Developing Our Religious Education

The Friedrich Neumann Foundation (FNF) held an international seminar on Religion and Education in Germany in March 2010. Several delegations from Russia, Belarusian, Slovenia, Kyrgyzstan and Ukraine attending the seminar proposed the inclusion of religion into school curricula. They argued that religion is an important part of human life and that it is impossible to talk about humanity without religion.

It was interesting that activists and thinkers, from atheist backgrounds in these countries, conveyed such opinions. The theory goes that even in countries in which religion does not play any significant role, religion should still be considered for inclusion in school curricula.

For a long time, Indonesia has included religion into school curricula, mostly in excessive proportion. The question is; what kind of religious education should be included in schools? This question is important because schools are not just missionary institutions, but are institutions for breeding par excellence and qualified human resources.

Therefore, religious education in academic institutions should meet scientific standards. Instead of learning about religion as doctrine, it would be better for students to learn about scientific research into religion. Thus students would acquire objective knowledge that would not merely be based on subjective knowledge and faith. For such curriculum teachers should be religious scholars from a range of religious backgrounds, instead of being limited to religious clerics. 

Currently, religious education in Indonesian academic institutions is still perceived as part of a religious mission. Hence, religious teachers are required to be clerics, priests, reverends etc. Instead of teaching religion in academic institution many religious scholars have become mere religious observers. This flawed religious education system has narrowed the scope of religious education in schools.

The prevailing assumption is that religious education in schools should be limited to religious theology and doctrine. In fact, religious sciences have developed far beyond the borders of theology and doctrine. Social studies into the behavior of religious adherents are a kind of religious studies. Recently, remarkable interest concerning Islamic studies has emerged all around the globe. The most interesting topics relate not to Islamic doctrine, but concern the behavior of muslims and their perceptions of their faith. Great scholars like Samuel Huntington, Ernest Gellner, Max Weber etc have further provoked Islamic studies into a broader scope.

There are several interesting findings in these studies. Many of them have presented data and conclusions in opposition to the assumptions of Huntington and Weber about Islam. Both scholars argued that Islam is a unique entity that makes it difficult to accept Western values of democracy and civil liberties. However recent findings, which are based on empirical studies into Muslim behavior, indicate the contrary. 

In such scientific approaches to religious studies, the doctrine is presented as the fact of faith. It is necessary to study the facts of faith rather than providing a true-false distinction to the doctrine which is the domain of religious leaders.

Such sociological studies of Islam are often regarded as marginal –and beyond consideration- within current religious studies in Indonesia. Consequently, religious academic institutions in Indonesia mostly breed missionaries instead of religious scholars or academics.

The biggest challenge to the scientific approach to religious study comes from the religious leaders themselves. They argue that religious education is solely the medium to preserve and spread faith. Therefore, children are taught religious doctrines from an early age, in order to adhere to their parents’ faith.

Obviously, many parents want their children to share the same faith. The issue is not whether parents have the rights of instilling certain beliefs in their children from an early age or not. The issue is whether a public academic institution has the right to direct students to believe in a particular belief or not. We have to distinguish between public or formal academic institutions and private informal ones. Formal academic institutions must apply scientific standards and therefore cannot make judgments over certain beliefs. Meanwhile, doctrinal religious education is provided in the informal family domain.

Religious education in Indonesia, both within the family and the school, used to be doctrinal. The scientific objective which must be the focus of public educational institution has been battered by the missionary objective. What the formal academic institution should do is teach students academic religious knowledge while parents should provide their children with the right to determine their own beliefs as they reached puberty. Parents may advice and motivate them, but it is the children who should give the final decision.

Hence, the expectation of breeding excellent individuals both in the matter of knowledge and faith will be soon fulfilled. The mature religious society will emerge from a new generation. Otherwise, it is generation of the fanatic believers who blindly claim the absolute and single truth who will emerge in the future.

This article is edited by Chris Hill