Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-12-13

Wv
ton of Pembina County, North Da-
kota, ct al, Plaintiffs and Respond.
ents,
Thingvalla Lutheran Church, a Reli.
gious Corporation Of Pembina Conn.
ty, North Dakota, ct AL, Defendants
and Appellants.
Defendants are charged with de,
parture from the original ~Icelandic
Lutheran faith, to ~promulgate which
this church was organized in 1889.
1t joined the Icelandic Lutheran Syn
cd. Both Synod and Church had writ.
ten constitutions and confessional
documents, One OF which mentioned
any doctrine of inspiration Of Scrip
ture. A schism arose in the congre-
cation over the doctrine of plenary
inspiration Of the Bible. Plaintiffs adj
hered to that doctrine, alleging it to
have been presuppcsed and therefore,
understood to have been a fundament-
al doctrine in 1889 of the %Icelandic
Lutheran Faith. This defendants de-
ny and assert that neither the parent
church OF Iceland nor their own
churc have ever been bound
to any specific doctrine of
inspiration of Scripture. In 1910
plaintiffs, a minority, withdrew
from the congregation and re-
fused to participate with the major
ity in congregational matters, The
majority, the defendants as a congre-
CATION on June 5, 1910, withdrew
Thingvalla Church from the Synod,
| which hn1u ho1 INV rocr1,It;or ~ 1nnn
for the first time placed itself on
record as accepting the doctrine of
plenary inspiration. The president of
the Synod vas notified thereof June
s., 1910, by written notice. He defer
red action thereon, submitting the
withdrawal to the Synod, which body
on the protest of the minority, these
plaintiffs, disapproved of the with
drawal, and passed a resolution hold
ing that the majority had departed
from the original faith and had vio-
lated it's constitution in so doing, find
ing them guilty of heresy toward the
Lutheran faith and holding the minor
ity to be the true Thingvalla Congre4
cation. All this was without notice
to the majority or any participation by
them in the Synod, they having treat
ed 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. This action is brought by the
minority for the recovery of the
church property on the grounds that
the plaintiffs are the true T%hingvalla
Congregation and charging that the
defendants are heretical because they
disavow the doctrine of plenary in
SEPARATION of the Bible. The trial
Court received in evidence the record
of proceedings had at the Synod with
its findings, and On that, with other
testimony, found that the charge was
true and that the plaintiffs were the
true congregation and entitled as
such to recover the church property.
Defendants appealed, claiming the
synodical proceedings not to be bind
ing upon them and incompetent as
evidence; that the evidence is insult
ficient to sustain the trial Courts
findings that the doctrine Of Plenary
Inspiration though not mentioned in
the constitutions, confessions or writ
ten creeds Of the Lutheran Church Of
Iceland and this church, was, however,
presupposed. a; rs,
HELD:
That the withdrawal of the congre-
cation from the Synod was complete
under the Lutheran congregational
form of church government upon the
passage of the resolution and notice
thereof to the president; and that the
subsequent proceedings of the synod.
ical convention were had without jur-
isdiction by it over the defendant
congregation and it's ex parte action
thus taken was void as to the de.
PENDANT congregation, over whom it
had NJ authority.
(2) The resolution and record OF
its proceedings were inadmissible in
evidence for any purpose I'VE objec-
tons taken.
(3) That there is 40 competent ev.
idence supporting the claim Of the
plaintiffs that at the time of organiza.
ton of this church, the doctrine OF
plenary inspiration of the Bible was
a presupposed and accepted funda-
mental doctrinal belief of the Iceland
lie Lutheran Church and as such pre-
supposed by this church constitution
and it's confessional documents.
ca 1t is not held that the authors
of the original Scriprural manuscripts
were not adequately inspired or that
the Scriptures are not adequately in.
spired. But the doctrine Of plenary
inspiration of the Eible assumes its
entire inerrancy and infallibility in all
matters aside from translation) IN
Guiding fact and doctrine, whether
contrary to history or scierce. There
are many doctrines of inspiration of
Scripture, such as partial, personal,
dynamic, adequate, plenary, verbal,
and mechanical. 1t is held that the
evidence does not warrant the fad
ings that this church adopted plenary
inspiration as enc OF IT'S fundamental
doctrinal beliefs.
~ The findings, order and judy
ment thereon appealed from are or,
dered set aside and Judgment directed
dismissing this action.
Syllabus by the Court.
From a decision of the District
Court of Pembina County, Temple
tor, Special Judge. Defendants ap-
peal. Reversed and dismissed.
Opinion of the Court by Co.'s, D.,
with Fisk, j., and Burke, J., concur
ring; Fisk, j., also files general con-
curing opinion. Bruce, j., tiles dis
senting opinion, in which Spalding, e.
j., concur by separate opinion.
Sveinbjorn Johnson, Of Cavalier, ~.
D, and Gislason & Gislason, Of Min
neota, Mimi, Attorneys and Counsel
for p1oinfiffc opd pna Sp~o1onfa