1 Introduction
In the years following the Third Millennium in Indonesia, violence against those who were regarded by the majority as deviating from true religious tenets had increased sharply. In the second period of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s presidency, the Ahmadiyah people became the target of attacks: their houses were burned, and in 2011 in Cikeusik, West Java, three followers of Ahmadiyah were killed by raging mobs. The outnumbered police could only watch the incident passively. In the town of Sampang on the island of Madura, East Java, followers of Syiah were ousted from their villages, and until today they remain as refugees in Surabaya. In the first period of Jokowi’s presidency, the scope of polarization widened to involve people from different religions, and this was caused by politics.
During the Jakarta local election in 2016, the Muslim population reacted strongly against the possibility of having a non-Muslim (i.e., a Christian) as their new governor, and in the end they succeeded in electing a Muslim candidate as the new governor of Jakarta. As their success involved a (false) accusation of blasphemy against the non-Muslim candidate, many Christians resented the outcome of this election. Since then, there have been incidents of attacks against statues of Buddha and Kuan Yin and statues of figures from the traditional wayang stories. In 2019 there were desecrations of symbols of the cross in public cemeteries and even the graves of newly buried non-Muslim people. The public officials bowed to the pressure and the remains were uncovered and moved to other burial places.
Since 2016, LGBT people and those who support them have also become targets of attacks. The police made raids on suspected rendezvous places and workshops on gender issues, transgender people were attacked in public by radical groups wearing white robes, a center for gender studies in the University of Indonesia was closed, following the accusation by the Minister of Research and Technology that it promoted deviant sexual habits, and the
There was also a motion to the Mahkamah Konstitusi (abbr.: MK, Eng: ‘The Constitutional Court,’ equivalent to the Supreme Court in the U.S.) to treat homosexual acts as criminal offenses, as in Malaysia, which means criminalization of the LGBT community. The MK rejected this motion. However, in the discourse concerning the renewal of the Book of Criminal Law by the Executive and the Legislative branches, many were still supporting this move. The move can be contrasted with the Supreme Court of India, which recently repealed the laws concerning homosexual acts.
According to many political analysts, this is a diversion from the real issue of polarization in politics during the general election of 2019 (between Jokowi and his arch-rival Prabowo), which resulted in inter-religious polarization, as both sides were manipulating religious sentiments. This inter-religious polarization caused the shift to the issue of LGBT. The diversionary tactic resulted in scapegoating of LGBT people. However, as it was the result of religious polarization, we can say that the LGBT issue was a side effect of religious polarization.
It is ironic that in the days of Soeharto’s totalitarian New Order regime (1966–1998) there was relatively little religious polarization. Obedience to the national ideology of Pancasila as the foundation of the state was strong enough to withstand domination efforts by the religion of the majority. Many of Soeharto’s ministers, public servants and army commanders were Christians (Catholic and Protestants). One of his ministers was known as a gay person, and before he was appointed as a minister he was the Head of the Presidential Palace Household.
In the New Order Era, it goes without saying that Christians, the PGI (‘Persekutuan Gereja-Gereja di Indonesia’; Eng.: ‘The Indonesian Communion of Churches’) and the member churches of the PGI, relied on Pancasila in order to be able to face the religion of the majority. That is why at present they often issue a plea to return to Pancasila and why, for them, Pancasila is non-negotiable (Ind: ‘harga mati’). Nowadays, however, it seems that Indonesian society is experiencing a paradigm shift, from an ‘ideology-based state’ to a ‘religion-based state.’ I have reflected on this change in a separate article and do not want to repeat everything that I have already said in that article.1 While
Not all are bad stories. In this article, I will also describe efforts to bridge or overcome this polarization, starting with the MK’s decision no. 97/2016 (made public on October 18, 2017) which allows adherents of ‘spiritual groups’ (Ind.: penganut aliran kepercayaan) to state their beliefs as such in their electronic national identity cards (Ind.: ‘Kartu tanda Penduduk Elektronik,’ abbr.: E-KTP). Prior to that, they had to affiliate themselves with one of the six official religions in order to fill the column of religion in the national identity card. I will summarize what the PGI did in response to the MK’s decision, and then move to describe how the PGI responded to intimidation of LGBT people, by issuing a pastoral statement on LGBT, how the Christian community reacted to this statement, and how the LGBT community and some Muslims responded to it. I will close with a conclusion, followed by some further reflection on the role of the PGI in overcoming polarization in Indonesia.
2 The PGI and Recognition of Spiritual Groups and Adat Society
The MK’s decision is crucial for the discourse on religious plurality in Indonesia. Although it is concerned with allowing ‘spiritual groups’ to disconnect their forced relationship with one of the six official religions and to stand on their own right, the impact of this decision is actually the state recognition of all ‘spiritual groups’ as legal bodies. For the first time in Indonesian history, these groups, which were formerly categorized as ‘spiritual’ (meaning lower than ‘religious’), are now on par with world religions such as Islam and Christianity. One factor that determined the MK’s decision is an argument during the public hearing that the so-called spiritual groups are actually the indigenous or local religions, so why are the imported world religions recognized, but the indigenous or local religions unrecognized?2
The problem is that in the Indonesian construction of religion there are two main categories: the first is the religions and the second is the spiritual beliefs.
On the other hand, the Minister of Religion, Lukman Hakim Saifudin, welcomed the MK’s decision. He reminded the public that spiritual groups were actually under the jurisdiction of the National Education Ministry, and not under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Religion. That was because formerly they were not regarded as religions.4 He also proposed a special E-KTP, but for a different reason than MUI; he did not want to place the spiritual groups in an inferior position, but to accommodate their wishes to be recognized fully as spiritual groups, which are not under the umbrella of one of the six official religions. The Minister of Religion also explained that he and the Minister for Internal Affairs will coordinate together, to issue 6 to 8 million new E-KTP s in 2018, to accommodate the MK’s decision, according to their estimation on the number of followers of spiritual groups.5
Beside the difficulty of implementing the MK’s decision, the picture becomes more complicated by the fact that the spiritual groups are often lumped together with other traditional groups of Adat society, as explained in the book published by the PGI, Masyarakat Adat.9 In the understanding of the PGI, Adat society means a traditional ethnic community, with its own customs and its own living space.10 The spiritual groups, however, regard themselves as ‘modern’ groups, but inherited traditional wisdom from the Javanese/Sundanese mystical tradition. They are groups such as Susila Budi Darma (SUBUD), Pangestu, Sapta Dharma, Sumarah, Suksma Sejati, and many others. They refuse to be categorized as religion, while those who regard themselves as Adat society hold that what they have is religion, not just spiritual belief. They are the Marapu people of Sumba, the Ugama Malim (formerly known as Parmalim) people from the Bataklands, the Kaharingan people from Kalimantan and some others. And there are groups, which on the one hand, hold that they
The Kaharingan people are not very enthusiastic about the MK’s decision, as they have struggled in the past, to be recognized as religion, and not as a spiritual group. In 1980 the majority of the Kaharingan people in Kalimantan decided to join the official Hindu Dharma religion, which is the majority religion in the island of Bali. As part of an official religion, they enjoyed government privileges such as subsidies to run religious schools. After the MK’s decision, most opted to stay within the body of Hindu Dharma, but a minority of them has publicly announced that they have cut their relationship with Hindu Dharma.11
Notwithstanding the difficulties, the Adat society has received state recognition concerning their communal property rights. In May 16, 2013, MK made public their decision No. 35/2012, which is popularly known as MK 35: the forests which traditionally belong to the people, and which is known as ‘adat forest’ cannot be claimed by the state.12 The impact of this decision is that the Adat society now has territorial rights. If the Adat society and the spiritual groups are now seen as one body vis-a-vis the six official religions, then the MK’s decision to recognize them as on par with the six official religions makes them strong, so strong, that they can now legally resist efforts by the six religions to convert them into adherents of a religion.
It is this new reality that was in the mind of Gomar Gultom when he reminded the member churches of the PGI that the Adat society had for a long time been placed in the margins and that they were even regarded as invisible. As such, they became mission objects of the six religions.13 Gultom was referring to the past practice, but I think he was indirectly pointing at what some member churches of the PGI are doing now. The Ugama Malim people are the object of the mission of the Toba Batak church (HKBP) in North Sumatra, the Kaharingan people of the Gereja Kalimantan Evangelis in Kalimantan (GKE), and the Marapu people of the Gereja Kristen Sumba (GKS). It would be interesting to see the reaction of these member churches, but no official statements
In Central and East Java, for a long period, the spiritual groups which belong to the Javanese mystical religion (Javanese: Kejawen) became the object of the mission of both Catholic and Protestant missionaries. The teachings of Kejawen were regarded as incompatible with Christianity, and there was a strong anti-Kejawen sentiment among members of the Javanese churches.15 However, there was some ambiguity in their attitude. The real antagonist seemed to be Islam, and in order to be strong in facing Islam, the Kejawen people also needed to be befriended, in order to attract them to Christianity. It was common in the New Order era to find Christian literature on the situation in Central Java which described the religious-cultural background of Java as Kejawen and not as Islam.16 It is only after the fall of Soeharto in 1998 that they acknowledged the Muslims of Java as followers of Islam, albeit contextual Muslims, meaning they are Muslims but still appreciative of their Kejawen heritage.
The PGI’s response to the MK’s decision has to be welcomed as one way of acknowledging its past mistakes, that is in regarding the world of Adat society and spiritual groups as the world of darkness. Although the churches always deny any accusation that what they brought to these people is mission civilisatrice, this is more or less what they were (and are still) doing. Christians in Indonesia are prone to follow outlines of modernization (development programs) which are designed by the state/government without ample study, to see their impact for the future. The modern world of the state/government is identified with the Kingdom of God. During the colonial period, they followed the policies of modernity from the colonial government, and during the period of independence they follow similar policies from the Indonesian government,
The mission programs of the churches need to be re-examined thoroughly, and here I am using the postcolonial perspective.18 In the colonial period, the missionaries were moving from the center to the margin (‘go!’), which in missiology handbooks is termed as doing mission following a centrifugal movement.19 When the center comes to the margin, the margin is encapsulated by the center. This centrifugal movement is often regarded as the realization of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20), and followed by church-planting (plantatio ecclesiae) strategies. During the colonial period, that is in the second half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, these policies succeeded in creating pockets of Christianity in parts of the archipelago. This seemingly successful enterprise has become the norm for mission in the theological minds of the Indonesian churches in the post-independence era. They have continued the colonial way of doing mission.
I have proposed a transformation of this colonial mission into a postcolonial mission.20 The churches still need to do mission work, albeit following a centripetal movement. In the Old Testament, the Servant Israel is called to become a model for the world, to live in such a way that attracts the attention of the world. Israel does not go anywhere; the world is coming to Israel (as in Isa. 2:2–5). The PGI also proposed that the church-planting strategies need to be replaced with the concept of presensia (‘stay!’), which in the understanding of the PGI, does not only mean living together peacefully with people of other faiths, but also living together in solidarity with people at the margin.21 In this
3 The PGI and the Plight of LGBT Communities
As mentioned previously, since 2016 the LGBT community in Indonesia has been facing many verbal attacks from both government officials and public figures, and not infrequently these verbal attacks have been followed by physical attacks by the police and also by unknown groups. As during the post-1965 period, when many people tried to claim that their regions were clean from PKI (followers of the Indonesian Communist Party), this time many people are proclaiming that their regions are free of LGBT people.22 Surprisingly, on May 28, 2016, the PGI issued a Pastoral Statement in which Christians and member churches are implored to end the burden of negative stigma applied to LGBT people as ‘sinners’ (Ind.: orang berdosa) and/or people with ‘psychological disorders/diseases’ (Ind.: berpenyakit jiwa).23
The PGI is not the first to issue a positive statement concerning LGBT people. A year before, the Salemba Reformed-Baptist Church of Grace Community (Ind.: ‘Gereja Komunitas Anugerah Reformed-Baptist Salemba’) which belongs to the Evangelical wing of Indonesian Christians and is not a member of the PGI, also issued a statement of solidarity with LGBT people. The church called for solidarity on the basis of the sovereign love of Christ, and argued that it is not the homosexuals who have to repent, but the heterosexuals, namely for
The response to the PGI Pastoral Statement was mixed. Though many individuals welcomed it, the member churches of the PGI protested, as the draft which had been prepared by the MPH (‘Majelis Pekerja Harian’; Eng.: ‘The Leadership’) was not submitted to the MPL (‘Majelis Pekerja Lengkap’; Eng.: ‘Representatives of member churches’) for consideration. Perhaps that was only a pretext for the real reason, namely a strong anti-LGBT theology. It is ironic that member churches of the PGI, which represent the Ecumenical wing of Indonesian Christians and are known as ‘liberals,’ have an anti-LGBT attitude. Although many Evangelicals are also anti-LGBT, there are evangelicals who are not against LGBT. As we have seen above, a church which belongs to the Evangelical wing can support the struggle of LGBT people. Yonky Karman, another faculty member of Jakarta Theological Seminary, who wrote a sympathetic introduction to the translation of a book on homosexuality and Christianity, also belongs to the Evangelical wing.25
Others protested that the Pastoral Statement will open the way to ‘same-sex marriage’ (Ind.: ‘Pernikahan Sejenis’), which has already been legalized in more than half of European countries, in several states of the U.S. (after the legalization of ‘same-sex marriage’ by the Supreme Court) and in Taiwan. Vietnam, Thailand and Myanmar also have LGBT-friendly policies, although they have not legalized ‘same-sex marriage.’ There are also others who protested that the content of the Pastoral Statement is ‘unbiblical’ or that the argument of the PGI has no in-depth discussion of certain texts which are used to support the condemnation of LGBT people. Gomar Gultom reacted to the charge that the PGI is promoting ‘same-sex marriage’ by clarifying that the PGI focused on acceptance of LGBT people and did not support or refer to ‘same-sex marriage.’26 Concerning the accusation that the leadership of the PGI is ‘unbiblical,’ PGI
In this booklet, I counter the argument that homosexuality is unbiblical by comparing texts which are hostile to LGBT (such as Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Deut. 22:5; 23:17,18 and Rom. 1:26–27) with texts which are not hostile to LGBT (such as 1 Sam. 18:1–4; 2 Sam. 1:26; Isa. 56:1–8; Dan. 1:1–21; Eccl. 4:9–12; Matt. 19:11–12; Act. 8:26–40).28 Concerning Gen. 19:1–29 (the story of the destruction of Sodom), I hold that it cannot be used as a biblical base to condemn LGBT people. It is true that in the narrative there is an attempt made to rape two heavenly guests by all male inhabitants of Sodom, old and young. From this, however, we may deduce that the perpetrators are both homosexual and heterosexual men. This deduction is further supported by the fact that the identity of the perpetrators is strengthened when Lot offers his two virgin daughters to the mob as alternative victims instead of the two heavenly guests. I also added that according to the prophetic tradition (Isa. 1:10–20; 3:9; Jer. 23:10, 14; 49:18; Ezek. 16:46–56), the sin of Sodom is not homosexuality but social injustice and inhospitable attitude.29
Before my reading of the texts, I explained my hermeneutical stance, which is still Sola Scriptura, but Sola Scriptura with Pluses. Even the reformers such as Luther and Calvin never just apply the text as it is to the situation. There is always something more than just ‘the plain meaning’ of the text. As an example, I traced the history of offices in the churches of the Reformation such as the minister, elder, deacon and superintendent, which on the one hand, are taken from the terms presbuteros, diakonos and episkopos in the New Testament, but on the other hand, are not the same as these three biblical offices. Likewise, I apply Sola Scriptura with Pluses concerning the related texts above. The pluses are Sola Fide, Sola Gratia and Sola Caritate. The last one, Sola
I also question the interpretation of texts concerning ‘fertility religions’ in the Pastoral Statement, which is contrasted with the biblical religion in the Old Testament. Starting from a negative evaluation of fertility religions, the PGI holds that there is no judgement or condemnation of LGBT people in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, only condemnation of the fertility religions of Canaan. I do not think this is true. There are texts which condemn homosexual acts, but my argument is that texts which do not condemn homosexuality can also be found in the Bible, and that the number of these texts exceeds the number of anti-LGBT texts. If so, then there is no point in holding that LGBT is unbiblical just by citing anti-LGBT texts. The antithesis between the religion of ancient Israel as a historical religion and the religion of Canaan as a fertility religion, which was common one generation ago, cannot be defended any longer. Both have elements of historical and fertility religions.31 For example, Yahweh is a God of fertility (Hos. 2:7, 20–22).
I also added scientific, cultural and human rights considerations to complement the use of these three considerations in the Pastoral Statement. Contemporary science does not understand homosexuality anymore as a psychological or hormonal disorder, but as a sexual orientation. Therefore, it is important to learn the new vocabulary, such as the importance of differentiating between gender and sexual orientation. I am aware that science alone cannot have the last word. It will depend on the relation between science and religion/faith. In pre-modern days, science was placed under religion. Scientific discoveries can never challenge the worldview of religion. In modernity, religion is placed under science. The worldview of religion cannot undermine the worldview of science. In the postmodern era (which is now), however, science and religion are in an equal position, and the worldview of science is in dialogue with the worldview of religion.32
In present-day Indonesia, the worldview of religion tends to be dominant, and threatens to dictate the worldview of science and culture. It is as if we are back in the pre-modern days. In the introduction, I mentioned the negative comments about LGBT people and their allies made by the Minister of
When it was the turn of the representative of the Indonesian Fellowship of Psychologists to speak, many were dumbfounded to hear him say that homosexuality is a psychological disease.33 From the audience and from netizens, a storm of protests arose, (including a summons by the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute) and after a few days he apologized publicly for his remarks.34 Although these protests indicated that critical views toward the old biases against LGBT people have become stronger, it does not mean that the tendency to place science under religion has disappeared. After the PGI Pastoral Statement and my booklet had sparked public debate, an Evangelical, Andik Wijaya, a medical doctor who frequently organizes anti-LGBT seminars and ‘healing sessions’ for LGBT people, posted his reactions on the internet in the form of ridicule and insinuations of criminal intent.35
For cultural considerations, the PGI in its Pastoral Statement referred to the traditional culture of the bissu in South Sulawesi and the warok of Ponorogo, East Java. The bissu are a particular group of transgender people, who in the local belief system are regarded as mediators between the human and the divine. The warok are a particular group of men, who are believed to have Herculean strength, which can only last if they have sexual intercourse with males. The phenomenon of LGBT is not the product of modern culture, nor is it a product of Western culture. It is part of traditional Indonesian cultural identity, albeit
The discourse on scientific findings, cultural heritage and human rights considerations has uncovered the issue of identity and the right to choose one’s identity. The Pastoral Statement acknowledges that it is difficult to separate identity that is the result of nature and identity that is the result of nurture. They are overlapping. However, in today’s context of Indonesia, heterosexuality is the norm, and therefore the discourse on scientific findings, cultural heritage and human rights considerations, which I also consider part of the pluses of Sola Scriptura, are mostly ignored. LGBT people are stigmatized as sexual predators who promote sexual permissiveness (Ind.: kebebasan seksual). I believe this is the reason why the PGI stopped short of referring to ‘same-sex marriage.’ I can understand their position and do not want to undermine it by suggesting that I would have a Christian concept of ‘same-sex marriage.’ However, it cannot be denied that there are gay couples who are very committed to each other, very devout and church-going. Because of this fact, I propose that perhaps member churches could perform a ritual for these committed ones, which in Indonesian is perestuan (from the term restu). It is not a pemberkatan (from the term berkat), which means ‘blessing,’ because ‘blessing’ has been identified with a church wedding. Perestuan is a ritual, but not a ritual for a church wedding. In Indonesia a Christian marriage is valid if it is performed by the clerics and confirmed by the municipality.37
After the Bible Symposium on LGBT above, in March 2017, the MPL-PGI met in Salatiga and one of the points on the agenda was evaluation of the Pastoral Statement and reactions to it. There is no press release, but it seems that the Pastoral Statement was rejected by the floor. The MPH will pay dearly for its procedural mistake mentioned above. Since then, the discourse on LGBT has disappeared from within both the MPH and the MPL. The staff of the MPH informed me that they are keeping ‘a low profile’ position on this issue. Apparently, they continued to do so, until the PGI General Assembly, which was held
4 Closing Remarks
I have described the role of the PGI in fighting polarization in contemporary Indonesia. In these two cases of polarization, first, on the status of religion versus ‘spiritual groups’ and ‘Adat society,’ and second, on the issue of LGBT, it has become clear that what the PGI is striving for is blunted by the wall of traditional theological stances of member churches of the PGI. We have seen that Gomar Gultom’s reminder to re-examine the traditional theology of mission following the government’s recognition of the spiritual groups and Adat society went unheeded. The Pastoral Statement on LGBT was rejected by member churches. The positive impact is that the outside world welcomes the PGI initiative on LGBT. Many Muslim figures who advocate acceptance of LGBT people rejoiced at the publication of the Pastoral Statement. For the first time, ‘Gaya Nusantara’ (an NGO that defends gay rights) dropped its cynical and skeptical attitudes toward religious people and invited experts of religion, both from Islam and Christianity, to meet at the beginning of November 2018.38 It was agreed to create together a project of interpreting or re-interpreting some scriptural texts in order to build a positive image of LGBT, under the name ‘Tafsir Progresif Lintas Agama’ (Eng.: ‘Inter-Religious Progressive Interpretation’).39
Because of this positive development, the PGI should not be discouraged by challenges faced internally. The Indonesian Communion of Churches has established signs of hope for all the people of Indonesia, and therefore polarization will not have the last word. I am convinced that the PGI has been advocating for the improvement of society. Therefore, we may conclude that the
Bibliography
Afikar, Amar. Ed. Tafsir Progresif Islam & Kristen terhadap Keragaman Gender dan Seksualitas (A progressive Muslim and Christian interpretation concerning gender and sexuality). Surabaya, Gaya Nusantara, 2020.
Albrektson, Bertil. History and the Gods. Lund: Gleerup, 1967.
Candra, Sapto Andika and Andi Nur Aminah. “Kota Padang Komitmen Berantas LGBT” (The city of Padang is committed to evict LGBT people). Republika.co.id, Nasional, November 15, 2018. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://nasional.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/daerah/18/11/15/pi7rg1384-kota-padang-komitmen-berantas-lgbt.
Erdianto, Kristian. “PGI Sepakat dengan MUI soal Pemenuhan Hak Sipil Penghayat Kepercayaan” (PGI agrees with MUI on fulfilling spiritual groups’ civil rights). Kompas.com, Nasional. accessed June 7, 2019. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/01/18/09310741/pgi-sepakat-dengan-mui-soal-pemenuhan-hak-sipil-penghayat-kepercayaan?page=all.
Fakhri, Fakhrizal. “Menag: Mendagri Segera Persiapkan KTP untuk Penghayat Kepercayaan” (Minister of Religious Affairs: Interior Minister will prepare special national identity cards for spiritual groups). Okenews, Nasional, April 4, 2018. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://nasional.okezone.com/read/2018/04/04/337/1882044/menag-mendagri-segera-persiapkan-ktp-untuk-penghayat-kepercayaan.
Gatra, Sandro. “PGI: Gereja Tak Akan Restui Perkawinan Sejenis” (PGI: The church will not bless same-sex marriage). Kompas.com, Nasional, July 10, 2015. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2015/07/10/13020621/PGI.Gereja.Tak.Akan.Restui.Perkawinan.Sejenis.
Glesne, David N. Understanding Homosexuality: Perspectives for the Local Church. Minneapolis, Kirk House Publishers, 2004.
Gultom Gomar, “Kata Sambutan Sekertaris Umum PGI” (Welcoming Address by the General Secretary of PGI). In Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian), ed. Jimmy M.I Sormin, vii-ix. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018.
Guhmanaff. “Kedaulatan Cinta” (The Sovereignty of Love). Suarakita.org, Gereja Komunitas Anugerah-Reformed Baptist Salemba, July 1, 2015. Accessed June 7, 2019. http://www.suarakita.org/2015/07/siaran-pers-kedaulatan-cinta/.
Hadiwijono, Harun. Iman Kristen (Christian faith). Jakarta: BPK, 1973.
Hadiwijono, Harun. Kebatinan dan Injil (Spiritual Groups and the Gospel). Jakarta: BPK, 1970.
Handayani, Sri and Achmad Syalaby, “Lengkap, Tujuh Permintaan Maaf Fidiansjah Usai Disomasi LBH Jakarta” (Seven complete apologies by Fidiansyah after threatened with somation by LBH Jakarta), Republika.co.id. Nasional, 23 Maret 2016. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://www.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/umum/16/03/23/o4hhk7394-lengkap-tujuh-permintaan-maaf-fidiansjah-usai-disomasi-lbh-jakarta.
Indrawan, Angga. “Komunitas LGBT di Jambi dalam Pengawasan” (LGBT community at Jambi under strict supervision). Republika.co.id, Nasional, February 23, 2016. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://www.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/daerah/16/02/23/o2z5y1365-komunitas-lgbt-di-jambi-dalam-pengawasan.
International Commission of Jurists. Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and International Human Rights Law, Practical Guide 4. Accessed October 1, 2020. https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4a783aed2.pdf.
Karman, Yonky. “Menyikapi LGBT sebagai sebuah Fenomena Sosio-Teologis” (Consideration of LGBT as a socio-theological phenomenon). In Homoseksualitas dan Kekristenan (Christianity and homosexuality), eds. William Loader and Stephen R. Holmes, vii-xiii. Jakarta: Bentara, 2018.
Kuijper, Arie de. Missiologia (Missiology). Jakarta: BPK, 1974.
Lemche, Niels Peter. The Canaanites and their Land: The Tradition of the Canaanites. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Mahin, Marko. “Menjadi Subjek: Identitas dan Eksistensi Agama Kaharingan Paska (sic!) Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XIV/2016” (Becoming subjects: Identity and existence of Kaharingan religion post Constitutional Court’s decision number 97/PUU-XIV/2016). In Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian), ed. Jimmy M.I Sormin, 129–141. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018.
Mudimbe-Boyi, Elizabeth. “Missionary writing and postcolonialism.” In The Cambridge History of Postcolonial Literature, ed. Ato Quayson, 81–106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Nababan, Abdob. “Reclaiming Identitas: Masyarakat Adat sebagai Subjek (Baru) Kewarganegaraan” (Reclaiming identity: Adat Society as (New) Subjects in Citizenship). In Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian), ed. Jimmy M.I Sormin, 41–63. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018.
Rafiq, Ahmad and Rina Widiastuti. “Menteri Lukman: Kami Tidak Terdampak Putusan MK Soal Kolom Agama” (Minister Lukman: we are not impacted by MK decision concerning reference to religion in national identity cards). Tempo.co, Nasional, November 8, 2017. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://nasional.tempo.co/read/1031909/menteri-lukman-kami-tidak-terdampak-putusan-mk-soal-kolom-agama.
Saputra, Andi. “Ketua MK: Kenapa Agama dari Asing Diakui, Kalau dari Leluhur Tidak?” (Chief Judge of Constitutional Court: Why is religion from foreigners recognized, if from ancestors not?), Detik News. Sidang Kolom Agama, May 3, 2017. Accessed June 7, 2019. http://news.detik.com/berita/3491040/ketua-mk-kenapa-agama-dari-asing-diakui-kalau-dari-leluhur-tidak.
Simanjuntak, Johny N. “Mencakapkan Sisi Orientasi dan Intensi Advokasi Masyarakat Adat” (Conversation on orientation and intention of advocating for the Adat Society). In Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian), ed. Jimmy M.I Sormin, 19–29. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018.
PGI, Dokumen Keesaan Gereja (Documents of church unity). Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2016.
Singgih, Emanuel Gerrit. “Dari Misi Kolonial ke Misi Poskolonial: Misiologi yang Kontekstual bagi Indonesia Masa Kini” (From colonial mission to postcolonial mission). In Gereja di Era Disrupsi (The church in the era of disruption), eds. Ebenezer Gaol et al., 141–153. Bekasi: Efata, 2019.
Singgih, Emanuel Gerrit. “Indonesian Churches and the Problem of Nationality and Ethnicity.” In Faith and Ethnicity, Studies in Reformed Theology 6, eds. Eddy Van der Borght et al., 103–123. Leiden: Brill, 2002.
Singgih, Emanuel Gerrit. Menafsir LGBT dengan Alkitab (Interpreting LGBT through the Bible). Jakarta: Pusat Studi Gender dan Seksualitas [Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality] STFK Jakarta, 2019.
Singgih, Emanuel Gerrit. “What has Ahok to do with Santa? Contemporary Christian and Muslim Public Theologies in Indonesia”. International Journal of Public Theology 13:1 (2019), 25–39.
Sormin, Jimmy M.I. Ed. Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian). Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018.
Stefanie, Christie. “Ketua MUI tak Setuju Penghayat Kepercayaan Tercantum di KTP” (The head of MUI disagreed with the decision to refer to spiritual belief in national identity cards). CNN Indonesia, Nasional, November 15, 2017. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20171115155715-20-255829/ketua-mui-tak-setuju-penghayat-kepercayaan-tercantum-di-ktp.
Steenbrink, Karel A. Dutch Colonialism and Indonesian Islam: Contacts and Conflicts (1596–1950). Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi, 1993.
Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, “What has Ahok to do with Santa? Contemporary Christian and Muslim Public Theologies in Indonesia,” International Journal of Public Theology 13:1 (2019), 25–39.
Andi Saputra, “Ketua MK: Kenapa Agama dari Asing Diakui, Kalau dari Leluhur Tidak?” (Chief Judge of Constitutional Court: Why is religion from foreigners recognized, if from ancestors not?), Detik News, Sidang Kolom Agama, May 3, 2017, http://news.detik.com/berita/3491040/ketua-mk-kenapa-agama-dari-asing-diakui-kalau-dari-leluhur-tidak (accessed June 7, 2019).
Christie Stefanie, “Ketua MUI tak Setuju Penghayat Kepercayaan Tercantum di KTP” (The head of MUI disagreed with the decision to refer to spiritual belief in national identity cards), CNN Indonesia, Nasional, November 15, 2017, https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20171115155715-20-255829/ketua-mui-tak-setuju-penghayat-kepercayaan-tercantum-di-ktp (accessed June 10, 2019).
Ahmad Rafiq and Rina Widiastuti, “Menteri Lukman: Kami Tidak Terdampak Putusan MK Soal Kolom Agama” (Minister Lukman: we are not impacted by MK decision concerning reference to religion in national identity cards), Tempo.co, Nasional, November 8, 2017, https://nasional.tempo.co/read/1031909/menteri-lukman-kami-tidak-terdampak-putusan-mk-soal-kolom-agama (accessed June 10, 2019).
Fakhrizal Fakhri, “Menag: Mendagri Segera Persiapkan KTP untuk Penghayat Kepercayaan” (Minister of Religious Affairs: Interior Minister will prepare special national identity cards for spiritual groups), Okenews, Nasional, April 4, 2018, https://nasional.okezone.com/read/2018/04/04/337/1882044/menag-mendagri-segera-persiapkan-ktp-untuk-penghayat-kepercayaan (accessed June 10, 2019).
Ind: Masyarakat Adat (Adat Society). The term adat is frequently translated in English as ‘social custom’, but it is more than that. Many regard adat as the ancestors’ legacy and as such can never be abrogated.
The proceedings of the Seminar are published shortly after, see below, footnote 9.
Kristian Erdianto, “PGI Sepakat dengan MUI soal Pemenuhan Hak Sipil Penghayat Kepercayaan” (PGI agrees with MUI on fulfilling spiritual groups’ civil rights), Kompas.com, Nasional, https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2018/01/18/09310741/pgi-sepakat-dengan-mui-soal-pemenuhan-hak-sipil-penghayat-kepercayaan?page=all (accessed June 7, 2019).
Jimmy M.I. Sormin (ed.), Masyarakat Adat: Pengakuan Kembali, Identitas & Keindonesiaan (Adat Society: Re-recognition, identity and how to be an Indonesian) (Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2018).
Johny N. Simanjuntak, “Mencakapkan Sisi Orientasi dan Intensi Advokasi Masyarakat Adat” (Conversation on orientation and intention of advocating for the Adat Society), in Masyarakat Adat, ed. Sormin, 19–29, 20.
Marko Mahin, “Menjadi Subjek: Identitas dan Eksistensi Agama Kaharingan Paska (sic!) Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XIV/2016” (Becoming subjects: Identity and existence of Kaharingan religion post Constitutional Court’s decision number 97/PUU-XIV/2016), in Masyarakat Adat, ed. Sormin, 129–141, here 130–131, 137–138.
Abdob (sic!) Nababan, “Reclaiming Identitas: Masyarakat Adat sebagai Subjek (Baru) Kewarganegaraan” (Reclaiming identity: Adat Society as (New) Subjects in Citizenship), in Masyarakat Adat, ed. Sormin, 41–63, 59–60.
Gomar Gultom, “Kata Sambutan Sekertaris Umum PGI” (Welcoming Address by the General Secretary of PGI), in Masyarakat Adat, ed. Sormin, VII–IX, VII–VIII.
Information from my MTh student Yustiwati Angu Bima (class of 2018–2019). She is Sumbanese.
Harun Hadiwijono, Kebatinan dan Injil (Spiritual Groups and the Gospel) (Jakarta: BPK, 1970). In his book on dogmatics, Iman Kristen (Christian faith) (Jakarta: BPK, 1973), 170–171, he stated that the teachings of the Bible are incompatible with Kejawen.
Karel A. Steenbrink, Dutch Colonialism and Indonesian Islam: Contacts and Conflicts (1596–1950) (Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi, 1993). Steenbrink examined the literature and concluded that the seemingly sympathetic Christian attitude to Kejawen was actually anti-Islam.
Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, “Indonesian Churches and the Problem of Nationality and Ethnicity,” in Faith and Ethnicity, Studies in Reformed Theology 6, eds. Eddy Van der Borght et al. (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 103–123. In this article I refer to the term hamajuon (in the Toba dialect) or hamajuan (in the Simalungun dialect), which means progress, and which became a catch-word for the Batak Christians.
Elizabeth Mudimbe-Boyi, “Missionary writing and postcolonialism,” in The Cambridge History of Postcolonial Literature, ed. Ato Quayson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 81–106.
Arie de Kuijper, Missiologia (Missiology) (Jakarta: BPK, 1974). It was still reprinted in 2011. De Kuijper summarizes the view of Dutch missiologists such as Verkuijl and Blauw.
Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, “Dari Misi Kolonial ke Misi Poskolonial: Misiologi yang Kontekstual bagi Indonesia Masa Kini” (From colonial mission to postcolonial mission), in Gereja di Era Disrupsi (The church in the era of disruption), eds. Ebenezer Gaol et al. (Bekasi: Efata, 2019), 141–153.
PGI, Dokumen Keesaan Gereja (Documents of church unity) (Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia-PGI, 2016), second printing; PGI, “Model-model Bergereja di Indonesia, 2018” (Models of church in Indonesia), abbr. MMBI 2018, unpublished document.
Sapto Andika Candra and Andi Nur Aminah, “Kota Padang Komitmen Berantas LGBT” (The city of Padang is committed to evict LGBT people), Republika.co.id, Nasional, November 15, 2018, https://nasional.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/daerah/18/11/15/pi7rg1384-kota-padang-komitmen-berantas-lgbt (accessed June 10, 2019); cf. Angga Indrawan, “Komunitas LGBT di Jambi dalam Pengawasan” (LGBT community at Jambi under strict supervision), Republika.co.id, Nasional, February 23, 2016, https://www.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/daerah/16/02/23/o2z5y1365-komunitas-lgbt-di-jambi-dalam-pengawasan (accessed June 10, 2019).
In the appendix 1 of Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, Menafsir LGBT dengan Alkitab (Interpreting LGBT through the Bible) (Jakarta: Pusat Studi Gender dan Seksualitas [Center for the Study of Gender and Sexuality] STFK Jakarta, 2019), 83–87. For an English version, see Stephen Suleeman and Amadeo D. Udampoh (eds.), Siapakah Sesamaku? (Who is my neighbor?) (Jakarta: Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Theologi Jakarta [Jakarta School for Philosophy and Theology], 2019), 311–315.
Guhmanaff, “Kedaulatan Cinta” (The Sovereignty of Love), Suarakita.org, Gereja Komunitas Anugerah-Reformed Baptist Salemba, July 1, 2015, http://www.suarakita.org/2015/07/siaran-pers-kedaulatan-cinta/ (accessed June 7, 2019). Also in the appendix 2 of Singgih, Menafsir LGBT dengan Alkitab, 89–90.
Yonky Karman, “Menyikapi LGBT sebagai sebuah Fenomena Sosio-Teologis” (Consideration of LGBT as a socio-theological phenomenon), in Homoseksualitas dan Kekristenan (Christianity and homosexuality), eds. William Loader and Stephen R. Holmes (Jakarta: Bentara, 2018), VII–XIII.
Sandro Gatra, “PGI: Gereja Tak Akan Restui Perkawinan Sejenis” (PGI: The church will not bless same-sex marriage), Kompas.com, Nasional, July 10, 2015, https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2015/07/10/13020621/PGI.Gereja.Tak.Akan.Restui.Perkawinan.Sejenis (accessed June 10, 2019).
Emanuel Gerrit Singgih, Menafsir LGBT dengan Alkitab, Jakarta: Pusat Kajian Gender dan Seksualitas (STFT Jakarta, 2019).
Singgih, Menafsir LGBT, Ch. III.
Singgih, LGBT, 43–-49. See also David N. Glesne, Understanding Homosexuality: Perspectives for the Local Church (Minneapolis, Kirk House Publishers, 2004), 98; NIV Study Bible, eBook, Zondervan, 2011.
Singgih, LGBT, ch. II. When I was in a catechism class long ago, it was more common to refer to Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide and Sola Gratia.
Singgih, LGBT, 51–53. See also Bertil Albrektson, History and the Gods (Lund: Gleerup, 1967); Niels Peter Lemche, The Canaanites and their Land: The Tradition of the Canaanites (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999).
Singgih, LGBT, Ch. IV.
TvOneNews, “[FULL] Indonesian Lawyers Club—“LGBT Marak, Apa Sikap Kita? (16/02/2016)” (LGBT is everywhere, so what shall we do?), Youtube, 19 February 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByQG4pPaE7Y (accessed June 20, 2019).
Sri Handayani and Achmad Syalaby, “Lengkap, Tujuh Permintaan Maaf Fidiansjah Usai Disomasi LBH Jakarta” (Seven complete apologies by Fidiansyah after threatened with somation by LBH Jakarta), Republika.co.id, Nasional, 23 Maret 2016, https://www.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/umum/16/03/23/o4hhk7394-lengkap-tujuh-permintaan-maaf-fidiansjah-usai-disomasi-lbh-jakarta (accessed June 10, 2019).
Andik Wijaya, “MPH PGI, Jangan ada dusta di antara kita!” (Let there be no lies among us), PGI, June 23, 2016; Gramediapost, “Mewaspadai Gerakan LGBT di Lingkungan Gereja” (On alert for LGBT movement within our congregations), June 18, 2018, https://www.gramediapost.com/2018/06/mewaspadai-gerakan-lgbt-di-dalam-gereja/ (accessed January 22, 2020).
International Commission of Jurists, Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and International Human Rights Law, Practical Guide 4, https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4a783aed2.pdf (accessed October 1, 2020).
Singgih, LGBT, Ch. V.
Those invited were Stephen Suleeman, Andreas Kristanto, Darwita Purba and Emanuel Gerrit Singgih from the Christian side, and Kyai Hussein Muhammad, Imam Naha’I, Arif Nuh Safri, Amar Afikar and Aan Anshori from the Muslim side. Aan Anshori is the chairperson of ‘Jaringan Islam Anti Diskriminasi’ (abbr: JIAD; Eng: Islamic Anti-Discrimination Network). Aan Anshori is very active at the grassroots level, promoting reconciliation among religions and reconciliation between non-LGBT and LGBT people. He already receives death threats because of his activities.
The project is now completed by the publication of Amar Afikar (ed.), Tafsir Progresif Islam & Kristen terhadap Keragaman Gender dan Seksualitas (A progressive Muslim and Christian interpretation concerning gender and sexuality) (Surabaya, Gaya Nusantara, 2020).