Religious Leaders Present Conflicting Views on Interfaith Marriage

Jakarta Globe, Nov 25, 2014

A mass wedding ceremony for couples looking to save money, in Tasikmalaya,
West Java, in this Oct. 27, 2014, file photo. (Antara Photo/Adeng Bustomi)

Jakarta. Asked about their stance on interfaith marriage as part of a judicial review hearing at the Constitutional Court, three religious leaders on Monday offered conflicting views, increasing the petitioners’ confidence in a successful outcome.

In September, a group of University of Indonesia (UI) law students sought a judicial review of Article 2(i) of the 1974 Marriage Law, which states that a marriage is only lawful “when entered in accordance with the laws of the respective religions and beliefs of the parties.”

This effectively outlaws interfaith marriages, given that nuptials conducted in one religion will not be “in accordance” with the laws of another. The petitioners argue that this clause violates their constitutional right to be allowed to get married as they choose to.

On Monday, the Constitutional Court held its second hearing in the case, listening to statements from representatives from the Bishops’ Conference of Indonesia (KWI), the Indonesia Hindu Dharma Association (PHDI) and the Supreme Council for Confucian Religion in Indonesia (Matakin).

Various views

Father Purbo Tantomo of KWI said that marriage is essential to human life and that the state should not interfere in people’s pursuit of happiness.

“A marriage is performed with the goal of happiness and nobody has the right to act against God’s will. The state’s job is to protect the individuals’ decision to live side by side” Father Purbo said, as quoted on the Court’s website. “The state is responsible to protect marriages and families, but Article 2(i) [of the Marriage Law] has created difficulties for couples who want to get married.”

“Marriage and faith are personal affairs. The state should not disrupt that, let alone infringe on someone’s rights. The two [the right to marry and keep one's faith] should go hand in hand,” the priest said.

I Nengah Dana from PHDI said Hinduism does not recognize interfaith marriage. “Marriage is formalized with a rite called Wiwaha Samskara led by a cleric, so both [bride and groom] should be Hindu,” he said. Marriage conducted between couples of different religions was not legitimate, he said, and would in fact amount to adultery.

Uung Sendana, from Matakin, stressed the importance of people’s happiness, but said there were limits to what religious could offer in this regard.

“A marriage should be conducted to achieve happiness and continue the blood line. No political view, ethnicity, understanding, culture or even religion can stop it,” he said. “However, an interfaith wedding cannot be conducted with a Confucian ceremony.”

During the first hearing, in October, a lawyer for the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), said marriage regulations have to be based on religion.

“The state [should respect] the regulation that every believer should obey their respective religion,” said Mirza Zulkarnaen. “A marriage would not be legitimate if it’s only administrative. Without religion, the administratively passed marriage would amount to mere cohabitation.”

‘Unclear regulations’

Damian Agata Yuvens, one of the petitioners, said in a statement on Monday that the differences in religious leaders’ opinions should be an important reason for the Constitutional Court to grant the judicial review request.

“Let the religions and their respective institutions prohibit interfaith marriage, let the families prohibit it, but such prohibitions shouldn’t come from the state in the form of unclear regulations or the actions of officials. Indonesia is not a country of a particular religion, and if the state only applies one religion’s rules, the state will be seen as a continuation of that particular religion’s view,” Damian said.