75 tahun GPM: taputar atau kaluar? Catatan 2

Dalam catatan pertama, saya mencoba menyoroti pentingnya membangun teologi politik sebagai salah satu pilar menggerakkan GPM mengembangkan perspektif eklesiologinya. Salah satu implikasi teologis dari kesadaran politik tersebut adalah dekonstruksi fondasi-fondasi pemikiran teologi yang diwacanakan melalui penyelenggaraan pendidikan teologi.

Dalam lintasan sejarah kekristenan di Maluku, pendidikan teologi sudah dimulai sejak berkaryanya badan-badan misi Barat yang datang bersamaan dengan ekspansi kolonialisasi bangsa-bangsa Eropa. Tentu saja bahwa “pendidikan teologi” yang berlangsung pada masa-masa itu masih sangat kuat dideterminasi oleh paradigma teologi Kristen yang berkembang di Barat, dan sangat tergantung pada agen-agen Injil yang bekerja sebagai misionaris di wilayah-wilayah koloni. Dari segi metode pengajaran, teologi yang dikultivasi ke dalam benak komunitas lokal di Maluku zaman itu masih berpola indoktrinasi dengan menempatkan komunitas lokal sebagai objek kafir yang perlu dimurnikan melalui proses kristenisasi. Kendati kristenisasi yang dipahami sebenarnya lebih merupakan difusi nilai-nilai dan praktik-praktik kebudayaan Barat. Maka terbentuklah suatu komunitas beridentitas ganda: orang-orang Kristen yang tetap bermental tradisional-adatis.

Dalam konstruksi mental semacam itulah (yang nyaris tidak mengalami perubahan hingga menjelang berdirinya Indonesia sebagai entitas politik mandiri tahun 1945), jemaat-jemaat Kristen dibina dan diasuh oleh guru-guru jemaat, penginjil, dan pendeta. Mereka “diproduksi” oleh lembaga-lembaga pendidikan teologi yang masih bersifat kedinasan: diselenggarakan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan tenaga pendeta dan pengajar gerejawi. Peran dan fungsi itu masih dipertahankan hingga sekarang oleh fakultas teologi UKIM, meskipun dalam beberapa hal sudah dilakukan modifikasi kurikulum mengikuti perkembangan dalam sistem pendidikan teologi maupun sistem pendidikan tinggi di Indonesia. Kondisi tersebut tidak terhindari karena fakultas teologi UKIM merupakan lembaga pendidikan tinggi milik GPM, yang dalam penyelenggaraannya harus tetap mengikuti format visi dan misi GPM di bawah naungan Yayasan Perguruan Tinggi (Yaperti) GPM.

Dalam kalangan internal fakultas teologi UKIM pun telah terjadi pergeseran paradigma dalam pembelajaran teologi sebagai ilmu. Untuk waktu yang cukup lama paradigma ilmu teologi di fakultas teologi UKIM sangat kuat dipengaruhi oleh pendekatan biblisentrisme yang termanifestasi melalui kajian-kajian alkitabiah (biblika) historis-kritis. Hal itu dapat dilihat dari bangunan kurikulum dan ketersediaan tenaga dosen di bidang biblika yang berlimpah.

Namun, pada dasawarsa terakhir, telah terjadi pergeseran paradigma ilmu teologi dengan lebih memberi aksentuasi pada “teologi kontekstual”. Dengan aksentuasi ini, seluruh kajian ilmu teologi diposisikan secara kritis pada tuntutan untuk memahami dinamika konteks dan implikasi dari berbagai ajaran-ajaran teologi terhadap pertumbuhan suatu gereja dalam konteks yang berbeda. Melalui pendekatan ini pola-pola indoktrinasi yang jumud secara gradual mulai ditinggalkan. Kesadaran akan dimensi-dimensi kultural yang sebenarnya memberi inspirasi bagi suatu living theology mulai tumbuh. Demikian pula dengan konteks agama-agama yang pada hakikatnya merupakan wajah komunitas Maluku dan Indonesia pun mulai dilirik dan dicermati sebagai dimensi penting dalam pesona teologi kontekstual.

Teologi hendak ditempatkan sebagai suatu diskursus keilmuan yang mesti berinteraksi secara interdisipliner dengan kajian-kajian kemasyarakatan (sosial, politik, budaya, hukum, dsb). Sebagai yang demikian, dosen dan mahasiswa teologi mau tidak mau harus membedah konteks dengan pisau analisis sosial serta instrumen-instrumen penelitian sosial, sehingga realitas itu tidak terpahami secara mentah tetapi dikaji dengan disiplin keilmuan yang matang. Apa yang dihasilkan oleh teologi itu sendiri bukanlah suatu rumusan-rumusan mengambang melainkan suatu terobosan-terobosan teoretik yang dibangun melalui alur induktif.

Namun, teologi ternyata tidak cukup dipahami dalam lingkup diskursus keilmuan. Pembelajar teologi selama ini dilihat pula sebagai pengemban nilai-nilai moralitas publik. Fungsi itu melekat karena teologi tidak hanya terekspresi sebagai ilmu tetapi juga internalisasi nilai-nilai transendental yang diyakini berasal dari Tuhan sebagai sumber kebaikan tertinggi. Bobot fungsi itu makin bertambah ketika si pembelajar teologi diharapkan mampu menjaga karakter-karakter ideal tersebut sebagai “pendeta” atau “pemimpin jemaat”. Pemahaman semacam ini menggiring pada aktivitas berteologi (doing theology), bukan sekadar belajar teologi secara formal.

Menempatkan teologi sebagai ilmu dan praksis, maka kita akan menyadari bahwa teologi mesti menjalankan fungsinya sebagai kekuatan transformatif dalam kehidupan sosial. Fungsi transformasi ini harus dilakukan secara cermat dan hati-hati agar teologi tidak tergelincir hanya menjadi problem-solver sendirian, tetapi dilakukan karena diperkuat oleh jejaring diskursus keilmuan sehingga memampukan pembelajar teologi membaca dan menafsir realitas sosial secara tepat sambil menghadapkannya secara kreatif dengan refleksi nilai-nilai transendental yang melekat pada keyakinan-keyakinan religiusnya.

Di lain pihak, teologi sebagai praksis tidak dapat dilepaskan dari determinasi institusional gerejawi sebagai tempat dipeliharanya tradisi berteologi. Gereja hidup dalam dunia dan masyarakat yang terus berubah. Gereja tidak bisa mengisolasi diri dari efek-efek perubahan sosial yang terjadi. Tetapi sikap gereja terhadap perubahan itulah yang membuatnya berbeda dengan sikap organisasi-organisasi sosial lainnya. Perubahan disikapi dalam perspektif penghayatan iman yang diawetkan dalam berbagai bentuk tradisi gerejawi. Tradisi iman inilah yang menjadi fondasi kehidupan bergereja, bahkan roh gereja, dalam menyiasati perubahan sosial.

“Praxis” di sini berkonotasi teologis dan sosiologis. Ajaran-ajaran kebenaran dalam gereja (ortodoksi) hanya dapat diimplementasikan secara komunal dalam tubuh institusi gerejawi, yang sekaligus mensyaratkan tersusunnya hierarkhi organisasi dengan pembagian otoritas yang tegas. Ortodoksi tidak akan mampu bertahan tanpa kekuatan komunal yang menjalankan tindakan-tindakan kebenaran (ortopraksis). Kendati disadari bahwa ortodoksi kerap menimbulkan ketegangan interpretatif sehingga melahirkan tindakan-tindakan yang tak sejalan.

Dengan konstatasi tersebut, saya mencermati bahwa pendidikan teologi pada hakikatnya adalah upaya membangun jembatan-jembatan konseptual yang secara imajinatif menghubungkan matra-matra “transendental” (Ultimate Being) dan “kultural”. Matra transendental sebagian dapat ditemukan dalam dialog teologis dan historis dengan pengungkapan-pengungkapan iman dalam konteks ruang dan waktu yang berbeda (masa lampau). Di sinilah kita bicara tentang pewarisan. Sedangkan matra kultural dapat menjadi media berteologi yang kaya dengan berbagai ekspresinya (bahasa, simbol, ritual, dll) untuk menemukan sebagian lain yang transendental itu dalam konteks kekinian (kontemporer). Pada lingkup ini kita bicara tentang pembaruan.

Jadi, teologi pada akhirnya memang menjadi suatu muara perjumpaan, yang sekaligus menimbulkan putaran arus, antara pewarisan dan pembaruan. Perjumpaan ini bisa menjadi perjumpaan yang kreatif yang melahirkan pemikiran dan tindakan berteologi yang baru dan relevan. Tetapi juga bisa menjadi perjumpaan yang tidak seimbang jika yang satu mendominasi yang lain (antara ilmu dan praksis). Di sini yang muncul adalah kejumudan (rigidity), yang menghalangi seluruh proses kreatif karena mempertahankan tradisi.

Lantas, percakapan tentang spiritualitas pun menjadi menarik dan menantang. Spiritualitas “pendeta” semacam apakah yang mampu menampung pusaran arus pewarisan dan pembaruan dalam konteks GPM? Adakah “spiritualitas” itu hanya terpasung pada romantisme masa lalu yang lebih banyak terbangun dari kecenderungan narsistik (pengagungan diri)? Ataukah “spiritualitas” itu sebentuk keberanian untuk melepaskan seluruh atribut kehormatan tanpa takut mengambil pilihan berisiko untuk menjadi “pelayan” dalam arti denotatifnya? Ini memang sulit karena “pelayan” atau “hamba” dalam gereja telah melekat dengan “Tuhan” (pendeta adalah hamba Tuhan), yang pada gilirannya malah mengaburkan taraf kehambaannya, karena orang yang dekat dengan “Tuhan” dipastikan kedudukannya lebih tinggi dibandingkan kaum jemaat-jelata, yang – konon – hidupnya [dianggap] jauh dari Tuhan. Apalagi kalau keberjarakan dengan sang Tuhan diukur dari “siapa yang belajar [ilmu] teologi” dan “siapa yang menjadi objek dari [aktor] teologi”. Suatu anggapan yang melahirkan dikotomi “pendeta” dan “kaum awam”.

Nah, kalau sudah begitu, spiritualitas itu seharusnya menjadi milik “pendeta” ataukah milik “jemaat”, atau keduanya? Pendeta meneladani jemaat atau jemaat meneladani pendeta? Tentu ini bukan catatan akhir, melainkan awal dari proses menorehkan narasi dan tindakan berteologi kita, terutama menapaki usia 75 tahun GPM. Seperti yang sering dikatakan: dari tanah lapang kecil ke tanah lapang besar; tanah lapang kecil adalah diskursus ilmu teologi yang mendorong tumbuhnya teologi kehidupan di tanah lapang besar. Lagi-lagi, itu hanya terjadi jika GPM menjadikan fakultas teologinya sebagai pusat kajian yang link and match dengan geliat konteks jemaat-jemaatnya mulai dari ujung utara hingga barat daya.

Read more ...

75 Tahun GPM: Taputar atau Kaluar? Catatan 1

Tanggal 6 September kemarin GPM genap mencapai usia 75 tahun. Menjadi gereja mandiri sejak tahun 1935. Perjalanan panjang selama 75 tahun sudah pasti menghadapkan GPM dengan berbagai dinamika tantangan dan pergumulan untuk memaknai kehadirannya sebagai gereja di Maluku. Bung Jacky dalam tulisannya bertajuk “Sidang Sinode GPM Dan Doa Basudara Salam: Dimensi Dialektis Dalam Relasi Islam-Kristen di Maluku” memberi inspirasi untuk merefleksikan kembali pemaknaan GPM di tengah tantangan konteksnya di Maluku dan di Indonesia. Kendati ditulis pada saat menjelang persidangan sinode ke-35 tahun 2005 yang lalu tetapi banyak ide bernas yang masih kuat relevansinya untuk mencermati secara kritis arah penatalayanan GPM sampai menjelang persidangan sinode GPM ke-36 tahun 2010 ini.

Refleksi 75 tahun GPM tahun 2010 ini dipayungi oleh tema: “Menjadi Gereja Yang Tahan Uji Di Tengah Pusaran Zaman”. Tema ini secara jelas hendak menempatkan GPM sebagai gereja yang berproses dalam dinamika konteks sosialnya di Maluku dan di Indonesia. Terkandung suatu kesadaran bahwa GPM terus-menerus bergerak dalam semangat mengejar hakikat dirinya secara ideal sebagai gereja (process of becoming). Kesadaran diri atau identitasnya ditempa dalam suatu proses, dan karena itu GPM tidak bisa berhenti belajar untuk menjadi gereja. Tapi apa artinya menjadi gereja? Pertanyaan itu bisa ditinjau dari berbagai perspektif. Perspektif yang utama adalah GPM merupakan suatu institusi keagamaan yang memiliki visi dan misi yang spesifik, yang tidak bisa diidentikkan begitu saja dengan institusi-institusi lainnya. Kekhasan GPM sebagai institusi keagamaan, salah satunya, adalah membentuk karakter spiritualitas orang-orang Kristen yang menjadi anggotanya. Karakter spiritualitas ini mesti dipahami dalam horison yang luas, bukan sekadar persoalan “berdoa dan beribadah” saja.

Spiritualitas di sini hendak dibingkai dalam kesadaran kontekstual bahwa warga GPM sedang berproses untuk menjadi orang-orang Kristen yang memilik kualitas iman dan wawasan berteologi yang berimplikasi pada semua bidang kehidupan yang digeluti oleh warga GPM, bahkan oleh segenap lapisan masyarakat. Dalam bingkai itulah “menjadi gereja” mengarah pada penguatan warga GPM untuk doing theology dalam konteks kehidupannya masing-masing. Doing theology itu mengindikasikan kapasitas warga GPM untuk memberi makna setiap aliran pengalamannya sebagai komunitas kepulauan dengan beraneka ragam tantangannya.

Proses doing theology itu pun berlangsung dalam dinamika kesejarahan yang fluktuatif. Rentang waktu 75 tahun itu menggambarkan bahwa GPM tak kunjung henti didera berbagai persoalan internal dan eksternal. Karena itu pemaknaan “tahan uji” menjadi penting agar GPM menempatkan dirinya sebagai entitas yang tidak imun terhadap berbagai unsur-unsur eksternal di sekitar kehidupannya. Perspektif “tahan uji” ini membuka celah bagi upaya berteologi untuk memperkuat antibodi GPM. Tanpa tantangan, GPM hanya menjadi gereja yang lembek, mawali, dan cengeng. Tiga karakter yang disebut terakhir ini akan memperbesar kanker ketergantungan, terutama pada pihak pemerintah atau negara. Justru dalam gempuran persoalan postur menggereja dan perspektif teologi GPM diperkokoh, sehingga berani berjarak dengan entitas lain dalam menentukan sikapnya sebagai gereja. Namun, lagi-lagi semuanya akan mengerucut pada satu pertanyaan: apakah memang GPM sudah belajar memaknai pergumulannya untuk melahirkan postur menggereja yang kontekstual? Ataukah kembali terperangkap dalam pusaran persoalan tanpa suatu jalan keluar? Taputar atau kaluar?

Kalau bung Jacky Manuputty mengelaborasi kegelisahan menjadi gereja pada perspektif hubungan agama-agama berbasis kearifan lokal, maka saya mencoba meneropongnya melalui lensa dialektika gereja dan negara. Bisa jadi sebagian orang menganggapnya sebagai masalah klasik (dan tidak perlu diwacanakan). Tetapi saya justru melihat bahwa dialektika wacana dan praksis gereja dan negara dalam konteks Maluku dan Indonesia, terus menjadi roh yang mendasari merebaknya berbagai persoalan menggereja di Maluku.

Saya menilai selama ini GPM tidak serius membangun teologi politiknya. Ranah politik kerap ditabukan dan selalu menjadi “kambing hitam” yang seolah-olah terus menggiring gereja masuk dalam percaturan kekuasaan internal dan eksternal. Sikap yang terbangun kemudian antipati dan ambigu, sehingga membuka ruang luas bagi interpretasi personal mengenai relasi gereja dan negara. Ambiguitas ini sangat memengaruhi paradigma kepemimpinan GPM. Maka isu-isu yang muncul pada setiap persidangan gerejawi, mulai dari aras jemaat sampai sinodal, adalah bagaimana sikap gereja terhadap negara. Wacana ini terus memanas tapi tak pernah sampai pada simpul gagasan yang tuntas, apalagi implementasi praksis secara institusional.

Kenapa harus teologi politik? Salah satu masalah mendasar yang membuat GPM terus taputar dalam pusaran situasi problematik adalah persoalan politik. Jatuh-bangun GPM sebagai gereja di Maluku adalah gempuran bertubi-tubi masalah-masalah politik sejak 1935 sampai sekarang. Sesuatu yang tidak terhindari bahwa pelabelan GPM dengan RMS terus-menerus menjadi persoalan yang menguras energi bergereja di Maluku saat ini. Lihat saja bagaimana sampai tahun ini (2010) setiap tanggal 25 april, jelas terpampang pengerahan tentara dan polisi di berbagai wilayah (jemaat-jemaat) dengan alasan mengantisipasi penaikan bendera RMS. Untuk kasus ini, GPM belum memberikan pernyataan tegas mengenai advokasi berdasarkan sikap politisnya terhadap persoalan itu sebagai sebentuk posisi tawar dengan kekuatan negara (militer dan polisi). Masih banyak persoalan-persoalan lain seperti posisi jemaat-jemaat berhadapan dengan monster-monster kapitalisme yang makin kuat menancapkan kukunya di pulau-pulau Maluku. Bahkan beberapa kasus jelas menggilas kehidupan masyarakat lokal di Maluku.

Sebagai gereja, GPM tentu tidak bisa mengharapkan banyak bahwa semua persoalan tersebut bisa diselesaikan oleh pemimpin gereja yang piawai memainkan retorika politik atau memiliki kedekatan dengan unsur-unsur pemerintah. Jika paradigma menggereja hanya terpaku pada pencarian figur pemimpin semacam itu maka sebenarnya proses menggereja GPM sedang mengarah pada kultus individu dan mengabaikan kekuatan kolektif yang mestinya terbangun sebagai paradigma gereja, bukan paradigma personal sang pemimpin. Dengan mengatakan hal itu, maka orientasi persidangan gerejawi pada semua aras tidak terkuras habis hanya pada perbincangan basa-basi mengenai siapa yang layak menjadi ketua sinode. Tetapi lebih terarah pada penguatan visi menggereja yang meluas dan menyentuh ranah politik melalui penelusuran sistematis yang bermuara pada terbangunnya wawasan dan sikap politik gereja. Dengan kata lain, seluruh energi menggereja jelas terarah pada upaya mengonstruksi teologi politik yang bernas. Tak peduli siapa yang jadi pemimpin di gereja ini (kendati itu juga penting, tapi bukan yang nomor satu), tetapi teologi politik itu menjadi roh dan semangat untuk menjadi gereja yang berpihak. Karena GPM tidak bisa bersikap netral. Sekarang tergantung ke mana arah keberpihakannya: penguatan civil society atau ketergantungan pada pemerintah.

Ini hanyalah catatan awal menjelang persidangan sinode GPM ke-36 bulan Oktober nanti.

Read more ...

Reformed-Catholic Dialogue: Indonesia's Experience

Introduction

Indonesia churches mainly both Protestant and Catholic are fruits of evangelization brought by European missions since sixteenth century. The evangelization ran along with trading companies of some European kingdoms which attempted to expand their economic domain reaching for Asia and Africa. Economic competition between European companies or kingdoms in Europe has most affected foreign economic policies in their colonies abroad. Including this is Christian evangelization’s approaches and activities conducted by European Christian mission in colony areas.

Economic competitions and conflict between kingdoms in Europe then left as inheritance within Protestant (Reformed) and Catholic churches in Indonesia.[1] However, the struggle for national independence during 1940s generally was most focus of Indonesian people, including religious organizations. Christians in Indonesia at those periods did not give main attention on theological disputes between Reformed and Catholic since they involved along with all people for national independence. During independence struggles of Indonesia, all religious organizations united their vision and movement to reach the independence of Indonesia definitively. The process and discourse on national independence and also nation-building actually became context of the birth of ecumenical movement of Indonesia churches, which had common concerned to unite as one new nation-state namely Indonesia.

Reformed-Catholic in Indonesia: An Overview

At national level, ecumenical relationship between Reformed and Catholic in general has no serious theological debates even though it must be realized that still it is. Konferensi Waligereja Indonesia (KWI) as representative of Catholic Church in Indonesia and Persekutuan Gereja-gereja di Indonesia (PGI) as representative of Protestant church in Indonesia often get involved and working together for doing some ecumenical events.[2] In some crucial cases they both communicate each other to release common Christian appeal for government or others. Every Christmas Eve, KWI and PGI releases a common pastoral letter for all Christian in Indonesia. It is one of ecumenical characteristic between Protestant (Reformed) and Catholic in Indonesia.

Nevertheless, Reformed-Catholic disputes still happened in some areas in Indonesia, especially in eastern part of Indonesia. These areas are former Christian mission basis during colonial periods. Some disguised conflicts between Reformed-Catholic, for instance, can be felt in Province of Nusa Tenggara Timur: Kupang and Sumba dominated by Reformed churches such as GMIT and GKS, on one side, and Flores dominated by Catholic Church, on the other side). In Province of Maluku, such dispute can be felt and often happened as open confrontation between two different Christian communities in District of South-East Maluku, especially in South Tanimbar and Kei islands (GPM and Catholic Church).

But most conflict between Reformed-Catholic communities in those areas (especially in South-East Maluku) as far I know was triggered by unclear borderline consensus between two or more villages and also a quarrel between two or more clans (extended families) deal with their cultural law and natural resources.[3] It could not be said generally, I think, as Reformed-Catholic conflict but it is social conflict without religious tendency. Nevertheless, religious dimension here remain plays important role to extend the conflict worse.

Ecumenical relationship between Reformed-Catholic in Indonesia, I think, does not very affected by theological dispute as happened in the past of Europe continent between Reformed and Contra-Reformation. But it is inevitably that there are theological debates toward crucial issues around church doctrine and theology, which affects attitude and perspective of each adherent of Reformed and Catholic. But as far I know those differences always being discourse openly each other.

Direction and Paradigm of Reformed-Catholic Dialogue in Indonesia

Reformed-Catholic dialogue in Indonesia actually has reached level of open conversation or dialogue theologically and ecclesiologically. In this open theological conversation or dialogue both Reformed and Catholic put their orientation mainly on ecumenical concern widely that focus on the struggle of Indonesian people for social justice, against poverty, people’s economic empowerment against capitalism, against oppressive political power, and other social-political issues. Solidarity with others forces Reformed and Catholic in Indonesia to strengthen their theological perspective and ecclesiological action contextually.

Some issues such as poverty, unemployment, climate change, environmental damage, lack of education and health public facilities for poor people, social injustice, political oppression, human rights violation, capitalism-minded development model, law enforcement, religious dialogue, fundamentalism, etc., are being convergence of religious dialogue in Indonesia. Religious life in Indonesia shows that social issues faced by ordinary people must be a theological paradigm of religions, including Reformed and Catholic. Religious dialogue (including Reformed-Catholic) therefore has to go beyond level of theological debate and seeing seriously contribution of religions toward human development holistically.

Protestant (Reformed) and Catholic in Indonesia realizes that doctrinal debates as inheritance of the past in different contexts is not useful to build religious networking positively in Indonesia context. The main agenda of Reformed-Catholic in Indonesia, I think, must be directed toward readiness to solve social problems facing by ordinary people of Indonesia regardless their religious orientation or ethnicity. Furthermore, Reformed-Catholic connection and dialogue can be used as theological power to reduce religious radicalism which growing narrow fanaticism and violence on behalf of religious doctrines.

For the future of Indonesia as a pluralistic nation-state, Reformed-Catholic dialogue continuously plays important role as a model of religious dialogue. In such dialogue Reformed and Catholic open their self to be honest about their history and directing their commitment to be living Christian Church which struggle for common justice and peace of Indonesia people. In that point Reformed and Catholic dialogue become icon of ecumenical life in Indonesia although many criticizes that amount of Christian remain but amount of churches increase significantly.

---

[1] Here I intentionally use “Reformed” for Protestantism in Indonesia since “Reformed” is dominant Christian tradition in mainline Protestant churches of Indonesia.

[2] As ecumenical body in Indonesia PGI have various church members but dominantly by Protestant-Reformed tradition churches.

[3] This data conveyed by some GPM’s ministers who services their congregations in that areas.

Read more ...

Church and the Struggle for Common Justice: Reflection of the Protestant Church in Maluku

Introduction

First of all, I would like to grateful for the opportunity to involve in GIT’s intensive course during two weeks in Chicago. Coming from all over the world we are gathering to share our stories, struggles, faith, and spirituality in ecumenical sphere. Personally I very realize that this is not merely an intensive course but a real intensive encounter.

This paper is a final paper for the core course which is divided into three themes: “Creation” by Prof. Dr. Anna Case-Winter from McCormick Theological Seminary, “Civil Society” by Dr. Douwe Visser from WARC, and “Church” by Dr. Benebo Fubara-Manuel from Presbyterian Church in Nigeria. Basically these themes are integrated. It could be distinguished but could not be separated to one another. There is fundamental connection between these three.

In this paper I would like to describe briefly my analysis and theological reflection about struggle to pursue common justice in Indonesia context generally and in Maluku context specifically. I am going to focus on “civil society” as my main theme but I think as well that the focus cannot be isolated from two other themes. My theological concern is on church within context. However, theological exploration is useless without considering its context: social, cultural, political, economic, and so on. Church can only be understood in its context.

What I mean as theological exploration is a basic understanding to make correlation creatively as well as critically between the Christian tradition which I belong to and the dynamic of context which people express deeply their suffering and hope, happiness and sadness, history and future, daily economic life and struggle for welfare, vision and crisis, etc. I am a part of my people, my community, and my society. Their stories are my story as well. As a people of God who live in Maluku we are not only living together but we are sharing our life and work, our faith and hope, which are deeply rooted in our common historical and cultural realm as Maluku people.

In that way this paper would not be such an academic paper which trying to elaborate theological grand narrative but willing to listen people’s story and their faith as Christian who live in local context of Maluku that at the same time touching and influencing by global impact of globalization in economy and politic. I will take account church specifically on my church, that is, the Protestant Church in Maluku (GPM) and the social-cultural context of GPM is Maluku, a province of Republic of Indonesia.

Struggle for Common Justice in Indonesia Context

Indonesia is an archipelago country in Asia. It consists of thousands islands spread from north to south-east and has diversity of ethnic groups with approximately 300 vernaculars. Through its long history since periods of monarchy or kingdom such as Majapahit, Mataram, and Sriwijaya, to the period of colonization by Portuguese, Britain, and Dutch, and then modern period of independence the concept of “Indonesia” gradually had been forming. “Indonesia” is established as a new nation-state since its Proclamation of Independence on August 17, 1945.

The history of modern Indonesia is very complicated one. I have no intention here to describe completely in chronological way about that history. What I would like to do, however, is to pay attention specifically on particular stages of the history through criterions namely [1] the birth of new nation-state of Indonesia; [2] political upheaval during the revolution of Indonesia; [3] developmentalism as new ideology under New Order of Soeharto’s regime; [4] awakening of Islam as political ideology and way of life.

[1] The birth of new nation-state of Indonesia

Indonesia is not monoethnic and monoculture country. Through its history the concept “Indonesia” waving up and down in interpretative line in order to form the unique identity among other nations. Formally, it could be said that before August 17, 1945 there was no “Indonesia” – there was only so-called Nusantara (archipelago). Some great kingdoms such as Majapahit and Mataram attempted to unify Nusantara into one region under their administration but failed. The influence of Hindu and Islam had been rooting for generations around Nusantara by which some parts later being Indonesia’s geo-politic. It is obviously true that then one can regard Indonesia’s culture might be contained by plenty elements of Hinduism and Islam.

However, the concept “Indonesia” then is very determined by its encounter with Western civilization through spice trading of Portuguese and prominently by Dutch. The concept of Indonesia as geo-politic entity was forming during the period of VOC (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie – Dutch East India Company) 1610-1619 and Dutch East Indie (Nederlands-Indië) during 19^th century. VOC established new economic system and constructed social structure of Maluku society for the sake of their economic advantages. Some significantly social changes taken place at the period of VOC through monopoly economic system of spices and crops. VOC implemented “structural adjustment” – like cultuurstelsel – in order to protect their benefit in global market at that time.

Then after the VOC’s period, Dutch government defined new concept of geo-politic which later became Dutch’s legacy deal with the establishment identity of modern Indonesia. The most important in this period was the emergence of sense of nationalism as one nation. During this period some profoundly figures endeavored to reconstruct national identity based on plurality of social-cultural backdrop. Revolutionary ideas and democracy notions expounded by indigenous scholars whose Western educational background formed national identity and triggered sense of nationalism. On August 17, 1945, Indonesia existed as a new independent nation-state.

[2] Political Upheaval during the revolution of Indonesia

The periods after Proclamation of Independence were well-known as revolutionary periods. “Revolution” due to many political disputes that focused on nation-building and common ideology as a basis for the new nation-state. Soekarno, the first president of Indonesia, introduced Pancasila (Five Principles) as Indonesia’s common ideology. According to Soekarno, Pancasila basically was excavated from indigenous cultural soil of Nusantara. He claimed that Pancasila is truly the unity spirit of new born Indonesia albeit he actually attempted to merge main elements of Marxism-Islam-Democracy/Nationalism, which he used it as Nasakom (Nasionalisme-Agama-Komunisme / Nationalism-Religion-Communism).

On the other side, however, Pancasila was accepted as a strange idea for those who believe that this new nation-state must be founded on Islamic law or syariah. They opposed it and argued that as a largest Muslim population country Islamic law should be a fundamental spirit for the people. The defender of Islamic law then was opposed by some Balinese who adherent of Hindu and Christian representatives from eastern part Indonesia, such as Minahasa (North Sulawesi), and Ambon (Maluku). The later groups denied Jakarta Charter (Piagam Jakarta) which was proposed by Muslim groups contained requirement to conducted syariah for all people. They questioned what Indonesia should be: secular state based on positive legal system or Islamic state based on syariah?

Overcame the ideological disputes, after long debates, then most representatives in parliament, of course very influenced by Soekarno’s ideas and ambitions, took a modus vivendi, that is, they had consensus to accepted Pancasila as common ideology of Indonesia. They eventually came to understanding that Indonesia is not a single ethnic or religious society, but multiethnic, multicultural, and multireligious society. Pluralism is the characteristic of Indonesia since the beginning.

[3] Developmentalism as new ideological approach under New Order of Soeharto’s regime

In the last 1960s Soeharto was elected as the second President of Indonesia. As a person who trained in military sphere, Soeharto applied national security approach to made social-political stability in order to implemented development program he called as “our calling to provide welfare for all people of Indonesia”.

Conceptually he realized that Indonesia society is pluralistic society. But practically he forced the unity as national orientation even though what he had been shown during his administration was sort of uniformity in many fields of social life. And the center of all social-cultural expression was Javanese culture and way of thought. Soeharto reduced political parties into only three; infused military discipline and character into civil services; recognized only five official religions; used military treatment to face some regional rebellion; caught and exiled thousands former PKI’s members or those who suspected have link with PKI; forced transmigration program to spread Javanese families around many islands in order to rooted Javanese culture and marginalized other cultural ways of life, etc.[1]

The main orientation of Soeharto administration was economic growth. During his administration Indonesia became a “paradise of investment” of multinational corporations from all over the world, especially Europe and USA. Indonesia economic rate growth significantly as then Indonesia became one of “Asian Tiger” in South-East Asia. National development was therefore basic tenet of Soeharto’s regime which well-known as developmentalism. In Soeharto’s regime Pancasila was an important ideological instrument to establish social stability for the sake of economic growth. Differences or diversities were only recognized in term of national unity; and national unity according to Soeharto means uniformity way of life under the shadow of Javanese worldview and culture.

The consequence of developmentalism obviously was uncontrolled multinational corporations invested their capitals in Indonesia. For example, the government produced soft regulations for such multinational corporations to explore natural resources (forest, mine, oil, sea, etc.) unlimitedly, and set aside rights and dignity of indigenous people who live in the certain land and their life depends on those natural resources. The government does nothing to advocate the people dealing with the impact of uncontrolled multinational corporations which affect on deforestation, air pollution, water poisoned, environment degradation, marginalization of indigenous people on behalf of national development, etc.

[4] Awakening of Islam as Political Ideology and Way of Life

When in his administration Soeharto oppressed some radical religious (Islamic) movements, during periods post-Soeharto Islam has rebirth as an alternative thought and praxis against globalization and neo-liberalism economic system. Some Muslim leaders condemned that the reality of mass poverty and structural injustice in third world countries, especially Indonesia, is an impact of Western globalization and neo-liberalism. They considers that the globalization is merely Western ideological weapon to paralyze and to subjugate, and then to seize natural and human resources in third world countries for the sake of their vested interest as wealthy countries in Western hemisphere.

They therefore eagerly propose Islamic values as an alternative against Western civilization which is suspected base on Christian values and ethics. In economic field, they apply Syariah Bank; in law system, they infuse syariah into national law system; in political field, they introduce Islamic political concept; in educational field, they send many Islamic scholars to study abroad (Nederland, USA, Australia) to absorb Western logic thought combining to Islamic ideas in order to cope with contemporary issues; in religious affairs, they tend to emphasize Islam as majority so that must be gain more advantages instead of minority groups (based on the concept Madani Society, which somehow translated as “civil society”), and so on. Today they do not prefer to use “Islamic state” but they are projecting idea of “Islamic society”.

Their belief on Islam become stronger in fact of economic crises hit Western countries, especially USA. They have more doubt on “globalization” and “neo-liberalism” instead of they have got much advantage from globalization. But they take critical distance to globalization and constructing the paradigm of Islamic global civilization. Interconnectedness of Islamic movements all around the world has open huge possibilities to link Islamic ideas both radical and moderate.

Church and Civil Society: GPM’s case

As a part of Indonesia, Maluku society had been facing the impact of social-political changes for the last two decades. Here I would like to note some critical moments in Maluku:

1. National economic crisis since the end 1997. This crisis had the great impact for Maluku people. Many lost their job due to job-dissolution by local or national corporations. The price of goods and services increased extremely as well as high rate of unemployment. Mass poverty becomes a social reality in Maluku. Indeed they have richly natural resources but actually they have no capacity to produce, manage, and sale to gain money for daily life. In some cases, multinational corporations seized people’s lands and did not allowed them to enter the land for cultivating or producing food, even not for hunting animals.

2. Socio-religious conflict between Christian and Muslim erupted on early 1999 had radically been changing social-cultural-political construction in Maluku. It was one terrible moment for almost four years Christian-Muslim groups fought one to another. Many public facilities, including mosques, churches, schools, universities, even hospitals, were destructed by unknown armed mass groups. During these years (1999-2005) Maluku in general, especially Ambon is capital city of Maluku, completely immobilized. Thousands died and wounded, orphan children, moral degradation due to violence and desperate, etc.

3. Political system changes deal with multiparty system. Multiparty system is a consequence of democratization in Indonesia. In local context the system opens space for people compete politically to reach political position. There are cases that it is a triggering factor to blast social conflict at the grass-root level. Money politic becomes a new political habit of Indonesia’s democracy.

4. Local autonomy and sharing power. There are tensions between local authorities and national elite leaders deal with sharing power under local autonomy regulation. Distinctly clear that this political business then push them far away from their public responsibility as people’s representative in parliament and as ruler. Political orientation to bring welfare and justice for people’s life shift into money and power oriented.

5. Urbanization and job opportunities. These are common social reality in many third world countries. Unbalanced development program between city and village had been generating villagers move to urban areas for many reasons. Consequently, on one side, many villages only dwelled by aging people and children. All whose productive ages live out their villages for seeking jobs in city. On the other side, people who move to cities trap on cultural-shock. Few can survive but many feel despair and frustration.

The Protestant Church in Maluku (GPM) is one of largest Reformed church in Indonesia. It has a long history since colonization until modern Indonesia. As an institution, GPM realizes that its history and life cannot be separated from people’s history and life in Maluku islands. GPM birth and had been growing on the soil of Maluku islands. Its existence is reflecting the struggle of Maluku people both historically and sociologically. It does mean that GPM is an integral part with the society and context where it existing.

However, theologically GPM also realizes its calling to bring the Gospel as good news in all situations. That Gospel is not only understood narrowly as “the bible” but as the Spirit of God who flows into the biblical message and reflecting by human being in certain time and space. The Spirit of God who actualized God’s truth through the biblical stories which enlightening the disciple of Christ to get God’s wisdom and reading the signs of time. The Spirit of God within Gospel is guiding church to be God’s witness to proclaim the Kingdom of God as God’s work for liberating and strengthening church to enforce justice, peace, and integrity of creation in the world.

However, GPM is realized that its theological understanding cannot be the praxis without programmatic action dealing with the concrete situation. Faith to God must be applied concretely in the context. Five problems that faced by GPM recently must be taken seriously as a part of contextualize its faith. And over all GPM commits to involve within people’s life as sign of God’s Kingdom in the world. The theological concerns of GPM deal with five problems above lay on “equality in life” and “quality of life”.

“Equality in life” dealing with struggle for living in balance between human being and God; human being and his/her neighbor; human being and other creations (nature, animal, and all environment). Equality of life is a sign of God’s reign in creation since God created all as a good creatures for all. The concept is also referring to responsibility. In the story of creation God gave duty to human being, that is, to name all creatures and to manage them with their own characters. It means that all creatures have their role and responsibility to maintain equilibrium of life which interdependent. None has higher status than other. Even human being must recognize that his/her life is depending on other creatures, and without others human being is nothing. Therefore equality in life directing all creatures to perform their potential for doing justice and kindness for all as God’s calling to responsible one another.

Equality in life leads all creation into deep responsible toward reach highest quality of life based on interconnectedness of whole elements of creation. Interconnectedness is main sign of quality of life. Life is become complete and qualified because of interconnectedness, relation between all elements in creation. The universe lay on basic interrelationship. This is so-called quality of life. Jesus started his works with makes relation with twelve disciples. May be he could do his ministry by his self but he choose to do it in relation with other.

During his life and works Jesus preferred to position his self “in-relation” with others: with God who he called as Father, with his disciples who he called “brother and sister”. Until his death Jesus still “in-relation” with people who crucified along with him. Jesus has power to do miracle or supernatural action as healing, teaching, and transforming. He did miracles not for his honor but to increase the quality of life through empower people to find inner power in their bodies, their minds, and their perspective about life, also the meaning of social body in society.

This is a basic theological understanding which generates GPM to continuously contextualize Gospel’s message in concrete life of human being. Along its history GPM believe that God is calling it to enforce equality in life and empower people to gain quality of life. Equality and quality are in turn strengthening GPM to live in dynamic situation and social changes. That is the purpose of its mission as Christ’s disciple.

GPM selects “plurality and human rights” as the main theme for one period of its ministry 2005-2010. The context of socio-cultural plurality basically is an objective of its programs to empower people managing and transforming their everyday life as a qualified life before God and with other creations. Other religions, mainly Islam, are important partner to actualize church’s calling as the witness of Jesus Christ. In that point interfaith dialogue is a key to make interconnectedness of all creation become possible.

Human right is another important theme by which GPM takes account its calling to advocate people who marginalized and diminished within global system of life. Some critical problems in third world country such as mass poverty, human trafficking, child prostitution, street children, drugs, etc., are coming urgent problems faced by GPM. The main challenge is how GPM can understand and involve and also overcome the problems? Considering the complexity of those problems GPM realized that they could be overcame “in-relation” as Jesus did. Mutual interrelationship therefore is regarded as the main direction to cope with crucial situation today institutionally and sociologically.

Closing Remarks

Throughout this paper I actually would like to reflect my involvement in church’s ministry facing social-political-cultural-economic problems in Indonesia and Maluku. The theme of Uniting General Council 2010, that is, “Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace” derived from Ephesians 4:3 which is try to crystallize long historical church tradition, differences theological reflection based on each own context, and challenges of globalization in twenty first century.

As a member of World Alliance of Reformed Churches, GPM involves in the struggle to implement the vision of that theme. The theme pervades its theology and action dealing with social-political-cultural-economic problems in Indonesia and Maluku. Facing the globalization and its impact all over the world, church cannot be stand alone without others in web of interrelationship. Church must take account the problem of globalization and postmodernism and hand in hand to solve human being’s problems as its impact.

Globalization offers us global problems that could be overcome by global networking of churches. As church, we are not only sharing our joy and sorrow, but our commitment to step further beyond our internal problem to the global problems that unifying human being as victim of that global system. Globalization is not Western countries’ problem but all society in the world. That is the reason globalization fundamentally deconstructed borderline between first- and third-world, and tied all “world” into common calling to cope with it.

“Unity of the Spirit in the bond of Peace” is God’s calling to shift our attention and theological understanding critically into the dialectic between text and context. And through the ages, church always in the journey to find, interpret, and get particular understanding of its correlation to God and its responsibility to human being as individual and communal. I hope by this short expound church in Maluku can be fulfilled God’s calling to perform equality in life and quality of life.

Ecclesia Reformata, Semper Reformanda

Grand Rapids, 20 June 2010

---

[1] Michael R.J. Vatikiotis, Indonesian Politics Under Soeharto: The Rise and Fall of the New Order (London: Routledge 1998), p. 93.

Read more ...

Sail Banda dan Salei Blanda

Di jiku rumah besar upulatu, Dace baku dapa Etus...

Dace: Konyadu manis ee, ale dar mana tuang? su lama paskali tinggilang seng lia ujung rambu...

Etus: Dace, ose ni memang tar laku. La ini ose tau ka seng samua orang ada maniso deng sail banda di katong pung bendar sapanggal ni. Os dar mana saja?

Dace: Istaganaga, ini katong ada tanya babae yo konyadu su manyala macang bagitu skali? Bet tanya ose, ose bale tanya beta. Lalu sapa musti jawab sapa ni?

Etus: Bukang bagitu nyadu. Anana kacupeng klas 1 SD saja tau katong ada balumpa kiri-kanan par ator bendar ni tarima dong dari saniri besar. No bet jawab ale kamuka. Beta ni maso jadi seksi "papalele" di sail banda. Ale?

Dace: hahahaeee... wangala ampong beta jua he-e ni. beta ni memang pata pena lai, maar kalo soal seksi-seksi beta seng undur ale kapa. Baru beta dengar par oras ni ada seksi "papalele"... akang bagumana tu nyadu?

Etus: Haayooo, susa jua stori deng anana macang bagini. Su mangaku pata pena, maar biking diri mangarti satu kapala. He, dengar beta, ini skarang katong su seng pake stori tinggi-tinggi lai. Seksi papalele tu akang sama deng seksi promosi. Jadi beta bajalang dar ujong kampong satu abis satu par tabaos anana bendar siap diri par akang sail banda ni. Suda? Ale su tangkap beta pung bicara?

Dace: Ooo... bilang bagitu dar tadi. Barang aer-aer saja tu... Jadi nyadu biking apa di situ?

Etus: Ha, kalo ale tanya bagitu baru sdap. Beta tabaos kiri-kanan par anana negri katong musti siap diri par tarima investor maso di katong pung kintal negri; katong pung negri ni akan jadi lumbung ikan nasional; katong musti tumbuhkan semangat kewirausahaan untuk bangun kerjasama deng pengusaha-pengusaha berkaliber internasional. Ha, itu dolo... Ale bisa mangarti akang ka seng?

Dace: Hahahaeee... konyadu e. Mangapa barang-barang bagitu ale musti tabaos akang lai? La ale kira selama ini seng ada inspektor eh investor yg maso di katong pung tanah ni ka? Co ale bale muka lia katong pung kintal-kintal su tagepe ancor tagal dong su kas badiri sagala macang perusahaan. Ale sangka katong masih bisa jadi lumbung ikan nasional? Co manjura kapala ka lau biru-biru, ale sangka cuma katong yang buang jareng gete-gete... itu kapal-kapal basar su kuras abis isi laut sampe katong su tar dapa ampas lai. Ale kira katong seng pica kapala par wira usaha? Laste-laste katong cuma bisa jadi wiro sableng.

Etus: Cukardeleng, beta pung nyadu ni biar pata pena tapi bole lai...

Dace: Beta mo bilang bukang, beta sangaja seng unju rupa sabulang ni tagal beta mo lia kata katong anana negri ni mangarti akang sail banda ni bae-bae ka cuma iko rame. Barang ini bukang cuma jadi "kebanggaan" mar musti jadi "tanggung jawab". Katong ni potong pusa di tanah ni musti tau apa yang jadi di sini. Dengar orang pung bicara bisa saja nyong, maar jang percaya dong kewel. Katong yang tau katong pung kahidopang di ewang deng laut.

Etus: Nyadu ale ni batu lai...

Dace: Seng jua nyadu. Beta ni orang bodo. Seng sama deng katong pung tuang2 besar yg jago barekeng sagala macang. Mar beta seng mau kalo katong cuma iko rame "sail banda" la tar urus apa2 abis itu. Lalu laste-laste skrek kata katong su "sale banda" atau jual tanah/laut par kasta2 galojo tu. La tinggal katong gigi jari, rabe mata, aer mulu tumpa, tagal su seng ampas lai par katong... Ini yang beta taku: jang sampe SAIL BANDA akang jadi SALEI BLANDA... rasa sdap di mulu mar abis capat2 saja.

Etus: Memang, memang, memang, kalo soal ini nyadu e beta musti bilang: ose seng ada lawang. Manyimpang nyadu ee...

Dace: Tagal itu jang cuma maniso deng se pung seksi papalele tu. Musti mangarti batul-batul. Co se lia laporan menteri "lautan biru", tuang Siake Manue, waktu ontua ada inspeksi pasar di Prancis sana. La ose rekeng saja.

(gandong ee, ini cuma kewel Dace deng Etus.... jang simpang di hati kio. Amatooo)

Read more ...

Sang Christina

Apalagi yang bisa dikatakan saat kita menghadapi kematian? Tidak ada. Yang bisa kita lakukan hanya menangisinya dan mengenang kembali detik demi detik saat kematian menjelang. Lalu kita pun merefleksikannya sebagai "sudah ada tanda-tandanya". Tapi kita hampir tak pernah menyadari tanda-tanda itu.

Christina Mandang, musisi gereja berkaliber internasional, menutup kitab kidung kehidupannya di Grand Rapids. Jauh dari negeri asalnya, Indonesia. Jauh dari orang tua dan sanak keluarganya. Kecelakaan tragis merenggut nyawanya setelah mengalami koma selama sekitar 5 jam. Hanya beberapa jam setelah Christina mengakhiri tugasnya mengiringi pujian komunal dalam ibadah penutupan Uniting General Council 2010 di Calvin College Chapel, Grand Rapids.

Terpekur dalam kesedihan mendalam, mata sembab menangisi kepergian Christina, lalu setiap orang pun mulai merefleksikan "tanda-tanda" yang seharusnya terbaca namun tak tersadari. Ketika ditanya naik pesawat apa kalau pulang ke Indonesia, Christina menjawab "tiket pesawatku mahal sekali, lebih mahal dari semua tiket"; usai closing worship ia mengatakan kepada seorang teman "ini ibadahku yang terakhir"; masih usai ibadah, ia minta difoto dengan semua orang - satu demi satu. Sesuatu yang jarang ia lakukan; dalam perjalanan pulang kembali dari membeli makanan ia tampak sangat ceria. Bercerita dengan gayanya kepada setiap orang - sesuatu yang juga bagi setiap orang yang mengenalnya tak lazim dari seorang Christina Mandang.

Kami - delegasi Indonesia - berbagi cerita tentang "tanda-tanda". Tapi apakah itu masih bisa disebut "tanda-tanda" jika ternyata kita tak mampu "membaca"-nya sebelum terjadi sesuatu? Ataukah ini bisa disebut "takdir"? Sesuatu yang terjadi karena kita percaya pada "grand-design" dari Tuhan Sang Pencipta dan Pemberi Kehidupan? Ada yang mengatakan "ini sudah jalannya". Kenapa harus jalan ini? Dan bukan itu? Ada yang mengatakan "ini suatu kebetulan yang bisa terjadi pada semua orang". Tapi benarkah hidup kita hanyalah serangkaian "kebetulan" yang tak punya mata rantai maknawi satu dengan yang lain? Ada yang mengatakan "kematian hanyalah suatu proses dalam kehidupan yang berlanjut dengan dimensinya yang berbeda. Apakah itu semacam kontinuitas dan diskontinuitas?

Saya tidak tahu jawabnya. Hanya sekejap termenung dalam kevakuman makna. Kita semua percaya bahwa kita akan mati: suatu saat dan di suatu tempat. Kita percaya, tapi sering kita tak siap menyambutnya. Bahkan tak ingin menyambutnya. Kita meyakininya sebagai takdir atau predestinasi yang tak terhindarkan, sekaligus kita lebih memilih untuk tidak menerimanya.

Saya tidak pandai membaca "tanda-tanda"... atau mungkin tak perlu membacanya. Hanya menunggu dalam irama waktu yang membuat kita tertawa, menyanyi, berjoget, bercanda, dan... mati. Kontinuitas atau diskontinuitas. Tak tahulah. Yang pasti: kita pulang ke Indonesia tanpa Christina Mandang bersama kita. Kita akan merindukannya. Maafkan kami Christina, kami tak sempat membaca "tanda-tanda" kepergianmu... Tapi kami tetap sahabatmu!

Langit kelabu dan hujan di Grand Rapids, 27 Juni 2010

Read more ...

Sayonara Chicago

Dua minggu berjibaku dengan intensive course di Cenacle Retreat & Conference Center, Chicago, cukup menyita tenaga dan waktu. Hampir-hampir tidak bisa meluangkan waktu untuk menulis di blog. Waktu berjalan dalam alur yang ketat, sementara tugas-tugas bacaan kuliah dan tatap muka kelas padat. Padahal banyak yang ingin saya ceritakan dan refleksikan. Tapi, okelah, saya pasti akan menuliskannya di blog kabaressi.

Pagi ini kami meninggalkan Chicago menuju Grand Rapids (Michigan) untuk mengikuti kegiatan Uniting General Council World Communion of Reformed Church selama seminggu. Nantilah saya ceritakan lebih banyak.

Sayonara Chicago!

Read more ...