\ 
 
 w 
 
 '^■^
 
 Cl)e ®a£ftent (Bm^tion Sls^sionatiom 
 
 PAPERS on THE EASTERN QUESTION. 
 
 No. 2. 
 
 RELIGIOUS ASPECTS OF 
 
 THE EASTERN QUESTION. 
 
 REV. J. LLEWELYN DAVIES, M.A., 
 
 Rector of Christ Church, St. AIaryleboJU\ and 
 Hon. Chaplain to the Queen. 
 
 PUBLISHED FOR THE 
 
 EASTERN QUESTION ASSOCIATION, 
 
 28, CANADA BUILDING, WESTMINSTER; 
 
 BY 
 
 CASSELL FETTER & GALPIN, 
 London, Paris 6^ Nero York.
 
 RELIGIOUS ASPECTS OF THE 
 EASTERN QUESTION. 
 
 The insurgent and disaffected inhabitants of the European pro- 
 vinces of Turkey are Christians, and the Turks who claim to rule 
 them are Mussulmans. Two great religions have thus been 
 brought into deadly conflict with each other. Looking at the 
 struggle in Eastern Europe from the religious point of view, we 
 see on the one side followers of the Cross, on the other side 
 followers of the Crescent. Is this all that English Christians 
 need to know about the matter ? Are we to take for granted that 
 it is our duty, because we are Christians, to sympathise with our 
 struggling fellow- Christians, and to help them to throw off tlie 
 yoke of an alien race and religion ? 
 
 It is inevitable that some account should be taken of the fact 
 that the disaffected subjects of Turkey are Christians. There are 
 persons in this country — others as well as Jews — to whom this 
 fact is a reason for lending their sympathies to the Turks. There 
 are many more who have been primarily induced by it to wish 
 well to the cause of the insurgents. It is reasonable that such 
 ties as those of a common religion should be felt deeply. No 
 one will think less respectfully of the prosperous English Jews for 
 sympathising with oppressed Jews in Roumania or elsewhere ; no
 
 one ought to think it strange that the cries of suffering Christians 
 should touch the hearts of their fellow-Christians. Nor ought we 
 to make an effort to quench our instinctive feeling when we are 
 reminded that these Bosnian and Bulgarian Christians, though 
 they bear the common name, profess a Christianity of a very 
 different type from our own. There is neither folly nor injustice 
 in thinking more of the points in which we agree than of those in 
 which we differ. We have a right to believe that in any com- 
 munion to which the name of Christ is supremely sacred, and 
 which confesses the paramount authority of the New Testament, 
 however it may have been degraded by superstitious corruptions, 
 there are objects of appeal and sources of moral influence which 
 justify the hope of a regenerated future. It is surely the fanaticism 
 of philosophic impartiality which can expect as much new life for 
 a corrupt Mohammedan world from a recurrence to the primary 
 traditions of the Koran, as we might reasonably hope to see 
 beginning to stir in the dry branches of the Eastern Church, if its 
 priests and people would turn with opened eyes and teachable 
 hearts to the Christ of the Gospels — Uieir own Christ. EngHsh 
 Christians cannot forget that a Reformation is possible. And 
 therefore it may be freely admitted that the professed religion of 
 these millions who are either defiantly casting off the Turkish 
 yoke or moving their shoulders uneasily under it, does something 
 to warm our hearts into goodwill towards them. The very fact 
 that the vital instincts of resentment and independence are burst- 
 ing into expression, suggests a hope of religious reform. The free 
 national spirit is akin to the love of truth. Men who are facing 
 risks in defence of domestic honour and security are in the way 
 to rise above servile superstitions. 
 
 '^\. 
 ■x^^^
 
 We may frankly confess, tlierefore, that, as Christians, we fed 
 impatient when we see a Christian population trampled upon by 
 Mussulman rulers. But it is no spirit of religious partisanship 
 which has set the mass of the people of this country against the 
 Turkish dominion as it exists and works in Europe. We are 
 open to the reproach that EngHsh Christianity is so rent by the 
 divisions of sects and parties that we do not willingly unite under 
 its common banner. It is often a cause of sadness and complaint 
 that Churchmen and Dissenters, the High Church and the Low, 
 are so little responsive to appeals which address them as all 
 Christians together. But now we see men of all schools and 
 communions united in the pro-Christian cause. The bishop 
 stands shoulder to shoulder with the Dissenting minister, the 
 Ritualist clergyman with the promoter of the Public Worship Act. 
 The truth is that our common humanity feels itself outraged ; and 
 the religious mind amongst us is still, thank God, profoundly 
 humane. We are believers in the Son of Man, and in proportion 
 to the strength of our faith we make it a matter of conscience to 
 care for the sacred human interests. 
 
 If the operations known as the Bulgarian Atrocities or Horrors 
 had been a unique and solitary outbreak of exasperation and 
 panic, they were, even in that case, of a nature to justify the 
 revulsion of feeling in relation to Turkey which occurred in this 
 country and throughout European Christendom. If a man whose 
 character has been previously irreproachable is betrayed into a 
 single act of murderous or lustful violence, he must suffer the 
 penalty ; and, though human compassion will pity him, it will not 
 excuse him. I deny myself here the use of any damnatory term 
 or epithet to describe the acts by which the feeble Bulgarian
 
 6 
 
 attempt at insurrection was trampled out; but I can imagine that 
 it may become a melancholy necessity to restate in some detail 
 what then took place. If people affirm that nothing was done 
 in Bulgaria much worse than has been habitually done by the 
 Russians in Poland, in Turkestan, and elsewhere, or than was 
 done by the English in the suppression of the Indian mutiny, it 
 can only be supposed that they refused, with the natural loathing 
 of humane and delicate minds, to read the authentic reports of 
 the doings of the Turks in that province, or else that these 
 things have faded with strange quickness from their memories. 
 But those who happened to know anything of the general con- 
 dition of the Christian provinces of Turkey during recent years, 
 or who have since made it their business to inquire into the 
 customary character of the Turkish administration, are aware that 
 the Christians of those provinces lead lives continually exposed to 
 insults, wrongs, and outrages such as no man can bear whose 
 spirit is not crushed, and for which they can obtain no redress. 
 If these allegations can be disproved, the English people have 
 been misled by statements of which the Turks have good right to 
 complain. Feelings and policy should rest upon fact and 
 evidence ; and the really important question in this whole 
 business is whether the local Turkish administration is hopelessly 
 corrupt and oppressive or not. But the charge is not only 
 sustained by irresistible evidence, it is virtually admitted by tlie 
 accused. The very promises and new decrees of the Porte imply 
 that the complaints of the Christians are well founded. The 
 answer returned contemptuously by all Europe to these Turkish 
 offers of amendment is, that their hollowness is too well known. 
 The Turks can promise nothing, decree nothing, which they have
 
 7 
 
 not repeatedly promised and decreed before. Men accept such 
 professions once or twice, but in time they grow tired of them. 
 There is no reasonable prospect whatever of any substantial and 
 lasting amendment of the condition of the Christians if the Turks 
 are left in unrestricted power over them. What should make 
 things better in the future than they have been in the past ? The 
 Turkish Empire is not in a more vigorous state ; its finances are 
 not more flourishing ; it is not less at the mercy of venal officials 
 and a licentious soldiery. Its Christian subjects, struggling 
 against hopeless misgovernment, cry out for sympathy and assist- 
 ance. If man is ever to help his brother man in trouble, why 
 should we turn a deaf ear to these suffering millions ? 
 
 The question might be asked, "Suppose that the positions 
 were reversed — that the Turks were Christians and the Slavs 
 were Mussulmans— would you be so ready to plead the cause of 
 the oppressed?" We ought not to shrink from the question; 
 and my answer would be — I hope that Englishmen in general 
 would be still more indignant than they are now. I am sure 
 there are many of us who would feel so acutely the shame brought 
 on the Christian profession and cause by such iniquities, that 
 our simply human hatred of them would be stimulated by an 
 eager desire to clear our religion from the discredit of them. I 
 cannot deny that cruel and unjust deeds have been done by 
 Englishmen in their dealings with less civiHsed races. The 
 memory of these things may reasonably make us slow in con- 
 demning others. Our sympathy with those who now suffer 
 at the hands of Turks should quicken our consciences in the 
 appreciation of any injury we ourselves may be doing, or may 
 be tempted to do, to weaker populations. But if it were
 
 8 
 
 reported here that in the remotest part of Asia some thousands 
 of natives were receiving from EngUshmen anything approaching 
 the treatment which ^has been the daily lot of the Christian 
 millions in European Turkey, does any one doubt that there 
 would be an outburst in England of honest and effectual indig- 
 nation against those who brought so great a dishonour on our 
 country and our religion ? 
 
 Much scorn has been cast, during the recent agitation of this 
 question, upon sentimental benevolence. Indignation against 
 Turkish violence has been represented as the luxury of those who 
 like to have their feelings stimulated by sensational descriptions. 
 Contrasts have been drawn between the politics of popular emotion 
 and the prudent wisdom of statesmanship. Let it be admitted, with- 
 out hesitation, that enthusiastic meetings are not fit to be entrusted 
 with the administration of our foreign policy ; that it would not do 
 to commence a crusade of redress whenever we hear of wrongs or 
 cruelties perpetrated in any part of the world. Let us listen with 
 the utmost respect to the cautions of prudence. It would be a 
 folly to embroil the world in the attempt to remedy some local 
 evil ; and the passionate enthusiasm of ignorant and irresponsible 
 persons is not incapable of committing such a folly. There is some 
 danger therefore, let it be frankly admitted, in such demonstrations 
 of feeling as those of the last half-year in favour of the Christian 
 subjects of Turkey. The work of ministers and diplomatists is 
 not to be set aside by popular emotion. But, on the other hand, 
 to suppose that the world either is or ought to be governed 
 by ministers and diplomatists is a delusion — a graver delusion, 
 perhaps, than that of those who believe too hastily in public 
 meetings. The world goes by motive power, and the motive
 
 power is supplied, not by the wariness of statesmen, but by the 
 convictions and desires of populations. These convictions and 
 desires are not always noble ; it is not in their nature to be 
 diplomatic : but they move the machinery ; and where would the 
 engine-driver be without steam? Now and then some great 
 minister of state^more of a hero than a diplomatist — has an 
 exceptional opportunity of forcing on, by his individual energ}^, 
 an important step in the development of human history. But of 
 late years the power of making changes for the better in the 
 condition of nations and of the world has been chiefly diffused 
 amongst the general populations. Every decade of history con- 
 victs the shortsightedness of those who imagine that the arts of 
 diplomacy possess the final control over human affairs. Revolu- 
 tions, wars, reforms, have all been instinct wdth emotional impulse, 
 sometimes simply patriotic, often strongly religious. Let any one 
 compare for a moment what has been done by religion in the 
 world, and what by the professional knowledge and skill of 
 ministers of state ! 
 
 It is not wonderful that men who are born to be bureaucratic 
 agents, and all those who are for keeping things quiet, have a 
 distrust and disHke of popular movements. These troublesome 
 phenomena disarrange their calculations. It is natural that 
 such persons should make the worst of the froth that is thrown 
 up by a philanthropic agitation, of the ignorance of the many, of 
 the disproportion between the aims of platforms and practical 
 possibilities, of the interested element which mixes itself with 
 every public-spirited movement. But the abler kind of minister 
 respects the resolute convictions and ardent desires which are 
 indispensable to a great policy; he does not think himself
 
 humilfated by the sense of a force in such motives superior to his 
 own skill j he will probably be in sympathy with the living part of 
 his nation, and he likes to feel a high-mettled steed under him. A 
 strongly excited national will, and a strong minister acting as its 
 instrument, may do wrong things. I am not in the least con- 
 tending that a policy of religious emotion must necessarily be a 
 good one. But the excitement of religious feeling has been the 
 historical method of bringing about many of those events which 
 later generations care to remember and to study. 
 
 It is surely apparent to the most sober-minded view that great 
 things are yet to be done by the action of true Christian senti- 
 ment operating upon international affairs. Our sense of duty is 
 notoriously behindhand in its appreciation of the dealings of 
 nation with nation. In domestic politics it has become a nearly 
 general conviction that we ought to be governed by the aims of a 
 high Christian morality, that the strong ought to care for the 
 weak, and that the well-being of the community ought to prevail 
 over the interests of the few. But we are hardly awakened to the 
 idea that, if the laws of morality have any force at all, they must 
 bind the conduct of the larger societies called nations as much as 
 that of individuals and classes. Great honour is due to a few 
 men, who without appealing to the Christian traditions have made 
 it their business to affirm strenuously and uncompromisingly the 
 subjection of all politics, foreign as well as domestic, to the laws 
 of moraUty. But it is in this sphere that Christianity ought to 
 speak with pre-eminent authority and power. It was its glory in 
 the beginning to overleap the barriers dividing nations and 
 tongues, and to proclaim a unity of men under one God and 
 Father of all. Catholicity belongs to the primary idea of the
 
 Christian religion. The more Christian a man is, the more he 
 ought to feel drawn towards men of other races and countries. 
 For the discharge of all duty towards others, we need that spirit 
 of self-suppression and service which is the characteristically 
 Christian spirit. Undoubtedly, if self-abnegation is to be practised 
 in the dealings of a nation with other nations, it must be practised 
 under somewhat different conditions from those which the Gospel 
 prescribes for individuals. A nation must be more careful of its 
 safety, for reasons on which I need not here enlarge, than a 
 thoroughly Christian man would be of his. National policy would 
 never be bound, I imagine, by the most exacting standard of 
 Christian duty to be what might justly be called reckless or 
 Quixotic. But it seems to me certain beyond the possibility of 
 denial that, if we are to think of nations as having duties and 
 virtues, we must desire that the action of our own country should 
 be marked by unselfishness and generosity as well as by a narrow 
 justice. We shall never attain to the highest blessings in store for 
 humanity, nor shall we reaHse the full scope and power of our 
 religion, until nations determine to judge their public and mutual 
 conduct by the Christian ideal. The path, for example, towards 
 the international peace which is now so much desired, is not 
 through a more enlightened and sensitive regard to self-interest, 
 but through loyalty to the common Master of all, and conscien- 
 tious devotion to the well-being of mankind. 
 
 Let those, then, who are conscious of a religious desire that 
 the power of this country should be used for the liberation of the 
 oppressed Christians in Turkey, assure themselves that there is 
 nothing weakly sentimental, nothing but what is rational and in 
 harmony with the best statesmanship and serviceable to the
 
 highest public ends, in the utmost fervour of such a desire. A 
 longing like this belongs to the vital and purifying breath of 
 human existence. Alas for a country when its sons have no 
 other political aspirations but those of a narrow and sordid 
 patriotism ! The mood that would cynically shut out pity and 
 kindness and enthusiasm from the external policy of a country 
 like ours would be as the frost of old age creeping over its 
 energies, and cramping them in ignoble impotence. 
 
 The weight of their responsibilities must needs press heavily 
 upon the representatives of a state at a crisis like the present. It 
 is their business to keep their eyes open to all possibilities, to 
 watch with some jealousy the action of other states, and to be 
 ready to thwart insidious and dangerous designs. When a 
 country is in the position now occupied by England, which has 
 nothing to gain by a disturbance of existing relations, and could 
 scarcely fail to suffer some injury from a European war, it is 
 natural that it should be a main object of its ministers to preserve 
 the status quo, and that the undefinable risks attending the sub- 
 version of an established government should cause them to shrink 
 from any action which might contribute to it. It is a very serious 
 thing, beyond all question, to disturb the equilibrium of such a 
 body as the congeries of European Powers. It is quite true that 
 no one can say what may happen if Turkey is brought to bay, and 
 resolves to fight desperately for its empire and independence. To 
 promote such a result with a light heart would be criminal folly. 
 But the religious sentiment of a thoughtful people has this 
 advantage over the apprehensive wariness of the diplomatist, that 
 it consists essentially of faith. We Christians cannot think of the 
 world as subject to chance. We habitually assume that human
 
 affairs are under the control of a righteous Providence. In this 
 faith it is natural to act with a certain disregard of consequences. 
 In such a condition as that of European Turkey — the old 
 dominion, established and maintained by the sword, crumbling to 
 pieces through internal corruption ; the oppressed populations at 
 once so angered by lawless violence, and so stimulated by new 
 hope, that they refuse to be patient any longer — we see a Divine 
 judgment beginning. We deem it safer to side with justice and 
 freedom insurgent, though we cannot foresee what the exact issues 
 of the insurrection may be, than to use our influence to preserve 
 the status quo which crushes them. 
 
 At the same time it would be affectation to assume that any 
 policy which it has been proposed that England should adopt 
 with regard to this Eastern Question would make a grave demand 
 upon the faith that stands by a good cause and pursues noble 
 ends in defiance of possible consequences. The boldest course 
 suggested is, in the opinion of many shrewd and experienced 
 public men, the safest. That England should join with Russia in 
 using force to compel the Turks to submit to restrictions which 
 united Europe beheves to be reasonable and necessary, is probably 
 the most considerate mode of dealing with the Turks, and the 
 best calculated to prevent any dangerous convulsion. It is idle 
 to suppose that a settlement can be effected on any terms which 
 will not wound the self-respect of the Turks and diminish their 
 power. It is not pleasant to a generous mind to see a nation 
 humiliated, whatever its misdoings may have been ; and the Turk 
 is admittedly at his best when fighting against an equal or 
 superior foe. It is an act of high policy to disarm the Turk as 
 the arbitrary ruler of Christians, and we are accustomed to
 
 14 
 
 feel some admiration for an offender who shows spirit and 
 courage even against the representatives of justice. But a 
 painful struggle may be averted by the use of strength so 
 overwhelming as to make submission a matter of course. 
 It would be an easy task for Russia and England together 
 to reduce the Porte to instant submission. This policy, there- 
 fore, has very strong recommendations for those w4io shrink 
 from bloodshed and convulsions. But there has been nothing 
 impracticable or Quixotic in the temper or demands of those 
 Englishmen who have advocated the liberation of the Chris- 
 tian subjects of Turkey. We are most of us well aware that 
 we do not possess the information which would justify us in 
 affirming peremptorily and in detail what this country ought to 
 do. AVe are anxious to learn, and willing to be instructed by any 
 one who has special knowledge. Whatever may be alleged with 
 plausibility as to the attitude and language of some few persons, 
 we deny that there is anything sentimental or fanatical in the 
 general tone of those, for example, who took part in the St. 
 James's Hall Conference. 
 
 But having kept our eyes open for many months, and being 
 conscious of no interest or prepossession which should warp our 
 minds from the honest desire to see right enforced and wrong re- 
 dressed, and feeling the obligation that lies upon our country to do 
 its duty in the sight of God, we cannot doubt that we see with 
 sufficient clearness the ends at which we are bound to aim. Our 
 own Government, starting with being avowedly pro-Turkish, has 
 given its concurrence in the most decided manner to the demands 
 made by Russia on behalf of its co-religionists. Not a state in 
 Europe justifies the non possuiniis of Turkey. There still remains
 
 ^5 
 to the army of the Porte the task which it was so slow in 
 accompUshing, to beat down the resistance of Servia, Bosnia, 
 Herzegovina, and Montenegro ; or, if Servia and Montenegro are 
 bought off by propitiatory terms of peace, there is the original 
 insurrection in the other two provinces to be dealt with. The 
 peasants of Bosnia and Herzegovina have not yet been reduced 
 to submission. Russia, not to speak of its sovereign's verbal engage- 
 ment, will be no more able than before to look on and see the last 
 embers of their courageous revolt extinguished in blood. All the 
 signs in the political heavens portend continued war and tumults 
 until the Christians are secured against Mohammedan license. 
 We cannot believe that England has permission from Heaven to 
 play the faineant in this business. It is to the protection of 
 England that Turkey has owed the power to misgovern for the 
 last twenty years. Our own hands are not clean ; we have some 
 reparation to make to offended justice. If it has been right to use 
 our influence and material force to sustain Turkey against what we 
 believed to be the aggressive ambition of Russia, it must be right 
 now, when all reasonable fear of that Power has been dispelled, to 
 recognise the responsibility we have thus assumed, and to transfer 
 our protection from the corrupt oppressor to the populations 
 blighted by his rule.
 
 J^h' 
 
 jJjl
 
 i£ti