Rensselaer Union, Volume 9, Number 34, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 May 1877 — The Religions Character of the War. [ARTICLE]

The Religions Character of the War.

The London Times, commenting upon the opening of hostilities, says; “Once more we behold the strange phenomenon of a religious war, which is likely to be as fanatical and relentless as any recorded in history. It will also have the characteristic that the Mahometan stands more on a level with his adversary than has ever been known in later ages." The statement of the TVmes is worthy of some consideration, the more especially as nearly every one has come to look at this, war as a political on®. It is, on the other hand, the only war that may be called religious since the last Russian war io Turkey. That war commenced as a religious one, but in its character was changed when Turkey’s allies entered upon the scene. Russia commenced the war for religious reasons;' England and France fought Russia for political reasons. In all the controversies that have characterised the RussoTurkish complication since the outbreak of the Herzegovina revolt a year ago, the religious question has been uppermost. Of course there has been mixed with it a motive of ambition, but the declaration of war disavows it. Nowhere in the manifesto does it appear, on the other hand, Russia clearly and succinctly declaies the object of the war to be the amelioration of the condition of the Sclavic Christians. The conference of the powers at Constantinople hinged upon it. It characterized the protocol. The ultimatum of the powers to the Porte made no demand of the Turks that they should cede territory or give up political control. They only asked that the Christian subjects of the Porte should be protected in their religious rights and moral privileges; that they should not be robbed, plundered, overtaxed, tortured, murdered and treated with infamy and cruelty that characterized the Dark Ages. It is to all intents and purposes a struggle of the fanaticism of the Greek church with the fanaticism of the Mussulman. A war of this kind must of necessity be a cruel and relentless one, character- ■ ized by extremes oj each side. The re--1 ligious motive is the most powerful of j human emotions that can actuate a naI tion, and it is especially powerfuljin such 1 a nation as Russia, where education is i not general, und where there is no divis- - ion of religious thought. In this coun try, for instance, there could not be such 1 a war, owing to the spread us general , intelligence and the multitude of other j subjects to occupy attention. In Russia, i however, the absorbing idea is not detuneI racy, republicanism, speculative phiioso-

: phy, or education, but religious dogmas. The priest furnishes the knowledge. The people, the press, and the government are swayed by this powerful force. . The Kus ian Emperor did not want to go 1 into the war. He was willing to accept ' the smallest terms of religious • tees; but when the Porte refused to ali low of any outside interference in its 1 internal affairs, then the religious sympathies of the Russian people with their oppressed brethren impelled the goverfimeut to declare war. The Turks themselves, also, are actuated by the religious idea, as they have been in every war . they have waged since they entered and established this Asiatic camp on Europe. Every motive and action centres in the fanaticism of the Mahometan theocracy. ‘They brought with them iuto Europe a religious fanaticism characterized by savagery, brutal tyranny, and the lowest and most disgusting vices of life, and they have preserved these' qualities in all their horrible monstrosity to this day. When we speak, therefore, of a war between the Cross and the Crescent, it means a religious crusade, a collision of religious ideas, in which even political results will be fought for in the name of religion. So far as the war is localized as between Russia and Turkey, and confined to its religious aspects there is no doubt as to the result. A half million of men cannot defeat a million and a half of men equally well if not much better armed and equipped, especially when the latter have the advantage of all the appliances of modern civilization and the former have none of them, being enemies of civilization and incapable of making progress. All Protestant Europe is in sympathy with Russia from the religious point of view. The Catholic Ultramontanes are not. Rome has no sympathy with the Grand Patriarch. Her sympathy is with the Turks, because the Russians have been severe in their treatment of her. The Jews have no sympathy with the Russians, for the Selave has not been so good a friend to them as the Turks; ou the other hand, it has abused them worse than the Catholics. The danger of Russia, therefore, lies in the possibility of her departing from the religious character of the struggle. So long as she confines herself to that, no power in Europe will interfere. If, however, Russia prevails and crushes Mahometanism, she may be tempted to bold possession of the territory, and in, her desire for political power and aggrandizement extend her limits by conquest. When this happens, when the political overshadows the religious, then there is danger of English interfereanee. because, while England sympathizes with the religious interests of Russia, she at the same time sympathizes with the political interests of Turkey. Chicagt Tribute. Last Monday Richard Fsrirts, a Scotchman, employed by theP., Ft. Wayne <fc C. R. R. Co., was run overiu the yards at Fort Wayne, losing both legs and ah arm. He lived only a few hours.