navigation
search
Christian Intellectuals’ Model of Involvement in Developing Civil Society in Indonesia
Overseas Ministry Conference XIII Event Committee
Indonesia’s struggle for democracy and a better country is far from easy. Indonesia is facing a lot of serious urgencies, such as the lack of society’s motivation to be involved in building Indonesia, the dull law system which is incapable to handle the flourishing corruption, premanism, terrorism, lack of sustainable development, widespread environmental destruction. In the midst of all its problems, a lot of effort has been raised toward encouraging democracy in the country, which met with seemingly contradictory opposition such as some PERDA (Peraturan Daerah- local law), which seems to start to move from regulating the public domain to private domain (such as RUU Anti-Pornografi, etc). This paper will attempt to discuss different models of how Christian intellectuals can be involved in the civil society component, as a means for integrating their faith in improving Indonesia in general.
The government and economic sector interaction alone are not able to improve Indonesia effectively. A lot of effort has been put into fostering democracy in Indonesia, such as holding a free election, etc; however, government effort in decreasing corruption is not supported by a good law system to punish those who are proved to be corrupt. Indonesian government has been trying to decrease corruption through forming Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi – KPK (Indonesian Corruption Reduction Commission), and there is a lot of law (Undang-Undang) that was made to support anti-corruption. However, we still see that some prominent government official who are involved in corruption are released even though their corruption act are of public knowledge, for example the head of DPRD-Bali (Provincial Legislative Council for province of Bali) was released even though it was proven that he corrupted Rp 11.8 trillion from Bali’s APBD (Bali’s budget) of Rp 57 trillion[1]. The government alone is not perfect in fighting toward a better Indonesia, and this is made worse by its internal corruption and other personal agendas, and lack of a good law system to discipline those who deviate from the right way. Another big segment of the society, namely the economic sector, has also failed to embrace a long term development process; it is apparent that decisions made by companies in Indonesia does not consider long term impact, but instead only think of short term financial gains, for example, the lack of good educational program in Indonesian TV channel, the lack of sustainable development in Industries, etc. This proved that both the government and market sector alone cannot effectively fight toward a better Indonesia.
There is still a third sector of the society, namely ‘Civil Society’. Some Indonesians maybe familiar with one definition of civil society as ‘Masyarakat Madani’, which is a society structure where the people have an increased responsibility, freedom, motivation to follow an organized society structure and requirement. However, the definition of civil society can be broader than that above, which is an organized sector in the society, which acts as a check for the government and a controlling sphere for the economic society. According to de Tocqueville, civil society has to be voluntary, self generating, and self supporting, as well as possessing the following characteristics: autonomy, a free public sphere, public discourse and based on citizenship principles[2]. The role of civil society as a check for the government is especially relevant in Indonesia; for example, the government needs civil society’s check not only on its policies against corruption, but also to have accountability on the corruption that is happening inside the government structure itself. The civil society sector may include individuals, media, students, intellectuals, professional alliance, social organizations, religious structures, and other civil organization. Figure 1 shows the segment of civil society in relation to the government and economic sector.
Figure 1. The Interaction between Civil Society, State, and Economics Society in a country.
Throughout the new regime (Orde Baru), the civil society development suffocated under Soeharto’s rule. Soeharto’s approach in ‘uniting and homogenizing’, while caused a fast economic growth and other advancement, did not foster the development of a healthy civil society sector, marked by the lack of freedom of press, crushing of ‘activists’ movement, lack of middle class involvement in the development of civil society, and other law structure and system which makes transition to democracy difficult for Soeharto’s successor. In turn, the development of civil society was also halted and diminished with Soeharto’s various policies at that time[3].
The church, as one important component of civil society, has not been fully functional in its role. According to Dr Melba Maggay, there are 3 tasks of church in the society: The Prophetic task, the Priestly task, and the Kingly task (Reference). They can be elaborated as follows:
- Prophetic task includes bringing the Word of God to the world, teaching people to be biblically literate. In this role, church not only has to communicate the Word of God, but also translate them into real actions, such as viewing the government policy critically and pushing them toward the biblical view. Churches have to voice their biblical opinion on certain issues such as abortion, homosexuality, etc.
- Priestly task includes church’s responsibility in bringing the need of the world to God, and being able to communicate the world. In this task, church has to balance activism with interiority, public engagement with private communion with God.
- Kingly task means the church is responsible to manage the world under God. This is aligned with the Cultural Mandate in Genesis 1:28 (“God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”).
In the current Indonesia context, churches often emphasize to Christians the task of ‘winning souls’ into the kingdom of God, while neglecting all other aspects. For example, Indonesian churches are often limited to the ‘spiritual’ and not engaged actively in educating the world in the biblical view of work and vocation, ‘Ministry’ are often limited to doing work in the church to support weekly fellowship, but people who engaged in public sphere according to their vocation are seldom appreciated as doing their ‘ministry’. General churches in Indonesia still lived under the mindset of ‘new regime’ (Order Baru), where it is afraid to voice its opinion to make tangible impact to the country. Furthermore, the general churches are divided in terms of the denominations and not united when proclaiming its mission to the world[4]. In short, church as one component of civil society is performing part of the prophetic and priestly task, but not a complete prophetic, priestly and kingly task. Its activities focuses heavily on people’s spiritual communion with God, not accompanied with the direct action of bringing God’s whole truth into life of the members and those around them, and the country. Only recently have few churches realize the importance of engaging the public sphere
The lack of a functional model of churches to actively participate as one component of civil society seems to be the problem in Indonesia. In the past, church around the world tends to be either in the side of power or powerless, either separation or solidarity, and either social compassion or social construction. Historically, churches around the world have their own functional model when engaging with the society (Reference: Melba Transforming Society). The first model is the City on the Hill, where the church view all the world as ‘evil’, and therefore isolate themselves to set out to be an example of a holy community inside the ‘fallen’ society; one example of this would be the Anabaptist society in the USA. The second model is the Political action, with the emphasis of being salt and light into the world, and focuses on social penetration. The third model is Structural change, where the church is actively involved in confronting the power or reversal in the power or state. The fourth model is the Social Compassion, for example Mother Teresa. Each of these models has their own vision on what God wants to do with being involved in the society. These models are certainly only contextual, and they do not provide a clear-cut approach to each situation, therefore we ourselves have to analyze and implement the appropriate model to Indonesia.
There are practical pathways of Christian intellectuals to engage in improving the civil society in Indonesia. According to Bill Moyer, there are 4 roles that every individual can choose in being an activist: as a rebel, citizen, reformer, and as a change agent. Some examples for each models are as follows: Rebels can aggressively hold protests on deviation from democratic principles and morality; Citizens can actively develop positive values and virtues in their daily lives, such as freedom, democracy, justice, etc; Reformers can change their environment through legal institution and law; Change agent can be effective through educating the public, as well as ensuring the participation of the whole society in the process of change. Moyer also describes how each of these roles can be filled effectively, and not effectively. According to Ulrich Dacron, in order to shape a strong civil society, there are 3 chosen models: citizen, reformer, and as an agent of change. Christian intellectuals can choose whichever model they want to participate in when improving the civil society.
Practically, Christian intellectuals can start to engage in the development of civil society by making the teaching of the church relevant to the problems faced by the world, by making churches accessible to the grassroots level, by penetrating the social structure from the smallest to the largest level, strengthen the voice of civil society by participating in professional alliance and association at work, and having a critical and biblical mindset of the situation around them, and continue to foster relationship with other religious and civil society by holding an open forum.
In conclusion, civil society component was hindered under the ‘new regime’ (Orde baru), and Indonesia’s current conditions is not an optimum medium for development of civil society component because of the remnants of the ‘new regime’ (Orde baru). Indonesian churches in general encourage the members to ‘win souls’ but are still wary to recognize the responsibility of actively voicing the Word of God and its viewpoint in the country social system. This in turn discourages the involvement in Christian intellectuals in the society. Christian intellectual has to be able to be a good citizen and an agent of change and reformer. With the current challenges, Christian intellectual has to be able to implement integration of their faith and their life in order to develop the civil society component in Indonesia.
[1] Kompas.com, Monday Jan 8, 2007, “Ketua DPRD Bali Terbukti Korupsi Tapi Dilepaskan”
[2] Cohen, Jean Luis and Arato, Andrew, Civil Society and Political Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1992
[3] Stanley, Civil Society: Dalam Konsep dan Perjalanan Keindonesiaan, 2006
[4] Sopamena, F. Transisi Demokrasi di Indonesia: Masalah Tantangan serta Implikasinya bagi Gereja, Sep 2006
