[See page image]
Page 431
431 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Simony 9imuitaneum friendship of President Lincoln. He was the author of Hundred Years of Methodism, New York, 1876; Cyeloptedin of Methodism, Philadelphia, 1878; Leo tures on Preaching, New York, 1879; and Sermons (posthumous, ed. G. R. Crooks, 1885). Bmrsoo"rHy: G. R. Crooks, Life of Bishop Matthew Simy eon, New York, 1890. ' SIMPSON, SAMUEL: Congregationalist; b. at Centreville, Mich., N ov. 24, 1868. He was edu cated at Olivet College, Olivet, Mich. (A.B., 1891), and Oberlin Theological Seminary (graduated 1894). He also studied at Hartford Theological Seminary (1896-98) and the University of Berlin (1900-01). He held Congregational pastorates at Garner, O. (1894-96), and Chardon, O. (1898-1900), and was associate professor of American Church history in Hartford Theological Seminary (1902 1909). He has written The Life of Ulrich Zwingli, Swiss Patriot and Reformer (New York, 1902). SIMSOR, JOHN: Scotch theologian; b. at Renfrew (6 m. n.w. of Glasgow) about 1668; d. at Edinburgh Feb. 2, 1740. He received his education at Edin burgh University (M.A., 1692); and appears to have studied theology at least under the advice of John Marck of Leyden, as he acknowledged receiving in struction from him; he is known to have been librarian at Glasgow College in 1696; he was licensed by the presbytery of Paisley in 1698, but, possibly owing to infirmity in health, did not receive a charge until 1705, when he was called to Troqueer, Kircud brightshire; he became professor of divinity in the University of Glasgow, 1708. In this last place he was exceedingly influential, the presbyteries of the west of Scotland and north of Ireland receiving a considerable number of ministers from the men who studied under him, and yet his position was fre quently assailed, and it was believed that he was untrue to the standards. In part this was due to his fundamental position that reason was the basis of theology and to his effort to make orthodoxy un derstandable. In Mar., 1714, charges were brought against him in the presbytery of Edinburgh, to which charges he made answer in 1715, and the answer was referred to a committee; the next as sembly passed the matter over, and, in 1717, a qual ified censure of certain opinions and expressions was passed. In his later teaching, after combating the Semi-arianism of Samuel Clarke (q.v.), he assailed Sabellianism; and in 1726 charges were once more brought against him, this time in the presbytery of Glasgow. The next year he was suspended by the general assembly, a committee being appointed to carry the case through. But in 1728 Simson's ac count of himself was regarded as establishing the orthodoxy of his belief, though his statements in teaching were not approved, and suspension fol lowed till the presbyteries could be heard from; the suspension finally occurred and was confirmed in 1729. The emoluments of the chair were left to him, but he was debarred from teaching. His only publications were those connected with his ecclesiastical trials: The Case of Mr. John Sim son (Glasgow, 1715); and Continuation of the Sec and Edition of the Case of Mr. John Simstm (Edin burgh, 1727-29).
BIBadooBAPaiY: In the British Museum Catalogue, ex., s column is devoted to titles of pamphlets, records, etc., dealing with the orthodoxy and trial of Professor Simeon. Consult further: Correspondence of Rev. R. Wodrow, ed. T. MacCrie, 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1842 l3; Hew Scott, Poeti eeeleciat Swticanm, 5 parts, London, 1871; W. M. Hetherington, Hid. of the Church of Scotland, pp. 337, 340, 348, New York, 1881; H. F. Henderson, Religious Con trovereiea of Scotland, pp. 5, 8, 11-17, Edinburgh, 1905; W. Beveridge, Makers of the Scottish Church, p. 174, Edinburgh, 1908; DNB, Iii. 280-287.
SIMULTANEUM (Lit., "simultaneous [exercise of religion] "): A term formerly used in the German Empire to denote the authorization of more than one religious body to hold services side by side in the same territory, so that the worship of the comparatively weaker communion should be more than the right of mere household devotion. The term also connoted, as it still does, the simultaneous right of two congregations of different confessions to the same ecclesiastical foundation, especially to the same church building, or the same churchyard. Such simultaneous conditions repeatedly arose in Germany, notably in the West and Southwest during the period between the religious peace of Augsburg and the Peace of Westphalia. The chief causes of this were the Protestant confiscation of a large amount of church property after the Peace of Augsburg, followed by its restitution, during the CounterReformation, in accordance with the edict of Mar. 6, 1629; as well as the changes, in the course of the Thirty Years' War, in the status of the religious bodies in the various territories; the frequent conversions of ruling princes (especially from Protestantism to Roman Catholicism); and the legal establishment of the joint rights of Roman Catholics to Protestant churches. The legal theory of the simultaneous use of ecclesiastical institutions (especially church buildings) is, however, only scantily developed and is much contested, since regulation by law is almost entirely lacking, except in Prussia and Bavaria. The legal basis for the simultaneous use of a church may arise from joint ownership of the building by both congregations, although it is also possible that the church in question may belong solely to one of the congregations, so that the title of the other religious body is merely one of prescription, the exact determination of conditions requiring a knowledge of the origin of the simuItaneum in each specific case. In these instances there are always two distinct congregations, conceived as separate legal entities, the view being untenable which maintains that the communions in question must be regarded, so far as the simultaneous church is concerned, not as distinct corporate bodies, but as a single congregation which still retains fellowship and unity of faith. Legal recognition of actual joint use is equivalent to a title to such right, and a legal simultaneum is also created in case one of the communions concerned cedes the privilege of joint use at the petition of the other party, while retaining the right of revoking such permission at any time. On the other hand, even right prescriptive can not create a simultaneum in case sufferance of joint use has been forcibly extorted from the party legally entitled to sole possession. Provision is thus made for cases in which the legal rights of the parties concerned can not be determined, the pre-