Er det den konfliktskapende eller fredssøkende Hauge som bør minnes?

Abstract

The approach of the Norwegian lay preacher Hans Nielsen Hauge (1771–1824) toward contemporary society was twofold. Before Hauge’s trial, it was largely one of conflicts; afterwards it was mainly one of conciliation. In the study of Hauge, there has been a tendency to approve of or give prominence to the former approach, while disapproving of or neglecting the latter. I argue that Hauge’s two approaches toward society should be valued according to what results they brought about. By this criterium, the conciliatory approach is seen to have accomplished results which the more antagonistic approach could not. However, both approaches had their merits: the antagonistic approach created the first Norwegian mass movement; the conciliatory made it acceptable to society.