Pages

Subscribe:

Rabu, 09 Mei 2012

Lve story of different religions

".... Because of love strong as death,persistent enthusiasm as the grave,flame is the flame of the Lord!,plenty of water can not quench love. "~ Song of Solomon 8:6-7I. IntroductionOften marriage posed essentially the statement that love is something that is subtle and penetrate the boundary. Said to be subtle (fine / subtle) because it is mysterious. No one is able to exactly understand why, how and when love comes, bloom and warm the heart. Presumably from there and then popularized plural idiom "fall in love," given the presence of love that all of a sudden, like someone who suddenly bounced and crashed. And is said to penetrate the border because it's a necessity of love. All building the separation wall that cooked up by people such as race, peoples, tribes, cultures, languages, rules, ideology and religion, in fact, could not stem the flame of love. Because the flame is the flame of the Lord! Thus the word-Song of Solomon.Once a child sucked in the vortex of human love, it is true that nothing substantive can hinder unity. And if forced to split up anyway, then it will be new stories emerge; love story set in a kind of tragedy Romeo and Juliet or Siti Nurbaya. Therefore not an overstatement that the Song of Songs in the Old Testament gives a very deep appreciation of the greatness of love: "As soon as passionate love, the rivers can not quench, and carry her away."Thus the essence of love is something sacred, sacred. Sourced from the depths of the divine love itself.That the way love is no longer sacred and profane contaminated by many influences that come from human flesh, so that the glow of love to fade or even disappear, then that's another matter. But respect is something you absolutely love.So in order to sustain and seek the support structure for the existence of love, the institution of marriage was then present and prominent. And those who want to establish a marriage in principle not be prevented. One of the most violent criminals were allowed, secured in the name of love and Human Rights, should not be prohibited if the request hold a marriage. Consequently, the same is ideally applied to a pair of human children of different religions .... Married different religions, why not?II. Mating of different religions (interference) in the BibleIf you look at the stories of marriage in the Old Testament, there is denial, or in other words, the word is NOT the phrase interfaith marriages.(See story of Deuteronomy. 7:1-11, Exodus. 34:12-16; Malachi. 2:10-15; Ezra. 2:59-62; Nehemiah. 7:61-64; 13:23-29.) As the search of my friend, the Rev. Andrew Purnawan, background rejection is the understanding that when the marriage of different religions do the people of Yahweh which are quantitatively much smaller than the number of people / other people of different faiths would be threatened fade.On the basis of the disappearance Yahwehisme concern, for reasons of securing identities, as well as the conservation of the number of adherents of the faith a little, then comes the marriage ban and the rejection of different religious / ethnic difference. Yahweh's people should only marry a fellow people of Yahweh, should not marry a goyim / are not the people of Yahweh.But the Rev. Andrew Purnawan based search, there is no doubt also that the reality of the encounter with other civilizations and diverse ethnic groups, making the marriage of different religions as an inevitable reality. Andrew noted that, even the "great men" of Israel was experienced, as shown in:

    
* Genesis. 38 :1-2 (Judah Syua married, a woman of Canaan)
    
* Genesis. 46: 10 (Simeon married the woman of Canaan)
    
* Genesis. 41:45 (Joseph married Asenath, the son of Potiphera, priest of On-Egypt)
    
* Genesis. 26:34 (with Judith Esau, the son of Beeri the Hittite)
    
* Numbers. 12:1 (Moses - the leaders of Israel - married a Cushite woman)And in certain contexts even permitted. As found in Deuteronomy 21:10-14. which is a series of passages that speak of the laws of war established for the children of Israel (see Deut. 20-21: 14). Andrew revealed that this section clearly set when Israel won the war, captured enemy among them women attractive, then she should be treated humanely, respected the rights-haknya.Lalu "so-so after that you approached her and became her husband, so that she becomes your wife. "In this context non-Israel/yang marriage with women of other faiths are allowed so people do not fall in the sin of war crimes, in this barbaric treatment of women prisoners of war.In the New Testament (NT).Andri penelusurannya Purnawan in the New Testament records the use of text 2 Cor. 6:14, which reads "Be ye not unequally yoked with those who do not believe it. Because equality is there between righteousness and iniquity? Or how can light unite with darkness? "Which is a favorite text, the most often cited to legitimize banning mating with people of different faiths.But if you consider the context, Andri explained that the verse actually not intended to prohibit or to support a Christian married to a non-Christian, but rather is intended for those who are newly converted, but her partner is still a long held belief. The goal is clear, namely that Christians / converts, actually implementing the holiness of his life and no longer fall within the life of impurity which is still a lifestyle mate. They are called to transmit the positive influence of an unbelieving spouse. Paul still prohibit people of different Christian faith divorces a spouse, unless the spouse who wants (see I Cor. 7:12-16, I Peter 3:1-7).So therefore, according to the search Andri above, can put forward a new subject of chastity.In Judaism developing halal-haram law. When the holy see of impurity, the sacred defeated by the impurity, by the unclean. From that evolved the concept of radical separation that separates a dichotomy between the sacred-they-with-they are unclean.But in the New Testament concept was overhauled.The scriptures do not need to be divorced by the impurity. Ransom people do not need to separate themselves from people who were not ransom. Because not only are unclean / impure are able to influence. The sacred was also able to influence the impurity. "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband" (1 Corinthians 7:14). And the fact is according to the Rev.. DR Bambang Ruseno an extraordinary proclamation.Gusti Jesus himself, through the action of reaching out to people affected by leprosy, the Samaritan woman, the woman who got the bleeding, and a collection of other human beings-who in the tradition of Judaism claimed to be the class of impure / unclean-in essence has unraveled an understanding of the sanctity of the original is closed / exclusive to open / inclusive. And of course the spirit of this understanding forward and re-echoed by Paul as his disciples in the pastoral letters, including to the Corinthians.If the mating was associated with different religions, but when considered impure different, theologically marriage was not always mean that the scriptures will be defiled by the unclean, so that should be banned. It can mean the opposite: the unclean and very likely influenced by the sacred through the testimony of real everyday life. So it should not be banned.III. Mating of different religions: from the history of the Church to the Dutch East IndiesScisma II or split the church in the range of 1500-1800 between Catholics versus Protestants actually preceded by a dispute in the realm of teaching. Which then spread and lead to conflict (seizure) of power politically. Disputes, in turn, inevitably raises the gap.According to Gandhi LM SH (in: "Implementation of the Marriage Law in the Christian perspective," CPC-GM, 1994, p 131) was originally forbidden Catholics to marry non-Catholics. And given the powerful Catholic church in Europe was originally a marriage subject to the laws and regulations of the church. Therefore the application of marriage law is rigid and exclusive.However, in line with the spirit of reform that swept the age, in turn timbulah protests in Europe and the turmoil of rebellion against the authority of the church. Then the post-revolutionary France, finally diundangkanlah Civil Code. Thereby obtaining a new round of marriage; organized as a secular matter, arranged in a distinguished civil law and no longer in the realm of authority of the church / religion. Consequently a person may request to be listed by the State marriage (legitimatio), but did not feel the need to ask the blessing (konfirmatio) at the church.At the time of the Dutch East Indies, originally in order to prevent mixing of identity that was allegedly able to demolish the building "caste" who made the ruling, then the VOC emphasizes separation / segregation closely. And when in 1799 the VOC transferred sovereignty to the hands of the Dutch Government, the policy of banning marriage "interference" is also still in place. That is, the Dutch prohibited marriage with indigenous / native. Indonesia Christian people also prohibited marriage with non-Christians. As a result, many couples are trying to get around to doing "cohabiting" or hidden marriage.But given the dynamics of encounters between people who are so abstruse it should be inhibited, the development along with publication of a new awareness of the existence of the love-it-it should not be hindered in 1848 interfaith marriage ban was lifted. Dutch government then issued a rule and the underlying substantive law marriages "religious differences" are referred to as: Regeling op de Gemengde Huwelijk abbreviated GHR, Staatsblaad.1989 no 158.In the GHR Article 7 paragraph 2 contained a clause which reads:"... The difference of religion, or national origin by no means an obstacle to marriage."IV. Marriage law No. 1/1974 and its implications for inter-religious marriagesWhen Indonesia Merdeka in 1945, appears to independently regulate the spirit of the foundation for life on earth with Indonesia, which is based on Pancasila. Later in the process and dibahaslah filed a bill (the bill) that marriage is based on Pancasila, the National nature, applies to all citizens and ensure legal certainty.Original article 2, paragraph 1 of Marriage bill reads:"The marriage is valid if performed in the presence of registrar staffmarriage, recorded in the marriage registrar by the employee, and carried out according to the provisions of this Act or the provisions of the law of marriage and the parties to the marriage, to the extent not in conflict with this Act "(Albert Hasibuan, Some Basic Thoughts About Resolution "mixed marriages, in the Implementation of the Marriage Law in the Christian perspective, Jakarta: BPK-GM, 1994, hlm77-79)But according to Albert Hasibuan, the bill will then have a reaction and outcry from groups that want the force of religious law in the regulation of marriage. Strong reactions not only about the validity of marriage, but also about the principle of monogamy, divorce, guardianship, including the article (11) subsection (2) the bill contains a provision that allows the mating of different religions.So when the Marriage Act was passed, there was provision that is compromised. Albert reveals that the Marriage Law No. 1/1974 says religious law imposed a compromise due to positive law, the laws of the State: at the end of Article 2, paragraph 1 of Law No. 1/1974 reads:"Marriage is lawful, if done according to the laws of each religion and belief"So that was originally in the draft bill, the marriage is legitimate if it is done in the presence of the State, now the marriage is legitimate when conducted according to the laws of each religion and belief. And about the mating of different religions in the Bill of article 11 paragraph 2 be eliminated (in-drop). However, confusion still arises in the interpretation of the implementation. Mainly concerned with interfaith marriages.In the article 57 of Law No.1/1974 was organized about intermarriage, and the question is:"... A marriage between two people in Indonesia are subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and citizenship Indonesia one of the parties."While for marriage "mix" between two people of different faiths are not regulated at all. Then clearly there is a legal vacuum. Thus it can be understood if the reason "lack of rules" are often used as justification / basis of justification of the Civil Registry, religious institutions, even the Church, in order to reject those who want to establish a marriage of different religions.However, if observed in the transitional provisions of Article 66 of Law No.1/1974, there is a statement which reads:"For marriage and all things related to marriage based on this Act, then the enactment of this Act, the provisions set forth in the Book of the Civil Code Act (Burgerlijk Wetboek), Indonesia Christian Marriage Ordinance (Ordinance Huwelijk Christen Indonesiers 74 S. 1933), Mixed Marriage Regulation (Regeling Op De Gemengde Huwelijken No.158 S.1898), other rules and regulations governing marriage has been arranged so far in this Act, declared null and void. "Therefore, according to Albert Hasibuan, by basing itself on the interpretation of "a-contratio" or commentary that compares the differences and see the reverse side, then the phrase "so far has been set", can actually mean that the Mixed Marriage Regulation (Regeling Op De Gemengde Huwelijken S. No. 1898 158, which is abbreviated GHR) remains valid, and can be used, given that the rules on inter-religious marriages do not exist and has not been regulated in the Act no1/1974.V. Ecclesiological consequencesArticle 66 in the issuance of certificates in turn underlie the MPL-PGI COURT DECREE NUMBER 01/MPL-PGI/1989 Regarding Understanding of Churches in Indonesia about the legality of Marriage and Marital Citizens For Different Religions. Provisions outlined in the trial Communion of Churches in Indonesia (PGI) in Wisma Kinasih, Caringin, Bogor on 29 April 1989, also set ecclesiological consequences; that the church can bless the marriage of different religions.Then what about the Christian Greja Wetan Jawi?As a basic gait and movement of the church steps, the Tata and Pranata GKJW tersebutlah published in 1996 General Assembly. Within the institution of marriage is in no way associated with the struggle accommodated interfaith marriage. In Chapter IV.Hal Specifically, Article 16, even the faint echo paradigm of exclusivism, when it disclosed that:"If there is a husband and wife are one of them to Christianity, marriage can not be ratified by ecclesiastical"Thus the marriage is considered valid by ecclesiastical are those who are both Christian. If only one who adheres to Christianity it is not legitimate. While the true biblical clearly contrary to the spirit of understanding 1 Corinthians 7:14 a patterned inclusive.In fact, GKJW are facing struggles of interfaith marriages. Even strategically GKJW had corresponded directly with the Director General of the Ministry of Religious Affairs BIMAS Christian, Questioning the marriage of different religions, which are then repaid by September 29, 1976.In the reply letter, expressed approval of the RI BIMAS Christian Religious Affairs GKJW conclusions and explanations related to article 66 of Law No.1/1974, namely:a. Things that are regulated in Law No. 1/1974, the existing regulations do not apply, because the regulations are the rules now.b. On matters that are not already in UU1/1974, then the existing rules can be used to solve these problems, thereby article (75) of HOCI is still valid.Only, when it is used as the basis for legal arguments GKJW interfaith marriage but not the GHR HOCI / Huwelijk Ordonatie Indonesier Christen, chapter 75, which also regulates the provision of inter-religious marriages.Thus on the one hand, textually, based on the Tata-Pranata 1996, GKJW look adopts exclusivism. Closed to the possibility of interfaith marriages. Thanks to the marriage is understood only exclusively dedicated to fellow ransom. Thus for a husband and wife that one of them to Christianity, marriage can not be passed by the church.Though in principle, the church is not Kristus.Gereja is not a source of blessing, but is merely a means to embody the blessing that comes from God alone.On the other hand, are factual, GKJW in actual praxis seems not simply turn a blind eye to the dynamics of the context that requires attention and real care. The proof, as there are people who struggle related to the existence of different religions want to marry, GKJW not remain silent. There is an effort to serve and embrace. Service and commitment shown by the presence of at least a "letter of advocacy / advocacy 'submissions to the BIMAS PHMA Christian Religious Affairs of Indonesia in 1976 that give advice and seek approval for the use of HOCI legal basis of article 75, to support the implementation of interfaith marriages in a constitutional manner.So, keeping in mind that God is good for everyone and full of grace to which maketh (Ps. 145:9), and taking into account the theme of Development Activity Program (PKP) GKJW which has always been oriented in an effort to be a blessing to others and the world, GKJW need to emphasize the stance that, in principle, Kristen Jawi Greja Wetan recognize and appreciate the marriage of different religions.When this principle is approved, it means GKJW dare assert that religion as a result of human construction should not be used to negate / exclude love as something ultimate and sacred.Consequently, the order / institution that is written must also be revised to align with the principles held. The next consequence, if there are couples who want to ask the blessing of interfaith marriage, the Assembly of the Church are not allowed to refuse and should continue to serve him. Included also accompanied the process to the Civil Registry, or to the District Court, in order to get a jurisprudence that can be used as a basis for civil registration.VI. Some caveats and technical difficulties.However it does not mean marriage is not confronted with obstacles of different religions. I noted some caveats that emerged, one that was brought up by my friend Andrew Purnawan:"Inequality ethical moral standard in a family could have happened. And quite possibly be the beginning of a major disaster in family life, especially if the family is dealing with domestic problems. For example: one forbids divorce, while others may say. Embrace the principle that a monogamous, others say the origins of polygamy may be unfair, and many other issues, including concerns regarding the food halal / haram, there is not a table in the house of worship, etc.. There is again a question of principle. Who is the head of household? Certainly no longer the Christ. The family impact may not be able to play a role in answering the apostolic duty to be salt and shine for Christ. If forced to continue running its own? Can! But the family is healthy is that? "The argument above is correct. It's very possible. But first, the danger of division and inability to tolerate differences / inequalities of moral standards, his life is not just merely be a risk that must be faced by those who hold different religious marriage only, but a risk and danger to be anticipated in any wise by all the partners who built the household, any religion. Management and policy is necessary for those who are diving interfaith marriages, but by no means be claimed once only, that as if they are married religious differences are much more prone to experiencing catastrophic when compared with those who are married co-religionists.Is a knife that has a risk factor could potentially injure your hands and be used as a tool of murder should be banned its existence? Not so is not it?!. Although the risk, but it does not mean that the existence of the knife should be altogether banned.Then so is the marriage of different religions. The existence of risk in a marriage two people of different religions, can not be taken for granted at the conclusion to negate / forbid interfaith marriage.That then it is necessary to provide Touchstone describing in detail the risk factors in a marriage of different religions, it is the duty of the Church in order to explain and assist in the process of special religious instruction.The second, related assumption triumphalistis, who claimed that families of different religions will not be able to answer the apostolic duty to be salt and light. I think the assumption is made exclusively through the lens, with an emphasis that only the color of the one who can bring in the mission. Different colors are not.So instead, is there any guarantee that the color / Christian family can completely bring in salt and light, and imposed a missionary Dei completely and totally?If a true salt and light associated with the daily behavior, manifested through speech, thought and action that surrounded you, then it would not be possible for families of different religions to bring harmony and peace through the story of their daily lives?I think the possibility is always open. And when put something good, beautiful, delicious to hear, which is based on love and truth are present and appear as the fruit of life of families of different religions, it is not true it is also an attempt enforcement of the will of God?In John 14:15 Jesus said Gusti, "If ye love me, keep my commandments." And in John 15:17 Jesus Gusti said that: "These commandments unto you: Love one another."So when families of different religions impose real love, would not they be called a family who keep the commandments of God and let the values ​​of Christ as the head of their household and menutun?Which means indirectly also be called as a family headed by Christ himself is not it?!Technical difficultiesSome questions related to technical difficulties.

    
* How to form N1-N5 are made assuming the same religion?
    
* How did the ID cards required by the registrar must co-religionists?Given the marriage of different religions is a special case, then the N1-N5 form to be filled according to the procedure, and include the ID card as well as it is. Religion does not need to be engineered to be equated. When records are not willing to accept the filing of civil marriage and religious differences have been refused even though the arguments proffered by basing on the transitional provisions of Law No. 1/1974 article 66, which allows entry into force of HGR / HOCI, then it means Greja must have a special wisdom.Basis for specific policy is Law No. 1/74 of article 2, paragraph 1, which states that "lawful marriage of each religion."So then, congregation council has the authority to certify the marriage of different religions and create a Certificate of Approval Marriage Different Religion / SuTaPKaBA (that meet the rule "in accordance with the laws of each religion"). After that SuTaPKaBA given to the civil registry to be listed. However if the parties still refuse Civil, and not willing to accept, then the basis of the refusal letter, requested the District Court jurisprudence that issued the warrant listing.

    
* What if there is going to hold inter-religious marriage, but are not willing to be blessed in the church?Then, as told by Rev.. Sumardiyono-mechanism can be set through a special trial of the Church Assembly sole agenda is to approve the marriage of different religions. In it there is no blessing. Only prayer.

    
* What if there are willing to be blessed in church, but still ask for recognition and appreciation of differences in beliefs espoused?Why not. That is, the church can bring religious leaders in accordance with the religion professed by one of the bride. As enacted in GKJ Salatiga, the blessing of marriage can be performed by a priest and kiai, simultaneously at the same time, using a special liturgy.Behind all of this, everything technical is essentially just follow the things that are of principle. So when the church decided in principle to transform itself from a paradigm of faith exclusive / closed to the paradigm of faith that is inclusive / open, then that can be arranged with the technical base themselves on matters of principle. Finally, inter-religious marriage in a particular context, if it should happen ... why not. ***Reference material:- Marriage Law 1 of 1974.- Rev. Andri Purnawan, Different Religions Marriages, Could it be?, In a post on www.gkjwcaruban.org/ ....- Weinata Sairin, Pattiasina JM, ed., Implementation of the Marriage Law in Christian Perspective, set the study of marriage in the environment: the Communion of Churches in Indonesia, BPK-GM, 1994.-Procedures and Kristen Jawi Greja Pranata Wetan, General Assembly GKJW, 1996

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar