I’ve heard that being sexually active actually reduces the frequency of involuntary emissions, as well as age does. Aquinas wrote that it could be a sin if there had been some fault in what led to it. I’ve heard various opinions. Personally, I don’t think it’s ever the same as if one simply masturbated and I’m not sure how involuntary emission adds to the sin committed by watching porn, for instance. If it’s a result of how the body operates, including attraction to women, perhaps even some struggles, but no voluntary savouring of sexual thoughts, then I can’t really see sin in it. Not like I’m any authority.
Also, it doesn’t seem like involuntary emission in itself can be someful, but more what led to it. That is, whatever sin is committed that may lead to it, is committed before it happens. Imagine the following situation: a man watches porn, repents a short while after, confesses, is absolved, goes to bed, has involuntary emission, did not entertain any sexual thoughts in between absolution and that involuntary emission. He obviously doesn’t incur any sin - at least that’s what my common sense is telling me. Now, this would suggest that if he doesn’t repent and gets the same, then well, the difference is that he didn’t repent of watching porn, so that sin holds, but the fact there was an involuntary emission later is probably just a sign of how intense the thoughts were (intense enough to lead to ejaculation and waste of seed). Another factor speaking against a sin “getting committed” at the moment of involuntary emission is that the man is sleeping (we aren’t talking about a hypothetical situation occuring while awake), so in no position to make choices. So I’m inclined to think the sin “gets committed” at the moment the cause of it happens. And if the cause is not a sinful act of itself, then there’s nothing sinful in the whole thing. But my logic isn’t flawless, I imagine, and I’m no expert in theology.
