in what Madjid says “submission to God”. This process could be realized through what Banawiratma calls “paradigm of mediation”. For Christians, the mediator to God is Jesus, whereas for Muslims the Qur’an.

Muslims and Christians need to reconsider their respective religious teachings concerning inter-human relationship, which seem rigid, and attempt to contextualize them in accordance with the spirit of tolerance and humanity.

In the context of socio-political life, a common ground in Pancasila should be affirmed. It is only with such a basis that the conflict between religious groups can be eliminated. This is because of the neutral principle of Pancasila in the matter of religion. This principle should be preserved. Any attempt to impose a certain value system, which is contradictory to the neutral principle of Pancasila should be avoided.

With the principle of Pancasila, the State should guarantee the freedom of religion in a consistent way. Any intervention, restriction, and discrimination in the matter of religion have to be avoided.

TABLE OF CONTENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
SYSTEM OF TRANSLITERATION
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background of This Study
B.Objective of This Study
C. Scope of This Study
D. Outline of This Study
II. MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN CONFLICTS IN INDONESIA: A BRIEF
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
A. Muslim-Christian Relations at Early Contacts
B. Muslim-Christian Conflicts during the Independence Period
(1945-1965)
C. Muslim-Christian Conflicts during the New Order Era
(1967-1998)
D. Muslim-Christian Conflicts in the Post New Order Era
(from 1998 up to now)
III. MANAGING INTERRELIGIOUS RELATIONS IN INDONESIA
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
A. The Policy of Government in Building Interreligious Harmony
B. The Council of Indonesian ‘Ulamā’ and Interreligious Relations
C. Private Initiatives of Interreligious Dialogues
IV. MUSLIM-CHRISTIAN DISCOURSE ON RELIGIOUS PLURALISM AND TOLERANCE IN INDONESIA
A. The Meaning of Religious Pluralism and Tolerance
B. Muslim Perspective of Religious Pluralism and Tolerance
1. Nurcholish Madjid
2. Abdurrahman Wahid
3. Quraish Shihab
C. Christian Perspective on Religious Pluralism and Tolerance
1. J. B. Banawiratma
2. Franz-Magnis Suseno
3. Eka Darmaputera
V. DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
A. Attitude towards Pluralism
B. Religious Pluralism and The Idea of Salvation
C. The Idea of Interreligious Dialogue
D. Pancasila as A Common Platform
VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Feeling Threatened: Muslim-Christian Relations in Indonesia's New Order

Feeling Threatened: Muslim-Christian Relations in Indonesia's New Order / Mujiburrahman - [S.l.] : [s.n.], 2006 - Doctoral thesis Utrecht University

Abstract

Muslim-Christian relations have been an important element of the social and political dynamics of Indonesia during the New Order period (1966-1998), and an ever sensitive object of Government policy. The relations between Muslims and Christians have been tense because of mutual suspicions existing between them. These mutual suspicions have been reflected in, and exacerbated by, the antagonistic discourses in which the Muslim and Christian leaders perceived each other as a threat against their respective religious communities. Among the Muslims, the Christian threat has been called 'Kristenisasi' (Christianisation). In the Muslim discourse, Christianisation meant unfair and aggressive efforts to convert Muslims to Christianity. The Muslim fear of Christianisation sometimes led several Muslims to violent action, by attacking church buildings and Christian schools. They also demanded that the Government control and restrict Christian missions by (1) making strict requirements for obtaining permission to erect a new place of worship; (2) restricting religious propagation only to those outside the five recognised religions; and (3) controlling foreign aid for religious institutions; (4) prohibiting inter-religious marriage; (5) requiring that religion classes given at schools should be taught by a teacher whose religious background was the same as that of students. The Government generally responded ambiguously to these demands: they were materialised into regulations, but were loosely implemented. Whereas the Muslims felt insecure and threatened by Christianisation, the Christians were afraid of the threat of an Islamic State. For the Christians, to have to live under an Islamic state in which the shar?'a law was implemented would mean that they would be turned into second-class citizens. To protect themselves from the threat of the Muslim ideological ambition, the Christians decided to ally with the emerging power of the army. This political choice was apparently natural for the Christians because, like the politically secular-oriented Muslims among the civilians, the army was known as the strongest proponent of the nationalist ideological outlook (as opposed the Islamic ideology). One of the consequences of this alliance was that the Christians became less critical if not totally supportive to the New Order authoritarianism. Worse than that, in their protest against certain Government policies, it was not uncommon that the Muslims blamed the Christians as the brain behind those policies. This was typically true when Muslims opposed certain Government policies clearly or allegedly came from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think tank established by an important group of Catholic activists in cooperation with two important army generals. Despite its ambiguous responses to the Muslim-Christian conflicts, since early 1970s, the Government sponsored inter-religious dialogue events in which religious leaders were invited to talk about a common discourse on development. Not all Muslim and Christian intellectuals, however, agreed with the Government imposed discourse. Some of them developed a counter discourse on social justice by developing a theology of liberation. In 1990s, some private institutions were established to promote dialogue. It was in this period that some Muslim and Christian intellectuals developed a common discourse on democracy and pluralism.

keywords: Indonesia, New Order, christianisation, Islamic State, inter-religious dialogue, Muslims, Christians, relations

http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2006-0915-201013/index.htm

Muslim-Christian relations in the New Order Indonesia: the exclusivist and inclusivist Muslims' perspectives

Husein, F. (2003). Muslim-Christian relations in the New Order Indonesia: the exclusivist and inclusivist Muslims' perspectives. PhD thesis, Melbourne Institute of Asian Languages and Societies, University of Melbourne.

Abstract

The relationship between Muslims and Christian in Indonesia is and important subject. Apart from a few investigations on certain conflicts in different areas of Indonesia, little effort has been devoted to thoroughly examining the complexity of the relationship between the two religious groups. This study is an attempt to investigate the perspectives of the exclusivist and inclusivist Muslims on Muslim-Christian relations in Indonesia, especially during the New Order period (1965-1998).

In dealing with this subject, the theological and legal precepts on the ‘religious’ other as developed in some classical texts are explored briefly. In order to provide the historical background of current Muslim-Christian relations, the study then investigates policies of the Dutch, Old Order, and New Order governments on Muslims and Christians. During the Dutch regime, Christians received better treatment as compared to Muslims. This was deeply resented by some Muslims, who identified the Dutch as Christians and Christians as colonists. By the time Indonesians were approaching independence, Muslim, Christian and other religious groups were preoccupied with deciding the philosophical basis of the state, and the Sukarno government paid scant attention to the hidden tense relations between Muslims and Christians. With the shift to the New Order period, Muslim-Christian relations changed dramatically because Soeharto intentionally and carefully controlled Indonesians based on the policy of SARA. The study found that some elements of SARA policy caused tensions between Muslims and Christians.

In separate chapters, the study then explores the backgrounds and concerns of the exclusivists and inclusivists in relations to Muslim Christian relations. It found that among both exclusivists and inclusivists the degree of ‘exclusiveness’ or ‘inclusiveness’ varied, as they were influenced by their different backgrounds. In addition, within each groups or among individuals, the concerns on issues related to Muslim-Christian relations differed. Four main exclusivist institutions are discussed in the study: the Dewan Dakwah Islamiyah Indonesia (DDII), the Komite Indonesia untuk Solidaritas Dunia Islam (KISDI), the Forum Pembela Islam (FPI), and the Laskar Jihad. Key issues discussed by the exclusivists include the Christian ‘other’, relations between religion and the state, Christianisation, and the Ambon conflicts. The relations between the exclusivists and the Christians have been coloured largely by disharmony. Exclusivists believe that Christianity underwent alteration and that the God of Muslims is different from the Christian God, who is described as having offspring. In addition, all exclusivist groups in the study stated the view that it was the Christianisation activities that tore apart the relationship between Muslims and Christians.

In contrast, the relationships between inclusivists Muslims and Christians are coloured largely by harmony. The inclusivists chose to work within the New Order system for changes beneficial to Indonesian Muslims by avoiding direct conflict with the government and occupying themselves with intellectual endeavours. Against such a backdrop, the renewal of Islamic thought, characterised mainly by inclusivism, was introduced and developed. Moreover, the inclusivists hold the view that plurality is a law of nature (sunnatullah). Within this view, all religions are seen to adhere to the same principle of One Truth; and will therefore gradually find their ‘common platform’ or kalimatun sawa. As a reflection of their perspective on religious pluralism, most inclusivists admit the existence and rights of other religious believers, especially the ahl al-kitab.

The study found that it was the exclusivists who were more adamant in criticising the inclusivists through articles in their media or sermons in their mosques. Three of their important critiques are the belief that the inclusivists have established a link with Jews and Christians, that inclusivism weakens Muslim faith by giving new interpretations to the Islamic foundation texts that deviate from the accepted views, and that inclusivists lack concern about Christianisation. In contrast, the inclusivists tend not to criticise or respond to critiques directed at them by the exclusivists, as they consider these to be emotional or personal.

http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/J4EF84X47K7U8SMXPJGR4V56BDF6JR62SCRA97PSEJGLFH2ND6-01409?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=65725&pds_handle=GUEST