Saga - 1982, Side 63

UM AFSKIPTI ERKIBISKUPA
61
Sturl.: Sturlunga saga I-II. Efter membranen Króksfjarðarbók udfyldt efter
Reykjarfjarðarbók. (útg. Kr. Kálund). Kobenhavn og Kristiania 1906-1911.
Sturlunga saga I-II. Jón Jóhannesson, Magnús Finnbogason og Kristján Eldjárn
Sáu um útgáfuna. Reykjavík 1946.
Sveinbjörn Rafnsson. Studier í Landnámabók. Kritiska bidrag till den islándska
fristatstidens historia. Lund 1974.
fellenbach, G. Church, State and Christian Society of the time of the investit-
ure contest. Oxford 1970.
Ullmann, W. Prnciples of Governmentand Politics in the Middle Ages. London
1961.
Ulimann, W. Medieval Politicial Thought. (án útgáfust. ) 1975.
Wallén, Per-Edwin. Hámnd. KLNM VII.
Þórhallur Vilmundarson. Ólafur Chaim. Skirnir 1977.
SUMMARY
In this thesis the author initially attempts to examine the pretexts of the demands
by Guðmundur Arason, Bishop of the see of Hólar at the beginning of the 13th
Century, concerning the right of the Church to arbitrate in ecclesiastical matters.
It is assumed that the Norwegian Church at that time claimed this authority and
tbat Bishop Guðmundur tried to pursue this authority in compliance with instruc-
t'ons in a pastoral letter, which he presumably received on his consecration in the
Vear 1203. In this context the author discusses the legal duty of a bishop to obey
the archbishop under whom he was serving, in accordance with canon law. Articles
venfying this are referred to, some of them from pastoral letters from Archbishops
°f Niðarós to Iceland, dating from late 12th century.
In those letters is evident the interpretation of the Archbishop of Niðarós of the
Pösition of the Icelandic Church at that time, namely that it should be subservient
to those statutes of canon law that were approved within the Norwegian Church.
Those articles of the letters raise the question of the propriety of defining the Ice-
'andic Church in the 12th century as a National Church as has been maintained. It
ls Pointed out that at that time a dual law was in effect in this country: on one hand
secular law and on the other hand ecclesiastical law which was based to some ex-
tem on articles of canon law, but was not acknowledged by the secular authorities.
There follows a discussion of the dispute between Bishop Guðmundur and
chiefs in the north of Iceland. The author attempts to indicate that in his demands
of íurisdiction for the Church in clerical matters, Bishop Guðmundur challenged
the authority of the chiefs; his demands would inevitably limit their powers and
their right to collect penalty fines.
An attempt is made in this context to point out that the methods of the chiefs
when they enforced secular law on the clergy were totally contrary to decrees of
can°n law which proclaimed inviolability for the clergy. The aims of the chiefs
were to a large extent based on the right to avenge but the doctrines of the Church