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.”
[pg 249]
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 [pg 250] 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. [pg 251]
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 [pg 252] 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 [pg 253] 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. [pg 254]
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 [pg 255] 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 [pg 256] 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 [pg 257] 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.
