A cross in the green rice field: Pastor and local election in Moslem-majority village of rural Java

Pastor in the rural church tradition

Adopted reformed-Calvinist model, GKJ (Gereja Kristen Jawa, Christian Church of Java) applied the presbyterial system of the church government. It means that the church is governed by church council comprising presbyters, pastor, and deacons. Pastor is the part or element of presbyters that has certain tasks i.e., teaching church members and sacramental minister (Sinode, 2020; Soekotjo, 2009). GKJ tradition emphasised that a pastor is called once for a lifetime. Accordingly, a minister of GKJ, from the initial calling, ordination, and retirement, she/he will live among and with the congregation. The pastor will not undergo any transfer of duties until they reach the emeritus stage (Sinode, 2018: 63).

The GKJ is the fruit of the evangelism efforts of laypeople, such as Mrs. Le Jolle or Mrs. Steven Philips (Sinode, 1986), which was later continued by local evangelists, such as Sadrach. However, it must be acknowledged that before the emergence of native Javanese evangelists, the role of Dutch evangelists was also significant, including, for example, Vermeer (Purworejo), Hoezoo (Semarang), and Bieger (Sinode, 1986; Aritonang and Steenbrink, 2008). Nevertheless, the role of local evangelists was more prominent compared to Dutch evangelists, such as those from the NGZV Mission (Soekotjo, 2009; Aritonang and Steenbrink, 2008).

However, to defend the unity of one and another churches, GKJ emphasise the existence of Synod as the uniting factor among the different churches. Therefore, GKJ's church governance system is Synod-presbyterial one. It means, at the local level, each church has its own authority but at the general level, they have a common policy taken by synod conciliar process (Sinode, 2020) –for example, in common issue, such as liturgy or worship, they have a same model, but its implementation at the local level, each church has authority whether or not to adopt and modify according to local context. Regarding the pastor calling and anointing, however, all churches under GKJ Synod will implement the same pattern: once anointed for a lifetime.

Based on such policy, the position of the pastor in the church of GKJ is full-time pastor. She/he will serve the congregation totally and not allowed to have a double office (rangkap jabatan). Or, if hold the other task due to certain issue, she/he needs to “put down” the office of pastor (Sinode, 2018). The pastor, in the service management, will coordinate with the church council. Therefore, the good and effective conversation, relationship, and communication between pastor and its church council is one important pillar to keep the cooperation sustain, either the pastor service or position in the church.

Pastor and politics in Indonesia context

The issue of pastor and politics is rarely being a research topic in Indonesia. It is probable that most of the Indonesia churches are applied the church governance system of presbyterial, despite once anointed for a lifetime, the pastor has a special task in the congregation i.e., as a teacher and sacramental minister. However, in the history of GKJ, there have been ever a pastor engaged in politics. Pastor Probowinoto is one of the key figures who elaborated on the role of pastors in politics, both in practical terms (forming and leading political parties) and in policymaking, where he contributed ethical and moral insights to the formulation of national policies (Kana and Daldjoeni, 2025; Aritonang and Steenbrink, 2008). In the current context, some churches permit pastors to enter the political arena, whether as members of parliament, regents, or mayors. Certain synods, such as GMIT (Gereja Masehi Indonesia di Timor, Indonesia Evangelical Church in Timor) Synod, stipulate that pastors entering politics must resign from their pastoral duties. However, other churches grant dispensations for holding dual roles or double function, allowing pastors to serve simultaneously as religious leaders and political figures, as seen in the GMIM (Gereja Masehi Indonesia di Minahasa, Indonesia Evangelical Church in Minahasa) Synod.

In American context, a pastor plays a role in the politics is as business as usual. Some of leading pastor in America, even more, having double duties, as a pastor as well as a minister, such as Abraham Baldwin, ² or as a leader of political party. However, adopted the reformed-Calvinist tradition, in GKJ (Gereja Kristen Jawa, Christian Church of Java) the engagement of pastor to politics remains a prohibition. The pastor expected by the congregation to put the first of priority is internal ministry and not political calling as a ministry.

Because American political culture has heavy religious overtones, emphasis is often placed on morality in American politics—both in debates about political issues and in discussions of the duties of democratic citizens (Crawford and Olson, 2001). This emphasis places clergy, who are by definition in the business of defining and promoting morality, in a unique position to shape democratic norms and to influence policy debates—when they have sufficient interest, motivation, and flexibility (Djupe and Gilbert, 2003). American religious pluralism adds to this mix by ensuring that myriad religious voices will be competing to define both morality and citizenship. (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 3; Djupe and Gilbert, 2003).

This notion that clergy ought to be involved in political activity is by no means universally shared, but ministers who are interested in participating in politics can find a number of justifications for their position (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 4; Djupe and Gilbert, 2003: 7). Alexis de Tocqueville explained that nineteenth-century American clergy had great political power but were careful to avoid explicit affiliations with political parties, as such entanglement might have eroded this power. Other risks, such as loss of livelihood or legitimacy, also factor into clergy's political choices. Although today's emphasis on morality politics creates an opening for clergy to meld their religious profession with political action, few clergy face easy choices in deciding whether and how to become involved in politics. Their first priority must be the maintenance of their congregations, which by necessity leaves political activity as a secondary pursuit (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 4). The last case is similar to the position of pastor in Indonesia context, congregation is first priority of service rather than other fields of service.

As religious professionals and leaders in the powerful social institution, clergy find themselves in a unique position to shape the interplay of religion and politics in the United States. The very organization within which they work carries the force of moral suasion. At least once a week, clergy have ample opportunity to provide political cues for others in sermons, study groups, and lessons (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 7). Clergy confront a wide variety of constraints as they form themselves into public citizens and decide what roles they will play in shaping the political views and actions of others. The choices they make affect the members of their congregations in ways that are both obvious and subtle (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 8; Djupe and Gilbert, 2003: 6).

Such a politically engaged Christianity flows from a theology that is both “communal” (as opposed to individualistic) and “horizontal” (primarily concerned with ethical matters). Because there is a negative relationship between religious orthodoxy and “ethicalism,” so it is not surprising that political activism often has been associated with theological and political liberalism (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 18). The same case, for some extension, also occured in Indonesian context, the pastor was engaged in political issue often seen as a kind of deviation, either personally or dogmatically.

Almost similar to what Olson explained that there is a big tension between the demands of political activism (building a kind of citizenship) and religious recruitment (a sort of political moralism), pastor Teofilus elected for the first period to harmonize both issue in rural politics (Adi, 2017). However, the religious congregations are not primarily political organizations, the requisites of political participation may seem rather costly in terms of other ministerial goals (Crawford and Olson, 2001: 21). Therefore, pastor Teofilus needs support from the church council to minimize the religious cost of the village head election, and it brough about the church decree that double function was legitimate because of the idea of the implementation of Kingdom of God in practice.

Based on such an idea, Pastor Teofilus combine two models of leadership: church and government as an art of rural service ministry. However, between two worlds sometimes there is no “border”. It means the function as a pastor and a village head are blurred. Basically, both tasks –as an officium—has a common meaning that is for common welfare. Agamben argued: every question surrounding officium, presents two aspects: the first concerns the highest good (finis bonorum), the second the precepts “by which one can give form to the use of life in all its aspects (Agamben, 2013: 74). He searched the originality basic of the office itself. It seemed that there was a transformation from religious to secular the concept of office. Furthermore, he explicated that:

“Conducting life,” “governing things”: this is the meaning of the “giving form to the use of life” and the “instituting the common life” that were in question in officium. What is decisive, however, is that in this way, the politician and the jurist's attention is shifted from the carrying out of individual acts to the “use of life” as a whole; that is, it is identified with the “institution of life” as such, with the conditions and the status that define the very existence of human beings in society (Agamben, 2013: 74).

The problem, if officium is not equal to munus—refer to the Christ's sacrifice in the cross for human redemption—there is an ethical issue here, because officium is tending to pragmatical and political one. Officium constitutes the human condition itself, and human beings, insofar as they are membra . . . corporis magni (parts of one great body), are beings of officium (Agamben, 2013: 75).

Emphasizing to the aspect of function, Agamben eventually had defined officium conclusively:

“The priest must carry out his office insofar as he is a priest and he is a priest insofar as he carries out his office. The priest is that being whose being is immediately a carrying out and a service—a liturgy….Action as liturgy… as a circular relation between being and praxis, between being and having-to-be: this is the disquieting inheritance that modernity, from the moment it put duty and office at the centre of its ethics and its politics, has more or less consciously accepted without the benefit of an inventory (Agamben, 2013: 88).

For Pastor Teofilus, double duties are equalized an officium which means that when doing both as a pastor and as a village head must be carried out harmoniously. Regarding liturgy, leitourgia, in fact, both are not separated: to do a service is to develop community. The problem is how pastor apprehends the officium, and struggle to implement it in practice, and how strategy of the implementation. Shortly, this paper will analyse the Pastor practices of the govern and conduct in the Moslem-majority village of Ragacita, so he re-elected in the second election at the local context.

Pastor re-elected for the second period as Village Head

The Ragacita Village located in the eastward of Semarang-Surakarta (Sala) toll road, has area 402 ha, and around 60 per cent is both full and semi-irrigated-system-rice field. Accordingly, this village is potential to be “rice barn” (lumbung padi) of Semarang District. Supported by organic system, this village produces the best or healthy rice for consumption. In terms of demographic, religious composition of this village: 89 per cent people is Islam (3628), 10 per cent Christian (408), and the rest of Catholic (11 people), and Buddhism (2 people). ³ Metaphorically or in actual the Ragacita Village, indeed, is a green village.

Christianity present to this village was because of the politic citizenship applied by the New Order Indonesia early 1970-s. Implementing cultural strategy of converting people to Christianity, the church council and pastor able to harmonize the inter-religion life in Ragacita and its surrounding area. Cultural strategy applied by the church was implemented by two important words: from sesepuh to pinisepuh. Sesepuh is Javanese word to refer the old, wise and higher rank people culturally. At that time, ex-communist party members are called by rural people as sesepuh because their knowledge and experiences in social and political aspects of previous time. However, such people usually are negatively treated by rural people, particularly Moslem community. Facing the politic of citizenship, however, they did not have many choices. This politics forced them to embrace one official religion, and it should be declared publicly in their ID card. Religion is indicator of citizenship. No religion, no citizenship. To convert them into Christianity, the church applied an artful or shrewd approach of conversion. If they are Christian, the cultural symbol of sesepuh is perpetuated and it will be transformed into the new status as pinisepuh –literally meaning presbyters or the religious elder. ⁴ They were not humiliated by conversion, and contrary, this process will lift them up into higher position, socially or religiously. This approach caused the church in Ragacita get membership manyfold, and the Christian people raise significantly.

Based on interview with some people, it's explained that the pastor has brought some significant changes in rural life and government. First of all is the office of the village now being open every day. Consequently, administrative issue now is taken care meticulously by the village office, and people feels that it is more efficient. In addition, based on his experience on land dispute settlement previously, the land certification in the village has undergone some progresses, particularly on the financial compensation process. The least, the pastor also encouraged of young people to apply entrepreneurship by giving them soft credit and build some places to run rural-based business, such as meat ball or fruit salad. The last and symbolic achievement is the pastor replaced the old village office with a new one, and in the new building he symbolically declared for the improvement of village administration system. ⁵ In addition to that, Pastor Teofilus apprehended that there were some programmes causing him being perfect leader in the village. Organic farming seemingly was a hindrance for him. ⁶ This programme only implemented by two third of famers in this village, and now he still persistently encouraging them to implement it.

Internally in the church, his double office or dual task is bringing a positive impact, because the pastor does not eager to have double salary by church and by government. Salary from the church is sent back to the church. He only leans on his life to the salary from the government as a village head. Then, he also distributed fund openly to all religious institution to support the operation of each religion. Pastor also invited by all religions to gives speech in every moment or religious activities. ⁷ Performing such an action, it is indicated that the pastor and his leadership is accepted by all religions.

Therefore, in the second election, and supported by the almost similar team of the previous time, the pastor able to win the game, as expressed by the supporting, as follow:

“Pak Kades (Mr Village Head) attending people's celebrations or social festival. This is an indication of attentiveness. This is what the people require: attentiveness. Some say: ‘Why does the village head attend to people who did not vote for him in the past?’” ⁸

Visiting all people's house is “a reflection of Christianity or my faith. When before being village head but pastor, I always visited my parish's house to listen, to know their struggle, their effort to live out the life, either as rural people or Christian people”. ⁹

Competition between religious Islam and cultural Islam

Why did people in the Muslim-majority village propose a pastor or Christian people being their village head? What kind of Islam is practised by the villagers? Is it religious Islam or secular Islam?

In the first election, there were three groups are behind the game of the election: on the one hand, rural elite or proponent –from families of the ex-village head, the real contender of the pastor—the political gambler or botoh, and in the other hand is village people –the supporter of the pastor. These elite groups operated within the middle-class circles of the community and seeks support to against the pastor as a candidate for village head. While, on the other hand, the lower group or families –for a long time did not see the better rural life—they campaigned for the pastor to win the village head election –against or compete with the ballot box. ¹⁰

What about the second election? Why did the pastor win the contestation? Do the ex-communist party members still play an important role, as in the first period?

On the personal interview, Pastor Teofilus narrated that the connection between the group of Islam within and the outside the village, as follow:

“The Islamic group now is very active. They have complete activities: from pre-school education to mother's group. It seemed there is no wasting time for Islamic education in the village. All the activities are funded by the village budget. Mosque every year is improved, more modern and bigger. Every Sholat Jumat (Friday Service or Prayer) most mosque here is fulfilled by attendant. Abangan might be starting to vanish.” ¹¹

Abangan, the Islam nominal, only on the words but no practice is foundational pilar for him in the first election. Now, because of his programme, abangan slowly being more religious and devout Moslem. When asked to him: “Does it a threat for you?” Casually, he gave me an answer: “They know who support them being at present day existence!” ¹²

The pastor contender in the second village head election is a young people, graduated of Surakarta State University. He was studying Islamic education and an Ustads (Islamic teacher) of the Ragacita Village. Based on information from several trusted people, he was supported by Moslem organization of Semarang District, Kabupaten Semarang. In addition, once the contestation started, he and the supporting group has been conducted regular pengajian (Islamic prayer) in the village –and one of the agenda was to discuss the strategy of winning the contestation. ¹³

It seemed in the discussion there was one sensitive issue that caused some Moslem people were not appreciated: issue of SARA. ¹⁴ It resulted to unexpected one: Islamic group in the village divided into two groups were opposing one and another. On the one hand, the group believing the pastor is a proper leader, in the pengajian, they silent and disengaged in the election discussion –separate themselves from the big group. While, on the other hand, another group was always busy with the agenda of the election. There is a story about two groups in the pengajian, as follows:

“Ever, I see in the pengajian there are two groups, and they make a contrast one and another. The first group is discussing the strategy of winning the election, and another group is silent. Then, the first group talking money collection for campaign, the other more praying and making a meditation to support of the village head election is going to be a peaceful election. ¹⁵

Moh. Zulfi ¹⁶ as the key person in the first election was on the side of the praying and meditating group. According to his statement that the praying and meditating group mostly used to be is abangan. They called themselves, as Moh, Zulfi, as cultural Islam. They are aware that they are not fluent in Arabic language, or practices Shalat meticulously and diligently. ¹⁷

Regarding the campaign, the pastor contender group distributing package of staple food as a media of campaign and it carried out home-to-home basis. The big mosque and its council giving support to the new young candidate to be the village head. While the pastor and its group still implement the model campaign as the first election –it based on the traditional social network. It seemed the pastor was do nothing of campaign, but underneath people unify themselves as the uniting voter to make a victory. The leader of local mosque said to the pastor: “You are not need to go around, let me do campaign for you!” ¹⁸

In the event of candidate presentation, the pastor presenting quite simple theme for his governance: “Sehati”, it was a short of Sehat (healthy), Sejahtera (welfare), Aman (safe), tertib (orderly) and Indah (beautiful). However, Sehati also has a meaning one soul, one purpose, one commitment, and what for? All is intended to achieve the unity of people in the village, to move forward together, maju bersama. The pastor's presentation making all the contender supporter is quiet. They were expressing openly: “the theme is simple, without Arabic quotation, but meaningful and easy to do or materialize”. ¹⁹ Contrary, the contender presentation if full of Arabic quotation –it resulted to the impact: make people reluctant to listen. The big Mosque is the campaign centre of the contender, while the local and small Mushola is the campaign base of the pastor. ²⁰

The unity of people in the village

The pastor's approach and methods of campaign apparently is the foundational factor why the village head election did not bring about a division in Ragacita Village. In an interview someone ever asked to the pastor: “Why pastor did not come to the pengajian carried out by Ustadz in one big Mosque?” Pastor replied to him by asking a simple question: “Do never I come to each pengajian in this village?” ²¹

In the election campaign, the hot issue attacked the pastor is he was accused of never attending pengajian conducted by his contender. Based on such thing, then it's rising a political issue of discrimination. His identity as Christian is utilised as political manoeuvre to drop him from the candidacy of village head. “The Christian has discriminated us of Moslem by not attending pengajian”. Such an issue blown up all over the village. This issue was growing bigger and almost bring him to the edge of political rift. However, the good fortune is side with him. In one night, Moh. Zulfi, leader of small mosques visited and asked him: “Why did he not come to the pengajian?”. The pastor replied to them calmly: “If I was not coming to the pengajian, it means, I was not invited intentionally by them!” then he continued: “I was standing here for all people in the village, does it possible for me as pastor come to the pengajian without an invitation? Please you’re trying to interpret of the case: what does it mean?” ²²

The discrimination issue in the election apparently will divide people of the village into some polars. At least, there are three blocks: Islam big mosque –the supporter of the pastor's contender, Islam small mosque or mushola –leaded by Moh. Zulfi, and Christian people. Pastor Teofilus does not want such situation taken place. Therefore, based on his experience and capability of conflict resolution, he sought to make a positive counter to such an issue. In the public campaign for his supporter, he asked a question: “Have I ever missed attending the pengajian in this village?” and continued: “If I did not come to pengajian, because I am not intended to give a speech”. ²³ Some people replied to him and gave a witness that “this is the election of village head, and not religious contestation”, and he emphasised, “Even though many kyais preaching in the name of religion, we are realised that such an action is politization”. Moh. Zulfi added some important point, said: “Now it is not a time to make religion as political commodity. Such a thing gives nothing at all for rural people”. ²⁴ Through a kind of counterattack, the pastor displays an aptitude and attitude of not makes use fake news as his campaign issue. Instead, for the sake of the unity Islam in the village, he does not mix religious and political issues together. Eventually, the pastor kept the election peace, without a meaningless bloodshed, violence and division in the community. He won again the head village for the second period.

The Spirit of discipleship

The underlying factor to motivate Pastor Teofilus for the second candidacy is the spirit of discipleship. Pastor Teofilus imagine himself as a school pupil who had completed the project given by his teacher.

“In the second selection, it is for me like a pupil, now is my turn to ask for a score; my job has been done and completed; and now it is just an evaluation. If it be given a good score, continue; or corollary if not, it could be changed with another, a new one!” ²⁵

This idea is inspired by the evangelistic concept of Jesus disciple. A good disciple is the one who obey and do persistently the task is given to him. There is possibility that the task is very difficult, but it should be finished: because he has no choice. The persistence and obedience of doing the task is parallel with the suffering –as it shown by Jesus at cross event (Yoder, 2003). Pastor Teofilus expressed:

“For me, it is difficult to avoid of this task: to comply with the community request, it needs to negotiate with the congregation members. The second candidacy more complex because the church council was changing totally. After these issues are finished, the administrative aspect needs to manage: the basic principle is no money politics –as in the first election, and no religious issue in the election. If the church does not give any support, however, I will continue to move forward in this second election. Indeed, this is my personal calling. Of course, there is a price to pay: suffering”. ²⁶

Yoder, in his book, Discipleship as A Political Responsibility argued that the Cross was a form of suffering that Jesus wanted to avoid. It was the cost of his obedience amidst of a rebellious world (Yoder, 2003: 60). Obedience and suffering are two faces of the single coin of the Christian discipleship. It seemed that the pastor put the spirit of discipleship is to unite on the one hand obedience: village people's request, and on the other hand, he should be ready to take a suffering: church council and members’ demand. In the second election, however, he has prepared himself to take a suffering by put forward a personal calling, because he knows the consequence if the church reject of his proposal for the second period of as a village head.

Participation is the foundation factor to understand the Cross of Christ. Human beings cannot follow Jesus by taking the same Cross as Jesus did. It means following Jesus is only realised by participating in the suffering. Someone is committing to be Jesus’ disciple meaning ready to take the suffering. “Following Jesus is the result, not the means, of our fellowship with Christ. It is the form of our Christian freedom and not a new law” (Yoder, 2003: 61). The manifestation of the discipleship of Pastor Teofilus implemented in the political context is he bravely declared that no money politics, no religious issues as a political means. In addition, he emphasized that church members are free to choice in the election –and not applied a people mobilization because of his influence as a pastor.

The spirit of discipleship of the Pastor Teofilus indicated through his openness of all what he has been done along his leadership of the village. In the second election, all people are free to evaluate and choose him –if they satisfy to his performance. His spirit of discipleship (Yoder, 2003) is support by two important pillars: obedience and suffering. He will obey the people if they agree to the foundation principle: the good and clean politics; and he ready to suffer –if the church is not giving any support—to realise his personal calling of being a village head for common good, ²⁷ and struggle the particular politics that is the politics to create a common welfare and development, as he said: “I will be a leader and governing for all people in the village”. ²⁸

Cultural brokerage, discrimination issue and political hoax

Why does in facing religious issue in the election pastor take soft approach? Historically, the pastor has a long experience in settling inter-religious conflict between church and society. Pastor Teofilus told that since 1980s, when he was young and fresh pastor, the inter-religious conflict has been approached him. At those times, he just started with a new building of a church. In terms of legal, he had obtained all preconditions to erect a new religious building. It does not be expected by everyone, however, at the same time, not so far from the location of new church, people also started building a new mosque. Of course, such a situation giving rise a tension among both people, Islam and Christian.

The tension was breaking when someone tear apart the Holy Quran is placed on the mosque. It is without any confirmation, both groups were on fighting one and another. Then, the conflict escalated and spread across villages. Consequently, many churches building, included the church just have been built were collapsed. Many Christian people got injured by the conflict and went to Salatiga for medical treatment. Also, the previous pastor candidate also flees away and not return until Teofilus replace him serving in the church of Ragacita Village. Eventually, through his leadership the church could settle the conflict by cultural approaches.

Therefore, when the contender in the election utilises the religious issue as a political weapon, he knows how to handle it. Instead of it, to give a positive counter, he asked a question: “Have I ever missed attending the pengajian in this village?” and continued: “If I did not come to pengajian, because I am not intended to give a speech”. It is normal in every pengajian, a village head gives an opening speech. It is a symbol between religion and state are in harmony or support each other. Does it possible in the pengajian that within discuss a strategy to win the election, and the incumbent invited to give a speech? Moreover, on the other hand, he is a pastor, so he said: “Does it possible for me as pastor come to the pengajian without an invitation?”

Based on such data, there are two possibilities to analyse: the first is religious issue exploited to be a political weapon to attack the political opponent. Secondly, because the opponent has a different religion with him, so the religious issue is packaged in the terms of discrimination. Therefore, both religious and discrimination issues are a “killing hammer” for village head coincidentally pastor. The pastor's answer, however, is no less wise and smarter than the attacking. “I was standing here for all people in the village, does it possible for me as pastor come to the pengajian without an invitation? Please you’re trying to interpret of the case: what does it mean?” By this statement, in fact, he declared openly his status as a village head and a pastor in balance way.

Through such a declaration, Pastor Teofilus plays a positive role as a cultural broker –he standing above all, becoming the bridge over everything, and distorts or twists the religious issues as an effort to combat political hoaxes, and changes the issue “he is no attenting the pengajian” as a counter of politics post-truth (Kalpokas, 2019) in the Village of Ragacita.

Abangan and cultural Islam in rural Java

Robert Hefner explained that abangan started disappearing and said that the collapse of abanganism, as a non-standard variety of Islam has, from political point of view, not led to greater support for Islamist parties advocating the establishment of an Islamic state, but as a result of the politics of religionization (Hefner, 2011: 72–80). It means that in the surface, the group of abangan, as Geertz describe out, slowly is difficult to see in material form. The mosque now is fulfilled by the attendants to subscribe the sholat, either in daily religious activities or in the Friday sholat, as a kind of Islamic koinonia.

When seeing the village election in Ragacita Village, what Hefner said that abanganism, as a non-stander variety of Islam has from political point of view started disappearing, it seemed giving a different portrait of rural Islam in Java. What painted here is abangan is not fully disappeared in rural political life. It had transformed “as if religious Islam” might be true. However, this abangan-type Islam did not entirely disappear, particularly in local political events, where it re-emerged in a new form adapted to the changing times. In the context of Ragacita Village, they call themselves as a cultural Islam.

If the pastor's contender in the election planned to race in the competitive way, might be the cultural Islam of Ragacita Village is still on submerged. However, the story is taking a different path. The pastor's opponent and its group have conspired to win the election through culturally unethical ways. They are inflaming religious issues and discrimination to undermine their political opponents. this is causing the big group of Moslem started to break and resulted a division among Moslem people in the village. This is then bringing about the re-emergence abangan and called themselves as cultural Islam. It is initiated by Moh. Zulfi, the abangan separate itself from the big mosque group and uniting into another group of the small mushola.

This small mushola group is ex-party communist and some people that love the pastor and being his political supporters or volunteers. They attempt to counter the religious issue and discrimination, and explains of the pastor performance, along governing the village, to all people as the true and open strategy of winning. It is the reason Moh. Zulfi said to the pastor: “You are not need to go around, let me do campaign for you!” In the end of the election, the Pastor Teofilus Arjuna won with got votes 1739 (70,4 per cent) and the contender was 731 (29.59 per cent). The abangan group in this context is take side on the politics of common sense-democracy rather than religion-based politics.

Dialogue and conversions

Relatively success in governing Ragacita Village, in one moment, I was asking him: “Is there a conversion along you have been a village head?” Reluctantly, he replied: “Yes, there was!” then, he told me stories of the conversion process in the last five years. ²⁹

The first case, there is a people outside Ragacita Village. He is Islam and wanting to marry a woman, member of the church where Pastor Teofilus served. Indonesian Law of Married stated that a couple to marry should have a same religion. Facing this case, the pastor is on dilemma: if he serves the wedding ceremony, it will ignite of the accusation of Christianizing. Therefore, he seeks to find a solution. He invites all mosque councils and village apparatuses and ask them for a permission the groom, from outside the village, is now a member of his family. All people were agreed with this proposal. Concurrently, the groom should change ID card and now being pastor's family member –he as if Christian because member of the pastor family.

What is seen here is the advocacy role of the pastor. It was very essential. If there is no pastor's advocacy for the man from outside village, there is no marriage. Based on the agreement, Teofilus Arjuna, as a pastor as well as a village head consults to civil administration office and register a mixed-religion marriage. Through combination of legal and cultural approaches, he proceeds the first mixed-religion marriage successfully. Then, people who marry the church member is converted to Christian and asks him for baptism.

The second case is totally different with the first one. Now, young people of Ragacita Village will marry Christian woman from outside. This young man is graduated from pondok pesantren. ³⁰ This young man has negotiated and discussed with the families. It seemed his efforts are vain. Then, this young man come to him, as a village head and asks for some advice. The young man wants pastor as a broker to his parent –for getting permission of marriage. Pastor Teofilus explains his family about the possibility for the mixed-religion marriage for their son. He emphasized that such a marriage is legal in Indonesia. This marriage is keeping each of the people are not changing religion, officially.

Shortly, the same procedure should be taken before marrying ceremony. The young man of Ragacita Village now should change the ID card, as a precondition for mixed marriage. The young people parent urges the pastor to help: does it possible their son is being pastor family member? Or, if no, could he recommend to which family they “foster” their son as family member? Then, a marriage is successful to do, and the young man, pondok pesantren graduated has a happy family, and now becoming a Christian.

Based on both cases mentioned, the pastor is performing a cultural and social broker. For the first case, he plays an active role due to his pastoral calling. In helping his congregation and his people, he takes a cultural approach: discussion with the local-cultural leaders about possibility to arrange a mixed-marriage, as a solution for societal problem in Indonesia. While, in the second case he functions the social broker. He builds a social bridge between his people with the parent and another Christian family to overcome the trouble water beneath. On the last case, once again, the mixed marriage seems is the last solution.

Since then, the pastor emerges as a mediator and/or advocate of mixed-religion marriage. It is indicated some people or church come to him of getting solution. Based on the field note, at least, there are two big cases talks about it: GKJ of Tegal District, northern Central Java, and GSPdI (Gereja Semesta Pantekosta di Indonesia, Church Pentecost Universe in Indonesia). Both cases explain that the mixed marriage is a kind or religious and social solution for preventing religious and sexual discrimination by marriage. ³¹ These actions of mediation and/or advocacy are also contributing to him when the village election for the second period.