Abbildungen der Seite

humanitarian politicians that Christianity cannot exist by the side of Islamism, and that it would therefore be better for Russia than for the Sultan to rule in the provinces inhabited by Christians. But let us look at the facts. Is Russia more tolerant towards alien religions than Turkey ? To this question no better answer can be given than the evidence of the Rev. Cyrus Hamlin, who has long resided in Turkey as an American missionary. In a lecture delivered at Boston in October, 1876,* he says :



[ocr errors]


“ Turkish officials are generally kind-hearted Turkish

All the persecution which Protestant missions have suffered in Turkey originated in the Christian priests, communities, and churches opposed to the Protestants. ... The Turks are naturally a tolerant people. It is specially provided in the Koran that any religion with a book '—that is, any religion which draws its authority from inspired writing—shall be tolerated; and under this provision the various Christian sects and the Jews find protection. ... There is this difference


* Boston Journal.


peace. It

between Russia and Turkey, that in Turkey all the various Christian sects, as well as the Mahometans, are at liberty to manage their own churches and schools, and to carry on proselytism ; but in Russia no Russian, under pain of heavy penalty, is permitted to leave the State church, and not even

a Pagan or Mahometan Tartar is allowed to be converted to any thing but the State church. The Turks are very bloody and savage in war, but are tolerant in peace. would be decidedly better for the people and for the cause of Christianity to have the Turks remain in Europe than to have Russia hold Constantinople.”

Another gentleman, who the Pall Mall Gazette * asserts “is entitled to speak for the whole body of American missionaries in Turkey,” informs that paper that “the missionaries have such a dread of Russian ascendancy

that they requested him

to lay before the German Government certain proofs of Russian intolerance, and to solicit that Government to secure from Russia guarantees for religious liberty before


* October 21st, 1876.

consenting to the dismemberment of Turkey, or to the occupation of Turkish soil by a Russian army.” The American missionaries, he says, are all known to him personally as men of candour and discretion, "and their long residence in Turkey and familiarity with the Government and peoples of the Empire entitles their opinion touching its internal affairs to most serious consideration." They are all of opinion “ that Russian influence is the most wily and deadly foe of themselves and their work.” 66 We have been indebted,” they declare, “ mainly to Russian influences for the persecutions that have attended our labours for the last forty years."

The president of a college in Turkey testifies :

[ocr errors]

“We have no special cases of persecution to allege. There is a vast amount of small

persecution against Protestants. They are sometimes excluded from representation in the local councils; sometimes their colporteurs are arrested, their books are forbidden, permits to erect buildings are withheld, and many similar things which, all put together, make their condition exceptionally uncomfortable, and constitute a repressive force to which others are not subjected. Russia never appears in this at all. She is much too wise and crafty for that. She openly and officially promises the very things she is resolved to destroy. Her agents, known and secret, are innumerable. They cover the empire. They accomplish their work through Turkish agents, without ever making themselves responsible."

And the Pall Mall correspondent concludes his letter with the following pregnant remarks :

“On the assumption that England had abandoned Turkey to her fate, I was, as I have said, requested to make an appeal to the German Government. This was several months ago. Since then the vigorous and at the same time judicious action of Lord Derby has changed the aspect of the case, and restored the British Government to its true position in Continental affairs. The uprising of the people of England against the barbarities of the Turks is most honourable to their humanity ; but I marvel that in suggesting a remedy they should be willing to take the risk of the extinction of religious liberty and

of Christian progress under the intolerant sway of Russia. Much that is attributed to the nature of the Turk is due to that false system which makes the head of the State the head also of a religion; which subjects the State in all its functions to the control of a religion that claims to be infallible; and would use the State for the defence and propagation of this religion as its supreme duty. We need not go back very far in the history of Europe to find outrages that parallel those of Bulgaria, perpetrated in the name of Christianity, under this same delusion. Now, I would give emphasis to the fact that the American missionaries in Turkey, who know both the Turks and the Russians, agree in preferring the rule of Turkey to the rule of Russia for the safety of all that is dear in our reformed Christianity. What they charge upon Russia is not a vague suspicion, not the conjecture of an individual of hasty or jealous temperament, not a gene

« ZurückWeiter »