Masturbation: natural law and a sudden lack of faith in the Church

[LittleDavid]

I think his point is just that we take some verses very litterally and others we do not. An example is Matt.18:8 ("If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire.) If taken litterally this verse means that it would be better to be castrated, and remove all sexual desires to masturbate(sin/stumble), would it not??

 

[rmbrulotte]

I think his point is just that we take some verses very litterally and others we do not. An example is Matt.18:8 ("If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire.) If taken litterally this verse means that it would be better to be castrated, and remove all sexual desires to masturbate(sin/stumble), would it not??

First of all, no one is suggesting that anyone cut off anything. Jesus was saying that to illustrate his point, not issuing a directive. Part of the problem we run into here is that most likely no one participating on this board is a Bible scholar. Things that are translated can lose and gain meaning to readers, and our view of them can change given our particular cultural context. That is a reason why we look to the Church for how we are to view the teachings of Jesus. We don’t get to interpret it on our own. (I just now am seeing that you are Methodist, so I can understand why this would not apply to you, but we are on a Catholic forum after all and the OP asked the question in this forum, so I am assuming he wants a Catholic answer).

A statement from Think About It that makes a blanket statement that he doesn’t see Christians actually following Christ when he has absolutely no way of knowing what sort of sacrifices anyone has made. I do not think he was trying to make a point, I think he was just trying to “prove” that Christians aren’t really Christians at all and that we use our faith to judge others while not really following it ourselves.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Part of the problem we run into here is that most likely no one participating on this board is a Bible scholar.

I am, actually, but I rarely contribute to scriptural discussions here because the topics in which scripture is referenced on CAF are often dominated by those with little apparent sincerity about probing the meaning of scripture, but rather those interested in amateurish argument to serve a preconceived conclusion (neither academics nor systematic or moral theology). IOW, they’re often more interested in playing games than serious discussion.

A statement from Think About It that makes a blanket statement that he doesn’t see Christians actually following Christ when he has absolutely no way of knowing what sort of sacrifices anyone has made. I do not think he was trying to make a point, I think he was just trying to “prove” that Christians aren’t really Christians at all and that we use our faith to judge others while not really following it ourselves.

…but that above statement I do agree with.

 

[rmbrulotte]

I am, actually, but I rarely contribute to scriptural discussions here because the topics in which scripture is referenced on CAF are often dominated by those with little apparent sincerity about probing the meaning of scripture, but rather those interested in amateurish argument to serve a preconceived conclusion (neither academics nor systematic or moral theology). IOW, they’re often more interested in playing games than serious discussion.

Great! And I agree with you 100%! What I should have said, obviously, was that those participating in this discussion were obviously not Bible scholars.

 

[LittleChimera]

Just to interject on two points, first masturbation is, and I can verify this both from learned Tradition and from personal experience, an inherently degrading activity that removes you from your happiness, peace, and sanctity and provides nothing more than a splash of excitement followed by full withering. It is no surprise it becomes habitual as people keep chasing the one fleeting synapse and then lapse into despondency immediately. And if you don’t become despondent it’s because you’re inured to the injury you repeatedly cause yourself. So I don’t see that it can be reasonably defended on any point, least of all that it is a pleasurable activity when it has absolutely no sustained satisfaction and no material value whatsoever. The claim that it is a natural function is deviant in that it presupposes that anything that is inherently useless can be profitable. God set such an enticing temptation in front of us to show us both the vanity of self-directed pleasure and the superiority of a romantic and sexual alliance with another person, without whom the entire sexual function would be unnecessary.

Second, in reply to the great thread of doubt, objection and skepticism proposed by several voices on this forum, you are in the presence of a system of belief that can only be coherently apprehended and confirmed through Faith. Anyone can issue doubt and denial but that will not take them over the extremely rocky terrain that life constructs. If you wonder why you always find yourself looking up from the bottom of a hole it is because you have not reached out and grasped for the fundamental Truths of existence, offered nowhere but in the Bible and the testimony of the Church. So you can join the skeptics of science and the secular world but you will only find a thin veneer of civility and under that a cancerous mass of cynicism and half-truth. Questions are fine but if you continue to poke holes you will only maintain your ignorance and you may very well antagonise your Redeemer. Christ did say that the stone the builders rejected has become the corner stone, and those who fall upon it shall be broken while those it falls on shall be ground to dust. So just be aware of your motivations.

I would also like to say that it is possible that the best way to avoid masturbation is to avoid pornography, and the easiest way I know to avoid exposure to pornography is to kill that first innocuous glimpse of the female (I’m referring to online exploration) that sets you on a slow, inevitable decline. Without causing scandal, I personally usually look for beautiful women of a certain ethnicity and then lapse into obscenity without having any conscious intention of doing so. And from there things basically just degenerate (or escalate) until I wish I had a gun. So that’s my story and my advice.

 

[Think_About_It]

When you read a book or watch a movie, you are learning something, or at least getting your mind opened to different ideas and experiences. You are not using a person to get enjoyment. And yes, there are books that are sinful to read. And there are reasons I suppose that would make it sinful to watch movies or read books, ie; if doing so took away from your or someone else’s dignity, took time away from what you ought to be doing, etc.

This is nonsense. If you watch TV at all, just for the pleasure of it, you’re not nearly escaping the same principle behind masturbation. When you say time away from what you ought to be doing, you should consider that this time is all on a continuum. There is probably aways something you could be doing better than watching TV and opening your mind to different ideas (whysoever I should believe that’s useful in itself), but you don’t. You might sit there and watch a movie instead of doing some charitable act with your time. Let’s not pretend that we don’t do things for the sheer pleasure of it because it’s hogwash.

It isn’t like the Church is saying that you can’t ever enjoy yourself. But if the pleasure takes away from someone’s dignity, then you can not. The sexual act is designed for the bonding of the married couple and procreation. Pleasure is involved with that (hopefully!) and contributes to the good of the marriage, of the individuals in the marriage, the children of the couple, and reaffirms the love the couple has for each other. The Church sees the pleasure involved with the sexual act in a very dignified way. To seek the pleasure out for its own sake separates it from part of the intended purpose of the pleasure.

And here is the meat of it all: this kind of pleasure is wrong to enjoy for the sake of it (unlike books, movies, etc.) because the church said so. It takes away dignitiy from someone else, because the church said so. How does it detract from the dignitiy of another? When you say intended purpose, you’re begging the question - you’re effectively proving that sexual pleasure outside the marrital context is not the intended purpose because it takes sex outside the intended purpose. Tell me something that appeals to my natural reason.

So if you want to have a respectful conversation, why would you insist on adding that in there? A broad, sweeping generalization about a Bible passage that you have taken way out of context isn’t helpful here. That comment adds nothing to the discussion at hand and is completely off topic. If there is a question you have about that particular passage in the Bible, I suggest that you start a new thread.

It’s illustrative. Christians do the bare minimum to fulfil biblical commandments. This pleasure thing is no different; everybody indulges in pleasure for their own selfish reasons. If masturbation is wrong, it must be based on how you can 1) prove, naturally, that it has an intended purpose and 2) prove that it definitely reduces the dignity of another person.

And if you don’t become despondent it’s because you’re inured to the injury you repeatedly cause yourself.

Not that I thnk this explanation is anything more than balogna… If you can’t, by habituation, see that you’re injured, in what ways will you determine that you are, in fact?

absolutely no sustained satisfaction and no material value whatsoever.

Many would assert the same for any satisfactions. How have you distinguished masturbation from all the other pleasures?

The claim that it is a natural function is deviant in that it presupposes that anything that is inherently useless can be profitable.

The claim, beyond that it is not damaging, is that it is profitable…

can only be coherently apprehended and confirmed through Faith.

If only by faith, then how shall we know that your philosophy is true? Imagine others with contradictory ideas have asked us to have faith in them? Faith, in that sense, is a useless thing.

So just be aware of your motivations.

I have no preference for the nature of the truth; my motivation is simply that I find it. I trust reason, and not faith, to do this. There can be an infinite number of appeals to our faith, where there can only be, if we are truely cautious with our thinking, a limited number of reasonable responses.

Until I wish I had a gun

This is an unusual orientation to lust outside of Christianity. Extremity aside (constant masturbation, porn addiction, etc.), there is no healthy reason to feel this way (and indeed most don’t) through casual masturbation.

 

[rmbrulotte]

“This is nonsense. If you watch TV at all, just for the pleasure of it, you’re not nearly escaping the same principle behind masturbation. When you say time away from what you ought to be doing, you should consider that this time is all on a continuum. There is probably aways something you could be doing better than watching TV and opening your mind to different ideas (whysoever I should believe that’s useful in itself), but you don’t. You might sit there and watch a movie instead of doing some charitable act with your time. Let’s not pretend that we don’t do things for the sheer pleasure of it because it’s hogwash.”

It is not nonsense nor is it hogwash. All you are trying to do is dismiss my words without actually offering a rational argument against them.

My statement about TV was basically to illustrate that TV can serve a purpose other than pleasure. It doesn’t have to, nor was I trying to pretend anything. There is nothing wrong with recreation or seeking pleasure. Our state as humans requires a certain amount of that. TV is fine, again, as long as it doesn’t become a habitual thing that we do in excess that takes away from what we OUGHT to be doing, (taking care of our kids, going to work, sleeping, etc) not what we COULD be doing. Yes, there is always something better you could be doing than watching TV, but that doesn’t mean that you have to be doing that thing.

“And here is the meat of it all: this kind of pleasure is wrong to enjoy for the sake of it (unlike books, movies, etc.) because the church said so. It takes away dignitiy from someone else, because the church said so. How does it detract from the dignitiy of another? When you say intended purpose, you’re begging the question - you’re effectively proving that sexual pleasure outside the marrital context is not the intended purpose because it takes sex outside the intended purpose. Tell me something that appeals to my natural reason.”

If you can not deduce with natural reasoning that our bodies were created as male and female; that our bodies were designed that way for giving and receiving sexual pleasure and creating new life, I don’t know what I can say to you. That should be self-evident whether or not you ascribe to a religious belief.

 

[Think_About_It]

It is not nonsense nor is it hogwash. All you are trying to do is dismiss my words without actually offering a rational argument against them.

I think I put my case quite clearly. Masturbation cannot be wrong simply or interactively for the pleasure it brings (as many other non-sinful things bring pleasure). You can’t tease apart the difference between masturbation as a pleasure from reading as a pleasure unless there’s another reason that masturbation is wrong (and you contend that there is, so your argument is not immediately shut-down for pleasure being out of the discussion). I think we can leave this part of the discussion at the doorpost.

My statement about TV was basically to illustrate that TV can serve a purpose other than pleasure. It doesn’t have to, nor was I trying to pretend anything. There is nothing wrong with recreation or seeking pleasure. Our state as humans requires a certain amount of that. TV is fine, again, as long as it doesn’t become a habitual thing that we do in excess that takes away from what we OUGHT to be doing, (taking care of our kids, going to work, sleeping, etc) not what we COULD be doing. Yes, there is always something better you could be doing than watching TV, but that doesn’t mean that you have to be doing that thing.

Agreed.

If you can not deduce with natural reasoning that our bodies were created as male and female; that our bodies were designed that way for giving and receiving sexual pleasure and creating new life, I don’t know what I can say to you. That should be self-evident whether or not you ascribe to a religious belief.

Obviously the argument I’m making is not that our bodies aren’t made for intercourse with each other, it’s that it can’t be deduced with natural reason that they are to be used for nothing else! (Masturbation, etc.). We could deduce with reason that the body is not meant to ingest drugs (because it lowers our life span, it affects us cognitively, lowers our sexual drive or whatever - we probably agree on this point). There isn’t a natural way, however, of deducing that a person should not masturbate (as science reports only positive health and psychological effects). So again, if it detracts from the dignity of another person, pelase explain how. And if intercourse is the exclusive purpose of our sexuality, please explain how you figure that is true.

 

[rmbrulotte]

Masturbation cannot be wrong simply or interactively for the pleasure it brings (as many other non-sinful things bring pleasure). You can’t tease apart the difference between masturbation as a pleasure from reading as a pleasure unless there’s another reason that masturbation is wrong (and you contend that there is, so your argument is not immediately shut-down for pleasure being out of the discussion).

I was not trying to prove that it is wrong simply because it is pleasure inducing. I was trying to point out that other things we may seek out simply for their pleasure can and do offer us something else besides pleasure. I think we are agreed on that; however, I think that was fairly obvious from my first statement. It is clear to me that your intent here is to prove that Christians are a bunch of closed-minded, ignorant, and judgmental individuals who can not think for themselves and blindly follow the teachings of a celibate man who lives in Rome which have no real value in modern-day life and are contrary to science.
There isn’t a natural way, however, of deducing that a person should not masturbate (as science reports only positive health and psychological effects).*

For a person without a religious or moral ground to not masturbate, I guess that certain scientific studies would suggest that masturbation is not bad for our bodies and that it can provide bodily benefits. I would also suggest that we keep in mind that scientific advice changes daily. We do a lot of things in our culture, some of which are based on vast amounts of scientific research, and some which are not. As an example, I can point to research that suggests that it is good to have a glass or two of wine or beer a day. Sometimes I don’t have any, sometimes I have more. Another example is the rate of cesarean birth in our country. All scientific data suggests that the rate should be no more than 10% but ours is much higher.
So again, if it detracts from the dignity of another person, pelase explain how. And if intercourse is the exclusive purpose of our sexuality, please explain how you figure that is true*

The only way we can really have a discussion about this is if we both agree on the premise that humans are created in the image and likeness of God. I have a hunch that that is where we part ways. But, as a person who does believe that, I can tell you that “created in the image and likeness of God” doesn’t mean that I look like Him. It goes further than that. I suggest that you read the Catechism 2331-2400. After that I would like to discuss this further with you, but I would have a really hard time re-wording an explanation to you here. You can google “catechsim masturbation,” or “catechism 6th commandment” to find what you need if you do not have a Catechism handy.

 

[rmbrulotte]

And let me add that I am not suggesting that you read the Catechism because I can not think for myself. I am suggesting you read it because for me it lays out the argument very rationally.

 

[rmbrulotte]

And from there things basically just degenerate (or escalate) until I wish I had a gun. So that’s my story and my advice.

I can understand that you feel disappointed in yourself. We all get disappointed in ourselves. But if you are really wishing that you had a gun and would want to harm yourself, I really suggest that you seek out medical, spiritual, and psychological help.

 

[LittleChimera]

Thank you for your sympathy, but I was exaggerating. I just feel a profound sense of defeat and disappointment coupled with some recrimination.

I think the reason that masturbation is an exercise in moral and spiritual failure is that it represents an inability to control our passions together with the physical release of a precious element that is vital and wasted. It is also a stark reminder that we lack either the capacity or the option of physical love. Lastly, it is necessarily combined with either visual fantasy or visual representation or visual reality of a woman objectified out of her value as a companion into a vehicle for lust, which is probably the cheapest of sensations. In any event although it is easy and free it is not good for a person and should be avoided like the snake that suggests it.

Faith is a higher and more dignified form of consideration than simple reason because it enables you to climb to places which are inaccessible by simply weighing facts. No element of Catholic dogma contradicts reason or itself although the value of most can only be accessed by the exercise of Faith. Faith in its definition is the acquisition of things unseen. Love cannot be quantified but few and only the most troubled would doubt its existence. Truth does not fold in on itself and Faith does not allow us to apprehend insufficient evidence. It requires confirmation which the Spirit provides. If you never seek to use Faith you will be trapped in a three-dimensional world. And you will never be allowed departure.

Nothing useless is valuable as the very nature of a useless act is empty. If it had a purpose it would have value, but it does not. Idle talk is condemned in the Bible, as are a wealth of vanities. We are meant to pursue objectives through effort and reason and not to deliberate with vague inadequacy. Every expense of effort should allow a reward. The Biblical corollary is that we should sow and then should reap.

Please let me know if I am wrong.

Nate

 

[rmbrulotte]

Thank you for your sympathy, but I was exaggerating. I just feel a profound sense of defeat and disappointment coupled with some recrimination.

I think the reason that masturbation is an exercise in moral and spiritual failure is that it represents an inability to control our passions together with the physical release of a precious element that is vital and wasted. It is also a stark reminder that we lack either the capacity or the option of physical love. Lastly, it is necessarily combined with either visual fantasy or visual representation or visual reality of a woman objectified out of her value as a companion into a vehicle for lust, which is probably the cheapest of sensations. In any event although it is easy and free it is not good for a person and should be avoided like the snake that suggests it.

Faith is a higher and more dignified form of consideration than simple reason because it enables you to climb to places which are inaccessible by simply weighing facts. No element of Catholic dogma contradicts reason or itself although the value of most can only be accessed by the exercise of Faith. Faith in its definition is the acquisition of things unseen. Love cannot be quantified but few and only the most troubled would doubt its existence. Truth does not fold in on itself and Faith does not allow us to apprehend insufficient evidence. It requires confirmation which the Spirit provides. If you never seek to use Faith you will be trapped in a three-dimensional world. And you will never be allowed departure.

Nothing useless is valuable as the very nature of a useless act is empty. If it had a purpose it would have value, but it does not. Idle talk is condemned in the Bible, as are a wealth of vanities. We are meant to pursue objectives through effort and reason and not to deliberate with vague inadequacy. Every expense of effort should allow a reward. The Biblical corollary is that we should sow and then should reap.

Please let me know if I am wrong.

Nate

I am glad that you are not considering doing yourself harm. I have struggled with depression since I was a teen so I know what it is like to be there. I do hope and pray that you can find healing.

I can also say that my best friend’s husband, after years of masturbation and viewing pornography, can no longer reach climax through sexual intercourse with his wife. The former is now to only way he can climax and my friend has now been reduced to viewing this with him at times and practicing that act on him so that he can climax. Neither his nor her dignity is being upheld in that situation. Masturbation has taken away his natural response to the marital act and has reduced his wife to that of the “servicer” of his sexual release. While neither of them ascribe to any religious beliefs, my friend has confided in me that it is degrading, humiliating, and that their sexual intimacy is now simply an outlet for sexual release when she knows it could be, (and has been!) a bonding, loving experience. So, even without faith or moral reasoning, she has seen the practical consequences of his habit.

 

[OraLabora]

I think the reason that masturbation is an exercise in moral and spiritual failure is that it represents an inability to control our passions together with the physical release of a precious element that is vital and wasted. It is also a stark reminder that we lack either the capacity or the option of physical love. Lastly, it is necessarily combined with either visual fantasy or visual representation or visual reality of a woman objectified out of her value as a companion into a vehicle for lust, which is probably the cheapest of sensations. In any event although it is easy and free it is not good for a person and should be avoided like the snake that suggests it.

There is so much generalization and nonsense in this statement that I don’t know where to start. But let’s start with the notion of a precious vital element being wasted. Surely you know that in the lifetime of a male… let’s take your normal family man… only a tiny number of sperm over the billions that a male will produce in his lifetime will ever fertilize an egg. The rest will be lost through intercourse that is not destined to result in conception, absorption back into the body, and assuming the man doesn’t masturbate, through involuntary nocturnal emissions, for those that experience them (most, but not all, men do).

Secondly you grossly generalize about the use of objectification of women. Yes men are highly visual but it does not mean that one, all men who masturbate use porn to do so, and two, it does not necessarily mean that the “lust” the man feels is unhealthy. A certain amount of “lusting” for each other is a healthy component of a marriage. Concupiscence is how we were designed to desire the sex act. A man who’s wife may be unavailable due to, say a business trip or military service, may do so while thinking of normal, healthy, licit intercourse with her (and vice-versa for her if she masturbates as well).

I can also say that my best friend’s husband, after years of masturbation and viewing pornography, can no longer reach climax through sexual intercourse with his wife. The former is now to only way he can climax and my friend has now been reduced to viewing this with him at times and practicing that act on him so that he can climax. Neither his nor her dignity is being upheld in that situation. Masturbation has taken away his natural response to the marital act and has reduced his wife to that of the “servicer” of his sexual release. While neither of them ascribe to any religious beliefs, my friend has confided in me that it is degrading, humiliating, and that their sexual intimacy is now simply an outlet for sexual release when she knows it could be, (and has been!) a bonding, loving experience. So, even without faith or moral reasoning, she has seen the practical consequences of his habit.

Here again I must take exception. The man in this example has another issue, sexual addiction, what is known as a “paraphilia”, a sexual addiction in which climax is only possible with the thing that triggers it. Most men masturbate all their lives and do not lose the ability to climax with their spouses, and do not develop paraphilias, just as most men all their lives can enjoy alcohol without becoming alcoholic. The grounds for declaring masturbation as immoral are based on Natural Law considerations and have nothing to do with the ability of masturbation becoming addictive and damaging; if addiction potential made something immoral in Natural Law, then drinking alcohol would be immoral. Even normal intercourse with one’s spouse can become addictive and damaging and done for the wrong reasons. That does not mean that normal intercourse is wrong!

The fact is, given human nature, this is one sin that most normal healthy people will stumble into and battle for a good part of their lives. Which is why I suspect the CCC’s pastoral guidance on the subject allows considerable leeway in assuaging guilt.

We aren’t perfect, we are the Church of the Fallen. The Church teaches a perfect path that only the very few will attain. The Church also teaches that Divine Mercy is available to all of us to help us deal with our hurts, our weaknesses and our addictions.

 

[Think_About_It]

It is clear to me that your intent here is to prove that Christians are a bunch of closed-minded, ignorant, and judgmental individuals who can not think for themselves and blindly follow the teachings of a celibate man who lives in Rome which have no real value in modern-day life and are contrary to science.

I don’t hold that view for Christians at all, for the most part. However, I do think that there are some things Christians follow that have no rational explanation for them whatsoever.

For a person without a religious or moral ground to not masturbate, I guess that certain scientific studies would suggest that masturbation is not bad for our bodies and that it can provide bodily benefits. I would also suggest that we keep in mind that scientific advice changes daily. We do a lot of things in our culture, some of which are based on vast amounts of scientific research, and some which are not. As an example, I can point to research that suggests that it is good to have a glass or two of wine or beer a day. Sometimes I don’t have any, sometimes I have more. Another example is the rate of cesarean birth in our country. All scientific data suggests that the rate should be no more than 10% but ours is much higher.

This should probably be your last resort claim - that science can be wrong. Science can be wrong about penicillin being good medicine, but to throw it into conversation doesn’t get you very far.

The only way we can really have a discussion about this is if we both agree on the premise that humans are created in the image and likeness of God. I have a hunch that that is where we part ways. But, as a person who does believe that, I can tell you that “created in the image and likeness of God” doesn’t mean that I look like Him. It goes further than that. I suggest that you read the Catechism 2331-2400. After that I would like to discuss this further with you, but I would have a really hard time re-wording an explanation to you here. You can google “catechsim masturbation,” or “catechism 6th commandment” to find what you need if you do not have a Catechism handy.

I’ve read my Catechism twice. The Catechism is more descriptive than apologetic, which is why I brought my argument to *this *thread in this forum. So here it is: I have to believe that I was made in the image and likenes of God before I can buy any theological nonsense about masturbation. The argument ends up looking something like this:

1. God said it was wrong
2. It’s wrong

It seems that masturbation being wrong is not written onto our hearts as it ought to be, after all, because it certainly doesn’t appeal to our reason.

 

[rmbrulotte]

Here again I must take exception. The man in this example has another issue, sexual addiction, what is known as a “paraphilia”, a sexual addiction in which climax is only possible with the thing that triggers it. Most men masturbate all their lives and do not lose the ability to climax with their spouses, and do not develop paraphilias, just as most men all their lives can enjoy alcohol without becoming alcoholic. The grounds for declaring masturbation as immoral are based on Natural Law considerations and have nothing to do with the ability of masturbation becoming addictive and damaging; if addiction potential made something immoral in Natural Law, then drinking alcohol would be immoral. Even normal intercourse with one’s spouse can become addictive and damaging and done for the wrong reasons. That does not mean that normal intercourse is wrong!

The fact is, given human nature, this is one sin that most normal healthy people will stumble into and battle for a good part of their lives. Which is why I suspect the CCC’s pastoral guidance on the subject allows considerable leeway in assuaging guilt.

We aren’t perfect, we are the Church of the Fallen. The Church teaches a perfect path that only the very few will attain. The Church also teaches that Divine Mercy is available to all of us to help us deal with our hurts, our weaknesses and our addictions.

I don’t disagree with anything you said. I said nothing about his guilt or otherwise jusdged him in any way. I was simply pointing out the destruction it has caused in my friend’s life, and relating the story to LittleChimera. I wanted to point out that even to those who don’t have a particular faith, it can be destructive to people. While there is no way to be certain, perhaps if the man had started from a moral standpoint of “masturbation is wrong,” it wouldn’t have got to that point.

My intention on this board has never been to judge, belittle or otherwise act better than anyone else. I do bad things too. If I am coming across in an uncharitable way, I do apologize.

 

[rmbrulotte]

“This should probably be your last resort claim - that science can be wrong. Science can be wrong about penicillin being good medicine, but to throw it into conversation doesn’t get you very far.”

That was neither an argument for nor against anything. I think the fact that you included scientific studies was a pretty weak claim, and so I was pointing that out. After all, if my inclusion of that fact is weak, your inclusion of facts makes your equally weak. It works both ways. Maybe tom

"*I’ve read my Catechism twice. The Catechism is more descriptive than apologetic, which is why I brought my argument to this thread in this forum. So here it is: I have to believe that I was made in the image and likenes of God before I can buy any theological nonsense about masturbation. The argument ends up looking something like this:

1. God said it was wrong
2. It’s wrong

It seems that masturbation being wrong is not written onto our hearts as it ought to be, after all, because it certainly doesn’t appeal to our reason.*"

Who said that masturbation being wrong was written into our heart? Did I ever claim that? If I ever came across that way, forgive me. I definitely don’t believe that and that definitely isn’t something one has to believe in order to be a Catholic.

Are you hoping to find scientific fact that we are made in the image and likeness of God?
Until then are you going to call religion nonsense?

“God said it is wrong, therefore it is wrong,” applies to more things than masturbation. I do understand that you can not fathom how it could harm anyone but I am not sure that you are willing to even consider that it would. Obviously we are not talking about physical harm, but what about more subtle things? Are you willing to consider at all that it can separate people from meaningful sexual partnerships by turning sex into a purely selfish act? By selfish I do not mean seeking it merely for pleasure, because that happens a lot and it isn’t necessarily a moral problem. What I mean is that if I turn to masturbation to satisfy a sexual urge and go it alone, I completely separate the human bonding experience that intercourse normally would entail. Sure, my body would feel great for awhile, but I would be missing out another equally important aspect of human sexuality that is essential for us. I don’t think that you can offer me any proof that masturbating even comes close to the amount of pleasure and connectedness one gives and receives in a committed, healthy, loving sexual relationship.

It isn’t like God just decided he didn’t want anyone to have any fun so he said masturbation was wrong. He wants us to have the best possible and the best, most meaningful sexual relationships we can have. As I said in a previous post, while not every person who masturbates has some sort of huge problem but I think it is fairly apparent that it is used as a substitute for genuine human interaction.

I am fairly certain that no matter what I say, you will only look for holes in my argument or go off on a tangent about a comment I made that was really not important to the overall picture, (ie., the TV example that I had to re-explain to you even though it was really not germane to the discussion, and you asserting that I was using the fact that science changes as a claim in favor of my argument) rather than actually consider for a moment what I am saying. I do hope, however, that you can acknowledge that there may be a possibility that Christians do have minds of their own and can reason. To me, the loss of the human element of sexuality in masturbation is a pretty good reason to avoid it, and I have a belief that God can help me to have the most human of sexual experiences.

 

[Think_About_It]

That was neither an argument for nor against anything. I think the fact that you included scientific studies was a pretty weak claim, and so I was pointing that out. After all, if my inclusion of that fact is weak, your inclusion of facts makes your equally weak. It works both ways.

Me: Scientific claim (masturbation is healthy and a healthy part of development)
You: Science could be wrong
Me: Okay…

The point is, TELL me how it is wrong empirically. Otherwise, you’ll have to give me a REASON why it’s wrong.

Who said that masturbation being wrong was written into our heart? Did I ever claim that? If I ever came across that way, forgive me. I definitely don’t believe that and that definitely isn’t something one has to believe in order to be a Catholic.

Are you hoping to find scientific fact that we are made in the image and likeness of God?
Until then are you going to call religion nonsense?

We judge the bible’s claims based on the reasonableness of those claims. I’m not asking you to find scientific fact of God. I’m asking you to defend his claims in a way that would lead a reasonable person to believe in him. “God said so” is the least compelling claim you could ever make for reasonable belief. I would have to wonder why God presents us with a perfectly innocuous situation and tells us it’s wrong (unless of course, the bible was a book made by men)

“God said it is wrong, therefore it is wrong,” applies to more things than masturbation. I do understand that you can not fathom how it could harm anyone but I am not sure that you are willing to even consider that it would. Obviously we are not talking about physical harm, but what about more subtle things? Are you willing to consider at all that it can separate people from meaningful sexual partnerships by turning sex into a purely selfish act? By selfish I do not mean seeking it merely for pleasure, because that happens a lot and it isn’t necessarily a moral problem. What I mean is that if I turn to masturbation to satisfy a sexual urge and go it alone, I completely separate the human bonding experience that intercourse normally would entail. Sure, my body would feel great for awhile, but I would be missing out another equally important aspect of human sexuality that is essential for us. I don’t think that you can offer me any proof that masturbating even comes close to the amount of pleasure and connectedness one gives and receives in a committed, healthy, loving sexual relationship.

Any anecdotes you have of masturbation doing harm really do nothing to strengthen your case. There are people who break out in hives when water touches their skin. There are people who, despite the health benefits, cannot take synthetic B-vitamins. Unless you can say there is a pattern of harm (even subtle emotional harm; this can only be done with science), you’ll still be the proud worshiper of a God who loves to confound our reason. And that’s not like a god at all. That’s a god only some people can worship because he doesn’t make sense to people like me (and increasing numbers of once-followers)

It isn’t like God just decided he didn’t want anyone to have any fun so he said masturbation was wrong. He wants us to have the best possible and the best, most meaningful sexual relationships we can have. As I said in a previous post, while not every person who masturbates has some sort of huge problem but I think it is fairly apparent that it is used as a substitute for genuine human interaction.

You couldn’t possibly demonstrate that. Calling something a substitute begs the question (again!) that there is a standard against which you can measure intended events for our sexuality’s course. Question begging is not going to do the trick.

I am fairly certain that no matter what I say, you will only look for holes in my argument or go off on a tangent about a comment I made that was really not important to the overall picture, (ie., the TV example that I had to re-explain to you even though it was really not germane to the discussion, and you asserting that I was using the fact that science changes as a claim in favor of my argument) rather than actually consider for a moment what I am saying.

I considered it was a manipulative tactic. You’re right that i’ll continue to punch holes, only because it’s obvious that some of God’s decrees can only be demonstrated with faith - a useless thing - and not reason (the thing Catholics pretend God’s Law has in full).

I do hope, however, that you can acknowledge that there may be a possibility that Christians do have minds of their own and can reason.

I know that they can; I used to be one. But I knew, after some time, that my rationalizations were only evasions of harder facts - things I couldn’t accept as a believer.

To me, the loss of the human element of sexuality in masturbation is a pretty good reason to avoid it, and I have a belief that God can help me to have the most human of sexual experiences.

I understand how that can be true for some - that it detracts something from the relationship. Can you understand that masturbation does not detract, but can even enhance, other sexual relationships? I have no problem accepting the Christian worldview, but when it claims to be the authority on what is right for everyone, I must disagree (esspecially when there is blatent scientific contradiction).

 

[Elizabeth502]

Our needs, our directions, our destinies, our imperatives, our fulfillment, cannot be reduced to those offered by science alone. The world and the interconnected principles of science are magnificent and wonderful, reflective as they are of the order of God himself, who is the center of it and the author of all connectedness. But even science by itself disappoints as the border of our experience and understanding.

We Catholics believe that while, like other animals, we are subject to biology on the physical level, ultimately our behavior is not sufficiently explained by biology nor restricted to it. Our behavior is not the sum of our biological impulses, including sexual, but is the product of impulses modified by our individual wills. We can surrender to every impulse and be controlled by our impulses, but in doing so we choose to behave merely then like competing animals within packs and tribes. Such people who have surrendered to every impulse, and thus choose animal-like behavior, find themselves eventually in locked cages surrounded by barbed wire, with equally ‘animalistic’ creatures preying on them in those physical and mental prisons.

Natural law is more than just base biological law; it is biology within consciousness – ours and that which envelops us: the consciousness of God. It is a law that is the outcome of God’s will and God’s order.

We believe that we were created qualitatively different from the rest of the animal kingdom. It is the complexity of our consciousness that makes that difference and affords us possibilities as well as responsibilities to govern our impulses and direct them to ordered ends, in relationship with others.

Masturbation is not reflective of natural law but of biological law without the divine component.

And yes, being made in the image and likeness of God is a belief, not a scientifically provable theorem. Catholicism is a faith. Did you think it was branch of science? And if not, why are using scientific language and assumptions to oppose its moral precepts?

 

[rmbrulotte]

I am not trying to manipulate anything here, I am just trying to explain to you what I believe. From what I could tell, I saw your presence on this board as a way to discredit Catholics as mind numbed robots, and I wanted to show you that we aren’t. If you think masturbating is fine, go right on ahead. I don’t see what your problem is if you aren’t a member of the Church and no one is threatening your right to do so. I haven’t met a “proud worshipper of God,” within my Catholic community, that tells me or anyone else not to masturbate “because God said so.”

It is a huge fallacy to believe that we have anything all figured out. We can base our decisions on the best information we have, but we will always make most of our decisions based on some sort of higher moral code we adhere to. I said what I said about science to try to illustrate that point, not manipulate. I have no reason to manipulate anything here.

Yes, I do know people report that masturbation enhances their sexual relationships. I know that many people report that watching pornography, “swinging,” and other things enhances their relationships. I do not doubt that they really feel that way.

If you really start reasoning, can’t you reason your way through just about everything?