[See page image]

Page 432

sumption being that the privilege of that party which was the later to receive permission of joint use was granted in response to petition and is revocable; while if the status of joint use can not definitely be determined, both communions are held to have equal rights.

The simultaneum is subject to great variation both in kind and in degree. One congregation may have the nave while the other has the chancel; separate hours may be appointed for the religious services of each communion; one of the parties may have the right to use the church only on special occasions, as for baptism; and in sporadic instances the two congregations may even worship together. Expenses, especially those for maintenance, must be defrayed according to any agreements previously drawn up, or, if occasion demands, from the common funds of the church. If such funds are lacking or are inadequate, both congregations, if possessed of simultaneous privileges, must contribute. When, however, one of the communions concerned has the exclusive right of possession, the other having only a right of use, the former must bear all charges legally incumbent on the owner, while the latter is required to contribute only in proportion to its rights of use. Any new creation of SiMultaneous rights in churches is precluded, from the standpoint of the Roman Catholic Church, by the rule that Roman Catholic churches must not be used for other than Roman Catholic services, and though Protestants play consistently grant the use of their church buildings to other religious bodies, as has been done repeatedly at the request of the Old Catholics, such action can scarcely give rise to obligations of a legal nature.

A simultaneum may be dissolved either by the union of the two congregations concerned (with the requisite sanction of their ecclesiastical superiors); or by surrender of rights by one of the parties in question, although this party is not thereby released from its possible obligations. It is a moot question whether one party may demand a settlement with reference to the simultaneous church and its joint property without the consent of the party of the second part, even txhough proper compensation be offered. This right is generally denied where the simultaneum has been created by legal enactments, as by the Peace of Westphalia; but if the simultaneum is based on a private contract, such a demand is legal as coming within the scope of private law. The principles of the modern State forbid it to use either administrative or legislative measures to compel churches to adopt a simultaneum. If, however, the parties to a simultaneum become involved in a controversy or dispute which disturbs the public peace, the authorities (especially the police) have the right to interfere. In case of severe breaches of the peace, the simultaneum may be temporarily suspended; but the attitude of the State toward religious communities forbids the permanent quashing of a simultaneum without the consent of the parties concerned.

In the case of cemeteries, however, the right of enforcing a limited or contingent aimultaneum is reserved by the State in connection with its claim to jurisdiction over burial. The Peace of Westphalia

enacted that if one of the recognized confessions possessed no cemetery of its own, its members might be interred in the churchyard of the other. This principle, with a number of modifications and amplifications, is still in force; but while it is recognized by the German Protestants as well as by the majority of the German States, the Roman Catholic Church rejects it except when absolutely compelled to do otherwise, in the latter contingency forbidding Protestant ministers to officiate at the burial, and also endeavoring, wherever possible, to set apart a special portion of the churchyard for non-Catholics. The only modern possibility of the necessity of creating additional simultaneous conditions is the cleavage of a communion by differences evolved within itself. This contingency was realized in Germany by the Old Catholic movemeut. Both in Baden and in Prussia State law permits Old Catholic congregations, under specified circumstances, to have simultaneous use of Roman Catholic churches and churchyards, etc., but this has failed to give rise to a true simultaneum, since the Curia has forbidden Roman Catholics to worship in church buildings given by the government to Old Catholics.

E. SE111.1NG.

BiBLjoa$APHY: P. S. von der Auraeh. Die kirchiichen SimuUanverhdUniaae in der PJalz am Rhein, Mannheim. 1888; M. J. Hartung, Das kirchliche Rack der Proteatanten im vormalipen Herzopthum Sulzbach, Erlangen, 1872; x. Kbhler, Simultankirchen im Herzoptum Hesse, Darmstadt, 1889; W. Wagner, Unterauehung fiber die ryaurdeksche Relipionaklausel, Berlin, 1889; W. Kmjs, %irchliche Simultanverh8ltniaae, Wiirzburg, 1890; E. Sehling, Ueber kirchliche Simultanverhaltniaee, Freiburg, 1891; idem, in NHZ, ii (1891), 777 eqq.; T. Lauter Die Entatehung der kirchlichen Simultaneen, Wtiraburg, 1894; Waller, Beitrw sum Recht der Simultaneen (disputation at Erlangen, 1905); Stole, Das Simultaneum in Repperndorf (dissertation at Wiirzburg, 1905). Further references to literature on German ecclesiastical law are given in Hauck-Herzog, RE. xviii. 374.

Nature (¢ 1). In the Old Testament (¢ 2). In the New Testament (§ 3). Ancient and Medieval View (§ 4). Doctrine of the Reformation (§ b). Post-Reformation-Views (¢ 8). Criticism of the Doctrine (¢ 7). Theory of sin (§ 8). The Court of Conscience; Forgiveness (¢ 1)).

In religious terminology sin is the name for evil. Practical philosophy [in the Kantian sense] deals with a contradiction between what is and what should be in human life, and, in its mgt intense moral form, with a " radical evil." The criminal code knows of misdemeanor, felony,