Sameiningin - 01.10.1961, Blaðsíða 21

Sameiningin
19
It is perhaps a unique phenomena in North American pioneer
history that farmers, hardly any of them having had the op-
portunities even for common school education, should take sides in
debate, and actually engage in a controversy relative to the teach-
ing of such men as Spenser, Schopenhauer, Hegel and Darwin,
or discuss publicly such doctrines of theology as predestination,
inspiration of the Bible, the Revelation, Christology, the nature of
the Church, the value of Confessions, and the like. This shows
at least laudable ambition to be counted among intellectuals, which
indeed many of these men were by natural endowment. It goes
without saying that those men had to lean on their leaders in these
matters. And leaders were not wanting. Everybody wanted to be
a leader, no one cherished being a mere follower. Such an attitude
is characteristic of Icelanders.
In this controversy, Olafson maintained the confessional stand-
ard of the Lutheran Church. He fought the good fight, even if so
fighting meant antagonizing some of the friends of his childhood
because he would rather be loyal to God and His church, by Whom
he felt called than to court the favor and friendship of men.
His struggles as a church-man were not confined to his local
parish, he was very soon called into the service of the Synod.
During his active ministry in the Synod he served almost all of the
offices that the organization could bestow. He served as Vice-
President. He served the Synod as Secretary and for twenty years
he served in the office as President, a longer term than any other
man has served in that capacity, other than the original founder,
the late Dr. Jon Bjarnason.
In his capacity as President of Synod, he was called upon to
travel extensively, and, of course, to conduct the annual Synodical
Conventions of Synod. I believe all who had the privilege of serv-
ing in the Synod during his administration as President agree that.
Rev. Olafson was an excellent administrative officer and a particu-
larly interesting and inspiring presiding officer at the Conventions.
I should state in all fairness that some of us felt that he was over-
whelming and that he was domineering as Synodical President. This
was not, however, due to his desire to be domineering, but he became
unconsciously so because of his intellectual stature and because of
his ability as debater. Frequently he would leave the chair and take
part in the debate with his characteristic strong convictions, with
his strong personality, his superb eloquence, his keen understand-
ing. Frequently after he had expressed himself in these debates
many of us felt there was not much to be said in addition to
what he had stated. Very few people had an inclination to rise up
and contradict him upon the issues at stake and so by sheer person-