Page 767

• Language: unknown
• Published: North Dakota State Library
• Subjects: Politics & Government; Valla; Iceland
• Online Access: http://cdm16921.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p16921coll3/id/28101

712 INDEX RELEASE—continued. 2. The same degree of proof is required in order to successfully impeach such settlement and release upon the ground of mental incapacity of plaintiff to enter into such contract. Pope T. Bailey-Marsh Co. 355. 3. Evidence examined and held insufficient to warrant the court or jury in avoiding such settlement and release, and it was accordingly error to deny defendant's motions for a directed verdict and for judgment notwithstand ing the verdict. Pope v. Bailey-Marsh Co. 355. RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES. DIVISION OF SOCIETY. 1. Defendants are charged with departure from the original Icelandic Lutheran faith, to promulgate which this church was organized in 1889. It joined the Icelandic Lutheran Synod. Both synod and church had written con stitutions and confessional documents, none of which mentioned any doc trine of inspiration of Scripture. A schism arose in the congregation over the doctrine of plenary inspiration of the Bible. Plaintiffs adhered to that doctrine, alleging it to have been presupposed, and therefore understood to have been a fundamental doctrine, in 1889, of the Icelandic Lutheran faith. This defendants deny, and assert that neither the parent church of Iceland nor their own church has ever been bound to any specific doctrine of in spiration of Scripture. In 1910 plaintiffs, a minority, withdrew from the congregation, and refused to participate with the majority in congrega tional matters. The majority, the defendants as a congregation on June 5, 1910, withdrew Thingvalla Church from the synod, which body had, by resolution in 1909, for the first time placed itself on record as accepting the doctrine of plenary inspiration. The president of the synod was noti fied thereofjune 5, 1910, by written notice. He deferred action thereon, submitting the withdrawal to the synod, which body, on the protest of the minority, these plaintiffs, disapproved of the withdrawal, and passed a resolution holding that the majority had departed from the original faith, and had violated its constitution in so doing, finding them guilty of heresy toward the Lutheran faith and holding the minority to be the true Thing-valla Congregation. All this was without notice to the majority, or any participation by them in the synod, they having treated their withdrawal as effectual from the date notice thereof was given, and had refused to send a delegate to or participate in the proceedings of the synod. ThU action is brought by the minority for the recovery of the church properiv, on the grounds that the plaintiffs are the true Thingvalla Congregation, and charging that the defendants are heretical because they disavow the doctrine of plenary inspiration of the Bible. The trial court received in