| Summary: | GUDMUNDSON v. THINGVALLA LUTHERAN CHURCH 309 Article XIII. Every Lutheran congregation of Icelanders in America, which de sires to join the synod, must (1) accept its constitution, (2) make written application for admission to the synod, and (3) submit its constitution to the convention for examination. If the convention de cides that the constitution of the congregation is in harmony with the constitution of the synod, and consents to the admission of the congre gation by a two-thirds vote of the delegates present, the congregation is thereby regularly admitted to the synod. It is noticeable that at no place in these constitutions is there any specific mention of any doctrine of inspiration. In the first para graph of article 2 of the constitution of the congregation, and article 3 of the s-ynod constitution, is found the foundation for the claim of the plaintiff's that plenary inspiration was a fundamental doctrine, so much so as to be presupposed by these constitutions. Such was found br the trial court to be the fact. A discussion of the government of this church in its relations to the synod is now in order. Concededly, the congregation came into exist- ' ence as ajtL independent society, governed by its constitution, which document then constituted the contractual bond or law resulting there from between its members and the association. Bear v. Heasley, 98 Mich. 279, 24 L.E.A. 615, 57 N. W. 270. The second paragraph of the confession provides "that the congre gation accepts the doctrines of Holy Scriptures in conformity with tlie Hutheran Church in Iceland, as expressed in its confessional doc uments." Thus these Icelanders organized their society on the same basis of faith as that prevailing in their mother church in Iceland. And such is all the expert testimony. This brings into consideration, as having an important bearing upon the interpretation of this consti tution and the determination of the fundamentals of the religious be lief of this society, the position of the Lutheran Church in Iceland with reference to pleiiary inspiration of the Bible. Did that church accept that doctrine, or was it unknown or undefined in its faith ? That is involved by respondents as evidence asserted to be both persuasive and conclusive is an alleged decision of the synod, act of the synod must be held to be either a final and conclusive de
|
|---|