Papers in Social Science and Comparative Religion.

BY REV. B. F. KIDDER, PH.D. IV. —INTEMPERANCE AND IMMORALITY IN MOHAMMEDAN COUNTRIES.

THAT Mohammedans at present drink less wine than nominally Christian races there can be no doubt. I say at present, because indications are not wanting (as, for example, in Algiers, where Christian (?) civilization is most strongly modifying Mohammedan types) that the followers of the Prophet will some time rival their Christian brothers in devotion to the pagan Bacchus. Mohammed's prohibition of the use of wine has certainly exerted a marvelously strong and good influence over his followers for more than 1,200 years. We would not detract one iota from his farsightedness or from their faithfulness in this regard, but rather unite with all good Mohammedans in the earnest wish that the "backsliders" may be "reclaimed," and that the "faithful" may have sense and grace enough in spite of corrupting influences from without to keep the precept unto the end.

Having said this, it is necessary to say a great deal more. The question of intemperance among Mohammedans is not so easily to be disposed of. Unfortunately for the Mussulman as for everybody else, wine is not the only thing that brings "woe, sorrow, contentions, babbling, wounds without cause, redness of eyes." The Mohammedan has studied his Koran far more carefully than many of those who praise him for his abstinence from wine, and he has discovered that the Prophet said nothing about cognac, neither did he prohibit drunkenness; and like many others who profess better things, he often rigidly keeps the letter of the law, and takes advantage of his opportunities.

Among the surprises which Prof.

Max Müller has recently given the reading public is the statement made in his article on "Mohammedanism and Christianity," which appeared in the February number of The Nineteenth Century, to the effect that Mohammedanism has cured that cancer of our

civilization, intemperance. The very day that my attention was called to this article I had been observing the effect of cognac upon a Mohammedan tippler at Cairo, and came uncomfortably near suffering personal violence for my temerity. This would amount to comparatively nothing, as an isolated experience, any more than the sight of a drunken member of a Christian church; but, unfortunately, it stands for a too general condition of things which is causing increasing alarm among the most thoughtful and conscientious Mohammedans. The use of spirituous and intoxicating liquors is an evil which threatens Mohammedan countries hardly less gravely than it threatens Christendom. I am glad to record that no Mohammedan city which I have visited presents any such array of grogshops, or turns loose upon its streets any such horde of drunken rowdies, as may be seen in many cities of the West; but the evil is working subtly.

Much of the curse from which Mohammedan countries suffer has been brought to them from lands that are more advanced, and that have the light of a better gospel. Ours is the greater shame. But the evil is not wholly from without. There is a native liquor which is causing greater havoc among the Mohammedans of Barbary, Egypt, and Turkey than any that is imported from Europe or America. I refer to the concoction known as "raki," used not so much by the "aristocracy" as by common people. "

the

66

In the very city in which Professor Müller received from his Mohammedan friends such marvelous reports in regard to their sobriety, I learned of

many recent cases of delirium tremens and death from the use of this peculiar drink. An eminent scientist in Constantinople (a professor in Roberts College), who has made an analysis of the poison, and who has carefully observed its effects upon those who use it, is authority for the statement that it is the worst of all the different kinds of alcohol known to science. This liquor is being consumed in increasing quantities by Mohammedans; and the results are not perceptibly different from those produced by other kinds of alcohol upon other men-drunkenness, disease, death, to say nothing of moral effects.

It is not easy to secure statistics among people who keep no statistics, and whose private lives are so deeply hidden from the general view; but the facts here stated in a somewhat general way are attested, not only by personal observations at Constantinople and in all of the Mohammedan countries of the Mediterranean except the regency of Tripoli, but also by Mohammedan testimony, as well as by the testimony of many Europeans, Americans, and others, who have spent years among the Mohammedans as business men, educators, missionaries, and especially physicians, who often have accurate knowledge of the private life where others can receive only general impressions.

Undoubtedly some will say: "But why such conflicting accounts from those studying social conditions in the same territory? What are we to believe?" If any of the statements made in this paper are incorrect, I shall be pleased for any one who is in possession of facts (not merely suffering from an attack of sentiment), to point out such mistakes. And if any shall feel that our conclusions or the processes which have led us to those conclusions are unreliable, he is at liberty to take them at his own valuation, or pass any criticism that he may see fit. I must claim for myself the privilege thus freely granted to others, and without intending the slightest affront to the great

savant of Oxford, I shall venture to tell the readers of THE REVIEW Something which I know that many of them will be pleased (at least amused) to hear, and that is the way in which the distinguished professor was led to his remarkable conclusions. I give the account as it was given to me by an eminent and most highly respected resident of Constantinople.

Not long since, some Mohammedan in India started the report that the British Government was about to remove the official head of the Sultan of Turkey and place some other man on the throne of the Caliphs. The Sultan was greatly alarmed. This happened just before Professor Müller's visit to Constantinople. A bright young man, whose identity I need not disclose (residing at Constantinople), hit upon a very bright plan to help secure for Professor Müller a pleasant reception in the famous capital; and he caused the report to be circulated in such a way that it was sure to come to the Sultan's ears that the celebrated Professor M., of Oxford, who was about to visit the city, was very widely and favorably known in India, and probably had more influence with the Mohammedans of that country than any other living man. (This was of course without the slightest knowledge or collusion on the part of Professor M.) The ruse worked perfectly. The distinguished professor had hardly arrived in Constantinople before he was invited to the Royal Palace, and he was most royally feasted and fêted by the Sultan and his friends, and told many beautiful things concerning Mohammedans, some of which he saw fit to repeat.

More subtle and more serious than the question of intemperance is the question of immorality among Mohammedans. Professor Müller was led by his Mohammedan friends to believe that this cancer has also been cured. This were indeed a marvel-nay, more, a miracle-if it were true; but the only marvelous thing about it in reality is the fact that a man of Professor Müller's

intelligence could be made to believe such an absurdity. He says: "If I may trust my Turkish friends, no Turkish Mohammedan woman leads an openly immoral life." It may be true that no Mohammedan woman in Turkey sits unveiled at the door of her house, as described by Solomon, or walks the street as a painted, brazen strumpet, seeking her victims; I, with Professor Müller, certainly saw none such; but, unfortunately, the virtue of Mohammedan women cannot be so easily established.

The rigidity of the social conditions to which all Mohammedan women are submitted, however pure and noble they may be (as, for example, the wearing of the veil, and their exclusion from the society of all men except their own husbands), of necessity compels the impure to adopt tactics that are somewhat peculiar to the situation. If any man doubts that these women have procurers, let him take an evening stroll along the streets of Constantinople, Beiroot, Damascus, or almost any other Turkish city, and his doubts will soon be dissipated.

But how is any decent man to be reasonably sure that the inmates of these places are Mohammedans? There is good evidence that may be secured. An intelligent young Syrian who had lived a fast life until his conversion to Christ about a year ago, assured me that to his personal knowledge most of the inmates of the houses of ill-repute in Damascus and a large per cent. of those at Beiroot were Mohammedans. An intelligent Mohammedan at Cairo, whose veracity among those who know him is unquestioned, told me (without, of course, suspecting the use which might be made of the information) the story of his once dissipated and immoral life; and the picture which he drew of nights in Turkish brothels will quite equal anything that has ever been brought to light in darkest New York. These are only two among many similar witnesses whose testimony cannot be lightly set aside.

It might not be counted a strange thing if Mohammedan countries should furnish a quota of depraved women as well as bad men, even if the precepts of Islam were perfect. Islam certainly contains many beautiful moral precepts, such as exhortations to "truthfulness, "honesty in business," "modesty, or decency of behavior, ""fraternity" (between all Moslems), "benevolence and kindness toward all creatures, " etc., none of which we would wittingly minimize. But, in spite of all this, it contains precepts and directly sanctions practices which must open the floodgates of iminorality. Evidence of this result is overwhelming.

A Mohammedan may call a woman his wife (and by woman is meant a girl anywhere from eight or ten years of age upward), and after three weeks cast her off, without excuse save his own caprice. (The abuse in regard to concubines is even less restricted.) few of these unfortunate girls may become the wives of other men; but, as a matter of fact, many of them sink to lives of shame.

A

It is true that the orthodox Moslem holds up his hands in holy horror at this moral lapse, and is ready to take up stones to stone the offender; but his wrath is too much like that of Judah against Tamar. If the Creator has made any discrimination between woman's sin and man's, if he has discriminated against that which is unholy, for a single day, in favor of essentially the same thing for a little longer period of time, we have not yet heard of it. If both are not damnable, the moral law has failed to disclose the fact, at least to uninspired intelligence. Mohammed said that the Almighty assured him that the thing was all right in his case; but the rest of us have received no such word.

This is not a charge of personal immorality against all Mohammedans. Many of them are living pure lives, each of them the husband of one wife, the keeper of no concubine. But, until the system is revised, Mohammedanism

must bear the weight of the immorality which it sanctions, and the immoral conditions which it creates and fosters.

If any such thing could be laid to the charge of Christianity, the common conscience of Christendom would call for a revision of the system. It is fairly safe to assert that the larger part of the Christian public listened with mingled amazement, sorrow, and indignation to a certain proposition made some time after the so-called "Dark Ages" for the church to open a vestry saloon for its young men (doubtless as a kind of final substitute for the prayer-meeting); but it is still safer to assert that even the few who may have favored the saloon proposition will turn away with unqualified disgust, or boldly utter their denunciation, if any would-be reformer shall ever suggest that the Church of Christ become patron to such relations between the sexes as everywhere prevail under Islam.

The licensing of vice in Mohammedan countries can hardly be balanced against the licensing of vice in nominally Christian countries; for, in the former (where Church and State are one), it is the direct act of the religious body; while in the latter it is in spite of the direct protest of the religious body. If any State-Church or Church-State is guilty of this crime against society, it must individually bear the responsibility; the Spirit of Christ and the Church Universal have no part or lot in the

matter.

It is painful to disclose even the small part of the evidence which seems necessary to a fair understanding of this case, but truth demands it.

The present official head of Islam is perhaps one of the best who has occupied that distinguished place. In both mental and moral tone, he is certainly far above many who have preceded him.

Yet, may we not ask what must be the moral influence upon the Moslem rising generation when this spiritual head and great religious light, in addition to his numerous wives, probably keeps more concubines than any

(if it be true, as every intelligent man in Turkey with whom I conversed on the subject unhesitatingly believes, and as certain of good repute would be willing to prove were it not for the fact that disagreeable witnesses in that part of the world have the disagreeable habit of not living to old age) he receives at least once every year at the close of the great religious Fast of Ramadhan the addition (often temporary) to his harem of the most beautiful woman that can be found in Turkey?

There are many things that contribute to an understanding of moral conditions in Mohammedan countries. Throughout the North African States, as well as in Turkey proper, I was assured by people of irreproachable candor and undoubted intelligence that, as a rule, the young Mohammedan who does not keep one or more mistresses is guyed and goaded by his friends and held up to ridicule as being less than a

man.

I am not unaware of the fact that society in Christian lands is far from being in an ideal state in this regard. But everywhere in Christendom, the man, young or old, married or unmarried, rich or poor, who keeps a mistress is branded, not always by fawning, vapid "society, so called, but by sturdy Christian sentiment, as a “rake.” One of the most terribly suggestive and painful disclosures that was made to me in the progress of these investigations came from hospitals and medical men. Without exception, in answer to the question, “What are the prevailing diseases among Mohammedans?" the first named was the most loathsome private disease known to the medical profession. In one of these hospitals for the treatment of Mohammedans, the head missionary told me that among those treated for this malady are many of very tender years. When the first of these, a lad of 14, came to the hospital, the physician expressed his surprise, and the boy replied in substance: "I don't believe that you can find a boy

of my age in all(mentioning the name of the city) who has not suffered more or less from this disease." The same medical authority said to me (I quote his exact words): "Sodomy also prevails among them to a frightful extent. "

It may be true, as is often claimed,

that the moral régime which Mohammedanism inaugurated is better than that which it displaced, but this is poor excuse in itself for its continuance. The cancer of Mohammedan civilization cannot be cured, at least by any force within Islam, until the knife is laid at the root of Islam's cancer.

The Christian Minister and Tobacco. BY REV. N. I. M. BOGERT, CLOVER HILL, N. J.

THE General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church which met at Portland, Oreg., in 1892, passed the following resolution :

"Resolved, That this Assembly would, and does, hereby earnestly call the most thoughtful and serious attention of all our ministers and elders and our candidates for the ministry in the academy, college, and seminary to the very apparent propriety and pressing importance of total abstinence from the tobacco habit." (Minutes, p. 217.)

It is understood, of course, that we have here, not the enactment of a prohibitory law, but a strong expression of the sentiment of the General Assembly. Is such an expression wise? Is it demanded by circumstances? No one can ever look upon this highest court of one of our most respected denominations without a profound regard for its intelligence and spiritual worth, and the presumption therefore is that a matter claiming its notice is of inuch importance. The fact that the conservative American Tract Society publishes a 64-page essay on The Influence of Tobacco upon Life and Health" strengthens the presumption in favor of the above resolution. If we draw a circle and, for argument's sake, call it now the field of personal liberty, there are two propositions to which all ministers of Christ will give their assent, for they indicate what plainly lies beyond the territory of indifferent things.

$6

1. No minister of the Gospel has a right to injure his health or impair his higher powers.

We say "minister, " because what is true regarding every man is especially true in reference to the preacher of the Gospel. Is any work in the world so important as his? Does any employment require such a splendid condition of the whole man, physical, mental, and moral? The conception and elaboration of sermonic truth, the optimistic view of life, the powerful utterance, the glow of feeling, with an abundance of effort in pulpit and out, and often of the most exhaustive kind, require that one keep himself in the best possible condition. The physical man must therefore be preserved in vigorous health and strength. A full measure of years, with powers unimpaired, should be eagerly sought by the minister of Christ as by no other man. tobacco may be, and is, often used to the extent of physical injury, to say nothing of harm to the higher powers, no one will deny. Is it ever so used by ministers? The innocence of the question produces a smile. Any minister in middle life, we venture to say, can recall instances in the range of personal acquaintance of those who have injured health, contracted usefulness, and even shortened life by such use. And these instances multiply with increasing years and a wider observation. When needs of the world are so great for all the moral forces that can be secured, is not such a fact lamentably sad, especially if for years, according to the ritual of

That