Religion, peace and conflict

Religion, peace and conflict

Ignas Kleden, Sociologist, The Center for East Indonesian
Affairs (CEIA), Jakarta, ceia@centrin.net.id

In Indonesia, religion seems to be a safe base for people to
fall back on. People faced with pressing difficulties tend to
seek security in their religion by relying more on their
religious community, taking God more seriously and relearning
their prayers. However, religion is not only a means of rescue in
the private domain. Social problems and political troubles are
often seen in relation to religious life.

One can easily come across social critics or high-ranking
politicians who contend that corruption, bribery and poor public
governance in Indonesia are due to a lack of religious awareness.
In the same vein, juvenile delinquency, new permissiveness in
urban life and a conspicuous lifestyle are believed to result
from a decrease in religious discipline.

People are more inclined to offer an easy explanation for the
social and political problems by referring to the degree of one's
adherence to religious norms, which one is supposed to implement
as a member of a religious community.

Social problems originate first of all in a social structure,
hence social development and social changes should be tackled
accordingly. The same can be said of political problems. A good
citizen is not automatically a good follower of a particular
religion and vice versa. There is no guarantee that a faithful
follower who regularly attends religious services will become a
faithful taxpayer.

It is also very uncertain that those who say their prayers
without fail will have more sensitivity toward justice and
injustice. Indonesia is a religious country per excellentiam and
yet it is still one of the most corrupt states the world over.

On the other hand, people who bravely sacrifice their lives in
defense of human rights, or for the rights of children,
minorities or any other underprivileged group, turn out to be not
always those who practice the obligations assigned by their
religious norms. From a formal point of view, these people are
not so much good religious followers as they are good citizens.

It seems that, linguistically speaking, the Indonesian
language does not have the vocabulary to enable that needed
distinction. The Indonesian word beragama comprises both one's
membership in a religious community and the degree of personal
internalization of religious values. There is no equivalent in
Indonesian as of yet for the concepts of religiosity and for
belonging to a denomination. As a result, people tend to equate
the spiritual dimension of living religiously with the
organizational aspects of one's membership in a religious-based
grouping.

The lack of a distinctly differentiating concept seems to
become not merely a linguistic deficit, but also indicates a
sociological deficit. People tend to equate a formal adherence to
a religious institution as a spiritual struggle for perfection.

Psychologically speaking, religion is not only a membership
group but also a reference group. It is not only a physical
collective made up of members as its constituents, but also a
place where one identifies oneself according to the certain
knowledge, ideals, norms and values of that group.

The lack of this distinction might not be recognized
theoretically. However, it brings about serious consequences,
whose manifestation is discernible in the practices of religious
teachings and religious education.

If religion as a membership group is emphasized, it will tend
to become inward-looking, rigid and exclusive. Conversely, if the
dimension of a reference group is given the main attention and
accentuation, a religion tends to become outward-looking,
inclusive and tolerant. This happens to be the case because
people can refer to and appreciate the same values they share
with each other, although they might belong to different
religious communities and come from different denominations.

The inward-looking and exclusive attitude or the outward-
looking and inclusive inclination is often reflected in religious
education. But are children and students taught and motivated to
respect and love one another as members of a religious community,
or first and foremost as human beings?

Are people from other religions treated as fellow travelers in
the common search for the truth and the common struggle for
perfection, or are they just discarded as the miserable who are
led astray by undesirable signs of darkness? Is salvation then
regarded as an attribute of a social group or the fruit of one's
perseverance in certain values and norms?

It is often underestimated that political affairs have a lot
to do with the instructional atmosphere and educational situation
in classrooms and lecture halls. Instruction in religion is a
good case in point.

If religion is introduced as a reference group with an
inclusive nature, it can become a way to help understand and
respect other people, even if they come from different
denominations. They are perceived and seen as fellow human
beings, the very bearers of human rights, who deserve our
recognition and respect even if they turn out to become murderers
or executors of high crimes.

But if religion is treated only as a membership group, which
is self-contained and exclusive, the outsiders will be easily
faced with suspicion, misgivings, prejudice and even animosity.
Those who are not with us must be against us.

Therefore it is up to religious teachers and spiritual
educators if they want to make religion a means of building
integration that is instrumental to long-lasting peace, or
whether they turn out to contribute unwittingly or consciously to
the distribution and proliferation of hatred, in which many
ongoing conflicts might have originated.