Aðskilnaður ríkis og kirkju. Almenn umræða á „stuttri tuttugustu öld“. Fyrri grein - Með aðskilnaði

In this article and another which follows the author analyses the discourse about the separation of the state and the national church in Iceland over the period 1915–1995 — called “the short 20th century”. In this first article it will be dealt with the arguments for separation. In the second one views against separation will be discussed.Various ecclesiastical, theological or religious arguments were presented for separation. First it was pointed out that the liberal theology had made a schism within the national church which according to the constitution of Iceland should be evangelical-Lutheran. Therefore, it would be best to separate the church from the state as soon as possible so that the liberal ones and the conservatives could go their own ways in the future. Later it was stated that the separation between the state and the national church increased the freedom of church in fulfilling its vocation. It was also argued for separation from the ecumenical point of view and stated that the religious communities in the country should stand on equal footing in spite of various size.Many advocated for separation on the basis of human rights views. Some of them stated that the national church system effectively prevented the constitutional religious freedom of the people. It was also pointed out that the national church enjoyed a multitude of direct and indirect economical support from the state. In this way, all Icelanders indirectly participated in the cost of churchwork regardless of their church membership and religious beliefs.Finally, some recommended separation of financial reasons. They pointed out that the state invested large sums in the church, which, however, had few formal roles in the society.