Sameiningin - 01.03.1912, Blaðsíða 17

13
,,ofrað“, né „glúpnum og verðum að gjalti“, einsog Nagli
skozki, „er liann sá, at þeir (Þórbjörn digri og menn
hans) ofruðu vápnum.“
N. Stgr. Þorláksson.
-------o-------
Dómr
í kirkjueignar-máli Þingvalla-safnaðar í N.-Dak.
State of North Dakota, In District Court,
County of Pembina, Seventh Judicial District.
Sigrbjörn Guomundsson, et al. Plaintiffs,
—vs—
Thingvalla Lutheran Church, et al. Defendants.
Memoramluin Decision.
A lengthy discussion of the matters in dispute in this controversy
will not be attempted. I will briefly outline my views of the more
important questions. When the case was first submitted upon the
evidence taken at Pembina a decision was rendered in favor of de-
fendants on the theory that section 11 of the Constitution of the
Church had been repealed, and that such repeal was acquiesced in by
every member of the church, and that the conclusion to be drawn
from such ap:peal necessarily was to leave the control of the property
of the Church in the hands of the majority of the congregation. I
also found that defendants (the majority) had departed from the
doctrines, tenets and faith which obtained when Thingvalla Congre-
gation was organized and which were at least implied in the consti-
tution. A motion was made to open the case, which was granted,
and a large amount of evidence has been introduced bearing both
upon the repeal of section 11 of the Constitution and upon the ques-
tion of the departure by defendants from a fundamental doctrine of
the Church.
I now find that section 11 of the Constitution has not been re-
pealed, but that section 11 of prior Constitution was repealed. Article
11 of the Constitution, as it now stands as far as material, provides:
“If a division occurs in tiie congregation the property sliall belong
to snch portion as ailhercs to this Constitution.”
A division has occured in the Congregation, the plaintiffs con-
stituting the minority faction and the defendants constituting the
majority faction. Of course, the burden is upon the plaintiffs to
prove that the defendants have departed from the doetrine of this
particular Church as regards some material or fundamental matter.
The polity of the Thingvalla Congregation is that of the Lutheran
Church in character. This Church was affiliated with the Lutheran
Synod of Icelanders of America at the time the factional differences
arose. The Synod had taken jurisdiction of these factional disputes
in Thingvalla Congregation and entered upon a consideration of the
ecclesiastical questions raised when the defendants (a majority of the
Congregation) voted that the Church withdraw from the Synod. I
think as stated in my former opinion, that the Church had a right
to withdraw from the Synod and that the opinion of the Synod whieh