Benturan Visi: Menganalisis Agama Sipil Rousseau Melalui Lensa Pluralisme Agama John Hick

Abstract

Penelitian ini menyoroti ketegangan filosofis antara gagasan agama sipil Jean-Jacques Rousseau dan konsep pluralisme agama John Hick dalam konteks relasi agama dan negara. Rousseau memandang agama sipil sebagai sarana politik untuk memperkuat solidaritas sosial melalui kredo yang ditetapkan negara, meskipun hal itu berpotensi membatasi kebebasan beragama serta membuka jalan menuju totalitarianisme. Sebaliknya, Hick mengajukan model pluralistik yang menekankan kesetaraan semua tradisi keagamaan sebagai respons yang sah terhadap Realitas transenden, dengan landasan epistemologis yang merujuk pada pembedaan Kant antara noumenal dan fenomenal. Melalui telaah kritis, penelitian ini memperlihatkan bahwa meskipun pemikiran Rousseau konsisten secara internal, ia kurang sesuai dengan realitas masyarakat modern yang multikultural. Sebaliknya, gagasan pluralisme Hick menawarkan kerangka teologis dan etis yang lebih inklusif untuk penyelenggaraan negara yang menghormati kebebasan berkeyakinan sekaligus mendorong dialog antaragama. Dengan demikian, penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa di tengah globalisasi dan keragaman keagamaan, pendekatan pluralistik lebih relevan dalam membangun masyarakat yang inklusif dan stabil secara sosial.This study examines the philosophical tension between Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s concept of civil religion and John Hick’s idea of religious pluralism. Both are analyzed within the framework of the relationship between religion and the state. Rousseau understands civil religion as a political instrument to build social solidarity through state-imposed creeds. However, this idea has the potential to restrict religious freedom and open the way to totalitarianism. In contrast, Hick proposes a pluralistic model that regards all religions as legitimate responses to the Transcendent Reality. His epistemological foundation is based on Kant’s distinction between the noumenal and phenomenal realms. This research employs a library study method with a critical-comparative analytical approach to the primary works of both thinkers. The findings show that Rousseau’s thought is internally consistent but incompatible with the reality of modern pluralistic societies. His concept also provides little room for individual freedom of belief. Meanwhile, Hick’s pluralism offers a more inclusive theological and ethical framework. This approach supports state governance that respects religious diversity and promotes interfaith dialogue. The study concludes that, in the context of globalization and religious plurality, the pluralistic paradigm is more relevant for building a just, democratic, and socially stable society.