Only last year the Arabic paper, Es-Zahir, published in
Egypt, said: “Has the time not come yet when uniting the
suppressed wailings of India with our own groans and
sighs in Egypt, we should say to each other, Come, let
us be one, following the divine words, ‘Victory belongs
to the united forces’? Certainly the time has come when
we, India and Egypt, should cut and tear asunder the ties
of the yoke imposed on us by the English.” On the other
hand, Mohammed Husain, the editor of a paper at Lahore,
wrote a treatise on Jihad (1893), stating: “The present
treatise on the question of Jihad has been compiled for
two reasons. My first object is that the Mohammedans,
ignorant of the texts bearing on Jihad and the conditions
of Islam, may become acquainted with them, and that they
may not labor under the misapprehension that it is their
religious duty to wage war against another people solely
because that people is opposed to Islam. Thus they, by
ascertaining the fixed conditions and texts, may be saved
forever from rebellion, and may not sacrifice their lives
and property fruitlessly nor unjustly shed the blood of
others. My second object is that non-Mohammedans and
the government under whose protection the Mohammedans
live, may not suspect Mohammedans of thinking that it is
lawful for us to fight against non-Mohammedans, or that
it is our duty to interfere with the life and property of
others, or that we are bound to convert others forcibly to
Mohammedanism, or to spread Islam by means of the sword.”
So the question of “religion and the sword” is still an
open one among Moslems. It must needs be so long as they
obey the Koran and tradition, for Mohammed said, “He
who dies and has not fought for the religion of Islam,
nor has even said in his heart, ‘Would to God I were a
champion that could die in the road of God,’ is even as
a hypocrite.” And again, still more forcibly, “The fire
of hell shall not touch the legs of him who is covered
with the dust of battle in the road of God.” In spite
of cruelty, bloodshed, dissension and deceit, the story
of the Moslem conquest with the sword of Jihad is full
of heroism and inspiration.
—S. M. ZWEMER, F. R. G. S. in “Islam.”
Selim III, sultan of Turkey from 1789-1807, more formally and
openly displayed the spirit and purpose of reform than had any of
his predecessors. He had been carefully educated, and conceived the
bold design of becoming the regenerator of the empire. He erected a
printing-press at Scutari, welcomed intelligent foreigners, employed
Christian workmen, and, among many other things, changed the system
of taxation. He also called in European generals to train his army,
and sought advice from the European residents of his capital. In the
meantime, the invasion of Egypt by Napoleon had stirred up the passions
of the populace of Constantinople, and the sultan with his unpopular
reform measures tottered upon his throne. Russians marched into the
Danubian provinces, while a British fleet passed the Dardanelles and
anchored at the mouth of the Bosporus. The Janissaries mutinied in
1807 and Selim’s rule ceased. These internal imbroglios had attracted
the attention of the world to Constantinople and Egypt, if not to all
Turkey.
After the brief reign of Mustipha IV, Mahmud II ascended the throne in
1808. He possessed extraordinary energy and force, and warmly espoused
the reform measures of Selim. Resisting Russia’s demand that all Greeks
in Turkey should be placed under the immediate protection of Russia,
he was soon at war with that country. Napoleon prevented the occupancy
of Constantinople by the Russians, but most of the Danube province was
lost. A Hellenic revolution was later fermented which broke into open
conflict early in the beginning of mission work in Turkey.
Turkey as a government and as a factor in the relations of Russia to
Europe was thus brought to the attention of the West. At the same
time there was a revival of interest in the Jews, both in Europe and
in the United States. There was a restudying of history and prophecy
with new interpretations, which led to the formation of societies
to circulate among them the New Testament and to preach to them the
gospel of Christ. Naturally, Palestine and Syria came first of all
to be recognized as a land that had peculiar claims upon Christians.
There was a wide-spread belief that the Jews were about to return to
their ancestral home, and that such return would be limited only by the
obstructions put in their way by the Ottoman government. Levi Parsons,
the first American missionary to Palestine, said, in 1819, just before
sailing, “Destroy the Ottoman empire and nothing but a miracle will
prevent the Jews’ immediate return from the four winds of heaven.” It
was natural that, in their judgment, missionaries ought to be there
to receive them when the Ottoman empire, then apparently in its death
struggle, tottered to its fall.
Moreover, the Turkish empire embraced the lands of the Bible. There
was in the minds and hearts of American Christians not a little of
the spirit of the crusaders of the middle ages. Why should the soil
trodden by the feet of the prophets and apostles, yes, even by the
Lord himself, remain a stranger to the voice of the preacher of
righteousness and untouched by the feet of the modern apostle? The
instructions given to the first missionaries to Turkey dwelt upon
this impressive and moving fact, as did the early letters of the
missionaries. Unlike the crusaders, these aimed at a purely spiritual
conquest, but it included the Christian subjection of all races and
peoples.
As a part of this same impulse may be placed the interest in the
historic Greek and Syrian Churches. Students of Church history were
profoundly moved as they learned of the decadence of vital Christianity
in these Churches, and they were thrilled with the desire to inaugurate
among them a revival that should restore them to their former
prominence and power. The purpose to reach Mohammedans does not appear
prominent in the earlier documents of this period, although it is not
by any means entirely wanting.
In view of these facts and also since Turkey was the most accessible to
America of any Asiatic country, it is not strange that in 1819, with
unusual enthusiasm, two missionaries, Levi Parsons and Pliny Fisk, were
set apart for work in Turkey by the American Board of Commissioners,
with special reference to the Jews in Palestine.
As a strategic center in which to begin to prosecute missionary work,
few countries are more attractive than Turkey. It lies along the
southern border of Russia throughout its entire length, except as
separated by the Black Sea. Upon the east it borders upon Persia, and
constitutes almost the only approach to this country of the shah, as
well as to the Caucasus possessions of the czar. Arabia, Egypt, and
North Africa all border upon the same Mediterranean Sea, and many
important islands like Cyprus and Crete lie but little off its coast.
Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman empire, occupies the most
strategic position of any city in Europe and dominates both the
European and Asiatic sides of the Bosporus. To this center all the
great and historic cities of Turkey look for political direction, and
to it come sooner or later representatives of every tribe and race
in the empire. All traffic from the Black Sea to the outer world and
even from Persia and southern and eastern Russia must perforce pass
through Constantinople and the Dardanelles. It stands upon the highway
and at the crossroads of commerce and travel. As a base for missionary
operations, not only upon Turkey but upon adjacent countries as well,
it is unexcelled. Smyrna upon the Grecian Sea, with immense populations
behind it, by the strategic force of its location, commanded the early
attention of those sent out to explore for location. Beirut in Syria
attracted for the same reason the attention of the missionaries to
Palestine.
There is an advantage in carrying on missionary work among sturdy
races. When such are converted, they become a force in the work of the
Church, the conduct of Christian institutions, and the propagation of
the gospel. No country in the world could present such an array of
ancient, historic, and hardy races as Turkey. Race survival there was
under the law of the survival of the fittest. None but the invincible
remained. Some had proven themselves invincible by arms, others had
conquered by superior intelligence, strategy, and cunning. Each race
remained because, in some particular, it had an advantage over its
natural and persistent antagonists. The very fact that these races had
kept themselves apart, resisting gradual absorption while repelling
open attempts at conquest, and all for twenty centuries or more,
testifies to their sturdy worth.
Some of these, like the Greeks, Armenians, Jews, and Arabs, had been
masters of an ancient and proud civilization, in which learning
had high place and religion was supreme. There was no ground for
questioning native ability to grasp the principles of Christianity
when once these peoples were enlisted. A modern Church and a modern
civilization built upon such historic races, and propagated by such
men, could not fail to become an irresistible force in that needy land.
It is no wonder that the officers of the American Board of Missions
early concluded that the Ottoman empire was a strategic point in which
to plant modern Christianity and the institutions which it fosters and
propagates.
While the sultan represents one sect of Mohammedanism, namely, the
Sunni, and the Persians another, the Shiah, between whom there has
existed great and often bloody hostility, yet the Persian Mohammedans
make their pilgrimages to Mecca, pray towards that holy of holies, and
reverence the sacred relics in the keeping of the sultan. However much
the shah may bluster, he listens when the sultan speaks. His country
can find outlet in the West only across Turkey, and much that comes
from the outside world comes through some part of the Turkish empire.
As the Nestorians and Armenians are found upon both sides of the line,
and constitute the chief non-Moslem populations of Persia, it was most
natural to connect the mission work of Persia directly with that in
Turkey. Such a connection holds to the present time. In many respects
Turkey was the key to Persia and is to-day.
At the beginning of mission operations, Russia was especially open to
the circulation of the Scriptures in the vernacular. It was hoped and
expected that soon the entire country would be accessible for direct
Christian and educational operations among the millions of that empire.
The whole Caucasus region can be easily approached by no other route
than the Black Sea. The Armenians dwell in large numbers in that
section of the country and are constantly passing back and forth in
trade and commerce. Constantinople lies at the crossing of all roads
from the Black Sea regions and beyond to the outer world and the West.
The Balkan peninsula and Macedonia, lying to the north and west, also
center in the capital of the Ottoman empire. As the seat of government
for Macedonia and the province of Adrianople, all political influence
and movement are that way. For generations it was the capital of the
Balkan provinces and even yet it is the great metropolis to which
merchants, students, and workmen go for a longer or a shorter period of
residence abroad. There is no other center so well calculated to be the
base of operations upon all that region.
The American Board was organized in 1810 and its first missionaries
were sent out in 1812. These went to the farther East, to India and
Ceylon. It was not the intention of the Board to confine its foreign
operations to these two countries. Christian leaders in America were
surveying the world for the purpose of finding other countries in which
to establish Christian missions. Explorations into the western parts of
our own country resulted in beginning work among the Indians as early
as 1816. It is not surprising that in their survey of the wide world,
its special needs and promising openings, attention should have been
early called to Turkey.