Better to spill your seed...?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Iambic_Pen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The_Iambic_Pen said:
Well, not to keep harping on this subject, but I think the idea behind the saying is that it is better to have sexual intercourse with a prostitute than to masturbate. The term “in the belly of a whore,” probably refers to the womb, the natural, ordered destination of “seed.” Whether this is true or not is debatable from my point of view, for the simple reasons that the consequences of sleeping with a prostitute could be more severe than the consequences of masturbation. In any case, both are sins, so to argue extensively about which is worse serves no purpose.
Click to expand...
Why would it be better [less sinful] to use another person or involve a second person in the engagement of sin? That actually makes no sense at all.

Leading another person into a sinful act or participating with another person in a sinful act is compounding [multiplying] the sin. Either by the addition of their sin with yours or by you sinning against them [use and abuse] in addition the sin of the sexual act which is a sn against God and your own person.

The solitary act is your sin against your body and against God … bad enough but less than gaining the participation of others …

This of course is just my person observations … but the quote as presented does not sound like any church teaching nor any Church Father … it sounds like a made up rationale for the sin … 😦
 
YADA said:
Leading another person into a sinful act or participating with another person in a sinful act is compounding [multiplying] the sin. Either by the addition of their sin with yours or by you sinning against them [use and abuse] in addition the sin of the sexual act which is a sn against God and your own person.
Click to expand...
This is my take, too, plus there’s the risks of material harm from sex (prengancy, STDs). Hurting someone (without good reason) is also a sin.

Which is not to say that masturbation isn’t a mortal sin; saying, “It’s better to murder people quickly than to torture them to death” doesn’t make murder, quick or slow, not a mortal sin.
 
Yes, I agree, that is why love of self and neighbor is the fulfillment of all the commandments. Any who love self and neighbor would do them no harm whatsoever. Masturbation is self inflicted harm sexually, it is sexual abuse of self.
 
faithmyeyes said:
This statement is not in the Bible, however, it is in reference to a story in the Bible.

One of Judah’s sons, Er, married a woman named Tamar. Er was wicked and God killed him before Tamar could bear him children. According to the traditions of the time, Er’s younger brother, Onan, was supposed to take Tamar as his wife and give her children, but instead ejaculating inside her, he “spilled his seed on the ground.”

So, God struck Onan down, as well. Judah was afraid that it was Tamar’s fault that his sons were dying, and told her to go back to her father’s house instead of giving her his youngest son like he was supposed to.

Tamar, being completely slighted, decided that she would have a child one way or the other. She covered her face and dressed up as a prostitute and waited by one of the roads Judah frequented. Judah saw her and offered to pay her for sex, and Tamar said yes. Tamar was impregnated during the encounter, and Judah admitted that Tamar was more righteous than he was because he should’ve given his youngest son to her in marriage.

Onan’s part in this story has been the biggest lesson learned, though, and the word onanism refers to the sin masturbation (despite the fact that it’s not probable that act is what is referred to in this passage.) God struck Onan down for spilling his seed on the ground, and the result of Tamar’s prostitution was one of Jesus’s ancestors. Therefore, it’s better to spill your seed in the belly of a prostitute than on the ground.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I always thought that in this story, Onan was cut down by God because he was being cruel to Tamar by refusing to have sex with her properly :confused:. Never heard this other interpretation before . . .

Does the Catholic Church have any official interpretation of that passage? Or is the interpretation that this passage means fornication is less grave a grave sin than masturbation a common interpretation of it? Or, if it isn’t a common interpretation of this passage, has it been a common interpretation of it in church history?

Also, I don’t know, personally, why masturbation of oneself by one’s marital partner would be considered a sin :confused:. And Tamar and Onan were married.

That’s one reason for thinking God punished Onan for being cruel to Tamar.
40.png
royal:
I already read the verse from the old testament and am currently re-reading Leviticus to find it.
Click to expand...
Was the passage referred to by faithmyeyes the one you were thinking of? If you were thinking of something more explicit, you’ll have to prove that, of course.
 
The interpretation of the church in the Catechism is that intercourse between husband and wife cannot be impeded by external controls such as condoms, iv inserts, spermicidals, and surgical operations to make the organs impotent. Masturbation of a spouse is also improper as described by Pope John Paul 11 in his bood Love and Responsibility as masturbation of either is a self serving act hence does not qualify as loving and giving. Also the organs must accomplish what they were created for which is impregnation. The goal of intercourse is creation of life, not orgasmic pleasure. Pleasure in intercourse is to lead up to the simultaneous orgasm of husband and wife with the intent to create life in impregnation. Masturbation is considered a sin in the Catechism. The reference that it is better to have intercourse with a prostitute implies that this behavior is closer to the intent of being open to creation of life, albeit disgraceful, it is not as abominable as spilling seed on the ground which is not open to creation of life but subverts God’s design for human kind.
 
royal said:
The interpretation of the church in the Catechism is that intercourse between husband and wife cannot be impeded by external controls such as condoms, iv inserts, spermicidals, and surgical operations to make the organs impotent. Masturbation of a spouse is also improper as described by Pope John Paul 11 in his bood Love and Responsibility as masturbation of either is a self serving act hence does not qualify as loving and giving. Also the organs must accomplish what they were created for which is impregnation. The goal of intercourse is creation of life, not orgasmic pleasure. Pleasure in intercourse is to lead up to the simultaneous orgasm of husband and wife with the intent to create life in impregnation. Masturbation is considered a sin in the Catechism. The reference that it is better to have intercourse with a prostitute implies that this behavior is closer to the intent of being open to creation of life, albeit disgraceful, it is not as abominable as spilling seed on the ground which is not open to creation of life but subverts God’s design for human kind.
Click to expand...
Impregnation is not the only purpose for sexual intercourse according to the Church. It is also for the unitive expression of love between a man and woman within the context of marriage. If it were only for impregnation, then couples who are unable to conceive because of medical reasons, would have to abstain from sexual intercourse. Such is not the case.

Jim
 
Hastrman said:
This is my take, too, plus there’s the risks of material harm from sex (prengancy, STDs). Hurting someone (without good reason) is also a sin.

Which is not to say that masturbation isn’t a mortal sin; saying, “It’s better to murder people quickly than to torture them to death” doesn’t make murder, quick or slow, not a mortal sin.
Click to expand...
True, my point is that it is ridiculous for some of the people here to commit fornication, perhaps adultery with a prostitute as long as you are not using contraception is not as sinful as masturbation.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Impregnation is not the only purpose for sexual intercourse according to the Church. It is also for the unitive expression of love between a man and woman within the context of marriage. If it were only for impregnation, then couples who are unable to conceive because of medical reasons, would have to abstain from sexual intercourse. Such is not the case.

Jim
Click to expand...
True.
 
As usual, my statement is taken out of context. I wrote that the objective of intercourse is creation of life. I did not write that the only objective is creation of life. My statement is obviously being distorted for the sake of relief of guilt for those who use intercourse primarily for pleasure.The Catholic church insists that openness to creation of life is mandatory at every intercourse. If you have read the Scriptures, God decides who gets pregnant. For you to decide that you will or wont get pregnant is a sin against the will of God called presumption. You give far too much worship to the the medical industry when you write about persons considered unable, go to misdiagnosis.com to see how miserably the medical industry misdiagnoses patients. Anyone may conceive with the will of God consenting. We must worship God in the Body and Blood of Christ, not the medical industry, whom are false idols. The unitive expression of love is the creation of a child. Love is not expressed primarily in singularly an orgasm especially an orgasm that is masturbatory.
 
I don’t know why Catholicism is all over the place like a richochet, but my friend is a devout Catholic and he was taught that masterbation used to be considered a sin, but it is no longer taught that way.

Loosen your collars a little.
 
Mariner2009 said:
I don’t know why Catholicism is all over the place like a richochet, but my friend is a devout Catholic and he was taught that masterbation used to be considered a sin, but it is no longer taught that way.

Loosen your collars a little.
Click to expand...
Code: 
When did they update the Catechism?  The on-line copy states
2352 By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. "Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action."137 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of "the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved."138
Click to expand...
 
I have a good Bible search engine. I just searched (using “near,” meaning within 3 verses) the RSV, the KJV, and the KJV Apocrypha for every possible two-word combination of spill, seed, whore and prostitute, and came up with nothing.

It ain’t there, folks.

Love,

Ruthie
 
I heard this phase 53 years ago in a Methodist Church and was under the impression it was a Bible verse. Aparently I was mistaken. My question is: “If it is sin to spill your seed upon the ground, why is it not a sin to go more than three days (the average life span of a sperm cell) without having intercourse with a fertile female?”
 
This is a commonly misinterpreted saying. It is a reference to taking responsibility for having sex with someone. It is saying that should you find yourself having sex with a whore, it would be less sinful to accept the responsibility for your actions and inseminate the whore than to attempt any form of birth control, including simply pulling out and acting as if you had been masturbating. You wouldn’t have been masturbating, though, you would be having sex, which ends in becoming one in the purest form: the creation of a single manifestation of the two of you, a fertilized egg.
It’s got more to do with the evil of taking the control of fertilization into your own hands and trying to stop it yourself instead of letting God make the decision and less to do with a whore and nothing to do with masturbation.
 
This is just a fanciful ‘saying’ out of ignorance in regard to the story in Genesis 38. I’m amazed by how many “Christians” think it’s in the Bible.

According to Ancient Near Eastern culture, it would have been the responsibility of Onan to impregnate his dead brother’s wife that his brother’s line/name might continue, the child/children would carry on the dead father’s name, be of help to their widowed mother, etc. (all men were commanded to do this–see Deuteronomy 25:6). Onan was selfish and greedy and wanted his own children to have the inheritence as well as ‘his’ name and not his brother’s. So, he 1/2 obeyed God and withdrew so his brother’s widow would not conceive. God struck him down because of disobedience, selfishness, and greed. This story is used by some to teach against birth control and others interpret it to have something to do with masturbation (he did not masturbate, he had sex). The rest of the story tells about the wife, Tamar, who is bound and determined to have a child anyway, pretended to be a prostitute (that’s where they get ‘belly of a whore’) and seduced Onan’s father, Judah, by which she conceives and has a son. And from this line (Judah) Christ would descend. One way or another, God was going to have His son descend out of the line of Judah. God’s choice is of Grace and not of Merit. The worthiness of Christ is of himself and not of his ancestors.

So, in short it has absolutely NOTHING to do with birth control, masturbation, or whores. It’s just another way of how man can take Scripture and ‘make his own’ rendition, thus we end up with: The Seven Deadly Sins, God Helps Those Who Help Themselves, The Eye Is The Window To The Soul, The Lion Shall Lay Down With The Lamb…and many more.

:hmmm:
 
Lief_Erikson said:
Also, I don’t know, personally, why masturbation of oneself by one’s marital partner would be considered a sin :confused:. And Tamar and Onan were married.
Click to expand...
This is a question I was wondering. If you do not masturbate at all, but your spouse does it and you spill your seed with both of your permission, and it is not intended for contraceptive reasons of course because that is sinful.
 
Bear in mind that in Augustines time the seed was thought to be a humanculus or a completely formed microscopic child which was implanted in the female who served as an incubator for that child. The concept of egg and sperm came on relatively late in time. To spill ones seed was to kill a nascent infant. I remember this information from a book titled Contraception that was published after humanei vitae by a Catholic author who wrote it as a history of contraception. I can’t recall his name.
 
First of all, this is as black and white as those two colors can get. Priests are NEVER supposed to do that, and if they do, I believe that they are excommunicated, that is, they are removed from the priesthood, and are no longer allowed to receive the Eucharist until they (publicly?) repent. The Catholic Church has NEVER stood up for something as heinous as this, and will NEVER allow it under ANY circumstances.

Honestly, I am seriously angry that anyone would EVER think that the Church would stand for something that inherently wrong.

Oh, and one more thing: those priests are also sent to help sessions so that they can properly deal with their disorder. The only grey area might be whether the Church turns these priests over to the public for the standard Justice system. As for Excommunication, it is the highest form of punishment that a person can receive from the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top