".... 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
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar