Intercultural Dialog in Taiwan

∗
Lazzarotti Marco

Dialog presupposes a clear and precise identity. On the other hand it requires also, as
basic requirement, the recognition of the identity of the other. Only in this way the
message can be understood and enrich the identities of the interlocutors.
The history of Catholic Church’s missions could be read as a dialog developed over
time. A dialog between the Church and the semina Verbi present inside each culture.
In this paper I will try to describe a case of “cultural dialog”, which took place – and
is still taking place – in Taiwan, where the Catholic Church celebrated, last year, the
150th anniversary of evangelization.

A Taiwanese Example

In the book One Hundred Years of Dominican Apostolate in Formosa, 1859-19581

some reports and letters that the first Dominican missionaries wrote to their superior in
Manila are recorded and translated in English. The reading of these letters - written in a
direct and sometime almost impulsive way - lets us to understand the missionaries’ frame
of mind. At the same time these letters let us catch a glimpse of what the Taiwanese
people answer to the Spaniard missionaries’ project of evangelization was.
According to the historians, there were indescribable difficulties against which the
Dominicans had to battle during the last years of the Qing Dynasty 清 朝 . These
difficulties were the greatest obstacle to the mission’s progress. The missionaries had
little defense. They were too far removed to Beijing, and being Spaniards, they did not
like to call on the help of France, which had done a lot for the foundation of the Catholic


PhD student in the Department of Anthropology, National Taiwan University (www.ntu.edu.tw)
Email : non.sono@gmail.com
Web site : www.marcolazzarotti.it.gg
1
Fr. Pablo FERNANDEZ, One Hundred Years of Dominican Apostolate in Formosa 1859-1958, SMC
Publishing Inc., Taipei 1994.

1
Church in China. They called upon the Spanish consul of Amoy, which was of some
help2. Of course this situation was a consequence created by the two Opium Wars
between China and European countries.
Dominicans moved back to Taiwan on 1859, just at the end of the Second Opium
War (1856-1860)3. The defeat suffered by the Chinese Empire under the Qing Dynasty
and, more important, the unequal treaties of peace that followed the Chinese defeat, have
been felt humiliating by a majority of the Chinese people, causing in this way several
popular rebellions, like the Taiping (1850-1864) and Boxer rebellion (1899-1901), until
the downfall of the Qing Dynasty in 1912, which meant the end of dynastic China. In
fact, since the Opium wars, the Chinese government and Chinese people considered
Christianity as a foreign religion, and more important, imported by colonial powers by
war and weapons.
Starting from these historical considerations, we can understand the strong feeling of
hostility with which the Taiwanese people (at least the largest part of them) received the
first missionaries from the Philippines. They were arrested by the local Mandarins,
kidnapped, robbed; their houses and churches were destroyed, looted and burned by local
population. Despite this, however, their job gave, and still gives, remarkable fruits.

The Cultural Interpretation of an Encounter

The missionaries who arrived on the island represented, for the local population, the
other. They were bearers of a new way of life, of a new way to interpret reality; in other
words they were messengers of a new culture. I think we must see the situation of the
Catholic Church in Taiwan as a reciprocal cultural interpretation based on the cultural
schemes specific of each culture. With culture I mean the symbolic system which gives a
meaning to all big and tiny events that characterize the everyday life of every man and
woman.

2
Verbist Study Note, Special Issue on the Catholic Church in Taiwan: 1626-1965, Published occasionally
by the China Program of the CICM SM Province, 16. Taipei 1994. Partially available on:
<http://www.catholic.org.tw/dominicanfamily/taiwan_history_english.htm>
3
J. W. WONG Deadly Dreams: Opium, Imperialism, and the Arrow War (1856-1860) in China,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998

2
 When Dominicans arrived in Taiwan, they brought with them a considerable
experience, but especially they arrived as protagonist of the Chinese Rites Controversy.
By definition, the term “Chinese Rites” does not refer to any indigenous Chinese rituals,
but to three specific customs. First, periodic ceremonies performed in honor of
Confucius, in temples or halls dedicated to the well-respected Chinese philosopher.
Second, the veneration of the familial dead, a practice found in every social class and
manifested by various forms of piety including prostration, incense burning, serving food,
etc. Third, the missionary use of the terms Tian (天 heaven) and Shangdi ( 上帝 lord of
heaven) to convey the Christian concept of God4.
Dominican, in opposition to Jesuits, rejected these practices defining them as
“pagan”, “idolatry” and “superstitious”. Chinese who wanted embrace to Catholic faith
were obliged to burn down their ancestors’ tablet and any image of Confucius present in
their home. Beside this, believers were forbidden to perform with their family the
traditional ceremonies that were – and still are until today – performed during the lunar
New Year or on other occasions. They were also forbidden to marry not-Catholic
believers. All this could help us to understand how these precepts, imposing a total
renunciation of the local traditions, often were an obstacle for those who wanted
embraces the new faith.
From the Taiwanese point of view, the situation was complex and complicated. Local
population - which was a result of different migratory movements from Mainland China
– was composed of people belonging to the Han ethnic group 漢 族 , which again was
composed of people coming from different parts of Mainland, as Minnan 閩南 and Hakka
客 家 people. These people, which came from the provinces of Fujian 福 建 and
Guangdong 廣東, were in contrast each others. Politically, the island was governed by a
Mandarin, who had ambassadors in the bigger cities. But from a local perspective, the
power was managed by the clan leader of the most powerful families. These families
thank to a net of influences and intimidations, created an out-and-out local mafia.
We must remember the deep xenophobic feeling that these populations felt toward
Western people. As example we can cite the case of the city of Tainan, which in 1868

4
Dy Aristotle CHAN S.J., Weaving a Dream, Reflection for Chinese Filipino. Catholics today, Jesuit
Communications, Quezon City 2000

3
was bombed by the English consol5. This intervention was requested by English citizens
(opium traders but also Protestant missionaries) exasperated by the continuous vexes and
mistreatment that they suffered from Taiwanese people. As we can see, the hate toward
Western people – called foreigner ghosts or devils 洋 鬼 子 – was generalized and not
specifically direct toward missionaries.
If contextualized in this way, we can understand many of the episodes described on
the missionaries’ letters: on one hand the missionary who after a touchily defense in
Spanish, was surprised that “I did not speak Chinese, and, most assuredly, the mandarins
did not speak Spanish”6; and on the other hand the conduct of the local people, who
defined the missionaries as “barbarians”7or “dog and pig” considering them as people
who came in Taiwan “merely to tell stories”8, which was the insult which hurted the
missionaries most.
In this above-mentioned frame, we can understand why Farther Sainz (the first
Dominican missionaries who arrived in the island after 1859) was ejected from his house.
And when he looked for another house, everywhere he went, the story was the same:
there were many houses available for rent, but none of them could be rented to this
missionary since the Mandarins were obviously hostile to him9.
At the same time we can also understand the Tainan (at that time the capital of the
island) Mandarin who, on 1866, forbade Taiwanese people to receive the baptism10, and
at the same time the strong protest of the Dominicans, which complained that that was “a
violation of the provisions of the treaties signed between the European countries and the
Chinese emperor at Peking”11.

5
Verbist Study Note, Special Issue on the Catholic Church in Taiwan: 1626-1965, Published occasionally
by the China Program of the CICM SM Province, 16. Taipei 1994. Partially available on:
<http://www.catholic.org.tw/dominicanfamily/taiwan_history_english.htm>
6
Fr. Pablo FERNANDEZ, One Undred Years of Dominican Apostolate in Formosa 1859-1958, SMC
Publishing Inc., Taipei 1994, page 43
7
FERNANDEZ, Op. Cit., page 110
8
FERNANDEZ, Op. Cit., page 48
9
Verbist Study Note, Special Issue on the Catholic Church in Taiwan: 1626-1965, Published occasionally
by the China Program of the CICM SM Province, 16. Taipei 1994. Partially available on:
<http://www.catholic.org.tw/dominicanfamily/taiwan_history_english.htm>
10
FERNANDEZ, Op. Cit., page 76
11
FERNANDEZ, Op. Cit., page 77

4
A Dialog between Cultures

What I want to stress here, is an encounter between two cultures, or better, a dialog
that developing itself on the basement of the respective cultural roots, has created the
history of the history of the Catholic Church in Taiwan.
This dialog between two cultures, this encounter-collision between two different
concepts of the world and of the man, can have different levels of interpretation.
Although submitted to a strong psychological and physical pressure (kidnapping, robbery
and ill-treatment), missionaries – observant of Jesus' precept that at the person who
strikes you on one cheek, offer the other one as well -, and christianly persuaded of the
redeemer value of martyrdom, missionaries never replied with other violence to the
violence made by Chinese people. Dominicans always addressed theirs complain to the
Mandarin, asking to be protect as stipulated by the treats between Chinese emperor and
European countries. Clearly these complain remained unheard, in part because the above-
mentioned situation, and in part because the Mandarin did not have at his disposal
enough forces in order to contrast the local gangs that practically managed the power in
that period.
This way of conduct, which we can define as exemplar, brought lots of “cultural”
consequences. On one hand the authors of these violence (for the most part Cantonese
people, probably Hakka) read the pacific conduct of the missionaries as an explicit act of
submission, with the consequence of an increase in hate toward the Fathers. On the other
hand the faithful interpreted this pacific conduct as a loose of the face, and in many cases
they left the ecclesial community.
What I want to stress out, it is that it seems that the same fact has been interpreted in
different way by different people, in according with their own cultural comprehension. In
other words, it seems denied any opportunity of dialog and of a reciprocal understanding.

Levels and Locus of Dialog

What I tried to show out on the previous pages is that the encounter between two
cultures can happen only in dialogic terms. What constantly appears from history – 150

5
years ago as well as today – it is that it seems impossible to avoid that this dialog being
interpreted by each participant, according to their own cultural category.
According to thesis stated by Todorov on his book The Discovery of America12, this
dialog can be considerate as a process composed by three levels. First of all, there is the
value judgment that Todorov calls the axiological level. At this level I can recognize the
other nature as good or bad, I love or do not love him, the other is my equal or my
inferior. A second typology is what Todorov calls action of rapprochement or distancing,
action that the author describes as a praxeological level. That means that I can accept and
embrace the other's values, I identify myself with the other or else I identify the other
with myself, I impose my own image upon him. Between these two extremes there is also
a third term, which is neutrality, indifference. Thirdly, there is a third level, the epistemic
one: I know or am ignorant of the other's identity (1984:185), I recognize the identity of
the other and in this way I am also able to better understand my own identity. Of course
there are relations between these three levels, but no strict implication. I can know very
well and recognize a culture identity but this does not mean that I like it. Or I like it but I
don't recognize the other’s identity.

But what is the place where these cultures meet, crash and have dialogues with each
others? If we speak in terms of dialog, we must have a place in which this dialog can
happen.
According to my experiences, I say that the place where the two (or more is we take
in consideration the globalized world) cultures meet each other is the person. Man is the
locus where different cultures can find their space, interact, and make a dialog. In other
words, the person is the field in which these cultures can rapport each others.
I’ll try to explain this concept with an example. Shuiwei village 水 尾 村 is a little
village situated in the southern part of Taiwan, in the township of Lunbei 崙背鄉, in the
Yunlin county 雲林縣. Catholic faith arrived here more that one hundred years ago, and
in a way so particular that it is worthwhile to be told. Shuiwei village is the first village in
Lunbei that accepted the Christian religion. Until now, the majority of Christians and
Catholic believers still live in this village, where there are two important familiar groups:
12
Tzvetan TODOROV, The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other, Harper & Row, New York
1984

6
Zhong 鍾 and Li 李 13. Around 1898 year, three brothers of the Zhong family were the
bosses of the local criminal community. Their power in the Shuiwei village was so big
that they provided a shelter to many murderers who found refuge there changing their
surname. They exercised his power also in places ten or more kilometers from Shuiwei,
like Erlun 二崙 or Xiluo 西螺. At that time in Xiluo a Presbyterian Church was founded.
The Pastor of the Church was a missionary from England, who beloved a bicycle with
which he was used to pay visit to the faithful. In all territory at that time there were only
few bicycles, therefore having a bicycle was considered as a status symbol. The bigger of
the three brothers (Dage 大 哥 ) was very curious about this bicycle, that in Chinese is
called “Iron Horse” 鐵馬, so he decided to go to ride “a horse that doesn't eat grass”, but
because his inexperience he fell down several times. At this point the missionary jumped
on the bicycle and started to ride it, arousing the admiration of Mr. Zhong. After that
time, whenever Mr. Zhong went to Xiluo to receive his protection money, he at all times
tried to ride the missionary bicycle, and in order to take a rest he started to listen the
sermons of the Pastor. Unexpectedly he became more and more interested in the
Christian faith, he was very touched by the Gospel sentence “Peace
I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give it to you.
Do not let your hearts be troubled or afraid.” (John 14,27). Meditating on this sentence he
realized that in his life, the lacking think in his life was just the peace, because his kind of
life was very hard and dangerous. Therefore he communicates his choice to his brothers;
one of them – Mr. Zhong Qin 鍾欽 – agreed with him, and he also received the baptism,
while the third brother, on the other hand continued his previous kind of life. In order to
show up their faith, people in Shuiwei built a church that was also used as place to dry
the rice. One time the two families – the old brother and Mr. Zhong Qin – started to
quarrel and entered in conflict because each family wanted put the rice inside the church
earlier than the other. The relationships between these two families became more and
more highly charged, and when a Catholic medicine's seller arrived in the village starting
to preach out his Catholic faith while he was selling his medicaments, the head of one
family, Mr. Zhong Qin decided to convert himself and his family to the Catholic faith.

13
Shuling LIAO 廖淑玲, Zhang Zhong Lunbei 掌中崙背 [Lunbei in Your ands], Yunlin Xian Zhengfu 雲
林縣政府, Douliu:斗六 2005

7
 It is this chain of (almost accidental) facts one after the other that started a strong
Catholic community (the actual Bishop of Jiayi 嘉義 is the grand-grandson of Zhongqin)
and that continued to consolidate the local church without the help of any missionaries
(the first priest established himself in Lunbei only after the Second World War).

At this point we can ask a question: and the dialog? Where we can put the so long
cited cultural dialog? In my view in the only place in which it can show itself: inside the
person. How can it be possible? First of all we must to affirm that culture is not a
concrete thing, but rather a system of symbols and significant, that in some ways culture
imposes meaning on the world; culture makes the world understandable through semiotic
processes. “Believing, with Max Weber, that man is an animal suspended in webs of
significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs”14; webs of meaning
which form every aspect of our daily life, from interpersonal relationships, to daily acts,
such as (how) to get dressed or (what) to eat.
The concept of religion falls under the boundaries of this environment of meanings.
Following Geertz, we can try to define religion as a cultural system, “where culture
means a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of
inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which non communicate,
perpetuate and develop their knowledge about attitudes toward life”15. Meanings,
according to this definition, are embodied in symbols and these symbols are historically
transmitted. But because history cannot belong only to one man, it follows that these
patterns of meanings also belong to a community, in other words, these patterns of
meanings are public.
I think we must put the situation of the Catholic Church in Taiwan within the
framework defined by the above mentioned concepts: as a new symbolic system that
merges into a preexistent one. To the old symbolic system are added new symbols, which
are translated and interpreted according to the symbols already existent. In this way each
14
Clifford GEERTZ, Thick Description:Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture , In Interpretation of
Cultures. Basic Books, New York 1973 Pp. 3-30. Fully available on: <http://www.iwp.uni-
linz.ac.at/lxe/sektktf/GG/HyperGeertz-1960-1969.htm>
15
Clifford GEERTZ, Religion as a Cultural System, In Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books, New York
1973 Pp. 87-125. Fully available on: <http://www.iwp.uni-linz.ac.at/lxe/sektktf/GG/HyperGeertz-1960-
1969.htm>

8
person chooses the symbols - in a personal way – that in a particular moment and
situation can help him resolve everyday problems or give a deeper meaning at his life.
It is clear that these cultural relationships are dialectic. Not only the preexistent
symbolic universe provides a translation of the new symbols (western people see as
devils and so on), But the new event may become new symbols able to re-interpret all the
dominant symbolic system, as the words of Jesus for Mr. Zhong. What is working here, it
is a dialogic relationship that involves both Taiwanese people and missionaries.
In conclusion, considering the person as the locus (and the time) where this dialog
happens, the traditional concept for which we can completely understand other cultures
just discovering one or more abstract concept, finally despaired. Putting man as space for
the dialog, person finally returns at the centre of our concern and our relationships.