| Summary: | 318 29 NORTH DAKOTA REPORTS flict with the Bible, then he should follow the Bible, and not the con fession of faith, and he would still be a good Lutheran. I have no reason to believe that the defendants in this case have gone a step further than the Bishop of the Church of Iceland and the dean of the theological seminary in Iceland and this other instructor. I hare always stated that according to the teachings of the Church of Iceland as taught by the bishop, the defendants are good Lutherans. . . . The organizer of the synod, Bjaranson, received his theological training in the Church of Iceland. When the Icelandic Synod was organized, it was organized with Bjaranson as president." . . . The witness also testifies that in 1910 an invitation was extended by the synod to those who had left to rejoin the synod with certain specifications. The synod has gone on record since 1909 as not favoring verbal inspiration. The construction had been put on the action of the synod in 1909 that they had adopted verbal inspiration. Plaintiff's next expert witness, Rev. Jonsson, testified on this sub ject: "Have been president of the synod since June, 1908, succeeding Rev. Bjaranson. The Icelandic Synod has no connection with the Church of Iceland, was organized in 1885, consists of several Icelandic Lutheran congregations in this country, thirty-five or forty churches belong to it now. . . . The synod decidedly holds to the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scripture as absolutely true in all particulars and in all matters is fully inspired. . . . The synod has declared that it adheres to the full inspiration of the Bible. . I agree with the definition of the plenary inspiration doctrine as given by Eev. Olafson. The synod has not anywhere gone on record in any manner as adhering to any particular theory of inspiration of the Bible. It has not done so by any constitution or in any of its confessions of faith, but it was the understanding of the synod. I do not know of any reso lution prior to the Fridriksson resolution, in 1909, where a formal statement of this fact was made. I understand that resolution to mean that the synod rejects the right of the individual to elevate his religious conceptions over and above Holy Scripture. Anyone rejecting parts of the Scripture would be putting himself outside the pale of Lutheran Christianity. . . . There is no decree of the synod to the effect that anyone who refuses to accept every portion of the Bible becomes a heretic to the Lutheran faith. . . ."
|
|---|