Chapter 6RELIGION AND SOCIETY FAITH AND THE WORLDThe Accountability of Our Hope (1 Pt 3:15)In Chapter 1 we have seen the meaning and the significance of social theology from the theological viewpoint. However, such views have often met opposition and resistance from both religious people, including Christians and “worldly people,” such as those who demand complete separation between religion and the society or the state. Some, even among religious leaders, believe that religion should not mingle or involve itself too much in worldly and societal affairs because the main task of religion is in a very different field. Similarly, among community leaders and intellectuals there is a belief that religion is not competent in worldly affairs. The above opinion is wrong and cannot be accepted by either social sciences or theology. In the social sciences, there are a number of reasons to show that there is a close relation between religion and the society (also between religious studies and social sciences). From the theological point of view, it is said that the faithful should account for their faith and hope both internally and in the presence of those with a different ideology. Faith realization in the world needs vision about the relation of faith and the world. The vision should be accounted for in a critical dialogue with the world. Therefore, this chapter is meant to deepen our understanding of the relation between religion and the society, between faith and the world. Social Reflection on Religion and SocietyBasic Premises on Religion and the World (1) The world is the reality of all human beings with the whole universe and all peoples with their histories. Seen from the world aspect, religion is, therefore, a human and mundane reality. It is the conviction of the believers that their religions have arisen from the experience of the Supreme Being, who controls humankind and the world. (2) The reality of the society is part of the world, the most real for us and the most touching in our social life. Religion is a part or an aspect of the society (see Basic Categories of Social Analysis in Chapter 5 and Structural Approach in Social Sciences in Chapter 9), giving meaning to a human community which has a mutual commitment based on a certain faith conviction. Many major religions are rooted in different societies (nations) and cultures. On the other hand, many societies such as the Indonesian society are religiously pluralistic. (3) From the viewpoint of religious sociology, a religious phenomenon is a social phenomenon, namely a view and way of life relying on a belief in the transcendent dimension or on a special revelation. Because the methodology cannot comprehend the transcendental dimension, it cannot decide whether the belief is true or not. Religious sociologists only examine and analyze the social religious expressions and their social context and performance. More concretely, religious expressions are revealed through and in (a) a community or a congregational life, (b) a teaching, which interprets and guides the life, and (c) religious services. In addition, religion is also manifested in (d) the nature of its relation with the world and the society. (4) Faith is a theological term, related to what the believers call 'the experience of faith,’ an experience of being touched by the Supreme Being, the Creator, the Direction and the Objective of Life, the Divine or God. Faith itself is a human response to this experience and to the relation between human beings and the Supreme Being. In this relation human beings involve themselves in complete surrender. They want their life to be meaningful and directed. This understanding also shows two powers in the world: the force that directs human beings to ultimate salvation and the force that alienates them from the One that determines human lives. (5) Therefore, religion is not only an aspect of faith. The experience of faith has a social manifestation, which at the same time is its institutionalization. Such is religion. What is experienced in the community of faith is formulated in the teaching and then is realized and felt more intensively through worshipping practices and life. Religious teaching not only presents theories but also formulates the faith and directs the behavior of the believers. Worshipping practices reveal and develop the experience of the life of faith. Further, what is realized and felt in the religious services drives the believers individually and communally to implement it in their daily commitment as the concrete manifestation of the faith. Historical Relation between Religion and Society (1) As mentioned above, religion is always part of the society. However, religion understands itself as the expression of faith in God. Therefore, theology often differentiates between faith and the world as a sort of two opposing realities. This distinction underlies the relation between religion and the society, or, more concretely, the relation between the believers and profane institutions. So also the relation between theology and the social sciences. The relation involves three interrelated aspects, but in reality they can be separated. The first is the aspect of the theoretical or theological concept of the relation. The second is the aspect of the socio-historical manifestation of the concept. And the third is the personal or interpersonal aspect. This helps a believer who lives in this world to integrate the two realities in himself or herself. (2) In principle, we can differentiate six models of the relation between faith and the world or between religion and the society, taking examples from the history of Christianity, which can be systematically categorized as follows: [1] Faith rejects the world. [2] Faith tries to dominate the world. [3] The world tries to dominate faith. [4] The world rejects faith. [5] Faith and the world coexist separately. [6] Faith and the world are dialectically related. Whether and in which forms the models are concretely realized depends very much on the power possessed by faith or the world, or more concretely by religion and the profane society. (3) Though all or several of the models are, in general, found together in a sort of rivalry, all the possibilities have been manifested more or less concretely in the history of Christianity. In the era from around the writing of the New Testament to the third century, the Church lived as a small minority community separate from the Roman Empire. In this period, facing the world, the Church sometimes took a rather pragmatic or even cooperative stance. But more often it took a negative attitude by rejecting the world, which at the same time was meant as a testimony of faith. From the fourth century Christianity was backed up by the emperors and became a state religion. In the following centuries the Church was increasingly cooperative with the society, and the popes and bishops often had political powers. The Church in a certain sense was “drowned in the world”. In the Middle Ages, in the Christian world of Europe, there were two powers tending to oppose each other - the political power (the emperors), which was also religious in nature, and the religious-hierarchical Church (the Pope), which also demanded political power. The point of conflict was who ruled whom. From the Renaissance period in the fifteenth century, through the Reformation and Enlightenment periods, the world became more emancipated from the Church. It started to demand and claim its own autonomy. Therefore, the problem of the relation between faith and the autonomous world became more serious and difficult. The industrial revolution, the French revolution, secularism (the confiscation of extravagant Church treasures by the state), liberalism (among others demanding the freedom of religion), Marxism and militant atheism in the 18th and 19th centuries sharpened the separation between the Church and the profane society. The attacks lent the Church to understand itself as societas perfecta, which means that the Church assumes itself to be a separate perfect society, and, therefore, it became more separate from the public society by establishing institutions restricted for Catholics. In the twentieth century, the relation between the Church and society has been colored by a sort of coexistence. The separation between faith and worldly affairs, such as the separation of the Church and the state, often permits good cooperation. Faith has become an individual and spiritual matter to the effect that many people hiddenly or formally have left the Church because they do not see the use of such faith. The process of secularism, with symptoms like rationalism, agnosticism and practical atheism have increasingly colored the life of current Western society. The critical situation caused two opposing reactions. On one hand, there have been more attempts of restoration and even fundamentalism, which want a return to the church before the Second Vatican Council. This is considered the golden era of the Church. On the other hand, there have been attempts to find a new form for the involvement of faith in the world without rejecting the proper world autonomy. This demands a dialectical relation in accordance with the view of Gaudium et Spes (see Theological Foundations of Doing Social Theology in Chapter 1). The Importance of Social Sciences for the Believers(1) Any religion, including those that base themselves on revelation, is manifested in history and society. This can be seen in the fact that every religion has a starting point in history and in a concrete society, though major religions claim to be meant for all of the humankind. Therefore, we need to distinguish between the indisputable essence of revelation and various concrete matters, which are merely socio-historical. Such distinction demands knowledge and understanding about the historical situation and the societal structure of the time when the revelation took place. For that purpose, societal sciences are needed. (2) Every religion wants to communicate with and convince people of a certain period, who live in concrete social contexts and face various difficulties, problems, sorrows and hopes, both personal and social. The communication will be successful and perhaps accepted if the social conditions are taken into account and understood. This again requires assistance from the social sciences. (3) Every religion must manifest itself in concrete actions in the midst of the society; otherwise faith would become nonsensical and would gradually be refuted. Such a religion would be considered superstitious. The self-manifestation of the faith is in fact demanded from all religions. The demand for orthopraxis (true action) is no less important than that of orthodoxy (true teaching of faith) and can be met if religions involve themselves in the society with all its problems and share the burden of daily struggles. The commitment should be appropriate and suitable to the needs of the time. Good will alone is not sufficient because belief in religions can be lost if, for example, the struggle for upholding justice is avoided under the guise of love and charity. That was exactly what happened in Europe in the last century and, as a result, labor felt abandoned by the Church and finally alienated itself and adopted teachings and organizations which seemed to fight more sincerely and unselfishly for its interests. (4) Every religion is in the midst of the world, is included in the world, and can reveal itself only in worldly forms. However, the theoretical-conceptual distinction between “religion and the world” is reasonable and necessary to critically examine religion. Concretely, the world always is one where human beings live together, in a society. Therefore, religion is always closely related with the society as a pluralistic social system and can reveal itself only in societal forms. For example, the Church is an institution with more limited sub-institutions; the Church has a social structure; in the Church there are many functions and roles, including the clerical ones. In the Church there are a lot of symbols. To better and more precisely understand all the above, social sciences are very useful. This sociological understanding is very important to avoid a notion that religion (the Church) maintains outdated beliefs related only to a certain era. (5) On the other hand, the intimate relation between religion and the society also means that every religion unavoidably, consciously or unconsciously, has strong influence toward the society in all its forms. Historical research clearly shows this fact. The influence has come from whatever is found in religion: its teaching, evangelization, and religious or social services. The problem is how far the influence can be positive or negative, seen, for example, from the viewpoint of the objectives of development and human rights. It is not certain which influence is greater and which deserves special attention. The possibility of the negative influence of the attitude of rejecting religious freedom, has created conflicts and even wars between religions. In this case, it needs to be realized that a neutral attitude, even towards politics, is impossible. If a religion, for example, keeps silent towards oppression and injustice, in reality this silence is more dangerous than declaring responsibility for the existing reality. To take such an attitude means to act like a blind person who does not know the way and can be guided to whatever direction. Therefore, again, knowledge about the society is very important so that such an attitude can be prevented. (6) Conclusion: From the notes above, it is obvious how important it is for any religion and for its leaders to develop understanding, sensitivity, awareness and knowledge about the condition of the society. Only in that way can they act responsibly and really serve their followers. It does not mean that religion should adapt itself to whatever is found in the society. On the contrary, religion is expected to provide guidance and assistance and to play a critical-creative role in the society, which in many cases is not perfect. In order to do so, a correct understanding about the society is needed. We can conclude that between religion and the society, between theologies and social sciences, there should be a reciprocal (dialectical) relation, in the sense that they should question, criticize and, thus, develop each other. Theological Reflection on Faith and World“Theology of the World” and Secularization It is true that there is only one reality of the world and the society with human beings as its subjects. The Church as the congregation of the believers is part of that reality. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Church has clearly and explicitly taken a positive attitude towards the world. In the world there are “signs of the times” which should be read and interpreted under the light of the Gospel. Therefore, it is assumed that God speaks to us also through the world though the world is still ambivalent. The Church also recognizes the proper world autonomy, which means that the world and profane sciences also possess their own laws but should realize their limits. Based on the above, in fact there cannot be any conflict between faith and reason, between theology and the profane sciences as two opposing sides. The recognition of the autonomy of the world, which can be called “secularization,” is ultimately rooted in creation and the incarnation. God creates and saves the world because it is the world. Only if the world is truly worldly can God be recognized as true and divine. However, the world finally can reach its goals if it is saved by God himself. Therefore, secularization in this positive sense, which emphasizes the incomparable grandeur of God, should be distinguished from secularism, which is an ideology, which puts worldly affairs in an absolute position. Therefore, world autonomy is never absolute. Faith needs to permeate the world with all its aspects and at the same time respect its autonomy. Mediation between faith and the world is needed. This means that faith does not have ready-made prescriptions or plans to solve worldly and societal problems. That is the essence of “world theology” and “new political theology”, which according to J.B. Metz should be mutually complementary. Concerning the two aspects, there will be more detailed discussion about the political dimension of Church praxis in Chapter 12. Holistic Theology of the World in the Indonesian Context Perhaps we think that secularization is a Western problem and not a problem in Indonesia. We might also think that the concepts of secularization and secularism here are not the same as in Western culture. We will still reflect on the socio-cultural reality in Indonesia, including the on-going transition under external influences (see Problems of Poverty from the Socio-Cultural View in Chapter 10). In this part, we will reflect on our understanding about the world in the Indonesian context. This understanding will be an inquiry and a trial rather than a definite positive statement. We may start with the discussion about the state of Indonesia, which is often called neither a religious state nor a secular one, but a Pancasila state. The form of the Pancasila state is the result of a political consensus and decision. We can ask if behind the political decision there is a view which places the world as a reality inseparable from the Divine, the Supreme Being, God himself. In this relation, we should perhaps present a hypothesis that the view of the world in the Indonesian society is a holistic view: between the world and the Divine there is no separation. The world is a cosmos, where human beings experience the presence of the Divine or perhaps the absence of the Divine. In the language of Christian tradition we can use the word sacramentum. The world is a “sacrament” of the Divine, which means that it is the sign of the presence of the Divine. Here, the immanence of the Divine is more dominant that his transcendence. Interdisciplinary Approach in Social Theology Considering the above (see Historical Relation between Religion and Society in Chapter 6), it is obvious that theology, especially social theology, needs assistance from social sciences. What needs to be described further is how the interaction between the two should occur. A possible interdisciplinary approach by social theology can be described as follows: The one and same social-objective situation should be approached from both social sciences and theology. Theology should rely on social sciences to describe and analyze social situations as objectively as possible. To dialogue with the social sciences, theology should understand the way of thinking of the social sciences in social analysis. Behind any social analysis there are value premises, whether realized or not. The value premises should be discussed explicitly (see Grasping Poverty Through Participatory Observation in Chapter 4). Then Christian theology should attempt to understand, examine deeply and critically relate the value premises to the values developed and promoted by the life of faith, namely the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the concern for the Reign of God (see The Reign of God as the Goal of the Faithful in Chapter 7). Critical social sciences - or more precisely social sciences based on social ethics - have certain ideals about the change of social situations. So does social theology. For the Christians human concern about social situations arising from social analysis should and can be the concern of faith. Then, it can be developed into a critical study in both social and theological reflection processes. The reflection should attempt to realize social theories and theological views (social interpretation and interpretation of faith), which can influence and can be utilized in the reflection. Here, a critical dialogue between theology and the social sciences is needed. A theological-social reflection is also an attempt to interpret and direct the social commitment of the life of faith. A critical dialogue between theological and social reflection should lead to actions that will change social situations into new situations aimed by the life of faith. An interdisciplinary approach in continuous critical dialogues can be seen in diagram 3 above. Conclusion: The relation between faith and the society, between theology and social sciences can be described as a continuous reciprocal (dialectical) relation. The reality of the world and the society should be questioned and criticized by faith. On the other hand, faith should be made accountable for the concrete society with all its problems. In this attempt, both theology and social sciences must use their own methods, which should not be confused. However, by studying the same reality from different angles, we should obtain more sound knowledge and a deeper understanding about the reality. That is what is emphasized and attempted by social theology. The Solution of Conflict between Theology and the Social Sciences It can happen that the result of social analysis or investigation is not in line with, and sometimes even contrary to, certain theological statements, which further can be felt to be against faith. In such a conflict, each side should reflect on and review their own theses, argue with each other and patiently search for the truth. From the theological angle, it is obvious that what is taught by faith and understood by the mind cannot so contradict or oppose each other that the two cannot meet since both are gifts of God. In the scholastic tradition it is said that grace supposes nature (gratia supponit naturam) and that grace perfects nature (gratia perficit naturam). Therefore, they cannot subordinate nor eliminate each other. However, because our mind is limited and can be deceived by various factors, we are always on a journey to search for the truth which is only one. Human beings are subjects created, called and continuously blessed by God. In this relation, a historical experience, such as the dispute between the Church and natural sciences about the Copernican concept that the earth is not the center of the cosmos, is also useful. In the case of Galileo, for example, the Church was not careful and made an error because it was not aware of the autonomy of the world. This is also true in dealing with social sciences, such as the issues of human rights, religious freedom or democracy. The less introspective attitude has shaken many intellectuals’ trust in the Church and even in faith. Of course, it is undeniable that profane sciences sometimes trespass the boundary of their sciences, such as claiming atheism as a result of their scientific attempts. If there is a concrete conflict between theological and social science theses, the most helpful first step to solve the problem is often clear distinction between various levels and aspects of the issue under study. The various levels and aspects need to be approached with different methods. There are four aspects, which are always important in controversial discussions, namely (1) social sciences, (2) philosophy, (3) theology, and (4) praxis. Take for example, the relationship of the human being as a person and individual with the society as a collective field. This issue has often become a starting point for the dispute between different schools of theology. Recently, liberation theology, for example, has been considered by the Sacred Congregation of Faith to be too collective. On the other hand, conservative theology has been considered by many theologians to be too individualistic. In such a case, social sciences can help in explaining how far human beings are, in reality, influenced or even determined by their social environment, either favored or not favored by theology. Human philosophy can, of course, reflect on human beings by paying attention to the reality. Moral philosophy (ethics) can draw conclusions about human responsibility. It is necessary in theology to describe the image and the dignity of human beings as found in the Bible and the Christian tradition. Finally, special attention should also be paid to the praxis of human life, namely the concrete socio-historical situation where people act. Based on the above, similarities and differences should be identified in order to achieve a mutual understanding about the issue under discussion. The understanding relied on in this book can be found in The Image of the Human Being in Social Sciences in Chapter 9. Selected Materials for Private or Group Study(1)Gaudium et Spes, Article 36.1: “If by the autonomy of earthly affairs we mean that created things and societies themselves enjoy their own laws and values, which must gradually be deciphered, put to use, and regulated by men, then it is entirely right to demand that autonomy”. -What is meant by the autonomy of worldly affairs in this text? -Which autonomy of worldly affairs is considered by GS as appropriate or inappropriate? (2) Gaudium et Spes, Article 42.1: “Christ, to be sure, gave his Church no proper mission in the political, economic or social order. The purpose which he set before her is a religious one.” -What is meant by the duty of religious mission (missio religiosa) of the Church here? (3 )Gaudium et Spes, Article 43: “This split between the faith which many people profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age”. -Why is the separation (discidium) between faith and daily life considered the more severe deviation, or even called a scandal? (4) Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, Article 41.4 (see also CA 5 and 54): “This is why the church has something to say today, just as 20 years ago, and also in the future, about the nature, conditions, requirements and aims of authentic development, and also about the obstacles which stand in its way. In doing so, the church has fulfilled her mission duty to evangelize, for she offers her first contribution to the solution of the urgent problem of development when she proclaims the truth about Christ, about herself and about human beings, applying this truth to concrete situations.” -Why are the Church’s social teachings seen as part of spreading the Gospel? (5) The Pastoral Letter of the United States Bishops’ Conference on “Economic Justice for All: Catholic Social Teachings and the US Economy” (13 November 1986), Article 127: “In short, the Church is not bound to any particular economic, political and social system; it has lived with many forms of economic social organizations and will continue to do so, evaluating each according to moral and ethical principles: What is the impact of the system on people? Does it support or threaten human dignity?” -What is the relationship between the above statement and the statement of GS about the world autonomy? (6) Is the formulation of “sanctifying the world” or “to divine the world”, in your opinion, suitable? Why? (7) If social sciences and theology arrive at a conclusion contrary to each other, what will be the way out? (8) Considering the plurality of religions and ideologies, what do you think should be a criterion for opting for a certain religion or ideology? Does the reality of the society play a role in it? (9)Considering the first principle in Pancasila and the plurality of religions, what is the concept of the relation between religion and the society (world) in Indonesia? Selected Readings Barbour, Ian 1990 Religion in an Age of Science. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Baum, Gregory 1975 Religion and Alienation: A Theological Reading of Sociology. New York: Paulist Press. Berger, P.L. 1969 The Social Reality of Religion. London: Faber. Berger, P.L. and Th. Luckmann 1973 The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Jacobs, Tom 1986 ”Gereja dan Dunia” in Gereja dan Masyarakat, ed. J.B. Banawiratma, Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 13-46. Metz, J.B. 1969 Theology of the World. London: Burns & Oates. 1980 Faith in History and Society: Toward a Practical Fundamental Theology. London: Burns & Oates. Müller, J. 1973”Beberapa Gagasan Mengenai Tugas Gereja dalam Pembangunan Masyarakat.” Umat Baru, 6 no. 35-36: 470-511.
|