Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-08-29
j. S. Church POLICY.
CHANGE D|SCERNED
Backing of Religious Bodies
In Foreign Fields May Be
Less Vigorous.

The evolution of new diplomatic
policy with reference to the amount
Of support that the United States
Government shall give religious in
Situations In foreign countries, wheth-
err Protestant or Catholic, can be said
20 be I'm process.
For generation the Protestant mis-
Eions in Turkey. China and elsewhere
have been enjoying the moral support
and at times the active backing OF the
Department of State and the AmbaS-
sailors and Ministers of the American
Government. This has been mostly
exerted where American schools or
colleges and religious institutions have
needed physical protection, but the
diplomatic influence has been present,
so that a degree of tolerance has been
possessed by American missions which
has not always been granted to those
of other nationalities
The question now Is whether a
precedent Of tremendous importance
to the future has been laid down in
the policy adopted by the Department
of State with reference to the Catho-
lies in Mexico. There have been
many advocates of "a strictly hands
off, policy on the ground that the
American Government should not in
terest itself in religious quarrelS
abroad. This advice has been needed
to the point of Withholding any formal
protest, but it is not yet clear how
far an implied interest or concern
shall he impressed upon the Mexican
authorities as coming from the Amer
team Government.
Assurances Asked of Turks.
In Turkey the United States Gov
eminent asked for definite assurances
with respect to the continuance or
the Protestant missions before the
Lausanne treaty was signed. Indeed.
some of the strongest supporters or
that pact. which has yet TO be rat1hed
by the Senate are the Protestant mis-
sionarieS But it is pointed out That
in Turkey the American Government
limited itself to concern over Amerl-
can citizens and their schools and
missions In Mexico the situation Is
somewhat different, because most OF
the priests who are affected by the
new laws are Europeans. The Amer
lean Government has found itself in
an embarrassing situation, however,
because under the implications of the
Monroe doctrine represe ntationS are
usually made TO any government in
this hemisphere on behalf of the ma
tionalS of European governments.
The very fact that the Washing
ton authorities felt circumscsibed in
the Mexican dispute to withhold the
full measure of its diplomatic influ
ence is being construed now as likely
10 he repeated if similar situations
should arise in Turkey. In fact, it is
openly suggested that if Turkish law
should suddenly he changed so AS to
make ii impossible for the missions
10 function. the Department of State
would be bound by the precedent it
has adopted in Mexico. namely to ex-
press itself in only the most discreet
and indirect fashion without using
q foil and formal protest.
Policy May Avoid Trouble.
Some of the Protestant missions
abroad realize that their life depends
solely on the good will of the govern
ments which permit them now to
function and that if these govern
mcnts indicated an unwill!ngness to
have them they might have to aban-
Don their work in certain fields. In
other words the day Of insisting on
religious tolerance and the legal right
to proselyte in foreign fields is pass
ing. and this is illustrated TO no small
extent in the new attitude assumed
BY the Coolidge administration
The theory behind the policy is that
in the long run such a policy, while
q reversal OF the policy of the Demo
cratic administration of President VIII
son and Secretary Bryan. will lead to
less ENHANCEMENT abroad and that it
Is better for the American Govern
plent to be cautious and do nothing
fevive old controversies.
It is apparent that there is no ques-
Zion Of religious discrimination in
rolved. for the present Administered ton
is certain to apply the same policy
with respect to both Protestants and
Catholics In foreign countries
At 3D. tCopyright. 1926