An exchange between the believers of Matsu, the goddess of the sea, on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait has become highly politicized recently. Ever since Taichung County Council Speaker Yen Ching-piao
In the March election, all the major candidates, including Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), promised -- if elected -- to approve direct links for religious purposes, in a bid to solicit support from Matsu followers. Therefore, one test that the new government now faces is how to make good on this promise.
Yen announced that, through the medium of divining cups, Matsu had indicated July 16 would be an auspicious date for the first direct sea pilgrimage to the Matsu Temple in Meizhou
Yen's announcement openly challenges the new government's China policy. The direct religious pilgrimage of thousands of Matsu followers to China has turned political. But this entire matter is unrelated to religion. Matsu has nothing to do with direct sea links.
On June 4, Yen received "instructions" about the date of the pilgrimage by throwing divining cups in front of a crowd of Matsu followers and TV cameras. It was very inappropriate for him to allege that the date of the trip was determined by Matsu.
Throwing divining cups is a traditional way of "communicating" with gods, a bridge between the mortal and the divine. This is a religious ritual through which people ask for a god's permission to do things. The god's will is interpreted by the ways the pair of cups fall when they are thrown to the ground.
When one cup faces up and the other cup down, we have a "hsinchiao"
On TV, we saw that Yen first got a hsiaochiao, a sign that his question was irrelevant. According to the ritual rules, Yen should have changed his question. Instead, he threw the cups again for the same question and got a hsinchiao this time. He then announced that Matsu had picked July 16 as the date for a direct pilgrimage to Meizhou.
His move was improper as far as religious rituals are concerned.
According to ritual, a positive answer from the god is obtained only when one has three hsinchiao in a row. In any event, July 16 may be an auspicious day for the pilgrimage, but I doubt Matsu would require a specific route for the pilgrimage. After all, it's the faith of the followers that counts. In short, it is absolutely inappropriate to say that it is Matsu's will to have direct links for religious purposes.
Pressure for such links has everything to do with politics and nothing to do with religion
A pilgrimage to Meizhou is a religious event. Direct links for religious purposes, however, is merely a common political show. These two, entirely separate, issues have been inappropriately mixed up and linked together.
Government officials oppose the direct links for religious purposes as a defense of the current ban against direct links, while legislators attack each other to promote the political interests of their parties. All these political disputes have nothing to do with Matsu. The selfish desire of Matsu's followers has brought shame to her name!
Fortunately, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC,
Politicians must not use the pilgrimage as an excuse for a power struggle and government officials must not disgrace the goddess by accusing her followers of exerting religious pressure against the government. Both groups have insulted Matsu!
Politicians have to take most of the responsibility for the politicization of direct links for religious purposes. To win more votes, they have unscrupulously turned religious forums into campaign stages by making reckless promises in front of the gods. Politicians should do some serious soul-searching -- when so many people in Taiwan look to religion rather than politics for answers in life and make generous donations to religious groups. A society where political corruption is rampant is the best nursery for religious frauds.
Matsu is supposed to be a goddess who bestows peace and mercy. However, the issue of direct links for religious purposes has caused serious discord in our society. How can her followers have the heart to cause political turmoil in her name? This religious pilgrimage has exposed the distorted relationship between religion and politics in Taiwan.
Lin Pi-yao is a professor at Tunghai University.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
RSS