"A good religion is the one that could make someone become more human. How you live with each other shows your faith and understanding of your belief."


I guess you are tired reading to (some of) my weird views about religion, theology, culture, and of course: God. So I decided, "hmm, maybe I should let someone do the talk here, just to give you all some fresh air and we could learn something from them." Then I found this guy, his name is Mikhael, he is a protestant priest who was a Master of Theology student in Göttingen University (at the time I was interviewing him), and he gladly accepted my request to discuss some things regarding the topic of this season.

However, I did not want my posts to be redundant, so I was looking for a topic that I have not discussed deeply, and I found one: the education of religion. As someone coming from a "religious" country, every student has to attend a religion class. If you are attending a private-religion-based school then you have to go to that religion class. If you are attending a public school, then the school need to find a teacher to educate you about your religion. Most of the times I found this system is seriously flawed and useless, but I want to know the perspective of a religion educator themselves. So, without further ado, I let him do the talk.

Part I: How Theology Came Alive

First of all, theology is such a rare subject for people to learn. Can you tell a bit about studying theology?

Theology comes from theos and logos, which literally means knowledge about God, but from my experience we did not learn just about the bible, also about how to apply this knowledge in the society. For example in Indonesia, religion is strongly shaped by the culture, so we could not separate this. In other word, theology is how we apply religion in society, and how we could make the contribution of the religion to society.

What is the difference between biblical studies, religion study, etc?

The difference is, in theology you need to use the faith and belief to learn it. You could learn religion studies without having faith in that particular religion. In theology, there are a lot of things that we could not use our common sense to process the idea, for example in Christianity we have the term "Trinity", and you need to use faith to learn it.

Can I say, that you need to have the faith first, to study theology?

I would say that it would be much better to have the faith to study theology because if we process all of the doctrines just with our common sense, it could lead to worse things such as giving false information about those doctrines. If you just want to learn about the religion and its history, it is more about religion study rather than religion. 

For example, let's use Trinity to differentiate it since it is the most absurd doctrine in the whole of Christianity. We could only learn about it if we believe. It is the way for God to communicate with us, and Jesus Christ came as a man to live with us, and the holy spirit guiding us along the way. However, you won't be able to grasp this doctrine without believing it. It is like describing how a durian tastes to someone who has never tasted one.

Religion study could explain how the concept of Trinity came alive, but it could not say whether the doctrine is right or wrong.

How could you say that the doctrines you are learning are true?

It is a highly individual concept because everyone has their own parameter about how strongly they believe in God, but as someone who has the faith, I could feel that there is this higher power that is guiding me through my journey.

There is a famous quote about theology by Thomas Jefferson, which he said that a professorship of theology does not have a place in his institution, compared to other subjects like anatomy and biology. I would say this is due to the lack of ways to test the truth of an idea, and really hard to parametrize it. What would you say about this?

Every subject rooted in two main ones: philosophy and theology, and both of this came alive because of phenomena we could not yet explain, such as why a volcano could erupt. Then they assume that there is a power outside our capability that makes that volcano erupted. Since this is based on an abstract concept, it is really hard to measure its development.

I would say that religion is successful when it could answer the questions that emerged in society. For example, one of the biggest issues in the current era is racism. Theology would be "successful" if it could answer how we should react to racism. This is why theology is really strongly connected to society. If a theology could not live together with the people, I would say that theology is not developing.

Part II: Theology In Our Education System

In Indonesia, Religion is a compulsory subject for students from 1st until 12th grade to learn. First of all, is there anything you want to say about it?

As I have said before, religion should be dynamic, and I personally think that religion in the schools is too strict, in a sense that we only learn about the bible and memorizing them for the test, but we never discuss how does it affect the society? For example, we only learn about how Adam and Eve are the first humans, but we never learn about the implication of this event.

We now know that Creation, especially with Adam and Eve is scientifically not true, and I personally think that they are a metaphor in the bible. However, how actually the church thinks about it?

In my opinion, these kinds of issues (the conflict with the scientific community) do not need to be discussed anymore in the church. For example in my church, we never discuss the absolute truth of the creation, but more about what are the implications in the society, such as how we should act to LGBT, tolerance, etc. We do not have a "standard" in the church, compared to schools in which we do have a strict curriculum from the government.

What do you think about religion tests? Because as you said, we could actually parametrize someone's ability in religion. Some schools nowadays try not to have a religion class, but a morality class, something that is more general and more directly involved in our daily life. Could this be a solution?

"Testing" religion is extremely hard. A school without a religion class could be a solution, in my opinion. Religion should have the students to think more dynamically. The problem is each teacher has a different standard, and a dynamic curriculum does not fit in our education system.

What if we do not have any religion tests? 

I strongly agree to that, or we change the test towards an understanding of a concept, rather than memorizing all doctrines, and it should not decide someone's grade.

Religion often teaches a lot of things that have been denied by the science community, and I personally think it is ironic to teach two conflicting things to students, which one of them is an absolute fallacy. 

I agree with that. Religion should not oppose the scientific truth, and if we teach it that way, religion is just a myth, or science is wrong, which both are totally dangerous. Religion teachers need to bridge this gap, not just teaching the doctrine and make sure the students memorize it. Changing the system has to be ground-up, both ways from the students and the teachers.

Part III: Free Speech in Religion

In Indonesia, which is allegedly a religious country, expressing a different point of view than the normal ones is oftentimes considered taboo. What do you think?

It is totally sad. We say that we are a democratic country, but the first rule is about God, and if someone thinks differently, they will be pressured by society. That is why religion study is extremely important to teach how we should deal with these kinds of things in daily life. This is totally complex, for example, if a priest does not have a good vision of responding to different opinions, then the congregation will follow its leader. We are talking about something totally abstract. We are drunk with religion. We are facing a situation that emerged from years of education from the churches, mosques, etc, schools, and parents. Changing one system only would not change how we think instantaneously. 

There is a study that said someone's ability to be openminded to different kinds of religious beliefs correlate with their literacy and knowledge. Do you think this is relevant to what happening right now, especially in Indonesia?

Yes.  Every day we hear a lot of things from people around us, and if we have a strong background of knowledge, we could filter all of this informations. For example, if a priest is teaching the wrong things in the church, and the people do not have enough knowledge, they will take these information for granted, which also could be totally dangerous.

Maybe you know the fact that in Bali, some tourism places, especially temples would not allow women on her period to enter, and a lot of foreigners think that this is discriminative. Scientifically there is no difference between a woman on or not on her period, it is a normal cycle. However, religious belief already shaped the culture and the norm in this society. How should we react to these kinds of situations?

Norm is an understanding between the members of that particular society, and in this case, for them, it is not discriminative. If this wants to be "fixed", you need to change the whole norm. The hard thing is not saying if it is wrong or right, but about how to find a solution to these problems. Including couples who have sex outside marriage and being taken to the court by the society, since it is "disturbing", and on the other hand this is never written in our law, this is just the norm that is already formed in a particular society. The problem is, we are often using one religion to judge every situation. 

Will there be a situation, especially in Indonesia, that religions would be shifted, as what is happening right now in Europe?

I would not say shifted, but it is more how we practise them. For example, in Europe, Religion is not a hot topic anymore. No one discusses about someone's belief, it is totally personal. Compared to in Indonesia, that we are still judging someone's religiousness by how many times they pray. What will change is the perspectives of the people and how we react to new information.

Part IV: Conclusion

Now you have experienced studying theology in Indonesia, and lived in Germany for a couple of years. Is there anything you want to change in Indonesia, from what you have experienced here?

Firstly, literacy is really important. You can really feel the difference between these two countries. Secondly, I want to adapt a more dynamic curriculum to my teaching in the church. Last, I want to emphasize that religion is not just about going to the church, etc, but how we act and live in society.

What I have learned is, someone's faith will get stronger if they asking about their faith at first. It shows their desire to grow and learn. For example, churches in Germany are not busy anymore to build themselves physically. They feel the need that the existence of the church should positively impact the society around them, not just inside the church. I used to think that this is just an idea, but living in Germany made me realise that this could be executed.

Is there anything more you want to say to the readers?

A good religion is the one that could make someone become more human. How you live with each other shows your faith and understanding of your belief.

Thank you so much for this wonderful discussion, looking forward to hearing from you soon!

*We will continue the discussion on the next posts.*