THE ICELANDERS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXI, Issue 20, 3 March 1893, Page 19

THE ICELANDERS.

The following correspondence hag appsared in tb.3 Otago Daily Times : — TO THE EDITOR. Sib,— ln your leader of yesterday on the Icelanders you wrote : — " Their forefathers went over to the Reformation as unanimously as their forefathers bad gone over to Christianity itself." Kindly allow me space to give two quotations bearing on this nutter — one from a Caihohc authority and the other from a Protestant source. Let the Protestant writer speak first : —

"Tne R(-t jrmation," says lha Edinburgh Encyclopedia, art. "Iceland," " was not effected without violence. John Areson, Bishop of Hoolum, was the most strenuous and violent oppoter of the introduction of LutheranUm." Archbishop Bpalding writes in a similar strain :—": — " It is admit ed on all sides that the Reformation was introduced into Iceland by downright violence, and Bgainst the knjwn and clearly-expressed wishes of the population," And he cojtinues :— ' The people of Iceland rallied round the zealous Babop of Hoilum, ani, with arms in their hands, declared Ihej would not be compelled to embrace the new religion, or submit to the authority of the new Lutheran bishop. How was the opposition subdued ? It was overcome by the sharp argument of the sword ! The Kmg of Denmark despatched a large foroe to the islind and by overwhelming nnmbers and superior discipline defeated the insur. gems. The Catholic bishop was seized and put to death. Still the disaffection continued, and it was finally put down only by brute force wiel'U'd by these foreign Danish troops. Thus was L atheranism established by violence in Iceland about the middle of the sixteenth century." According, then, to two respectable authorities — oie a Cathol'c and the other a Prolesiant— the forefathers of the Icelanders, instead of going over unaaimously to the Reformation, were forced to accept Luthernnism at the point of the Danish sword. — I am, etc., February 21. *>. Lynch.

[No doubt the use of tha word •' unanimously " was an inexact way of expressing our meaning. What we meant to state was that the Icelanders, as a community, went over to the Reformation. Whether they were driven or not was nothing to the purpose. The one indisputable fact is that they very soon became Lutheran, and from that time they have for the most part been the well-educate J and mild-mannered people they now are. We know quite well that ihere was a struggle in Icelaud as in most other countries where the Lutheran doctnnen got a footing, but it was soon over. Ti ere was of course, violence on both sides, aud we are not anxious, neither aie we at the present moment prepared, to maintain that the Lutheran paity did not cairy matters with a high hand. Very likely they did especially as they had the support of the King of Denmark. But violent dealing was up to that time the custom of the race. King Olaf, in ijtroducing Christianity in Norway, used the most barbarous cruelties towards his subjects, pursuing them with fire and sword, but he was canonised by the Church for bis savage zeal, — Ed. O.D.T ]

To the Editor. Sir, — Your mode of reasoning can scarcely be commended. There nas question of Iceland in my letter, and, in your subjoined note, you betake yourself to Norway. You run off, in a rather illogical fashion, to another country, to another and remote age, and to other circumstances. What has the introduction of Christianity into Pagan Norway to do with the forcing of Lutberanism on Christian Iceland ? How can the Bemi-savage customs of the piratical Northmen of the eleventh century illustrate the mi'der m,inn°rs of a more cultured race in the sixteenth century ? You say th.it King Olaf of Norwiy was "cinonUed by the Church for his savage zeal." Kindly permit me to 6ay that King Olaus, or Olave, or Olof , was canonised not '• for his pavnee zeal " but because he was considered to have " died for the Christian faith. ' His enemies were unnatural Pagans. He fought against brutal idolators, who most obstinately clung to barbarous practice?. It was humanity vertut barbarism no leas than Christianity against heathenism. He was killed while figh ing the battle of hnmanuy as well as that of Christianity. He was venerated as one who diel for the faith. He is in the calendar of the Cburch as "8. Olof, martyr." Neander, a strong Protestant writer, who is by no means complimentary to King Olof, thus speaks .— " The banished Olof returned and prepared himself for h new struggle. He would receive none but Christians into his army. He caused the shields and helmets of his soldiers to be emblazoned with the sign of the cross, and gave them as bis watchword, ' Onward, warriors of Christ t The CroBS and the King.' He was wounded in battle on (he 29th of July, 1033, and coon after his death was honoured by the Christians as a martyr." The same Protestant Neander and the great German historian Alzog are strikingly in accord as to the opinion of the Christians about Olof« Says the Protestant Neander :— " The veneration in which Olof was held could not fail to have a salutary reaction on the tone of popular feeling towards Christianity." Says tbe Catholic Alzog:— "The veneration in which his memory was universally held produced a reaction of public sentiment in favour of Christianity."

But enough of King Olaf and Norway — for the present, at all events. Allow me to request you. when answering this letter, to keep to the subject under discussion. If afterwards you wish to wander, I have no objection to accompany you in your wanderings. Come back, then, please, to Iceland . Tbe " one indisputable fact "is tuat, speaking of the Icelanders, you ma r le, unsupported by any authority, the assertion that '' their forefai hers went over to the Reformation as unanimously ac their for< fathers had gone over to Christianity itself." The obvious meaning of your words is that the Icelanders voluntarily embrstced tho doctrines of the Reformation. Your fresh assertion that " the Icelanders as a community went over to the Reformation ' is equally false. You only repeat in another way what I found fault with. I therefore repeat my assertion that the Icelanders, ' instead of going over unanimously to the Reformation, were forced to accept Lutheranism at tbe point of the Danish sword." This assertion, which I supported by authority, you meet, without authority, by an ad captandum vvlgiis argument. An appeal to prejudice is not always successful. Please do not again try to draw the proverbial herring across the track. Do not wriggle out of jour difficulty by quibbling about your " inexact way " of expressing your own meaning. A leader writer should be scrupulously ax act in the narration of historic fact, and should in a matter of this kind, when challenged, either gracefully acknowledge that he is fallible as the rest of men, or at once produce reputable authority for his statements. — I am, etc., February 24. P. Lykch. [The Rev Father Lynch is as eager for a shindy as if he were fresh from Donnybrook. It is not our custom to allow insolent letters to appear in our columns, but we have made an exception in his case on accoun* of his youth and his cloth. In our article about the proposed migration from Iceland we sai \ that the Icelanders " went over to the B' formation as unanimously as their forefathers had gone over to Christianity its4f." Father Lynch took exception to the word " unanimously," and we explained that it did not exae'ly express what we meant. It was, as a matter of fact a sip of the pen. We imagined, however, we had made it quite clear that what we intended was simply to state that th j Icelanders as a communi'y became Lutheran. But bee hist we used the expression " went over in a body," the rev father is down upon us with all the bluster of a Bombastes Furioso. We, besides, expressly stated that " whether they were driven or not was nothing to the purpose. " We had no polemical design whatever in making th« original statement, and if Father Lynch had read our note appended to his first le'ter he would have seen that we ou!y meant to siy that the Ice'anders, whether they were driven or not, went over to the Reformation. That a Urge number went over voluntarily there caa be no manner of doubt, though it is also true the introduction of the new (Ecclesiastical Constitution was stoutly opposed by a considerable part of the population. But it is not our business either to defend or to blame that measure of Christian 111. The one in lisputable fnct, as we add, is that the Icelanders have ever since been the well-educated and mi)dmanaered people they now are. Up to that time their manners had

I been of a very different kind ; hence oar reference, not in the least " illogical," to King Olaf and his barbarous treat mint of bis Pagan subjects. As to " King Olaus, or Olave, or O'ot " (the rev father is determined tc make sure of his man — wa continue to call him Olaf), tbe fact that he die I in battle certainly does not aff set the essential truth of our statement that he was canonised for bis savage zeal, neither does the " fact " that the bones of tbe bloodthirsty barbariau (a fine exemplar of humanity 1) began after a time to work miracles. Father Lynch says in his hectoring lecture on the duties of newspaper w liters that they "should be scrupulously exact in the narration of historic il fact." I believe we have heard something like this before ; but alas for the infirmity of human nature I Newspaper writers *re not infallible. They commit mistakes, sometimes through ignorance and sometimes through inadvertency, just as some newspaper correspondents write at" if they were as iofallible as the Pope, and privileged to give their pen a license wbich maturer years will probably show them to be a* uub^cjm.ng as it is ineffective in argument —Kd. O.DT.J