One distinctive feature of Islam in Turkey—and this
applies to nearly all Moslem races in the Ottoman empire
except the Arabs—is that the Turk does not know the
language of his sacred book. The Koran is as much a sealed
book to the Turk as the Bible is to the peasant Roman
Catholic of Central Europe. He knows, even if he is a
peasant, many Arabic words and phrases, but although he
may read the Koran, he cannot understand it; and it is, to
the Mohammedan, a greater impiety to attempt to translate
the Koran from the Arabic, than it was, till recent
years, in the eyes of the faithful but ignorant Romanist
to translate the Latin Bible into French or German. This
ignorance of Arabic is a fact even among the more or less
educated Turks of the capital and coast cities. It is
very rare to find one who can read Arabic intelligently,
and who speaks it correctly. Some years ago, when
K—— Effendi, a learned Arab Koord, who had embraced
Christianity, was called before the highest Mohammedan
court, his perfect knowledge of the Arabic, of the Koran
and of Mohammedan law and traditions completely confounded
and silenced those who would have been his judges.
—From “The Mohammedan World of To-day.”
At the beginning of mission work in Turkey the government and high
officials seemed indifferent. They looked upon missionaries as only
another sect of Christians. It apparently did not occur to them that
Christians would attempt to present the claims of their religion to
Moslems, or that there was the least probability that any Mohammedan
would listen to a Christian upon the subject of religion. For centuries
no Christian in Turkey had made any such attempt. Indeed, the lives
of the Christians there exhibited little that was attractive in the
religion of Jesus Christ.
The Turks, therefore, appeared to assume that the missionary movement
was an effort to reform the Christians or to divide and weaken them. To
either of these purposes or results the sultan and his officers saw no
objections. To the Turks all who are not Moslems are infidels, and it
mattered little to them what these believed since they denied faith in
Mohammed.
Contrary to expectations, observing Moslems were attracted by the
fact that the Protestants made use of neither pictures nor images
in their worship, and demanded purity of life, honesty, temperance,
and truthfulness in their adherents. This was to them a new phase of
Christianity, one that accorded more with the Mohammedan ideas than
the practises of the Catholic and Oriental Churches with which they
were familiar. Among the early inquirers there were many Mohammedans.
In 1835 Dr. Goodell of Constantinople wrote, “Almost every day I
am visited by Mohammedans. I could very profitably devote my whole
time to them.” In cases not a few, in the early days, the Turkish
officials were not slow to shield the evangelical Christians from the
persecutions of the officials of the old Churches. As it did not occur
to the sultan that there was any danger that Moslems could look with
favor upon Christianity, he was the more free to grant full religious
liberty under the importunity of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, the
British ambassador.
It was not, therefore, a difficult matter for Sultan Abdul Medjid to
issue, November 3, 1839, an imperial rescript named the _Hatti Sherif
of Gul Hane_, promising to protect the life, honor, and property of
all his subjects irrespective of race or religion. At that time the
sultan was eager to enlist and hold the sympathy of European rulers,
and believed that such a concession would materially help toward it.
This directly pledged the protection of the imperial government to
every subject of the empire in the exercise of his rights as a citizen,
without regard to religion or sect. It was the first declaration of the
Turkish government putting Christians upon a parity with Mohammedans
before the law. It was a long forward step in the way of administrative
reform.
In August, 1843, an Armenian youth, some twenty years of age, was
beheaded in the streets of Constantinople and his body exposed for
three days, because he had once declared himself a Moslem and then
later recanted. It seems that through fear of punishment this young
man had accepted Islam and left the country. Later he returned and
resumed the practises of his former religion. In spite of threats and
promises, he adhered to his ancestral faith with the above results.
Sir Stratford de Redcliffe did all in his power to save his life, but
without success.
This execution aroused the ambassadors of England, France, Russia, and
Prussia, who united in a formal demand upon the sultan to abolish the
death penalty for a change of religion. Hitherto, there had been full
liberty to change any and all non-Moslem religions, and for any one to
abandon the faith of his fathers and to embrace Islam, but the right
had been denied to a Mohammedan to depart from that faith.
Under pressure brought to bear by the four named ambassadors, led by
the British, the sultan on the twenty-first of March, 1844, gave a
written pledge as follows: “The Sublime Porte engages to take effectual
measures to prevent, henceforward, the persecution and putting to death
of the Christian who is an apostate.” Two days later Abdul Medjid, in
a conference with Sir Stratford, gave assurance “that henceforward
neither shall Christianity be insulted in my dominions, nor shall
Christians be in any way persecuted for their religion.” The giver
of these pledges was not only the sultan of Turkey, but he was also
the caliph of the Mohammedan world. The year 1844 is memorable in
Turkey and among the Mohammedans for this record of concessions in the
interests of religious liberty in Turkey, and for all races, including
Moslems.
In 1847 the Protestants had no standing in the Turkish empire.
Nominally they were under the protection of the patriarch at
Constantinople, but in fact they were without protection since their
formal excommunication from the Old Church in the previous year. When
their separation had been made complete, it was necessary that some
recognition be secured for them from the sultan himself in order
that they might continue to live in the empire. Through the British
ambassador negotiations were carried on which resulted in the issuance
of a firman by the grand vizier declaring that “Christian subjects
of the Ottoman government professing Protestantism shall constitute
a separate community with all the rights and privileges belonging to
others,” and that “no interference whatever be permitted in their
temporal or spiritual concerns on the part of the patriarch, monks, or
priests of other sects.” This Protestant charter of 1847, as it was
called, covered all Protestants who should change from the ancient
Churches, but seemed studiously to avoid giving recognition to the
possibility of Moslems accepting Protestantism. This charter was not
issued with the imperial authority of the sultan, but only under the
ministerial authority of the Porte. It was, therefore, liable to appeal
at any time by either the sovereign or any succeeding ministry. In
November, 1850, the reigning sultan, Abdul Medjid, granted an imperial
charter to the Protestants confirming their distinct organization as a
civil community and guaranteeing them religious rights and privileges
equal to those granted all other religious organizations.
This secured in _perpetuum_ to the Protestants the right to choose
their own political chief, to transact business, to worship, to marry,
to bury, and to perform all the functions of a religious organization
under imperial protection. This was the Magna Charta of Protestantism
in Turkey, and is called “The Imperial Protestant Charter of 1850.”
This was supplemented in 1853 by an imperial firman which was sent
to all governors in the provinces, as well as to the head men of the
Protestant communities, requiring that the charter of 1850 be strictly
enforced. The above were issued in the interests of the Protestants
alone.
Besides the written pledge of the sultan given to the ambassadors in
1844, there was no charter in Turkey insuring religious liberty to
Mohammedans, except as the above mentioned Protestant charters admitted
of such an interpretation. That was indefinite and, it was feared, did
not guarantee safety to a Mohammedan who should change his faith. The
European nations had demanded that the death penalty for Moslems upon
changing their religion should be abolished.
In February, 1856, Sultan Medjid issued what is called the Magna Charta
of religious liberty in Turkey. It is entitled the Hatti Sherif (Sacred
Edict) or Hatti Humayoun (Imperial Edict). It was regarded at that time
as guaranteeing full religious liberty to all Turkish subjects of every
creed and faith. One sentence reads, “No subject of my empire shall be
hindered in the exercise of the religion that he professes, nor shall
he be in any way annoyed on this account. No one shall be compelled to
change his religion.” Lord Stratford assumed in his correspondence with
his government that hereafter no one was to be molested on account of
his religion or punished “whatever form of faith he denies.”
This imperial charter was recognized by Great Britain, France, Austria,
Russia, Sardinia, and Turkey, through their representatives who met
in Paris in the same year to form the Treaty of Paris, to which body
it was communicated by “His Imperial Majesty, the Sultan” and as
“emanating spontaneously from his own will.” However, it was clearly
understood that no right was conceded to the above named Powers
“to interfere either collectively or separately in the relations
of His Majesty, the Sultan, with his subjects nor in the internal
administration of his empire.” This left Turkey the only interpreter
of the document, and as sovereign in the administration of her own
internal affairs, including the actual granting of religious liberty.
The acts of government and the behavior of Turkish officials at
that period gave the impression that the Porte meant to recognize
and enforce the principles of religious liberty. Many Mohammedans
began openly to purchase copies of the Turkish Bible and to examine
the claims of Christianity. In September, 1857, officials of the
government in Constantinople carefully examined a Turkish gentleman,
Selim Effendi, and his wife, and gave a certificate that they had
become Christians without compulsion, and that “it was the will of His
Majesty, the Sultan, that every Ottoman subject, without exception,
should enjoy entire religious freedom.” The spirit of inquiry spread
and a converted Turk was employed as an evangelist in Constantinople
and was unhindered in his labors among his countrymen.
In 1858 religious meetings were held with Turks and Koords in Eastern
Turkey. In 1859 it was reported that the Turkish governors of Sivas,
Diarbekr, and Cæsarea, after considering cases of the conversion of
Moslems to Christianity, declared publicly that a Mohammedan who
became a Christian would not be molested. In 1860 cases were reported
from the Taurus Mountains of converted Moslems, and of others who
were attendant upon Christian services. One of these was a member of
the governor’s council. In the vicinity of Aintab, at that time, some
thirty Mohammedans were in attendance upon Christian services at one
outstation. There were conversions of Turks reported at Diarbekr,
Harpoot, and Cæsarea, followed by baptism, and without disturbance.
Up to 1860 fifteen Moslem converts had been baptized at Constantinople.
One of these was a Turkish imam or preacher. In an examination before
the Minister of War this imam declared that there were forty Turks in
the city who believed as he did. This spirit of inquiry was wide-spread
and continued until 1864. There was no doubt that Christian ideals
were spreading rapidly among the Turks, and it is thought that the
government formed the opinion that a considerable number of Mohammedans
were desirous of reforming their own faith. Sultan Abdul Aziz became
suspicious and fearful, and set spies to watch the missionaries. On
a Sunday morning in Pera, Constantinople, Selim Effendi, a Turkish
evangelist, and some twenty Turks were arrested as they emerged from
their places of worship and were cast into prison. Without trial some
of these men were sent into exile.
The official French paper, the _Journal de Constantinople_, in its
issue of August 4, 1864, published a leader supposed to emanate from
Ali Pasha, the grand vizier, in which the arrest of the Christian Turks
was charged to the alleged fact that the zeal of the missionaries
in making converts amounted to a “veritable war,” and that in this
work of proselyting seductive arts were employed. These charges were
investigated by the Minister of the United States, and by the British
ambassador, and not only were the missionaries exonerated from all
blame, but Earl Russell, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
in Great Britain, strongly defended the missionaries and demanded
of Turkey that she maintain in her dealings with her subjects the
observance of the true principles of religious liberty. Upon the demand
of the English government the exiled Turks were permitted to return.
It was at once understood by the Moslems that for them there was no
liberty to change their faith. It is true that none were arrested upon
the open charge of changing their religion, but every conceivable
pretense was trumped up against them, to substantiate which any number
of Mohammedan witnesses could be procured, and the Christian Mohammedan
was sent into exile, languished in prison, or disappeared from view.
Frequently missionaries attempted to follow up a case of manifest
persecution, but they usually came upon a medical certificate that the
man had died in prison from fever or some other natural cause, or lost
all traces of the prisoner through frequent transfers to distant parts.
Some men are known to have been shot by their guard in the transfer.
In the Treaty of Berlin, entered into in 1878 by England, Austria,
Russia, France, Italy, and Turkey, Article 2 states that absolute
religious liberty is to exist in all the various territories mentioned
in the preceding article “including the whole Turkish empire.” The
sixty-second article begins, “The Sublime Porte, having expressed its
willingness to maintain the principle of religious liberty and to give
it the widest sphere, the contracting parties take cognizance of this
spontaneous declaration.” Then follow specifications of how the sultan
is to carry out these principles.
In spite of these reiterated declarations, it is evident that the
Turkish government does not and never did intend to acknowledge the
right of a Moslem to become a Christian. A high official once told
the writer that Turkey gives to all her subjects the widest religious
liberty. He said, “There is the fullest liberty for the Armenian
to become a Catholic, for the Greek to become an Armenian, for the
Catholic and Armenian to become Greeks, for any one of them to become
Protestant, or for all to become Mohammedans. There is the fullest and
completest religious liberty for all the subjects of this empire.”
In response to the question, “How about liberty for the Mohammedan
to become a Christian?” he replied, “That is an impossibility in the
nature of the case. When one has once accepted Islam and become a
follower of the Prophet he cannot change. There is no power on earth
that can change him. Whatever he may say or claim cannot alter the fact
that he is a Moslem still and must always be such. It is, therefore,
an absurdity to say that a Moslem has the privilege of changing his
religion, for to do so is beyond his power.” For the last forty years
the actions of the official and influential Turks have borne out this
theory of religious liberty in the Ottoman empire. Every Moslem showing
interest in Christian things takes his life in his hands. No protection
can be afforded him against the false charges that begin at once to
multiply. His only safety lies in flight.