I

n offering its system of meaning, religion has two dialectical functions in public life: social critique and instrument of legitimacy. When the first function doesn’t effectively work, the second one will go unchecked, and religion becomes prone to abuse of power. We can find this in the history of world religions and in our Indonesian reality today.

Sociologically, most major religions emerged in times of crisis initially and primarily as ethical, moral and social critiques of the status quo. Founders of religions are strident social critics who, at times, have to suffer alienation, persecution, expulsion or even crucifixion.

As such religion emerged as a radical challenge and prophetic alternative to the existing confining social praxis, moral decadence, corrupt tradition and false system of consciousness. In this way, religion also provides inspiration, social energy and vision to create sociological imagination.

Sociological imagination, to reinterpret C. Wright Mills (1959), refers to a creative ability to see the big picture beyond the perceived unalterable web of circumstances and relationships between personal story and social history in a given society.

In Abrahamic traditions, as social critique, the principle of ethical monotheism of Judaism freed generations of enslaved Jews under the ancient Egyptians to become “the chosen people”. Christianity empowered a handful of marginalized people, entrapped by first century Jewish violent sectarianism and Roman oppression, to become exemplary people espousing altruism and love.

Islam also liberated seventh-century Arabs locked up for generations in raw materialism and tribalism, creating a strong community united by transcendental humanism based on the principles of justice, compassion and peace.

This social critique function of religion declines when religion is overly co-opted by established authority. As a consequence, religion serves more as an instrument of legitimacy. Instead of providing sociological imagination, religion is turned into a set of doctrines and closed theology consisting of anti-historical rules, along with an
unquestionable reward-punishment mechanism.

It happened to Christianity from the period of Constantine onward. It also happened to Islam soon after the death of Muhammad. The same story applied to Confucianism when it became the state orthodoxy under the Han dynasty in the second century BCE.

We need to remember, however, that the pendulum between social critique and instrument of legitimacy always swings back and forth in the history of any religion. That is why we witness the waves of heresies and reformation movements in all religions. Such individuals as Martin Luther, Siddharta Gautama, Mahavira, Confucius and other reformers will come on to the scene when religion functions more as an instrument of legitimacy.

Since Islam is the religion of the majority here, the case of Islam is instructive in an Indonesian context.

The emergence of so many “false prophets” over the past few years is a symptom of how religion (Islam) has increasingly become an instrument of legitimacy. Look at our religious forums in mosques, public gatherings, on TV and radio programs or any mass media, and you will see how most clerics are desperately selling obsolete images of heaven but losing almost all connection with the actual problems of their audience.

Some even believe there is one simple normative solution to solve all problems, such as the implementation of sharia in its very narrow sense. The option left is either sharia today or hell in the hereafter.

We are a society in deep crisis surrounded by a great many problems: high poverty and unemployment rates, poor education and environment, unanticipated frequent natural disasters, annual epidemics, etc. Many people are suffering in “hell” every day. They don’t need encouragement merely to follow blindly a set of obsolete rules from ancient times.

What they need is spirit and energy to change reality and transform their lives. We must stop religious bullying and religious hoax from spreading further.

If minority groups are being denied the right to practice their religion or even being persecuted, as in the many instances of church banning/burning and attacks on Ahmadiyah and Shiite communities, what is that if not “religious bullying”? This can sew the seeds of greater violence, even terrorism, in the name of religion.

Formally, our public space looks much more Islamized today. By looking at their physical appearance, you might assume that Indonesian people are much more religious now than ever. Islamic political parties and missionary organizations are multiplying and becoming very aggressive. Islamic products, signs, institutions and groups are
everywhere.

However, when we look at the widening gap between rich and poor, high crime rates, worsening corruption at all levels (including by Muslim politicians), the more intolerant attitude toward others as shown by current findings of the Pew Research Center, all things that are contrary to the central message of Islam, what connection can we make?

Of course, Islam and Muslims are not solely responsible, but if the observable phenomenon of Islamization is not to be simply a rebranding of the same old stuff to make it look nicer in mainstream discourse, there needs to be fundamental change in this majority Muslim society. If not, that is what I call “religious hoax”.

The function of religion as social critique is not working. Over the past two decades, Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah, the two largest Muslim organizations, seem to have lost support especially among the young due to their declining vitality in presenting Islam as social critique. Sadly, the groups that are promoting Islam as social critique, and therefore more attractive to our youth, are the exclusivists with a narrow sociological imagination. While sounding attractive to some, their final orientation will not fit, it may even endanger, our diverse society.

We are grateful to have had such figures as Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid who presented religion as a struggle to create a just and peaceful society for all, Y.B. Mangunwijaya who used his faith as a force to defend the marginalized against all kinds of domination, Th. Sumartana and Djohan Effendi who dedicated their lives to nurture religious diversity as a means to develop democracy, and many others who share their visions.

Certainly, we need many more individuals and groups like them to keep the primary function of religion as social critique working properly.

The writer is president of Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) Community in North America.