Ásgeir Ásgeirsson, who later became president of Iceland, prophesied in 1925 that psychical research would become for the 20th century what historical research had been for the 19th century.[1] Although this prediction has not come true, it nevertheless shows the prospects that paranormal research held for many Icelanders in the early part of this century. Indeed, many assumed that psychical research would save religion from utter defeat at the hands of science. The towering figure in the psychical movement in Iceland was Haraldur Níelsson (1848- 1928), professor of the theological faculty of the University.[2] In analyzing his thought, I aim to show his strong dualistic framework, which was also informed by spiritualism. Haraldur Níelsson was not a systematic theologian, but he still created his own system. There is an intrinsic and coherent structure in his thought, erected on the basis of his theological and spiritualistic presuppositions. The major issues he coherently worked out.

I will deal first with the struggle against materialism, which was fundamental to the development of the spiritualist movement. Secondly, Haraldur’s spiritualist worldview is described, which was the basis for his depiction of God. Delineation of the model of the relationship between God and Jesus will follow. The final section aims at disclosing his dualistic structure of thought and the way he sees the world as utterly limited, meant to be transcended or overcome rather than confronted with an authentic reaction.

The basic aim of Haraldur Níelsson’s theology was to correlate religion to science, on the one hand, and to the basic needs of the people of his time on the other. The nature of this need came to determine the criteria for valid religion and science. He thought that his contemporaries’ essential problem was their lack of certainty about the question of an afterlife – hence his concern with epistemology. In a lecture given on the occasion of the Student Association’s week of religion in 1922, Haraldur provided some insight into the religious problems he faced as a young man. First of all, when working on a translation of the Old Testament, he had been stunned by the errancy and what he considered dissatisfactory content of the Bible. Secondly, the problem of intellectual certainty about the fundamentals of Christianity haunted him. He became acutely alert to similar doubts among his contemporaries. In his early years, he never gave up certainty of immortality and the importance of Christ. Once he discovered the shaky ground on which the Bible and the creeds were based, psychical research offered potential solutions to the question of certainty.[3] Haraldur Níelsson’s struggle is fundamentally the struggle to find a gracious God. In Luther’s version, it resulted in an emphasis on the grace of God in Christ, but in Haraldur’s version this struggle resulted in a particular worldview with a nomistically structured cosmos, which furnished explanations to a mind seeking certainty.[4] Haraldur Níelsson related the craving for certainty to several issues. Doubts about religion arose because of religion’s epistemologically problematic character. Haraldur accepted that the intelligibility of the creeds and the Bible could not stand up to the penetrating critique of contemporary science. Because of doubt, human beings not only essentially lacked that which was meant to be fundamentally important in the life of the individual, but also that which was needed for social coherence, namely faith. He understood faith as the right orientation toward self, other human beings, and finally the fundamental meaning of life. Faith is understood in a late neo-Kantian sense as that which makes up the disposition of the self. Haraldur maintained that one important feature of faith was a positive approach to miracles or wonder. The loss of the miraculous meant a loss of faith. The term miracle seems to have a double meaning for Haraldur. First of all the miraculous is that which transcends what is strictly worldly in empirical terms, i.e. that which seems to break with natural laws. But the miraculous also refers to dimensions of wonder or spiritual depth. A materialistic worldview, he thought, not only explodes a healthy approach to the supernatural realm but also devastates the glorious worlds of wonder and adventure that belong to the human spirit. The loss of the miraculous in human life means the loss of the very essence of religion.[5]

Materialism

In Haraldur Níelsson’s estimation, the chief enemy of faith – and hence of the human being, science, and religion – was materialism.[6] He used the term to designate many diverse movements of thought. He understood materialism as any approach based on a non-transcendental presupposition, which resulted in an emphasis on matter rather than spirit (i.e. a reversal of the correct hierarchy of values in the world). He saw evidence of materialism in quite a few movements of his time. First of all, he considered the science of his day to be heavily contaminated. As a member of the academy, he valued scholarly research highly, believed in the progress of science, and was convinced of the value of scientific findings. Haraldur was committed to the Darwinian view of the progressive development of human beings from animal ancestors. But he denied that this progress was only a material development. The essence of this progress was certainly spiritual. Haraldur was highly critical of those who fought Darwinism, particularly the English clergy. He compared them to the Pharisees in the New Testament. Those striking remarks have to be understood in the context of his struggle. He thought of himself as introducing a new breakthrough in science, a breakthrough of greater importance even than Darwin’s. He encountered hostility from the bishop of the Icelandic church and several clergymen. Having committed himself unshakably to the cause of spiritualism, he considered criticism of this new program to be nothing more than a Pharisaic denial of divine guidance. Haraldur was seemingly firmly committed to Darwinism as a scientific theory of the development of life and did not qualify his approach with any warnings against materialism. He also seems to have condoned a form of Social Darwinism in his description of non-theological or non-spiritualistic social development, i.e. the way society develops when the certainty of immortality and the divine spirit has not rightly structured the hierarchy of individuals.[7]

Matter, science and religion

Haraldur Níelsson was an ardent protagonist of science, but he renounced and fiercely fought against any dogmatic materialism that overextended the proper role of science by renouncing the priority of the spiritual dimension of the world. The scientific materialism of Germany in particular, with its replacement of spirit by matter, was a clear example of a fatally wrong approach. He maintained that materialism was practiced in religion as well. He had become convinced that historical research, particularly as practiced in Germany, was fundamentally materialistic.

What Haraldur refers to as materialism has been variously labeled as materialism, naturalism, positivism, and realism.[8] Generally speaking, scientific materialism was an attempt to make sense of the entire world by explaining everything in terms of matter and energy, cause and effect. Laplace’s Essai philosophique sur les probabilités (1814), with its emphasis on matter as the sole reality and the universal reign of causality, was an introduction to a long list of German works on science with similar emphases, e.g. Gauss, Liebig, Wohler, Schwann, Schleiden and DeBois-Reymond. The evolutionary theory of Darwin and the advance of physics spelled out a kind of paradigm shift away from the older Newtonian paradigm. These new discoveries disclosed the history of both nature and the human being. Those who were primarily responsible for making the new shift of thought public were Ernst Haeckel and Ludwig Buechner. Of special importance were the consequences Haeckel drew from his scientific theories on religion. He maintained that psychology should be derived from physiological principles. Furthermore, he thought that God, freedom of the will, and immortality of the soul provided no help in solving the grand riddle of the universe. Naturally this approach was rejected by those who were informed by psychical research, both in Iceland and abroad.

Haraldur Níelsson was deeply disturbed by Haeckelean thought and scientific development as a whole. Buechner brought the widely circulating ideas of materialism together and proclaimed what Níelsson considered the unholy gospel of materialism in his book Kraft und Stoff which went through ten editions and caused a considerable stir. Buechner developed a strictly reductionistic version of Kant’s epistemology. He maintained that matter and mind were inseparable, like force and matter. He considered self-consciousness to be nothing more than a product of nature. Material determined all thought and consciousness. Hence, speculative philosophy and theology were basically pointless activities. Physiological processes explained religion. Albert Lange, in his History of Materialism (1866), thought Buechner’s approach was naïve and too far-reaching in its conclusions. Lange, however, thought the critique of materialism was in fact a critique of correct epistemology. Lange thought the final value of metaphysics and theology might be left untouched.[9]

For the theologians, the frightening lesson to be learned from the materialistic thinkers was how religion was being explained away in terms of physical processes, social institutions, and naturalistic psychology. The crisis Haraldur Níelsson experienced consisted of what he considered the destruction of meaningful personhood and finally the devastation of any foundation for society due to the loss of the essence of personhood.

History, scholarship and the crisis of the miraculous

Secondly, historical research had renounced all that was related to the miraculous in the Bible and human history and hence became an advocate of materialism. Haraldur Nílesson detected a reductionism in biblical criticism similar to that of the natural sciences. What he considered the fundamental characteristic of materialistic, biblical, scholarship was the attempt to explain away everything related to the miraculous. He thought supernatural events like healings, the appearances of dead people, the transfiguration, the resurrection, and the events of Pentecost should not simply be explained away. All of these events, he thought, might gain some intelligibility within the right explanatory framework, and he thought the spiritualistic structure of thought provided the clues to this correct framework. The critique Haraldur leveled at German historical criticism was not aimed specifically at individual works or scholars, but rather pointed out the general materialistic prejudices governing their thought.[10] On the other hand, Haraldur practiced severe criticism of the Scriptures, but always from the perspective of spiritualism. For example, he denied the importance of the Old Testament, especially what he considered its cruel concept of God. His progressivist view of the development of religions placed Jesus’ religion in a superior position over against the Hebrew religion.

Suspicious of religious despisers

Thirdly, the cultural movements of his time were materialistic. Haraldur Níelsson spoke not only against materialistic critics of religion but also against political movements as well, like socialism and other movements that fought for social welfare. He was not against social improvement, but movements whose sole priority was making the material world better were actually fighting for the wrong hierarchy of values, viz. materialism, in his opinion. Socialist movements based on the dialectical materialism of Marx fundamentally erred in their theoretical and practical presuppositions, he thought.[11]

The elimination of doubt and the development of certainty became the criterion of Haraldur Níelsson’s critique of science, cultural philosophy, and religion. The primary aim of his thought was to provide proof of the truth of religion that would satisfy his intellectual questioning. And secondly, theology had to be revised in order to provide an explanatory structure of thought that could provide certainty, direction in worldly affairs, and finally, explain in a coherent sense what human beings can hope for.[12] The grand solution that he discovered to the problems of his contemporaries, as well as to those of science and religion, was spiritualism.[13]

Spiritualism introduced in Iceland

Einar Kvaran was the first Icelander to introduce psychic research to Iceland. He had read Fredrick Myer’s two volumes The Human Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death and they profoundly intrigued him. Kvaran had been one of the realist critics, but along with some other members of the movement, he had become somewhat disillusioned by the Brandesian approach. Being a member of the Icelandic community in Denmark, and having moved beyond the cultural and political struggle in that country and the needs of his student years, he fought for positive thought constructs that would be suitable for the new intelligentsia in Iceland and in line with modern movements in culture and science. Kvaran and his friends managed to involve quite a number of social and scholarly heavyweights in Iceland in their effort, e.g. Björn Jónsson, the editor of an important newspaper, Ísafold, and later prime minister; physician Guðmundur Hannesson; Haraldur Níelsson; and philosopher Ágúst H. Bjarnason. The movement was lucky enough to discover some powerful mediums, of which Indriði miðill (medium), was the most famous. Soon remarkable events were taking place – spirits were speaking through the mediums, there were elevations and  materializations, etc. The researchers were convinced of the uniqueness of what they were doing, but they could not quite agree on how to interpret these happenings. However, as with other spiritualists, tricksters haunted the Icelandic researchers. It was demonstrated that one important medium had cheated. In addition, as expected, good mediums were constantly at risk of being exploited for purposes of deception. Evil spirits were said trying to interfere with the task of revealing true messages.[14] Guðmundur Hannesson’s reports were later printed in the Proceedings of the American Society for Psychical Research. In spite of the problems of the original Experimental Society, more and more Icelanders became convinced of the importance of spiritualism, not least because of the work of the highly respected Einar H. Kvaran, established by then as an outstanding novelist, and Haraldur Níelsson, professor and preacher at the sensational services held in the „Free Church.“ In 1919, the Psychical Society was finally founded as a national organization for research, and Haraldur Níelsson became its first president. By that time, several pastors and theology students were heavily influenced by the spiritualist approach. Indeed their numbers grew and made up a significant segment of the pastors and bishops of the ELCI, the evangelical Lutheran national church, by the mid-20^thcentury. In addition, a large number of Icelanders, cultural celebrities, as well as others who were not so well known, became convinced of the validity of the spiritualist cause, particularly due to the séances held all over the country well into the eighth decade of this century. One séance was even televised nationally. Spiritualist societies are still alive in the bigger towns in Iceland at the beginning of the 21^st century C.E.

The role of spiritualism

Spiritualism provided Haraldur Níelsson with scientific proof of immortality and preserved a place for miracles. He thought it also gave legitimization to religion and individual personhood. It was the grand unification and correlation of all disciplines and the solution to all personal dilemmas. It was scholarly sound and religiously productive.[15] Haraldur was not fighting the scientific acquisition of knowledge. He was concerned that science be understood broadly enough to allow for religion, and in that sense promote unity among different aspects of the whole cosmic system.

Haraldur summarized the value and proper application of psychical research as follows:

1. First of all, proof of immortality had been provided for a great many people. This proof had strengthened their faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and religious promises of afterlife.
2. Psychical research had proven that human nature is more glorious than we had imagined. This glorious nature relates to a transcendent world.
3. Psychical research had proven highly useful in solving riddles in biblical scholarship and shed light on their proper meaning.
4. There was no need to eliminate miracles from religion. Miracles were not contrary to the laws of the universe, but in accordance with them. Psychical research had disclosed these laws to us and made miracles intelligible.[16]

From this perspective Haraldur consoled battered souls, counseled and preached, leveled criticism at science, and read the Bible with a new lens that filtered out whatever did not accord with the general framework of spiritualism. Haraldur thought psychical research disclosed and affirmed Christ’s teachings. That view implies that Christ and the supernatural events of the Bible were spiritualistic,[17] and he subsequently revised the theology of his day in that light.[18]

Based on a powerful program, which Haraldur Níelsson became utterly convinced was true, he leveled a critique against science, theological constructs, and critics of culture, and simultaneously proclaimed the solution to the basic problems of human beings and complicated issues in both society and the academic life of his time. His justification for being active in psychical research, which some people believed to be outrageous activity, is found in his discussion of the meaning of being a pastor. He maintained that the vocation of the pastor requires that the clergyman, according to the division of labor in society, concentrate on the issues of eternity, especially those relating to the human soul.[19]

Followers and enemies

Haraldur Níelsson did convince quite a number of his Icelandic contemporaries of the truth of his program. As spiritualism gradually gained a substantial following, the conflict between its followers and those who were hostile toward spiritualism intensified. The strain was probably most severe among pastors. At some point the new movement had to be accepted or renounced. A conflict finally broke out between old friends and colleagues over the new theology, Jón Helgason and Haraldur Níelsson. In the first years of Haraldur’s participation in psychical research, Jón did not officially object. But the more Haraldur plunged himself into spiritualism, the more Jón became weary of the whole affair. Their relationship seems to have gradually deteriorated between 1910 and 1920. In spite of Jón’s misgivings about the scientific value of psychical research, he began his career as a bishop in 1917 by authorizing practical research into these matters in his Episcopal letter to the Icelandic Church, his Hirðisbréf. But Haraldur was not allowed to preach in the Reykjavík cathedral or give lectures at the Synods. A schism was imminent, along with the formation of a spiritualist sect, which was something Haraldur had fought against. Reports on spiritualism in Iceland appeared in the Danish press in 1921. The Bishop of Iceland was said to have participated. This report, along with other issues, infuriated Jón Helgason. He consequently wrote quite vehemently in the Danish newspapers against what he now called spirit-belief, discrediting the research on it as dubious, and implying that Haraldur had tricked his uncle, Bishop Hallgrímur Sveinsson, into seeking a spiritualist cure for his diseases, and claiming that the spiritualists were faint-hearted on religious matters, since they needed proofs. Understandably, Haraldur had to strike back. He lectured at public meetings and wrote quite heatedly against his bishop Hví Slær Þú Mig, II (Why do you hit me?) and Kirken og den Psykiske Forskning (Copenhagen: 1922). The Icelandic book, in addition to being a defense and explanation of spiritualism, is a severe attack on Jón Helgason’s integrity. This conflict marks the split of the new theology movement into two separate factions, complicating the theological struggle in Iceland. The fundamental and methodological issues were never worked out. The conflict was never resolved or reconciliation achieved. The formal unity of the National Church was not broken, but the Icelandic church has been broken-hearted ever since. Even today, a theologian attempting an analysis of these issues puts his or her professional standing at risk.

Spiritualist mentoring and new cosmology

Understanding the structure of the spiritualist worldview is of major importance for understanding the implications and subtleties of Haraldur’s thought. Haraldur remained an avid reader throughout his life. As he plunged deeper into psychical research, the major writers of that tradition became more and more important for him. The English tradition was the one he was closest to. Of primary importance was Sir Oliver Lodge, whose ideas were clearly reflected in Haraldur’s writings.[20] Oliver Lodge had an outstanding career as a physicist, but he was not content to deal only with science. Quite early he began to take an interest in psychical research. Of major importance was the foundation of the English Society for Psychical Research in 1882. But the invitation to join the successor to the Metaphysical Society, the Synthetic Society, founded in 1896, was even more important. At its meetings, some of the best and brightest Victorian minds were present, discussing philosophical and theological problems. In this context, Oliver Lodge developed his theories on spiritualism and the use of science for the benefit of religion. He became convinced of the possibility of mutual service between religion and science. As a result he began to write regularly on religious topics, revising theology in line with the progress of psychic research. Having already clarified his general scheme of thought in the debates of the Synthetic Society, he was well prepared to launch a frontal attack against Haeckel’s materialistic Riddle of the Universe, which appeared in 1899. Lodge published his Life and Matter in 1905. Although, one may see a unified path in Lodge’s thought, the major breakthrough for him came after the death of his son, Raymond, in 1915. Lodge contacted his dead son through a medium. An extraordinary book was published on these contacts, Raymond, or Life and Death. Based on these experiences Lodge could finally make claim that he had proof.

A detailed comparison of Lodge and Haraldur Níelsson will not be attempted here. But my thesis is that on the most important issues Haraldur followed Lodge, both in his view of the function of science and his revision of theological topics.[21] This worldview will provide clues about Haraldur’s emphasis on the individual, limitation, and the hierarchy of values, his approach to the social movements of his time, and his revision of major theological themes. The dualistic character of his theology is rooted in this general scheme, as is his manipulative approach to worldly issues – such as his approach to femininity and feminism. Before explaining the practical and theoretical consequences of this worldview, I will highlight the general scheme.

The grand web of being

Haraldur Níelsson became convinced that everything is structured into a hierarchy of being. On the lowest level is matter. He refrained from saying that matter is evil in itself. It simply occupies the lowest place in the hierarchy and becomes evil only when wrongly elevated above its proper position.[22] Material laws, which science is eminently suited to study, govern the material world. Nature, society, work, and the body are subject to these material laws. Haraldur did see some differentiations within the physical world. Stones for example, are inferior to fauna, which in turn are inferior to the animal life from which human beings eventually emerged. Society is in a sense the highest phase of the material world. The material world is only the lowest step in a ladder of worlds. The phenomena of our world are like signposts pointing toward some higher meaning. The beauty of nature, for example, is a sign of a deeper beauty. The good and beautiful aspects of human society point toward ideal relationships. The laws of nature point toward the essentially more meaningful laws of the universe.[23]

Beyond the material world, according to the common spiritualist approach, there are several other worlds in a hierarchical order. Some people thought there were other worlds of still higher orders beyond them. The third world is normally called the Summerland, a place of enormous beauty, and a world of schools for children who die young. Haraldur’s estimation of the number of worlds is not clear. He left the question open, stressing the importance of accepting this worldview as such, rather than acquiring an exact knowledge of the number of worlds. In death one moves from the material world to one of the higher worlds in accordance with the growth one has achieved. Most people will arrive directly in the third sphere, the Summerland, where evil and sorrow are completely gone.

Duality of the human and progress of the soul

The human being, more than any other creature, provides the link between this world and other worlds. Like many other spiritualists, Haraldur maintained that the old distinctions of body, soul, and spirit were fundamentally right.[24] In addition to the material body, every human being has a soul, which survives death and functions as a nonmaterial body for the spirit in transcendent worlds. At times this body is identified as the astral body, in which we travel while dreaming. The soul-body is identical in appearance to the material body and is not easy to identify, because of the similarity between the two bodies. Spiritualists, Haraldur included, argued that the soul-body was somehow made of matter, although it was not matter. No final explanations were given of how that could be, but the soul-body might be understood as energy. Haraldur uses the terms spirit and soul in a somewhat open-ended manner. He normally speaks of the soul of the human being as the wholeness of that which survives death. He speaks of the soul of Christ in that sense, too. But the spirit is essential to life.

The primary function or goal of human life is to venture upon a process of growth toward spirituality. Because of the hierarchical order of the universe, the first task for the human being is to conquer the material dimensions of life and mature spiritually. It is a process each human has to work on during the span of life given to him or her. Due to the limitations of life in the flesh, one must progress as quickly as possible. Those who die young do not lose their chance, but they will mature in other worlds. The question of the death of young children was especially pressing. A solution was developed through reports received from spirits at séances. Children will be put into schools to develop their maturity, it was said. They will stay so close to the earth that they will be able to observe people within the material world. They will be socialized in accordance with what they see in the human struggle in material life. This poses an important ethical obligation for us. In addition to progress for our own benefit, we have to be good examples of the progressive and ethically responsible life for the benefit of those who have passed away before they matured.[25] One’s quality of growth, or conversely lack of it, continues into one’s transcendent life.

Souls in trouble

Those who commit suicide, for instance, remain very close to the material world, because they have not submitted to the task of growth and have not cut the bond between matter and spirit.[26] These persons will, for instance, account for some of the disturbing occurrences in the world. Poltergeists, evil ghosts, and other such transcendent beings can be seen as un-matured spirits who have not accepted their call to growth and are still disturbed by the evil in life. Because these spirits are still close to the material world, they retain great power. Those who have progressed further have lost this material power and gained spiritual power instead. Haraldur told a story about a spirit who was troublemaker at the séances of the Experimental Society. His name was Jón, and he caused a great deal of disruption. He constantly returned to séances, scaring other spirits away and making things difficult for both the distressed medium and the participants in the séance. He even tried to kill the medium, which made the whole affair into something rather remarkable. Jón was quite antagonistic toward spirits who already occupied higher positions. After a considerable time, much discussion, and many attempts to soothe and counsel this unruly spirit, Jón relented, partly through the help of Hallgrímur Pétursson, the poet, who was discussed earlier in this book. Spiritualist maintain that in the other worlds, a person will be rid of the material body. This means for instance, that all material deformities disappear. Those who were handicapped in life will have no handicap at all; facial features will improve. Beauty will prevail over any defects. The aim in other worlds is the same as this one: growth toward the most complete actualization of the potentialities God gives spiritual beings. Arriving at that goal means being filled with God and being totally with God. It is living in the highest world.

Guidance

In the process of growing, one is also called on to give guidance to others who are struggling to grow. Spirits dwell close to earth for some time, in order to help those who still live in the material body. We may experience them as angels or other beings who appear to us on occasions such as séances. Angelic beings are a very important part of Haraldur’s scheme of thought. They watch over the world as God’s messengers and servants. Hence he emphasizes the closeness of God to everyone. No one is left alone.

These beings and their intervention in the world are incorporated into a progressivist, hierarchical, spiritualist scheme of the way angels provide guidance. A general belief in guidance and active concern for individuals’ welfare in built into this scheme of thought. Haraldur contends that those who have passed away are sad until they have contacted their mourners. Once they have done so, they can start their lives in the spiritual world. First of all, they travel for a while to become oriented, then they settle down with the family they had in their material life. On this point Haraldur was in disagreement with some common spiritualist beliefs. He insisted on strong family ties, which accounts for his counsel to mourners: You have not lost your child who dies young; it has merely passed away sooner than you. The notion of spiritual leadership accounts for the strong elitist character of spiritualism.[27] Finally, miracles are indeed important in the general framework of spiritualism.[28]

Laws and the world

The spiritualist universe is depicted as governed by law. Time and three-dimensional space seem to be extended to the entire cosmos. Matter is not essential to space. But matter prevents human souls from communicating with souls in other non-material worlds. In other worlds, maturity determines how well one can communicate. In general, the principle seems to be that there is direct communication up the chain of being. Beings of a higher order seem to be better equipped for downward communication, if they wish to do so. The laws of nature are meant to be truly real in the material world. But beyond these laws more fundamental laws rule, especially the laws of morality. It is important for the welfare of the human self to obey these rules, since they are more fundamental than material laws.[29] Although it is not worked out in any thematic sense in Haraldur’s writings, he seems to hold the view that the universe as a whole is somehow making progress in spiritual growth. The principle of growth also applies to religious truth. Religions and societies improve over time, in accordance with the will of God. The principle of growth also serves as a razor, eliminating everything that does not fit the spiritualist worldview. Discussing the Bible, theological topics, or simply historical development, the growth principle provides Haraldur with support for his critique.[30]

The loving God

The model of God in Haraldur’s thought corresponds to his cosmological framework. God is depicted as the essence, force, and consummation of the whole universe. God’s being encompasses the beginning and end, the ground, purpose, and work of fulfillment. Haraldur’s interpretation of God is twofold. He did not want to engage in speculation beyond what the hermeneutical framework of spiritualism would allow. The Godhead is thus not described in any detailed sense, it is only alluded to, and then only in line with the revelation of divinity in the human perfection of Jesus Christ.

First of all, Haraldur had a mystical approach to God that does not easily lend itself to verbal expression, except in the form of classic metaphors, such as those involving light, depth, height, silence, oceans, or wells, and these and similar comparisons are used. When this God-talk is examined from the perspective of his whole theology, one senses a strong Platonic-Augustinian strain of thought, exitus a Deo, reditus in Deum. In other words, the developmental character of the cosmos might be expressed in terms of a theos-en-panism tending towards pan-en-theism. God is depicted as a cosmic soul, the essence of all there is and to which everything will return.[31] Human spirits, traveling through different worlds, owe their origin to this God and make their aim a return to God. As a universalist, Haraldur maintains that human spirits will ultimately return to their origin. He completely renounces damnation or any theology involving the sacrifice of one for the many. This is rooted in his concept of God as all-embracing love. He denies the view that a satanic force or evil is fighting against God.[32] God is most commonly depicted as love and omnipresence. This denial concerned both a literal and a symbolic understanding of the devil. The question of the omnipresence of God is not totally clear. Many spiritualist writings emphasize that God’s nearness means that the guiding and supporting spirits are the messengers or angels of God and help human beings. This view seems to be represented to some extent in Haraldur’s thought. But on the other hand, he emphasizes that God Himself is near. My hunch is that he holds both opinions and solves the conflict by seeing the Spirit of God as near and working in and through angels.[33] Evil is reinterpreted in line with this hierarchical and progressive cosmology. God is also the primary aesthetic being, whose life is essentially beauty.[34] God as love is the essential image proclaimed by Jesus. The image of a loving God is diametrically opposed to what Haraldur considered the Hebrew-Jewish notion of an angry, cruel, despotic God. He was very stubborn when it came to rejecting any religion of sacrifice, punishment and, renunciation. His theology aimed at a culmination of love.

Jesus Christ – the greatest Medium

Secondly, God is depicted in line with the monarchic-fatherly model in the same dimensions exemplified in Jón Helgason’s theology: teleology and pedagogical features.[35] God is depicted as powerful in relation to the entire hierarchy of being, acting upon and providing a challenge for us so we may arrive at some realization of who we are and for what ends our existence is intended.[36] In a sense, all there is, both inside and outside us, is God acting upon us by providing “mirrors” in which we can truly see who we are, i.e. something divine.[37] In accordance with the monarchic model, Haraldur maintains that God distributes misery and hardship with the greater purpose of bringing human beings to life.[38] God demands that human spirits obey the laws of the universe, not only the material laws, but above all the laws of growth. These laws demand faith and obedience as the human response. The models of Jesus and the human being interpret the monarchic model. In these supporting models, one will see the monarchic-fatherly model being revealed.[39]

Even in the uncertainty of his youth, Haraldur never doubted the fundamental importance of Jesus Christ. Indeed, he thought Jesus fulfilled a primordial role in the cosmic progress of souls. Haraldur maintained that Jesus’ descent into this world marked the beginning of a new cosmic era. The first major era began when God blew breath into the nostrils of some primordial ancestors of the human race. In line with Paul, Haraldur speaks of a beginning, even though he does not use the Adamic terminology.[40] Without making caricature of Haraldur’s Christology, it could be maintained that Jesus is a medium through which God is revealed to the world and through which human spirits progress toward their goal. As such, the Jesus-model is a support model for the model of God and is also the prototype for the model of the human being.

Furthermore, Jesus is also the mediator between the world of matter and the God-spirit in the sense that an intelligible relationship is disclosed. According to Haraldur, psychical research shows, through the messages of the spirits, a worldview that is the same as that revealed in the message of Jesus Christ. This is necessarily so because of Christ’s high position within the chain of being. From these two sources one can construe a reasonable cosmology. God has a goal for the world of matter. Its function is to be the lowest ranking school for developing souls. The divine spirit was materialized to make this function of the matter-world clear. Jesus discloses the primordial relationship between God and the world. The axioms of hierarchy and progress are disclosed in His life on earth and show the ranking of the material world as the lowest stage, which is there to be transcended. The sense of Haraldur’s Christology is a unity, but it has two dimensions, roughly exemplifying the mystical dimension of the Godhead and monarchical dimensions. The first is related to Jesus’ self, and the second to His function over against human beings.

The basic metaphor by which the self of Jesus is described is the metaphor of a child. The child metaphor, within Haraldur’s total framework, preserves the axioms of progress and hierarchy. The growth of Jesus’ self from the originally unmolded child to maximum maturity is expressed as disclosing God’s being, which in turn becomes the mirror or prototype for human beings.

Haraldur Níelsson refrains from stating anything about the essential relationship of God and Jesus. For him, the classical formulations of the nature of the Son of God are part of an uninformed tradition that needs revision in light of the modern worldview. What Haraldur asserts is that Jesus, like other human beings, enjoyed preexistence prior to His birth. As an extremely progressed spirit, Jesus, descended from the highest step in the ladder of being. He entered the world by taking up a dwelling in a human fetus. Themes relating to the virgin birth and immaculate conception are avoided in Haraldur’s theology. The emphasis in his thought is always on the soul rather than the body, on the divinity of the soul, not that of the body.[41]

Christ Soul

 As a human child, Jesus had to grow. Haraldur makes the claim that from the beginning Jesus’ soul was bent toward faith.[42] Completely on His own, he matured and reached a certain level of growth. He was tested in everything and endured all temptations without failing.[43] As a self that developed toward perfection, Jesus revealed God. His teachings and miracles exemplify what is essential, the divine. His death was not an atonement for sins, but rather a sign of obedience to the laws of the universe. His death reveals His mature spirituality, not yielding to the “law of the fist” but rather obeying the law of humility. Due to the function of matter within the spiritualist framework, Haraldur renounced the resurrection of the flesh. The essence of Jesus was His spirit, which appeared after his death. The body of Christ may have been left in the tomb, or it may have become dematerialized. What is essential about His resurrection is the disclosure of the primacy of the divine spirit and immortality.[44]Some of the characteristics of Jesus’ soul are stated. These refer to what Haraldur called the Christ-soul.[45] Humility is the most striking feature of Jesus. Humility toward God results in humility toward other human beings and toward the laws of the universe. Humility is the essential feature of growth.[46] Some other characteristics of the Christ-soul are an absence of egotism, a depth of vision, a sensitivity to injustice and disorder, and a stubborn, daring and unbending will. The full actualization of the essences of spirit in Jesus’ life makes Him divine to human beings. He is fully with God. As such He reveals to us what is hidden in us, our potentialities.[47] Essentially, the Christ-soul reveals the miraculous nature of divinity in the world. The whole career of Christ – the transfiguration, the victory over the “law of the fist” on Good Friday, the appearance on Easter, and so on – is a perfect revelation of God. His career proves that God exists, the world is miraculous, the kingdom of God has arrived with power, and everyone will survive death and progress toward God.[48] In line with late neo-Kantian thought, the Christ-soul is interpreted as the basic core of Jesus’ personality.[49]

Since Jesus has actualized what is in us all and has thereby revealed what is divine, He is naturally depicted as the grand prototype for human beings to follow. First of all, He is a spiritual guide or master. Human beings should submit to this master, who will always reveal to us the primacy of spirit over matter. Most basically Jesus reveals the loving God who will grant us peace.[50] He will disclose to us how we may indeed be saved. As a spiritual guide He will save us, first of all by revealing the meaning of the world to us. He will show us that we truly are children of God and as such we may, like Him, approach God. This reconciliation will elevate us toward perfection of knowledge and relationship.[51] But it also means that we will be given ethical guidance in our daily conduct in the struggle.

Secondly, Jesus discloses to us the will of the monarch. He is a prototype for belief and conduct. He teaches us the basic law of self-sacrifice. He will grant us power so our will can be strengthened, enabling us to submit in humility to God and sacrifice ourselves.[52] This sacrifice can be revealed in many ways, by not allowing material goods to rule our lives, and by conducting ourselves in an upright manner in our homes and in society. But the fundamental meaning of self-sacrifice is the submission of matter to spirit on all levels of human life. An important aspect of true discipleship is stubborn adherence to a positive approach to other human beings. Haraldur tried to live up to his own theory, both in his private life and in his public teaching. He maintained that one should not develop one’s character negatively by glorifying oneself at the expense of others. True human dignity consists of a self-appearance in concert with Christ’s’ conduct. Christ examined everything in the light of the soul and perceived divinity in every human being. That approach leads to a reexamination of humanity and participation in the public life of society.[53] Haraldur taught that Jesus’ spirit also affects human beings in an indirect way. His spirit is revealed in beauty, in nature and in human constructions like temples, works of art, prayer, and efforts to bring equality to society.[54] The spirit works for the same purposes in these indirect functions.

Human pilgrimage – actualizing essences 

The theological anthropology developed from the spiritualist cluster of thought is little more than an outgrowth of the spiritualist model of Christ. This is understandable, since Jesus is depicted as thoroughly human. The basic metaphor is that of the child.[55] As children of God, we are endowed with divine qualities or essences. Alluding to the metaphor of the field, Haraldur quite often speaks of the essences as seeds in the soul.[56] In spite of Haraldur’s emphasis on faith in our efforts to help others, his basic concern relates to the individual’s core. Prior to any relationships in the world, not to mention worldly improvements, the seeds of the soul have to grow in relationship to God. One gets the impression that the basic approach to the human being is monistic, emphasizing the extreme individuality of the soul.[57]

The formal essence of the individual is the soul-spirit.[58] That essence involves the categories of power and life, both of which are also essential. The soul is thus a life force meant for growth. The soul has other features – the seeds, which give further meaning to the concept of soul. A careful reading of the texts seems to suggest the following features as seeds or essences: love, faith, humility, beauty, and peace.[59] These essences are closely related. As a unity they are called the Christ-soul of the Christian, which remains asleep or dormant until awakened.[60] Once developed, they are both powerful and alive.

These potentialities are born into the world of matter, which includes all the limit-features with which the Christ-soul must struggle. The world of matter is structured in a hierarchical order, and for this reason it is easily confused with spirit. Pure matter, stone for example, is at the lowest level. But matter is structured into the world. Nature, being so immensely beautiful at times, is given structure by spirit. As such, nature is a signpost that refers to spirit. Animals are primarily matter. Haraldur sometimes entertains the idea that animals might survive death. The human body owes its origin to the bestial world, and as such it is ruled by the laws of bestiality, which accounts for human passions, desires, and temptations. But bestiality is also responsible for tragic events in the human world, such as feuds and wars. Being partly spiritual, human society is a step ahead of matter, containing some joy and goodness. But due to the transience of matter, even social experiences disappear into the progression of the world. Works of art have an important status since they exemplify beauty. Only that which is beautiful can be a work of art. That which is ugly is nonessential and remains merely material.[61]

What justifies the world of matter is its function as a training camp, a school for the growth of the essences. Wars, misery, sorrow, grief, poverty, and crises are tragic, but they should be viewed as challenges in the quest for growth. The greatest spirits grow out of severe struggles. The highest development comes at a high cost; it demands sacrifice.[62] Finally, the world of flesh and matter is only a bridge; we should pass over it as rapidly as possible, our sights firmly fixed on our ultimate goal. Everything worldly should be made to serve the highest things. Anything that does not serve this purpose should be altered or discarded. The Bible and the creeds are contaminated by matter and should be renounced as a whole, although they are important in some sense.[63] The world is no place for rest and ease. It is there to be overcome.

The Christ-soul of the human being ventures upon the pilgrimage or homeward journey through development that follows the axioms of progress and hierarchy. All matter needs to be subordinated to the values of the soul. Everything should be placed within the perspective of eternity or spirit.[64] In the struggle of life, while progressing and structuring one’s world into a just hierarchical order, several other issues enter the field.

Essences of the Soul

 As potentialities, the essences have a teleology. When actualized, the essences become powerfully alive, the soul has progressed to its peak. In summary, Haraldur’s thought on faith has five major points:

1. 1. Love aims at a total fusion with God. But along the road, love is trained in relationships with other human beings. Friendships, marital relationships, children, and indeed every human being should become an exercise in love, aiming at the one final culmination. Mercy and care are exercises of love.
2. 2. Faith should be practiced in trust, which is the final goal of faith. Practicing one’s hope and convictions in life makes for a powerful faith.
3. 3. Humility should be practiced in accordance with the law of sacrifice. The human being should strip the self of all pride, self-centeredness, or whatever else matter contaminates. In the world of struggle and bestiality, the law of sacrifice is extremely important. One should learn to obey, even in awful situations like war, where bestiality reigns. Humility conquers matter by submitting to the laws of nature. The spirit is tempted to protest the external laws of the fist, society, bestiality, or matter. A weak will, which is far worse than any kind of misery, is the main obstacle to the progress of humility. What is important is to allow our power to be unleashed and used in the struggle. Freedom should also be used for that purpose. Once this power has taken over, a weak will and freedom are engulfed by the obedience of humility.
4. 4. One should develop appreciation for that which heightens the spirit such as art, society, human relationships, etc.
5. 5. Peace should be sought in life. However bleak the situation might be, one should try to achieve calmness of mind. Fear should be expelled. Reason in her multiple forms serves peace by providing the certainty essential for a calm mind. One should nurture a peaceful attitude toward others, the peace of one’s soul thereby maturing into a oneness with divine peace.

Haraldur Níelsson’s impact

Haraldur Níelsson’s spiritualist version of the New Theology had a major impact in Iceland. His books were best sellers and psychical research became a major movement in Iceland. The tragic death of Haraldur Níelsson in 1928 was a major blow to the movement and probably weakened its ecclesiastical status in the long run. Due to its problematic scientific status, more and more scholars and academics turned their backs on psychical research, leaving spiritualism to mediums uncensored by any kind of academic research, and to grieving people searching for emotional comfort at séances. Psychical research lost any academic status it might have had, but echoes of spiritualist theology are still found among the general public in Iceland. As a pastor working with all kinds of people, with all kinds of theological backgrounds, one cannot help noting the Wirkungsgeschichte, the lasting impact of Haraldur Níelsson.

(Chapter 10 from Sigurdur Arni Thordarson: Limits and Life: Meaning and  Metaphors in the Religious Language of Iceland (American University Studies, Series VII, Theology and Religion) Peter Lang, London, New York, Zürich, 2012.)

[1] Ásgeir Ásgeirsson, Kver og Kirkja (Reykjavík: Bókaverslun Ársæls Árnasonar, 1926), 159. I will use the terms „spiritualism“ and „psychical research“ interchangeably. In Iceland these have more or less the same meaning, although those in favor of this type of research have tended to use psychical research to emphasize scholarly character. Opponents of spiritualism have used the derogatory terms like spirit-belief or ghost-belief.

[2] For a good biography of Haraldur Níelsson, see Gunnar Árnason, Kirkjuritið, 34 (1968), 475ff. See also Haraldur Níelsson: trúmaður á tímamótum, ritstjórn sýningarskrár, myndritstjórn og höfundur texta Pétur Pétursson (Reykjavík : Landsbókasafn Íslands – Háskólabókasafn, 2008). See also the impressive scholarly biography by Pétur Pétursson: Trúmaður á tímamótum: Ævisaga Haralds Níelssonar, (Reykjavík: Hið íslenska bókmenntafélag,  2011).

[3] See „Afstaða Sálarrannsóknarfélagsins til Kirkjunnar,“ in Trúmálavika Stúdentafélagsins 13.-18. Marz 1922: Erindi og Umræður, (Reykjavík: Steindór Gunnarsson, 1922), 81-81.

[4] On the importance of proofs in religious matters for Haraldur, see his Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar (Reykjavík: Ísafold, 1916), 27. On doubt, see Árin og Eilífðin I: Predikanir (Reykjavík: Pétur Oddsson, 1920), 297 and Árin og EIlífðin II: Predikanir (Reykjavík: Aðalbjörg Sigurðardóttir, 1928), 336-42. One should note the stress on the awfulness of doubt common to both Helgi Hálfdánarson and Haraldur Níelsson.

[5] On miracles, and wonder, see Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 32-40, 63 ff, 94; Árin og Eilífðin , I, 342; Árin og Eilífðin, II, 128-34, 175ff.

[6] Haraldur Níelsson, Hví Slær Þú Mig II: Andsvar gegn Ummælum Biskups (Reykjavík: Ísafold, 1922), 98, Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 36, 61, 94.

[7] See Árin og Eilífðin , I, 57.

[8] Fredrick Suppe, The Structure of Scientific Theories, 2nd. ed. (Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1977), 8. On the early development see J. T. Mertz, A History of European Thought In the Nineteenth Century, 4 vols. (London: William Blackwood and Sons, 1904).

[9] For a review of Buechner, Lange, and some of the literature of materialism, see Richard P. Busse „Ritschl’s Critique of Materialism,“ in Papers of the Albrecht Ritschl Seminar: AAR 1988 Annual Meeting, ed. William R. Barnett (Syracuse: Le Moyne College, 1988), 42-44, 53f.

[10] See Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 63ff, 93. On Icelanders whom he considered contaminated by German scholarship, Friðrik J. Bergmann and Jón Helgason, Hví Slær Þú Mig?, II, 165ff.

[11] Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, I; Árin og Eilífðin , I, 9, 54, 58f, 121. On Nietzsche, Ibid., 212.

[12] „Afstaða Sálarrannsóknarfélagsins til Kirkjunnar,“ 93ff.

[13] On the history of psychical research In Iceland see Haraldur Níelsson, „Afstaða Sálarrannsóknarfélagsins til Kirkjunnar,“ 77-94; Benjamín Kristjánsson, Haraldur Níelsson: Stríðsmaður Eilífðarvissunar 1868-1968 (Reykjavík: Sálarrannsóknarfélag Íslands, 1968); Jón Auðuns, Ágrip af Sögu Sálarrannsókna og Spíritismans (Reykjavík: Sálarrannsóknarfélag Íslands, 1948). On the debate between a proponent of psychical research and one of the growing number of  dissatisfied young scholars in the twenties, see Sigurður Nordal and Einar H. Kvaran, Skiptar Skoðanir: Ritdeila Sigurðar Nordal og Einars H. Kvaran (Reykjavík: Menningarsjóður: 1960). For an early introduction to spiritualism, see Einar H. Kvaran, Samband við Framliðna Menn(Reykjavík: Ísafold, 1905). For a bibliography of the books published in Iceland prior to 1922 on issues related to spiritualism, see Haraldur Níelsson, Hví Slær Þú Mig, II, 28-29.

[14] Insight into the problems of conducting serious research is provided in Haraldur Níelson’s lecture, given in Warsaw, Poland, and published as „Reimleikar í Tilraunafélaginu“ In Lífið og Ódauðleikinn: Fyrirlestrar (Reykjavík: 1951), 87- 113.

[15] Ibid., 85-95, 106, 110, 115, Árin og Eilífðin  I, 320.

[16] Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 93f.

[17] Hví Slær Þú mig, II, 169. See also how the framework directs the reading, Lífið og Ódauðleikinn, 139 and Kristur og Kirkjukenningin: Fyrirlestrar  (Reykjavík: Aðalbjörg Sigurðardóttir, 1929). On the denial of the creeds, see Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar , 32ff.

[18] On the errors and errancy of theology, Árin og Eilífðin  I, 251, 262, 282.

[19] On the role of being a pastor and the defense for his affiliation with spiritualism, see Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanir, 27ff. On the social importance of faith, Árin og Eilífðin , II, 55-57.

[20] On the English tradition, see John Beloff, „Historical Overview“ In Handbook of Parapsychology, ed. Benjamin B. Wolmann (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1977), 3-45.

[21] Oliver Lodge’s development and scheme of thought are exceptionally well reported by John D. Root in „Science, Religion, and Psychical Research: The Monistic Thought of Sir Oliver Lodge“ In Harvard Theological Review, 71:3-4 (1978), 245-263. See also Paul Tabori, Pioneers of the Unseen (New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1972), 61-97.

[22] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 356.

[23] Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 94.

[24] Ibid., 5. He refers to an elaboration on the distinction by Thurney.

[25] Lífið og Ódauðleikinn, 37-56.

[26] Lífið og Ódauðleikinn, 87-113.

[27] Ibid., 146, 153.

[28] Kristur Vort Líf, 36.

[29] On ethical laws, see Ibid., 78, 152ff and Árin og Eilífðin, I., 114.

[30] Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar.

[31] The exception might be matter. I did not find any clear passage on that issue. And in general Haraldur does not speak of God in creationist terms. On the cosmic Soul, Árin og Eilífðin, I., 172.

[32] Ibid., 204-5 and Árin og Eilífðin, II., 152, 223, 231.

[33] On love, see Árin og Eilífðin, I., 204-5, 238; and Árin og Eilífðin, II., 235. See Árin og Eilífðin, I, 4; and Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 70ff.

[34] Árin og Eilífðin, II, 44. God is nothing but spirit, i.e. nonmaterial. Árin og Eilífðin, I, 3.

[35] Ibid., 208.

[36] Ibid., 1, 4, 114ff, 251 and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 152, 223. God Is everywhere reconciling the world to God self. Kristur og Kirkjukenningarnar, 27.

[37] God’s immutability is related to this point. In prayer we do not change God, but rather ourselves. Árin og Eilífðin, I, 172. God directs the distribution of knowledge with the aim of our return to life Ibid., 379, 393. On human nature as divine, see Ibid., 244, 251.

[38] Árin og Eilífðin, II, 152, 223.

[39] On the aspects of God’s demands and of the monarch-father, see Árin og Eilífðin , I, 22ff, and 154ff. On goodness, forgiveness, justice, holiness, and strictness, see Ibid., 208. On the providence of God, see Ibid., 243. On Jesus’ disclosure of fatherhood, goodness, justice, and love, see Árin og Eilífðin , II, 235.

[40] On the new beginning, see Ibid., 178ff.

[41] Árin og Eilífðin , I, 41, 138, 293, 295, 379.

[42] Ibid., 11, Árin og Eilífðin, II, 152.

[43] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 14, 57. Jesus always considered or obeyed only the spiritual.

[44] Haraldur thought that the theory of a resurrection of the flesh was childish. Instead, Jesus appeared in an unexplainable vision. Árin og Eilífðin, II, 117. The major events of Jesus’ life were reinterpreted in line with the spiritualist theory. The transfiguration was, for example, interpreted as a séance.

[45] In Icelandic, he talks of Kristseðlið, which roughly means the nature of Christ. Kristseðlið then refers to the basic features of his soul. In all humans there is the Christ-soul, sometimes dormant, sometimes active.

[46] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 22 and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 106.

[47] Ibid., 106, Árin og Eilífðin, I, 251.

[48] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 33, 57, 114, 131ff, 138, 296, 319, 379; Árin og Eilífðin, II, 107, 231 and Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 63f. On modern science’s support of Jesus as the total disclosure. See Árin og Eilífðin, I, 320. Like Jón Helgason, Haraldur makes the contrast between life and doctrines. See Kristur og Kirkjukenningarnar, 29ff, 63-64.

[49] See Árin og Eilífðin, II, 40.

[50] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 204-05; Árin og Eilífðin, II, 235; and Kristur og Kirkjukenningarnar, 1. Jesus revealed a new concept of God, opposed to the Hebrew concepts of the divinity. Jesus came to disclose the most fundamental feature of God and to teach the Jews that they were fundamentally wrong. Árin og Eilífðin, II, 229.

[51] Kirkjan og Ódauðleikasannanirnar, 9, 27, 34f. His salvific act does not entail sacrificial death. On the errancy of the idea of sacrifice, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 166. On salvation, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 22, and 57. On our need of a Savior, see Ibid, 41. Jesus’ death is a proclamation of his ethical power. See Árin og Eilífðin, II, 107.

[52] Ibid., 107.

[53] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 212, 228.

[54] Árin og Eilífðin, II, 180-81.

[55] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 250.

[56] Ibid, 11-13, 41, 45, 57.

[57] Árin og Eilífðin, II, 38, 40.

[58] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 1, 57, 114, 166, 212, 218, Árin og Eilífðin, II, 9, 44, 203.

[59] On love, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 57, 274; Árin og Eilífðin, II, 45, 85, 180ff; and Kristur og Kirkjukenningarnar, 35. On faith, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 261, 263; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 245. On humility, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 22, 57, 154ff, 280; and Lífið og Ódauðleikinn, 153. On beauty, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 307; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 44. On peace, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 72, 83, 204-05; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 235, 243.

[60] Árin og Eilífðin, I, 114, 166.

[61] On the aesthetic, see Árin og Eilífðin, II, 44. On bestiality, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 204, 244; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 70. On nature, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 307; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 42, 180, 238. On society, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 144; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 43, 54. On war, see Árin og Eilífðin, I, 244, 375, and 388. On flesh, ibid, 188, 204, 229, 243, 331 and 350. Flesh is not evil, ibid., 352ff.

[62] Ibid., 1, 15, 45, 57, 183, 318, 327, 352, 388; and Árin og Eilífðin, II, 74, 132, 194, 203. Árin og Eilífðin, I, 163, 191f.

[63] Ibid., 212, 215, 270.

[64] Ibid., 1, 9, 218, 220, 243, 254, 356. On the two persons in every human being, see ibid., 353.