NEOLUTHERANISM. - It presents itself as a current of revival and restoration of theological and ecclesiastical Lutheranism in the 19th century, closely connected with that Romantic revival of national community consciousness, which matured during the anti-Napoleonic wars and the Restoration, as a reaction against both rationalistic and foreign Illuminism. It gained strength especially in 1830, when Frederick William III of Prussia attempted to impose his Prussian "union" between Lutherans and Calvinists by combining the doctrines and practices of the two historical Churches.
In reaction, the dogmatic and ecclesiastical peculiarities of Lutheranism were accentuated with the refusal to unite ecclesiastically with those outside their own tradition; and political motives were not absent. The movement unfolded especially in regions where the "union" had not been implemented, namely Bavaria on the right bank of the Rhine, Saxony, Hanover, Mecklenburg, and Schleswig-Holstein. It gave rise to the establishment of "Free Churches" (Freikirche), referring exclusively to the dogmatic foundations of the Church, in contrast to the "established" Churches, recognized, supported, financed, and directed by the State. Moreover, leagues of "Old Lutherans" were formed in individual territories, such as the General Evangelical-Lutheran Confraternity of 1868, which later also coordinated the activities of individual Churches in the fields of domestic and foreign missions, charitable assistance, education, and similar areas. The term "neolutheranism" then has a twofold meaning: polemical with regard to dogmatic indifferentism that adapts to extrinsic combinations of the distinctive doctrines of the Churches; and historically conservative because it aims to return to the Lutheranism of the "confessions of faith" and to the ecclesiastical and cultural organization of the 16th century, concretized in the orthodoxy of the 17th century. Hence the quasi-Catholic character of neolutheranism regarding the visibility of the Church, the real presence in the Eucharist, the liturgical structure of the Mass, the liturgical ordination of pastors, and the conception and administration of the Sacraments. Hence also the effort to free itself from the dependence on the territorial prince inherited from the 16th century, affirming a situation contrary to Lutheran principles and merely of emergency origin, and seeking the autonomous existence of the Church with its own ecclesiastical law.
Theologically, neolutheranism appeals to the divine-human person of Christ as the center of religion, and to its interpretation in St. Paul, in opposition to the merely ethical conception of Christianity spread by the Enlightenment. This Christocentric consciousness leads to recognizing the Church as a super-individual reality, already attested in the Lutheran confessions of faith. On this foundation, the sacramental element revives, not without some influence indeed from the Romantic inclination toward symbols; but above all, there is a vigorous emphasis on the Church as the depository of the Word of God and the Sacraments, experienced as a transcendent yet concretely historical bond. These positions are variously justified by individual theologians and coordinated with the Lutheran principles of *sola Scriptura* and personal experience of the divine, leading to a reconsideration of the theme of the essence of the Church. The most authoritative representatives of neolutheranism are: K. F. Fr. Roth, Tholuck, Walch, Thomasius, and, more generally, the Faculty of Erlangen.
NEO-MALTHUSIANISM. - A particular form of birth control (v.) which, originally taking its starting point from Malthusian theories and departing from the honest means he proposed (delay of marriage, continence between spouses, etc.), advocates absolute freedom in the use of means to avoid procreation.
Given the Christianization that has taken place since the time of the "Reformation," the principles of neo-malthusianism have spread rapidly and widely and are widely used in contemporary society. Insistent and widely organized propaganda, in the interests of which commercial motives cannot be excluded, has led to an incredible spread of contraceptive methods, whose characteristic may be said always to aim at vitiating the intrinsic mechanism of sexual intercourse. While there are States, such as, for example, Italy (Penal Code, art. 553), which, concerned about the serious demographic, social, and hygienic damage produced by unconditional propagandizing of limitationist and neo-malthusian methods, prohibit them with more or less severe penalties; in others, particularly in Anglo-Saxon countries, it is supported and taught through specialized societies and clinics. In this sense, the Malthusian League works in England, the Nieu-Malthusianische Bond in Holland, and an "International Neo-Malthusian and Birth-Control Federation" has its center in America; many newspapers have as their specific aim such propaganda: *The Malthusian*, *Birth-Control News*, *Die Neue Generation*, etc.
The methods proposed for contraceptive purposes consist of the use of chemical or mechanical devices or of ways of performing the sexual act such that the death of the male sexual element is produced after its emission, or such that it is prevented from reaching and fertilizing the ovum.
All contraceptive means, while in terms of effectiveness they do not achieve absolute certainty (some reaching 93-98% effectiveness), are more or less harmful to local integrity and general health from a medical standpoint. Eminent gynecologists have extensively described and documented local utero-ovarian manifestations, general manifestations related to neuro-vegetative imbalance (general malaise, asthenia, dizziness, insomnia, migraine, etc.), and damage to various organic systems (digestive: nausea, diarrhea, constipation, gastralgia, etc.; circulatory: tachycardia, palpitations, false angina pectoris crises, etc.; endocrine); and damage to neuro-psychic equilibrium: hysteria, neurasthenia, depressive psychoses, anxious states up to Freud's sense of anguish, not to mention the sense of guilt that affects the conscience of persons endowed with moral and religious sensitivity (cf. Frankel, *Congress of the German Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology*, in *Arch. f. Gyn.*, 144 [1931], p. 86; Clivio, *Atti della Soc. Ital. di Ostetr. e Ginec.*, 36 [1939], p. 621 and bibliography at the end of this entry). Various authors (Lanz, Schröder, Löfker, Sellheim, Goeth, Schimitz, etc.) further believe it possible that spermatozoa escaping destruction but partly altered by the chemical substances used in contraceptive practice, while retaining their fertilizing power, may produce malformed offspring. In some forms of control, the impossibility of reabsorption of sexual fluid on the part of the woman could give rise to true syndromes of sexual deficiency (already described by Mattei as early as 1863) characterized by irregularities and progressive diminution of menstruation, nervousness, and a tendency to melancholic and anxious states, etc. It should be noted here that equally harmful, and indeed more so than others, both locally and generally and particularly neuro-psychically, are interrupted acts, which are widely practiced, especially in more recent centuries.
From the moral standpoint, while it is beyond doubt that even a cursory examination clearly reveals how the killing of a fetus already conceived—especially if sufficiently developed—is a patent violation of the right to life (v. ABORTION; EMBRYOLOGY), the malice involved in the deliberate distortion of the human sexual act might appear less evident. Yet if one considers that the generative act is a natural act, ordained by God, the author of nature, to a specific end—in this case, generation—it will be easily understood that while man has the freedom to perform or omit this act, if he does perform it he must do so fully and completely. To corrupt such an act is to deviate from the natural order, a sin which, if the distortion is essential, is grave in itself. In the case under consideration, there can be no doubt that the distortion is essential, since in this way the attainment of the proper end of the act is rendered impossible. The means employed by the so-called neo-Malthusian practices are deliberately directed to introducing such a distortion into the natural act, preventing the end of procreation, while aiming instead only at instrumental pleasure, represented by sexual gratification. If the distortion of the act were absent, but the purpose of gratification and the rejection of offspring remained the same, even if one could not strictly speak of neo-Malthusianism, the individual might still sin by reason of the motives and end that move his action (v. BIRTH CONTROL).
The Church has always condemned neo-Malthusian practices as a grave transgression of the natural law (S. Penitentiary, various responses from 15 Nov. 1816 to 3 June 1916; S. Congregation of the Holy Office, 20 May 1851, 19 Apr. 1853, 26 Mar. 1897, 23 Nov. 1922). While ministers of other religions were reluctantly accommodating themselves to the spread of this evil, as evidenced by the 15th resolution of the Lambeth Conference of 1930, Pius XI solemnly proclaimed the doctrine that “whoever shall use, in the venereal act, a means that frustrates its natural power to generate life, sins against the law of God and nature; and that those who are guilty of such actions render themselves guilty of grave sin” (AAS, 22 [1930], p. 560). The solemn manner in which the Supreme Pontiff introduced this declaration has led many to believe that here we have an infallible teaching ex cathedra (cf. A. Vermeersch, Catéchisme du mariage chrétien d'après l'encyclique «Casti connubii», Bruges 1931, pp. 90-91). The encyclical, going into detail, also provided specific norms regarding the conduct of a spouse forced to cooperate materially in illicit neo-Malthusian practices (v. MATRIMONY. VIII. USE OF M).