RELIGIOUS HARMONY, GODLY NATIONALISM, AND THE LIMITS OF STATE-SPONSORED INTERRELIGIOUS DIALOGUE AGENDA IN INDONESIA

This paper discus the discourse of religious harmony in Indonesia by looking into the role played by PKUB/FKUB, a statesponsored body focused on maintaining religious harmony, in the context of interreligious dialogue agenda in Indonesia. By looking into its trajectory and legal standing, this paper hypothesizes that there are some limits within the PKUB/FKUB in addressing the spirit and practice of interreligious dialogue to the Indonesian public due to the preference of religious harmony rather than interreligious dialogue. This paper then wants to explore the preference of religious harmony by employing Godly-Nationalism/Productive Intolerance concept. The data of this paper is collected by library research methodology. Finally, this paper suggests that despite the discourse of religious harmony requires the religious community to engage in the dialogue, there is a different direction and objective to which the dialogue would lead. While the dialogue in the context of religious harmony would be directed to maintaining harmony itself, the interreligious dialogue as suggested by several scholars requires religious people to learn from others to change and grow together.


Introduction
The issue of harmony among religious believers in Indonesia is very crucial because it affects the stability of social life, hence it attracted the attention of many community institutions, including the State. The issue, according to Robert W. Hefner, 1 in part because of zigzag shifts in this country's politics and associated challenges for religious tolerance, social freedoms, and citizenship. Indonesia is one of the most diverse countries in the world, with over a quarter of a billion people, most of whom coexist peacefully and generously in religious matters. But another factor is that there is a marked regional variation in religious intolerance and religious attacks. As Paul Marshall wrote: There is controversy about the extent of religious freedom in almost every country in the world. Governments are likely to stress the positive aspects in their polity while human rights defenders are likely to be much more critical. But the disagreements about religious freedom in Indonesia are usually sharper than most, with reports depicting an increasingly violent and repressive country and others stressing extensive co-existence and harmony. 2 Since its establishment in 2006, PKUB (Pusat Kerukunan Umat Beragama, Center for the Harmony among Religious Communities) has been considered as the guardian of harmonious relationship between religious communities in Indonesia. 3 The background of the establishment indeed is interreligious conflict especially between Muslim and Christian regarding the place of worship. Therefore, the main agenda of PKUB has been addressing the issue of building 1 Robert W. Hefner, "The Study of Religious Freedom in Indonesia," The Review of Faith and International Affairs, Vol. 11, No. 2 (2013), pp. 18-27. 2 Paul Marshall, "The Ambiguities of Religious Freedom in Indonesia," The Review of Faith and International Affairs, Vol. 16, 1 (2018), pp. 85-96. 3 See Noor Achmad, "Inter-Religious Harmony: From History to Indonesia Today", in Proceeding of the International Seminar and Conference: The Golden Triangle (Indonesia-India-Tiongkok) Interrelations in Religion, Science, Culture, and Economic, 2015, p. 100 worship"s places in which every representative figure coming from every recognized religion in Indonesia would discuss and negotiate the proper way when there is an issue of building worship"s places. As the state-sponsored body, PKUB in a normative way has been playing a strategic role that its presence would reach until the level of province and residency.
However, as this paper suggest, the role played by PKUB or FKUB (both in province and residency level) has a latent challenge within the religious community itself that has been distancing its objectives from the substantial achievement of interreligious agenda in Indonesia. Ihsan Ali-Fauzi wrote that many experts also still doubt FKUB's capacity in managing harmony, especially in ensuring the socio-political inclusion of vulnerable religious groups in Indonesia. Limited evidence shows mixed imagery: FKUB sometimes plays a role in solving problems, but also sometimes even aggravates conflict and discrimination. Meanwhile, in many cases of other religious conflicts, FKUB has not seen its role at all. 4 Aspect of "dialogue" among scholars are realized in the form of a formal inter-institutional relation. However, this formal inter-institutional relationship is still ceremonial, yet at the conceptual level. 5 Therefore, this paper would see the interplay between the discourse of religious harmony, interreligious dialogue, and the concept of Godly Nationalism. This dialectic process would be seen in the context of PKUB/FKUB's role in Indonesian religious life. The significance of this research-according to Hefner -"lies  The trajectory of PKUB and the discourse of religious harmony has a long story within Indonesian religious community. Due to the plural and diverse Indonesian society in terms of religion, ethnicity and language, the certain socio-political arrangement should be formulated to manage and prevent the negative impact of conflict and violence. We could trace back in the era of presidency of Soekarno when the religious leader from Islam, Christians, Catholic, Hindu, and Buddha came to a meeting taking place in Jakarta in November 30, 1969. This meeting has resulted into a conclusion that it is important to establish a body consisting of delegation from every religion and that every religion should put their signature on a regulation that every religion should not preach to the people that already adhere to a certain religion. Unfortunately, some participants of this meeting could not agree on this important point. In this sense, we could see that the challenging point in terms of the relationship between religious communities was the issue of proselytism. To some extent, this crucial issue would appear in any given situation and times when it comes into the issue of interreligious relationship.
In the same year, there was a joint decree of the Ministry of Religious Affairs and the Ministry of Domestic Affairs that emphasized the responsibility of the government to maintain religious harmony in Indonesia. In this sense, Alamsyah Ratu Prawiranegara, the Minister of Religious Affair in Soeharto presidential era, stated that there are three type of religious harmony in Indonesia, that are intra religious harmony, inter religious harmony, and harmonious relationship between religious community and the government. The minister then initiated the establishment of Wadah Musyawarah Antar Umat Beragama (WMAUB) as the forum where every religious community could delegate their representation to discuss any issues regarding interreligious relationships. In the next period, the ministry also initiated the designation of Lembaga Pengkajian Kerukunan antar Umat Beragama (LPKUB) in Yogyakarta, Medan, and Ambon. 7

ISLAMIKA INSIDE: Jurnal Keislaman dan Humaniora
However, as the forum designated for the religious elite, this type of forum could not address the grassroot experiences regarding the interreligious relationship.
Meanwhile, in the post reform era, the 1969"s joint decree then discussed again due to the polemics regarding the establishment of worship place building. Some groups were criticizing the regulation preventing the building of worship places. The rest were supporting the regulation, yet it needs to be revisited to be in line with the current situation. This was triggered by the two incidents taking place in October 2004 and September 2005. Both incidents were relating to the worship place used by Christian community that were protested by Muslim for this usage was not legal. 8 This process was resulted in another joint decree between (Peraturan Bersama) Ministry of Religious Affairs and Ministry of Domestic Affairs based on a series of discussion among religious delegation on March 21, 2006. In this joint regulation, there are two important points. Firstly, the definition of inter-religious harmony that defined as "a condition in which the interreligious relationship would be based on the principle of tolerance, mutual understanding, mutual respect, respect equality regarding the implementation of religious teaching and cooperation within the Unitary State of Republic of Indonesia that based on Pancasila and 1945 Indonesia Constitution." Meanwhile, the body of FKUB defined as "a forum that is established by the society and facilitated by the government in order to build, maintain and empower the harmony and prosperity of religious communities." Furthermore, another important point the issue about the building worship place that should be legalized by the government.
The FKUB"s duty according the joint decree formulated as follow; (1) FKUB should implement the dialogue among religious communities and societal leaders, (2) FKUB should accommodate the aspiration coming from religious organization and society, (3) FKUB should convey the aspiration to the local government to be considered when the government formulate the policy, (4) FKUB should communicate every policy and regulation regarding religious issue, particularly when it deals with the agenda of religious harmony and empowerment of the society, (5) FKUB should issue the written recommendation regarding the license of the establishment of worship place.
From these duties, we could see that FKUB has been a middle body that connects society and the government to formulate a policy regarding interreligious relationships that is in line with the aspiration of the religious community. The domination of the role of government in FKUB has been obvious as we could see it in the regulation. The board of advisors of FKUB both in province and regency level is the local government, while the society would be incorporated in organizational level as the representation of every religious community. Furthermore, the issue of worship building has been a major concern of the FKUB legal standing.
The recent development of FKUB has been the publication of the Index of Religious Harmony in Indonesia. In 2019, the Ministry of Religious Affairs announced the Index of Religious Harmony of 34 provinces in Indonesia. In that report, the average of religious harmony index in Indonesia was at 73,83 points with the highest point being West Papua province and the lowest point was Aceh province. There were three indicators of this index, that are tolerance, equality, and cooperation. This survey was asking 400 random respondents in each province regarding their attitude toward these three issues. Even though there was critique regarding the methodology and the accountability of this survey, it is important to note that by publishing the index of religious harmony rather than other issues, such as religious freedom or interreligious dialogue, the discourse of religious harmony has a special place in the mind of the state. This is the very concern of one interesting article on the interplay between religious harmony and religious freedom in which the state and the society in Indonesia prefer the religious harmony at the expense of religious freedom. 9 According to Sofjan and Asri, 10 there are two effects of the primacy of religious harmony in Indonesia. First, as a part of state policy, religious harmony could not be disentangled from the legal framework upon which religious harmony was built and maintained. While the process of legislation in Indonesian context has been influenced by the process of the implementation of Sharia, it is important to be aware that the discourse of religious harmony would only be beneficial for only Muslim community in Indonesia. Second, religious harmony would be exercised in the context of minoritymajority relationships among religious communities in Indonesia. Meanwhile, in a multi and diverse culture the majoritarianism could not be justified anymore particularly when we see it through the perspective of Pancasila that emphasizes social justice and unity.
Why does the state play a dominant role in the formation of FKUB and the discourse of religious harmony in Indonesia? This paper would offer the perspective of state corporatism to see how the state handles the issue of religious harmony through the establishment WAUB/LPKUB/PKUB/FKUB. State corporatism can be explained into three main aspect as follow: (1) Corporatism starts from the state that maps groups of interest and their relationship toward the state, (2) Corporatism also consider the structural condition that shapes and determines the relationship between groups of interest and the state bureaucracy, (3) Corporatism does not see the state a single entity that only has single. It rather considers the state as the result of diverse interests and different patterns of interaction between many groups of interest. The state cannot be independent from the society. 11 9 Dicky Sofjan and Syamsul Asri, "Bridging the Unbridgeable"; Dialectics of Religious Freedom and Harmony in Post-Reform Indonesia," Unpublished paper, 2020. Meanwhile the objective of state corporatism is (1) as a means of control or domination over society, or (2) as a mechanism in which state and the society could interact, or (3) as a mean to maintain the support for the government. 12 From the perspective of state corporatism, the discourse of religious harmony and the establishment of FKUB is the extension of state domination over the society by delivering and maintaining the discourse of religious harmony.
However, from the annual report on religious freedom and belief published by The Wahid Foundation in 2018 shows that in terms of the worship place issue, Indonesia has been improving in which the legal cases regarding the restriction and closing the worship places was in at the lowest rank after the intimidation. Here are the top ten cases surveyed by The Wahid Foundation. From the report we also could see that the actor of the violation toward religious freedom and belief has been both the state apparatus and non-state actor as well. Despite the number of religious freedom and belief violations the report also found many positive practices done either by state or non-state actors. The survey included FKUB as a non-state actor that maintains positive practices regarding religious freedom and belief issues. However, the role and significance of FKUB was still under the performance of interreligious communities (106 actions) and non-governmental organizations (56 actions). Meanwhile, FKUB in regency level has conducted 31 actions. Therefore, this report suggests that the interreligious community was more effective to handle the issue of religious freedom and belief issue. 13

Interreligious Dialogue as Learning Process to Change and Grow
The interreligious dialogue agenda was not emerging in a vacuum condition. There were many certain socio-historical backgrounds that pushed the religious community to undergo the dialogue. The main reason was the "absolutistic exclusivism" of the religious community particularly when they deal with other religious communities. This "absolutistic exclusivism" was causing the conflict and violence done by the believers. 14 Historically, as Kuntowijoyo explained, the relationship between religions in colonial Indonesia is dominated by shades of colonial interests that are rust and order. 15  rivalry between religions occurs at the national level each missionary activity of these religions, while at the "grassroots" of the Dutch colonial government to be very careful and make extra tight guard to prevent inter-religious clashes involving adherents. Thus, the pattern of competition is characterized by competition between institutions, in particular competition regarding to doctrinal problems of these religions. Each religion considers itself as the only true and did not notice anything of value from another religion. The competitive spirit until now despite the new trend began to appear more inclusive still inherited by many people. 16 However, positive human factor characteristics through communication can function in cooling down the tension between these various segments. Dialogue and join activities among diverse religious institutions can play a central role in this regard. 17 Meanwhile, Leonard Swidler defined dialogue as: …means to encounter the Other to learn more Truth (Dialogue of the Head), join together with the Other to heal the world (Dialogue of the Hands), embrace the beauty and "spirit/heart" of the Other (Dialogue of the Heart), and integrate all into a Holos (Dialogue of the Holy). 18 From this definition, we could see that the dialogue requires all parts of ourselves, head, hand, heart, and the Holy. In the dialogue, these four parts of our religious experiences would undergo the process of "learning", "healing", "embracing", and "integrating with the Holy". These processes partly would erase the "absolutistic exclusivism" within the religious community in a way that they are supposed to be humble and wise to learn from others. The notion of 16  learning from others is essential in the dialogue processes. As noted by Catherine Cornille Cornille, dialogue is "a constructive engagement between religious texts, teachings, and practices oriented toward the possibility of change and growth". 19 Furthermore, Catherine Cornille also emphasizes the notion of "the possibility of learning" in the process of Inter-Religious dialogue. In this sense, Catherine Cornille then detailed certain conditions upon which the process of interreligious dialogue could be exercised effectively.
On the other hand, Paul F. Knitter offers four types of interreligious dialogue that could be implemented conditions; (1) Theological dialogue, this type of dialogue is the dialogue of the head. It needs the rational understanding of the sacred texts, teaching, and ritual of other religious traditions, (2) Spiritual dialogue as the dialogue of heart. It would go deeper into the feeling and practicing the ritual, (3) Practical dialogue is the dialogue of action in which people coming from different religions conducted a common agenda to handle a common problem such as pandemic, ecological crisis, and poverty. Knitter also insisted that these three types of dialogues are the intentional dialogue that each religious community should come together in a common place to consciously undergo the process of dialogue to change and grow accordingly.
We could get a general emphasis regarding the discourse of the dialogue in terms of interreligious communities that are the process of learning and the intention to change and grow. However, to make sure that the dialogue could be exercised properly, Catherine Cornille then offered the five virtues of dialogue that should be embraced by the dialoguers. The five virtues are (1) Humility, this virtue requires each believer to see the possibility of kindness that probably the believer does not know yet. Humility also would require the curiosity to explore other religious teaching, traditions, and the society of religion itself, (2) Commitment, the dialoguers should exercise the dialogue through the commitment to certain religious traditions. The dialogue is not a personal or individual dialogue, it is about dialogue between two religions that are represented by a particular believer, (3) Interconnection, it is the awareness that every religion has a common issue that they deal with; poverty, health care, and education. The sense of interconnectedness of the dialoguers would help them to improve and maximize the objective of dialogue itself, (4) Empathy, it is the intention to understand and engage the other religious teaching or ritual to embrace the beauty of that teaching or ritual, (5) Hospitality, it is the attitude toward the partner of dialogue that recognize and integrate the positive aspect to maintain "a constructive engagement" of dialogue. 20 John Azumah wrote that since Islam has a variety in term of its interpretation and implementation. He argues that it was-what he called as "Lived Islam" which could actively and openly encounter the dialogue with local tradition. On the other hand, he noted that there is a kind of "Normative Islam" which is not tolerant with local African tradition. In other words, he wants to say that not all type of Islam is compatible with dialogical encounter in which Islam can influence and being influenced by local tradition. 21 We suggest that this notion is too simplistic notion about the sophisticated historical processes between Islam and other tradition and civilization. Because there are more historical examples that the dialogue also possible in various ways and form. However, in Islamic history context, perhaps what Syed Hossein Nasr wrote about the nature of Islamic encounter with other tradition. He said that the process of cultural interaction between Islamic tradition with other tradition is like the process of our body metabolism in consuming food. When we consume certain food, our body will select which part of that food is useful to our body, while the body will discard some parts which is not useful even dangerous to our body.  Nasr, Islam: Religion, History, and Civilization, San Francisco: Harper One, 2002. p. 5. In Islam, there are two kind of teaching or element that is unchangeable (tsawabit) and changeable (mutaghayyiraatt). The unchangeable part of Islam is related to the six pillars of faith; believe in God, Angels, Scriptures, Prophet, etc. In my view, whether it is "Lived Islam" or "Normative Islam", it is not acceptable when the process of dialogue eventually influences these elements. Meanwhile, it is possible when the process of dialogue could influence the changeable elements of Islam.

The Challenge of Godly Nationalism
Godly Nationalism as formulated by Jeremy Menchik is the "imagined community bound by a common, orthodox, theism and mobilized through the state in cooperation with religious organization in the society". 23 From this conceptual framework, we could see the important role played by religious Islamic organizations in shaping the particular social formation in Indonesia where both the Islamic organization and the state envision a particular concept and practice of tolerance in Indonesia. This concept was formulated to explain the intolerance attitude toward Ahmadi in Indonesia. For Menchik, it is not adequate to refer to the impact of democratization and decentralization as the background of intolerance attitude toward Ahmadi in post Reform era in Indonesia. By looking at the Ahmadi persecution as the main case, Menchik said that there is one thing that has been overlooked by many scholars when they describe the intolerant attitude toward Ahmadi in Indonesia. In this sense, Menchik wrote: I suggest that the privileging of religious orthodoxy and the truncated pluralism of the Indonesian state constitute a theoretically neglected form of religious nationalism that I dub "godly nationalism.
Menchik then differentiates his "godly nationalism" with the term "religious nationalism" for the latter is used to refer to the concept of nationalism that relates to specific religion. Meanwhile, Indonesian "godly nationalism" acknowledge the influence of religious teaching in national life yet "being ambivalent as to which path to God should choose''. 24 In Menchik"s argument, the intolerance attitude toward Ahmadi was successfully uniting the Islamic organization into one standing point. Menchik wrote that, To Muhammadiyah, Ahmadiyah was a fifth column within Islam. To Persis, Ahmadiyah stubbornly held onto beliefs that perverted the pillars of Islam. To NU, Ahmadis were apostates and stewards of imperialism. That Ahmadis deny the pillars of Islam while calling themselves Muslim has provoked opposition across the diverse Muslim world. This history further suggests that intolerance is a productive part of the process of transforming a latent identity into one that is politically salient, bringing new attitudes to the fore and enabling new political institutions to emerge…. This opposition to Ahmadiyah enabled a coalition that other pressing issues facing the Muslim community-Dutch colonialism, the dissolution of the caliphate, the restrictions on religious propagation, and opposition to Christian missionaries-did not. 25 Why did the state and the Muslim society in Indonesia prefer the discourse of religious harmony rather than interreligious dialogue-for the interreligious dialogue is the intentional dialogue that aimed to change and grow-as reflected in the establishment of many state-sponsored bodies as mentioned above? All the bodies that have been founded always promote the importance of religious harmony. By borrowing the concept of "godly nationalism" or in a more practical concept we could call it "productive intolerance", we would ISLAMIKA INSIDE: Jurnal Keislaman dan Humaniora suggest that that is because the state and the Indonesian Muslim society put the nation building as the primary agenda while the "religious harmony" itself has been a part of the process of nation building. By considering godly nationalism, it is also a challenging task to change and grow by engaging in dialogue with other religious communities.
Does Indonesian political text provide such sources to establish and maintain interreligious dialogue? Menchik"s work indirectly has answered this question. To some extent, the answer is yes. Pancasila and UUD 1945 that could be considered as the constitutional manifestation of what Menchik called as Godly Nationalism, I suggest, have offered basic capital to undergo interreligious dialogue: equality. In a normative sense, Pancasila and UUD 1945 acknowledge six "state-sanctioned pathways to God" rather than privileging certain religion. As such, the Indonesian state puts all "state-sanctioned pathways to God" in equal position that supposedly have same position and opportunity in this country.
Following Menchik"s logic, by deciding to erase the "Tujuh Kata (kewajiban menjalankan syariat Islam bagi pemeluknya) in Jakarta Charter (the preliminary form of the preamble of the Constitution of Indonesia), the founding fathers of this nation-state has provided an example of interreligious dialogue basic attitude; majoritarianism. We could consider that the "Tujuh Kata" is a form of majoritarianism of Muslim community that felt that they were eligible to get special position in this country due to its great contribution.
However, by considering other part of this nation, Christians, people living in the Eastern of Indonesia that felt the "Tujuh Kata" will be excluding their constitutional existence in this nation, the Muslim representatives in the constitutional forum has willingly to erase the "Tujuh Kata". That is how the basic form of Interreligious dialogue conducted by the founding fathers in political texts arrangement. Unfortunately, political text is not enough to bring the interreligious dialogue into everyday life. A broader and concrete political arrangement should be exercised by the state and society to bring a kind of productive interreligious dialogue (following Menchik"s logic of "Productive Intolerance") to the real life By following the logic of godly nationalism, we suggest that the discourse of religious harmony and the role played by FKUB has a different direction with the spirit of interreligious agenda. This is because the discourse of religious harmony, particularly if we see the role of FKUB would not require every part of the religious community "to change and grow" as the result of the learning process, the openness, and the involvement of head, heart, hand, and the Holy. As the state-sponsored body that could not disconnect itself from the state"s influence and interest, FKUB would prefer the harmonious condition rather than the changing and growth of religious attitude and engagement among religious communities.
If the discourse of religious harmony and the role played by FKUB to some extent has been overlooking a proper process of interreligious dialogue-learning to others to change and growwhere does the FKUB's current direction go? We will offer the current development in the FKUB trajectory to suggest that the discourse of religious harmony leads the FKUB to pay attention to the issue of conflict and violence in Indonesia rather than the intensification of intentional interreligious dialogue.
One important current development in FKUB is the publication of a book guide that attempts to reinterpret and contextualize the discourse of religious harmony and FKUB"s role in national religious life. The important point was that the body has invited the two prominent institution regarding the issue of religious tolerance, religious pluralism, and religious freedom, that are Centre for the Study of Religion and Democracy (PUSAD, Pusat Studi Agama dan Demokrasi) and Centre for Religious and Cross-Cultural Study (CRCS, Pusat Studi Agama dan Lintas Budaya). This book still based the definition of religious harmony on Joint Decree Number 8 and 9 Year 2006. Yet this book also added the definition from Mukti Ali, the Minister of Religious Affair period 1971-1978 that conceptualized the religious harmony as "a situation in which each religious community could live together without violating the basic rights when they practice their religious obligation". 26 The book preferred the Mukti Ali"s definition where we could find two main aspects in religious harmony, that are "living together" and "basic rights". By emphasizing these two aspects, the book wants to address the conflictual relationship between "religious harmony" and "religious freedom". Based on this definition, we could not achieve a true religious harmony without respecting the basic rights of each person and the issue of the fulfillment of basic rights is the main concern of religious freedom. Furthermore, "living together" requires tolerance as the minimum capital to exercise religious harmony. However, without tolerance it is difficult to build an engaged cooperation between different religious communities. 27 The book also attempted to strengthen the discourse of religious harmony from Indonesian Constitution, the higher rank of regulation in Indonesia. By quoting Article 29 point 2 that say, "State guarantee the citizen"s freedom to adhere his/her belief and to practice it according to his/her religion and belief", Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights, and Law 12/200 on International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights the book wanted to suggest that there has been an important point lies on our national law regarding to the religious harmony; equality and non-discrimination. In short words, there is not religious harmony without respecting equality and battling discrimination. For discrimination as different treatment toward any people based on social prejudice toward certain identity (religion, sex, age, and nationality).
Interestingly, the book also put the aspect of dialogue and reciprocity as the principle of religious harmony. While Djohan Effendi, as quoted by the book, asserted that there are two way to achieve harmony; dialogue and regulation, the book stated that it is important note that the regulation is the minimum borders for people to conduct properly yet the dialogue would transform the attitude of people toward a better behavior and relationship. 28 The principle of reciprocity deals with the willingness to feel what the others might be feeling. In the context of reciprocity, the book asserted that the religious community should not think in "majority-minority" minded. Because the majority-minority minded imply the inequality and there is no harmonious relationship when there is still inequality. It is important to note that "majority-minority" is not about the number, it is about the superiority and inferiority based on that number.
Finally, the rest of the book are addressing the controversial issue regarding the religious life in Indonesia, conflict, and violence. It started in Chapter 2 that explain several religious conflicts in Indonesia, the conceptual framework of how to resolve the conflict, it also discussed the role of mediatory institution, and the practice of mediation. The important thing was that the book has shown that the role of FKUB has been undergoing a shifting toward the institution that are going to tackle or prevent conflict and violence among religious community. In this sense, we could see the relevance between the role of FKUB in tackling conflict and the role of interreligious dialogue in peacebuilding agenda. In the context of peacebuilding, process of dialogue would lead the people to the more "tolerant and open-minded attitude". 29 However, offering the dialogue to resolve the conflict is not adequate since the conflict itself has multi-dimensional factors that push or pull the conflict itself. Considering the religious community as the main actor that cause the conflict is one of the approaches to explain and handle the conflict. It is primordialist approach. There are other approaches, such as constructivist, instrumentalist, or institutionalist. 30 Therefore, shifting role of FKUB to handle religious conflict may be effective, but it 28 Ibid., p.8-9. 29 Cornille (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell Companion..., p. 154 30 Andreas Hasenclever and Volker Rittberger, "Does Religion Make a Difference? Theoretical Approaches to the Impact of Faith on Political Conflict," Millennium -Journal of International Studies, Vol. 29, No. 3 (2000), pp. 641-674 would not be as decisive as other state institution that has stronger power, such as police and judiciary body. 31

Conclusion and Discussion
This paper was attempting to examine critically the fate of interreligious dialogue agenda in Indonesia by looking at the religious harmony discourse as conveyed by the state-sponsored/initiated body, FKUB. As suggested above that the intentional dialogue among religious community both the elite and the grassroot has been challenge by the preference of religious harmony that influenced by the prevalence of godly nationalism within the Muslim community in Indonesia. Yet this paper does not suggest the impossibility of the state-sponsored interreligious dialogue in Indonesia. Rather it argues that the pattern of relationship between state and society in Indonesia put the primacy of harmony, social cohesion, and national building.
Furthermore, when our focus is the prevalence of godly nationalism, in a broader context it shapes the Indonesian style od democracy which is different from democracy as practiced in many Western, Asian, or African countries. It seems that the way Menchik see the relationship between Islam and Democracy by looking to the Indonesia Islamic organization"s attitude toward the others group, both intra and inter religious group, were using the agency of the organization to survive and positively contribute in a democratic way of political arrangement. The moderate choice between religious and secular arrangement of Indonesia nation-state by using Pancasila as so-called common denominator were facilitating the emergence of what Menchik found as communal tolerance. The communal tolerance is a result of negotiating process by which the Indonesia Islamic organization should play a moderate role between implementing their divine duty as a Muslim and maintaining proper attitude in the diverse Indonesian society. As such, regardless of what type of political arrangement we choose, we could see what possibilities the citizen-both individual or organizational-could exercise to offer a positive and constructive conduct and value to the society.
However, as the reader could see this paper only used the second sources and did not provide an empirical or several cases upon which the core argument would be built on it. Therefore, further discussion on the interplay between religious harmony and interreligious dialogue should engage with such case study.