The mission era is over, the partnership era is upon us. But what does partnership mean when one church no longer sends missionaries and the other no longer sends students for training? Last August the colleges of The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan and the colleges of The Presbyterian Church in Canada tried something new. Students and staff from the Canadian colleges went to Taiwan for a consultation with students and staff of the Taiwanese colleges on biblical interpretation. The professors from each college made presentations and professors from the other country responded. It made for lively and stimulating discussion.
By the end of the meeting, identity had emerged as a crucial common theme. There was the identity of the biblical author. Who was this person, or persons, who left us the text? There was the identity of the interpreter; we all go to the Bible with different identities, men or women, old or young, Canadian or Taiwanese.
The students were given a selection of texts and asked to prepare a sermon outline. One of the texts was the story of Moses' adoption by an Egyptian princess. Two students, a Canadian and a Taiwanese, chose this text, but approached it in entirely different ways. The Canadian gave a series of very personal reasons why he had chosen this text and expounded it in terms of the low-key ways God deals with us. The Taiwanese student saw the story as the beginning of Israel's liberation, a liberation he saw as similar to that beginning in Taiwan. From 1895 to 1945 Taiwan was part of the Japanese Empire, and the Taiwanese were expected to be Japanese. Then they came under the control of the nationalist government from mainland China, and they were expected to be Chinese. At no time were they allowed to be Taiwanese. In the last 10 years things have loosened up a bit, and the Taiwanese student saw a parallel between his people's experience and that of the Jews. The Canadian acknowledged there was a liberation element in the story, but he regarded it as secondary. His Taiwanese colleague disagreed.
In other words, who we are influences how we read the Bible. Within reason, there is no right interpretation of a text. These differences were not deplored in our discussions; they were celebrated. At times it seemed that the theme of the consultation was In Praise of Ambiguity.
Still, the experience was worth repeating. We plan to have another meeting in Canada in a couple of years. The conversation, and the partnership, continues.
