Berkley Center

Background: Matius Ho has followed a diverse career path, beginning from a degree in electrical and computer engineering and stint in management consulting, but for the past two decades he has focused on the Leimena Institute, an Indonesian “think and do” tank involved in education and training. Matius and the institute are pioneers of an ambitious program of cross-cultural religious literacy (CCRL) that reaches teachers across Indonesia. Katherine Marshall and Matius Ho spoke in Jakarta, Indonesia, on July 14, 2024, on the margins of a Leimena Institute-organized conference on CCRL. The exchange traces the origins of the program, including its context in Indonesia’s national ideology of Pancasila and concerns about trends towards extremism in the society. It addresses Ho’s religious background and its links to interreligious approaches that are well adapted to Indonesia’s contemporary challenges.

Since you are focusing so sharply on cross-cultural religious literacy, can you please start by introducing the concept? 

Cross-cultural religious literacy is a framework that basically talks about how we, in a religiously diverse society, can build peaceful interfaith relations and also motivate collaboration for an inclusive and cohesive society. 

CCRL consists of three competencies: personal competency, comparative competency, and collaborative competency. In a personal competency, the focus is that when someone has a religious belief, then the person has to understand well what the religion says, especially in terms of treating people who are different from them. Comparative competency is saying that it's good and important for me, for example, to understand my own religion, but I need also to understand the religion of other people or the beliefs of other people, but from the perspective of that believer. So for example, if I'm a Christian, if I want to understand Islam then I need to ask Muslims to explain their Islam to me. But even those two are not enough, because we also need to understand how we can collaborate, which is the collaborative competency. That means that even though we are different, and we will remain different after we collaborate, we need to be able to understand how we can work together for the common good.

How did you get started? We can start with where you were born!

I was born and raised in Jakarta, so this is really my hometown, from kindergarten to junior high, to graduating from senior high school. I am the youngest of five children, with my sister the eldest, then three other brothers.

What did your parents do?

My mom was a teacher; she taught in a Chinese school during the time before they were banned in the 1960s. My mom taught in a school that was affiliated with Taiwan (other Chinese schools were affiliated with China). Since they closed, she has been a housewife. My dad basically began by helping his dad, my grandfather, in their shops. Our ethnic group is known for opening mini supermarkets. He then went into trading and other areas. 

Did you go to the Chinese schools? Or government schools after they closed?

No. My parents sent all their kids to Christian schools. At that time, the Christian schools were the good ones, so my sisters and brothers went first to a Baptist school, then to a different Christian school, from primary through secondary.

What were you interested in then, in school and outside? What did you dream of being?

I liked reading! I remember once my mom asked me that question, and I answered that I wanted to be a pastor.

So you went through high school in Jakarta. What then?

When I was near graduation, I was looking at first at a university in central Java, Satya Wacana Christian University, because one of my brothers was going there. I registered there and took the exam. Then my dad suggested that I think about going overseas to study, that maybe we could afford it. At that time none of us went abroad. And it was not on my list! But my dad’s suggestion sounded good to me. At that time the choice was really Australia, because it was closer and maybe cheaper. Then he suggested that I look at the United States, and I was like, “Wow! The USA was far away!” We came from a middle-class family, working parents, so it never crossed my mind that I could go to the U.S., as it’s so expensive and so far. But I began looking into several options. My older brother had friends who were going to the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and that became the choice.

So I went to the U.S., even before I was admitted. We spent a few days in transit in Los Angeles with my brother, then on to Wisconsin. I remember flying over miles of what seemed like jungle and wondering if there was any town or city. The application deadline had passed, so I took the TOEFL [English-language proficiency] test. This was 1990. I registered to take an [English as a second] language course at an institute in Madison. I planned to apply for UW Madison but considered some other options as well. I took the SATs and did well. I was accepted and began as a freshman in spring 1991. I have vivid memories of that time. It was a life-transforming experience to study there.

So you spent four years at Madison?

I actually spent almost seven years there. I took four years to graduate with a B.S., because I was active in some student affairs. Then I did my master’s degree in electrical and computer engineering. For my master’s degree I specialized in electromagnetics.

So you finished in 1997, a turbulent time in Indonesia!

My dad passed away in the spring of 1997, during my final exams, and I went home. I remember well a conversation with one of my professors on the implications of leaving without finishing exams. He agreed to look at my records and said I could pass the course even if I was unable to return. But what he said was more important to me. He said it might be useful if I could complete the exam. But he also said that the aim of studying is not to put a burden on you; “So don't worry. Go home.” That experience really taught me something about humanity. At that time, I had the idea, maybe wrongly, that teachers and others would be unsympathetic. 

I graduated in the summer of 1997 and then got a scholarship to take a short, four-month course in London at the Institute for Contemporary Christianity, run by a famous theologian, John Stott. It was basically on Christians in the modern world, basically talking about Christianity and its interactions with postmodernism and various issues like that. After that I went home to Indonesia in December 1997.

When you were growing up, how well did you actually know people from other communities? How much exposure did you have as a young person to diverse cultures and religions? And then at Madison? These are questions that are very much part of your cross-cultural literacy approach!

My experience in studying in the U.S., in Wisconsin, was really a first step with interacting with different people, different in the sense of not Indonesians. But because I went to Christian schools, and in the U.S. I was active in the Indonesian Christian Fellowship, in a way my interactions were again largely with Indonesians and Christians. I did interact somewhat with other people outside the group but still spent more time with Christians and Indonesians.

When you were growing up, did you have Muslim friends?

No. Because I went to Christian schools with mostly Christians, and also mostly ethnic Chinese. So the experience of interacting with other religious people came later, in the past few years, when I was at Leimena Institute. I did have the experience of interacting with the Americans. Then in London, I stayed in a dormitory for the course, in a small room for three people. The two other people were from India and Zimbabwe. Both were basically pastors. That was really a new and a good experience for me, because the cultures were so different. 

What took you from electrical engineering to Christian theology?

Even though I went to Christian schools, I really got to know more about Christianity when I was in college in Madison, Wisconsin. That’s where I spent more time with different groups. I learned a lot about Christianity, working with the Christian student fellowship. There, in Madison and in other places, the Indonesian Christians were active in thinking about Christianity but also about Indonesia. Especially in Madison, there were Indonesian Christian students, but also Indonesian graduate students sent by the government. They were quite active in thinking about the situation in Indonesia. At the time under President Suharto, there was a lot of discussion about reforms and about democracy. The idea of reformasi started growing. That influenced me and the Christian student fellowship. It also got me thinking about life issues, that there was something bigger than just me and this life, and not just about Christianity. 

I forget the order, but during this period I got to know about what is called human rights, reading books on the subject. I also came across the biography of Yap Thiam Hien, a Chinese Christian Indonesian, born in Aceh, who later became the most well-known defender of human rights. He founded legal aid in Indonesia and other things. It was especially interesting for me at that time. My initial three-word Chinese name was changed to Matius Ho at a period when all the Chinese Indonesians had to change our Chinese names. But Yap Thiam Hien kept his Chinese name and was able to have the respect of many people, including non-Chinese and others. Stories like that really made an impression on me. 

I spent a lot of time in the library at Madison, and I found books in Bahasa Indonesian, including some that you cannot find in Indonesia. I found a history of how Christians were involved in the independence struggle of Indonesia and in building Indonesia. Thus I started learning about the building and development of my country. It helped me to think about my identity as an Indonesian, as Chinese, as Christian. In the library I also came across the name of Johannes Leimena. I began to see that there could be something beyond this life that is more worth pursuing than just material things. I spent a lot of time reading about subjects like that even though my major was electrical engineering. I did pretty well, and I graduated with distinction, so it’s not as if I abandoned my electrical engineering.

The Christianity part was also very interesting for me. It gives me a more holistic understanding of life and provides me a worldview. We talked a lot about worldviews when I was in college, and that really helped me shape how to understand the world more comprehensively, more coherently, and how issues of human rights and patriotism and other topics fell into this worldview. One of the folks and influential books at the time was written by John Stott, a theologian in the United Kingdom. He’s an evangelical; it's unfortunate that the word evangelical now has such a political connotation, because I think the foundations and some of the people involved are actually very good thinkers, not at all parochial as some see right now.

John Stott was someone who really tried to build sound ideas. One concept that he developed that he is famous for is what is called “double listening”—so that we as Christians will listen to the word of God obediently, but also listen to the world with empathy, with sympathy. We cannot just follow the spiritual principles but forget the world. We need to bridge them.

To take another side trip, how long has your family been in Indonesia, and where did they come from? What drove them to Indonesia?

Both of my parents were born in Indonesia. My grandparents from my mother's side, I believe, came from Taiwan, and they settled in a small town called Ciamis in West Java. They then moved to Jakarta. I know that because my mom has very fond memories of living in Ciamis. It was very peaceful, playing with people of different ethnicities with no problems. My mom really grew up with that sense that we are all the same, regardless of any ethnicity, because she lived in that small, peaceful town. My dad’s father, my grandfather, was born in Indonesia. My grandfather’s mother came from Bengkulu. She's what we call here peranakan, the Chinese who have already stayed for many generations in Indonesia. But my grandmother from my father's side came from China. In the family we are all basically Chinese.

What brought them? Why did they come?

The usual reasons: simply to find a better life. And Indonesia offered them that at that time. They already have relatives here and there were difficult times in China. My mom’s parents moved to Jakarta because they had relatives in Jakarta and they wanted to try something new. My grandfather from my mother's side used to work for a Dutch company in Ciamis before moving to Jakarta.

Coming back to the young man Matius Ho, was John Stott the draw to the London institute?

Yes. John Stott had this course running in London, and someone at the time offered a way to get a scholarship to go there. He’s very famous and the course was appealing. 

It also fitted another interest, which was psychology. I had thought of doing a double major in engineering and psychology. I liked the course on introduction to psychology, about understanding people. But I looked at the requirements and realized there was no overlap. So basically I sat in on psychology courses and learned a little about it that I still find very useful in trying to understand people.

So you finished your institute course at a time when Indonesia was in turmoil. What did you decide to do? You had to decide on a career. You had a master’s in electrical and computer engineering and an interest in Christianity. And curiosity about psychology. And an interest in Indonesia.

Too much interest in different things!

During my college years I was involved with the Indonesian Christian Fellowship, and we began doing what was basically a yearly conference that talked about Indonesia. We invited people from Indonesia. A couple of them were actually linked to Leimena Academy at that time. That's how I get connected.

So, Leimena Academy existed?

Leimena Academy was actually founded in 1984 by the Communion of Churches of Indonesia (at the time, it was the Council of Churches of Indonesia). During my student years, I got to know some scholars and government officials, because we invited them as speakers in that Christian conference in the U.S. They talked about Indonesia and the situation, things like that, so we are very interested. So, whenever I came home for summer holidays, I had some phone numbers of these important people, and I start calling them, saying, "Hey, maybe you don't remember me; I was one of the organizers. I'm here for vacation. Can I meet you?" At the time I simply wanted to meet them, but found myself frantically preparing what should I say so that I didn’t look too stupid. But it was an interesting experience. Looking back, I wonder if I was crazy to call these people, but it was a learning period. That's how I got to know them. And it set me thinking about Indonesia.

I returned to Indonesia at the end of 1997. Many of my friends at the time decided to stay in the U.S. and find a job there, a reasonable path because at the time, the U.S. economy was booming, and it was a good time to find a job. I got that and tried for a bit to get an interview. The time I had spent in the U.S. was an important formation time for me, a transforming time. But I saw it as an investment with the real goal of going back home to serve my country and God, basically. I had determined in my mind that I needed to go home.

So I did, and voila, financial crisis. I didn't have a job in 1998 for six months. And in between, there were anti-Chinese riots in May 1998. I remember them clearly. I had to guard my house and the neighborhood with other neighbors. Everyone, including me, basically brought anything we could find in the kitchen, knives or whatever. People used pots as a helmet, things like that. The violence happened at night and through the day we heard lots of news about burning here, burning there. The situation was very tense, with people trying to escape Jakarta. One night, I remember hearing gunshots very near us. Listening to the radio channel from the police and military, we heard that the rioters were inching in and then there were shootings. Those are moments that you cannot erase from your memory. I think it had more influence on my life than I understood at the time. 

That was in May. As I still had not found a job, I began to think that I might have I interpreted wrongly what God wanted in my life. Maybe not Indonesia. Should I look for a job elsewhere? I began applying to Singapore, as the next best thing. But just a week after I began applying, I got a letter of acceptance from Andersen Consulting (later Accenture), and I began work there. I spent three years at Accenture, as a consultant for IT and management. I also did a lot of computer programming for big companies and government offices. That was another very important period in my life. I learned about professionalism and methodology. It's a great, very professional company. I spent half of that period in Indonesia and the other in Singapore. Indonesia was still in a financial crisis and there were few projects there. I also learned a lot working in Singapore, with its very different work ethics. Despite all the hard work, the perks were great and life in Singapore was good. I had no reason whatsoever to stop.

But I remember a moment in the Singapore [metro system] that signaled change. The train was full, so I was standing (I was going home), and I glanced at someone reading a newspaper. The headline, if I'm not mistaken, was that Indonesia’s president, Gus Dur, was being impeached and was taken out of the parliamentary building. And the thought struck me forcefully then and there: “What am I doing here in Singapore?” I had left the U.S. to come back to Indonesia, to do something for the country, and now I was in Singapore. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but it was not what I intended. Very soon after that, within days, I submitted my resignation. My feeling was that I simply had to stop. I could not ask Accenture to go back to Indonesia because there were no projects there. Some might have considered going to other countries, but that was not what I wanted to do. So I decided to quit. I then joined a furniture manufacturing and export company.

How long was this next chapter?

About seven years. I quit Accenture in 2001, and I decided to go full-time to Leimena Institute around 2007-2008. 

So how did you come to join Leimena?

I had first encountered Leimena as a student. Then, while I was working in Singapore, I became more involved. Around 2005, in a very Indonesian style, without asking my approval, they simply informed me that I was now a member of the board and vice secretary of the Leimena Academy. I told them I could not attend meetings, but they responded: "No worry." Thus I was a board member of the Leimena Academy in the early 2000s. Again, it was an important moment because during that time, I built a friendship with the person who later became so important in founding the Leimena Institute. He was a son of Johannes Leimena, Viveka Nanda Leimena, and the vice treasurer of Leimena Academy. After one of the board meetings of Leimena Academy, around 2005, he asked me if he could join me on the drive home. In that two or three hour drive, we got to know each other and simply connected. At that time the Leimena Academy was not in a good shape, so we had lots of discussions from that point on. 

When the Leimena Academy was established (1984), there was one dominant church association, the National Council of Churches, that is now the Communion of Churches in Indonesia (PGI). In 2005, there were already other institutions, including the Fellowships of Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Baptists, and others. We invited the seven major national church fellowships, including the Communion of Churches in Indonesia, to a series of meetings to discuss the future of Leimena Academy. Then in 2005, we facilitated a series of meetings where all agreed that we needed a new think-and-do-tank for the Christian community. But instead of each national association establishing their own think tank, they wanted an independent one that was not under any particular denomination, so all agreed to establish a new institution that could continue the mission of the Leimena Academy. We did a lot of personal consultation with different leaders involved with the Leimena Academy, to make sure that the decision was well accepted by everyone involved in the discussion. I was one of the five founders of the Leimena Institute on September 30, 2005.

What was the concept, the strategy, for the Leimena Institute at the start?

The mission we have followed, at its heart, has been constant from the start. It follows from the Leimena Academy, which is basically to build the participation of Christians in building the Indonesian nation.

Let me go back to the background of Leimena Academy, because that influenced the Leimena Institute. Leimena Academy was established in 1984, during the general assembly of the National Council of Churches. It was proposed by a person named T.B. Simatupang, who was at the time a retired general. He was Indonesia’s second military commander after the great general Sudirman. Simatupang was a leader during the Indonesian war for independence, a military commander. He believed that Christians and the churches had to be constantly reminded to take part in nation building. If they failed to do so, they would become marginalized, irrelevant in the society. It would also deny the call for churches to be lights for the society. 

That's why he proposed the organization, Leimena Academy. He named it Leimena after Johannes Leimena, because during the negotiations for Indonesian independence, the most influential commission, at the forefront of negotiating independence, was the military commission. The military commission was headed by a civilian, Johannes Leimena, a medical doctor. Simatupang, a colonel at the time, was his deputy. Simatupang, like many others at the time, respected Johannes Leimena. A very devout Christian, he was universally respected because everybody saw his deep commitment to the good of all people, regardless of religion, race, or ethnicity. He was calm, a balanced person, a great diplomat, and a great negotiator. So Simatupang named the new institution after Johannes Leimena. That's why the mission of Leimena Academy is to build a society that does not depend on a privileged class in the society, but to work together with all members of the society, all citizens, to build a nation. 

So that's really the mission of Leimena Institute from the beginning. The program we began at the time was more focused on church members and church leaders. Later, we saw a need to switch the strategy to work more with different religious groups, and to bring the churches along. That in essence is the approach we are working with today.

When you began, what kind of work and programs did you focus on?

That's almost 20 years ago. Initially we focused on a series of small group discussions, focus group style. A think tank approach focused on thinking! And then we began holding a national conference, the first in 2008 or 2009. We invited church leaders to discuss issues and challenges facing Indonesia. Church leaders were from the different denominations because with its new mandate, the Leimena Institute was (and is) an independent organization, not under any single denomination. Thus we worked with several of the larger national church associations and invited the church leaders to discuss different national issues. We had three such conferences. Then some inputs from the leaders in the program urged us to diversify geographically. We therefore began developing what we called civic or citizenship education, a form of training. That’s how we began learning how to do training, very useful up to the present. A three-day civic education training addressed the constitution, the responsibility of Christians, and responsibilities of citizens. We worked through our channels with different churches in Indonesia, all the major church denominations.

One of Johannes Leimena’s major contributions is the concept of double citizenship. He gave a speech on the topic in 1955, before the first election in Indonesia. Speaking to a Christian audience, the title of his speech was double citizenship. His argument was that we, as Christians, are citizens as members of the kingdom of God, as Christians, but also with responsibilities as citizens of Indonesia. The two should not be in conflict, because as Christians, we need to be true patriots, a model of those who really love their homeland and are responsible citizens. If you look at our name card, it says “Responsible citizenship in a religious society.” Thus the idea of citizenship is something we want to maintain in Leimena Institute. 

So a major initial focus was on civics training? Mainly directed to Christians?

But not just Christians. The focus was on church leaders, clergy and lay leaders, because we worked through our network of the churches. We saw a need to train leadership, and some members they brought along. We worked in different cities, different provinces—Maluku, Sulawesi, for example. It was a learning experience in many ways. For example, at the time we assumed that on Sulawesi Island, it was easy to travel around. Apparently not. Often you had to leave Sulawesi to go from one place to another as there are no direct flights.

Geography lessons!

It was interesting to learn about the extraordinary diversity of Indonesia. Coming back to my background as someone who was born and raised in Jakarta, I had really very little interaction outside, so the experience was eye-opening. Now, through the Leimena Institute, I can see how the different experiences connect and contribute, including my background as engineer. I had the chance during that period focusing on civic education to see still more interconnections, including the complex ways in which different cultures affect a region.

Take some examples. In Ambon, people who don't know Indonesia might think that I might be from Korea or China, though I speak Indonesian, because our skin colors are so different. The indigenous inhabitants in Maluku are predominantly Melanesian. I learned about ways to speak to people in meaningful ways. Those experiences really made me an Indonesian. For example, in Maluku, the people are very warm, cheerful, but elsewhere the characters can be different. 

I went to NTT (Nusa Tenggara Timur) province, in the western part of the Timor Island. Alor Island there is a separate island from the capital city. They received us with dancing—very simple, basic dancing. We then had an extended break time because they had to pick up an important person at the airport. During this three-hour break, people were dancing. This was quite new for me! I remember two things. First, the chief organizer of the civic training, event, said in his welcoming remarks: "Today we have speakers from Jakarta. What else do we need except Jesus Christ for the next visit?" I was like, “Wow!” They very rarely have any visitors from outside, though we are in Indonesia. No one from Jakarta visits them, though there’s a big church there, the largest denomination in Timor. Second, near the end of our training, they were grateful for our visit, and organizers said, "In our tradition, what we need to do with you is to dance. We will dance from the late afternoon, early evening until tomorrow morning. Then after the dancing, we need to dip you in the sea, to make you one of us." 

We were able to negotiate a one-hour dancing, called Lego-Lego. Unfortunately, at the time, handheld cameras were not that good, so the images are bad, but it involved a spiral, an endless circle, that basically connects the little fingers (pinkies). While we are dancing, I kept stepping on someone's feet because they kept changing the direction. And then someone brought some food that makes your mouth red.

Beetle nuts?

Yes. We call it sirih and pinang. It keeps you awake, like an energy drink. The one who commanded the dancing stood in the middle with a gong, and some percussions and a very simple instrument, and someone read a poem, and the participants responded. I learned that they were speaking about some tradition. I thought, “What a brilliant way to teach your younger generation.” You hold them together. They cannot escape the class. They get to listen to the folk story, the values, how the elder generation talk about them. 

That kind of experience really makes me more Indonesian and more human. When I went to Alor Island, they were so happy. By our standards, they are very poor, though they are not starving. I was thinking about people in Jakarta, who have everything. They work extremely hard but oftentimes, they don't seem happy. These people, who don't have much, are happy. It brought me to question things like happiness and welfare. 

That period of work on civic education taught me, personally, something important about training and then something about understanding Indonesia.

Where did you encounter the Templeton community? How did the CCRL work start? You started with civics education. How was that funded?

A lot of our development happened less by planning than through organic processes. I can look back and see turning points where a decision made really set us on the path. And the COVID-19 pandemic also played a part.

In 2014, we began some interfaith discussions. We began engaging, at that time, with Christian and Muslim leaders. We had a meeting with different interfaith leaders, at our office and at the Ministry of Religious Affairs. The host was Vice Minister Nasaruddin Umar, who has now become the grand imam of the Istiqlal Mosque. We met there, discussing the challenges of extremism in Indonesia. It was telling that the threat of extremism is not just a threat for Christians and non-Muslim, but also for Muslims. They spoke about the dangers of Islamism. This was eye-opening for me. 

Then, in 2017, a private foundation hosted me and a board member of Leimena Institute, Jakob Tobing, and three Muslim leaders—Amin Abdullah, Alwi Shihab, and Azyumardi Azra (who passed away in 2022)—to go to different cities in Europe and United States, basically talking about Indonesian Islam, Wasatiyyah Islam, the Middle Path. On that trip, we got to know each other better and built relations. I learned more about Islam from them. I learned about Muslim brothers and many other realities. 

Fast forward (that was the background for my introduction to CCRL): in 2019, Chris Seiple sent me an email inviting me to write a chapter in the Routledge Handbook of Religious Literacy. 

How did he know you?

It was Paul Marshall who introduced me to him, many years ago. Chris Seiple was then with [the Institute for Global Engagement, IGE], which was organizing a training in Singapore. I met him there. I remember the events vividly, even the room. At a restaurant after a discussion, Chris Seiple commented: "If we cannot find a way to work together, then we are not smart enough." That was a challenge: we needed to find a way to work together. I felt that there was a connection. It’s not easy to connect with people like you both, from the U.S. or what they call the West, that have sensitivity and empathy for this region. Our experience of being colonized, then fighting for independence, is another factor. We are sensitive about foreigners who tell us what to do. But Chris Seiple fit in well in Indonesia. Then in 2017, IGE, the Leimena Institute, and BYU [Brigham Young University] did a joint program in Indonesia on religion and rule of law. 

Though we kept in touch in all those years, Chris’ invitation to write the chapter surprised me. Initially I was hesitant, but then accepted the invitation. Reading about cross-cultural religious literacy, I found it to be a framework that could work in Indonesia. In the chapter, I focus on Indonesia’s history and the emergence of Pancasila, which has direct relevance for our work and for a CCRL approach. Preparing the chapter was thus a first step in launching CCRL. I introduced the framework to Alwi Shihab and Amin Abdullah, who agreed that it was well suited to Indonesia: simple enough that we could build on it and make it Indonesian. It’s important that Indonesians feel that it's our framework. It cannot be too detailed, clear enough that our partners, Muslims notably, can scrutinize it and see that there's no hidden agenda. I realize now that CCRL can, in a way, function as a pact, as an agreement, demonstrating that the approach is not proselytization. A core idea is that you will remain different and I will remain different, and that is part of the objective.

This preparatory work all took place during the COVID-19 crisis. We were looking for new directions within our team and beyond. At one point, I discussed the idea with Chris Seiple, by Zoom, and he suggested that I write a proposal for the Templeton Religion Trust. That worked, and we began with a one-year project, and after that, we submitted for multiyear project and here we are. The CCRL was really driven by a strong collective sense that the purpose was essential.

Indonesia needs a concerted effort to promote tolerance, to counter extremism, that can supplement many good things that are happening. What CCRL provides is a simple framework that has academic authority, a published journal article that can serve as a reference. There's a theory of change. Again, the framework is simple enough that we can make it our own.

We're in a world where everything is changing and with diversity everywhere, not least in technology. So how do you dealing with the change that's happening in Indonesia and elsewhere? 

When facing the issues of diversity and dynamism, the question is how to channel changes in good directions, especially when dealing with younger people. I focus on how to keep this dynamism and will for innovation in Leimena Institute moving forward. Many companies, once they are moving well, find themselves becoming weak and unstable. That’s a topic we need to keep in mind. 

The links between religious literacy and CCRL are interesting. The book your chapter is part of focuses on religious literacy. It is, in a way, the minimum standard that you need in order to have sound interactions or engagement. CCRL can help shape that into some specific competencies, which many people can understand. Religious literacy was the focus of the July 10-11 conference in Jakarta.

Religious literacy has many definitions. CCRL, from a business perspective, can be seen as a brand, where basically you can define religious literacy as you wish. In talking about CCRL, we focus on three competencies and three skills that we emphasize equally. The three skills are perhaps rather generic, echoing management literature. But the three competencies are really functional in an Indonesian context (and other countries in Southeast Asia) and point the way to a path where they will be better off. 

Perhaps linked to my background as an engineer, I focus on how to make something practical. Perfect mass scale production in our field is not practical, either from a scientific or political perspective. Ideal solutions are rare, and there are plenty of flaws. Engineers tend to tolerate flaws on the path to scaling up, and I tend to see things from that perspective. We have many good people, many good ideas, so the challenge is how I can help multiply them. Our three years of experience with CCRL is driven by that spirit.