Masturbation....Or not?

[Mamanurse]

This comparison fails because getting drunk is NOT a biological urge. The sex drive is.

That’s not always the case…if the person is a true alcoholic it has become a biological urge. I am married to a recovering alcoholic and and I can say for sure, that during a period of our relationship, drinking was absolutely a biological urge. Just like any urge or desire, our bodies want us to fulfill that need-whether it be good or holy depends on the issue.
I have to say that masturbation is a problem for a lot of people and I think it detracts from the marital act. It allows the person to become completely consumed with themselves and think nothing of another person-at least not in a lustful way-…which is the opposite of what true giving is about.

 

[OAO]

I get prostatic congestion, the so-called “priest’s disease”, if I don’t masturbate. I don’t think that looking at masturbation like an addiction is quite right - and the many, many threads about it on this forum illustrate something, I think.

 

[DrFloyd]

I get prostatic congestion, the so-called “priest’s disease”, if I don’t masturbate. I don’t think that looking at masturbation like an addiction is quite right - and the many, many threads about it on this forum illustrate something, I think.

This proves my point, and it also illustrates even further why the alcoholic comparison fails. If you don’t relieve sexual pressure, then definite, documented medical problems result, as indicated here. Does God give us the biological urge present in the sex drive, only to then dictate to us to abstain from it, causing the result to be a medical problem? Is that logical at ALL? Why would God choose to do this to us?

 

[DrFloyd]

Can you find the canon law? Here is what I found on Wikipedia. (I know it is a questionable source.) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_celibacy_%28Catholic_Church%29

I did extensive searching in canon law, and have been thus unable to find it, but I know it is there somewhere; it was also reiterated to me by a few priests. Years back, when I was very much interested in going into the priesthood and then uncovered it, it was one of the things that caused me to seriously question the church. It is completely illogical to have a natural biological urge, force yourself to suppress it, then apply psychological reasons for doing so (calling it an “addiction”, etc). If the church wants clergy to do this, then the logical thing to do would be to have all of the clergy castrated, chemically or otherwise. That would eliminate the biological urge, eliminate the need for such psychological mumbo-jumbo, and also end all cases of sexual abuse by those among the clergy.

From that, it doesn’t sound like engaging in sexual acts is a violation of the vow. Of course it is still sinful act, but not a defrockable offense.

If this rationale is true, a priest can then masturbate as much as he likes, as long as he confesses to it and asks for absolution.

 

[DrFloyd]

They all end up being enforced immediately after death at the particular judgement.

Fair enough, but why isn’t the church – the establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth – enforcing them NOW? Why is the church quietly covering it up and ignoring it? What is the point of canon law, the Vatican legal system, etc if it’s not going to be used for a purpose in which it should be?

 

[DrFloyd]

And on topic:

All pleasure, outside of marriage, that is associated with the creative power, that is directly willed or desired, and intentionally acted upon, is a mortal sin.

You decide.

Or, rephrased:

1. God gives humans a sexual drive
2. God expects humans to relieve the sexual drive only in certain proscribed ways
3. failure to relieve said sexual drive causes medical problems, and relieving the sexual drive outside of those ways is sinful
4. relieving said sexual drive outside of the proscribed ways, to stop the medical problems, is a sin that will cause one to burn in hell eternally

Questions raised by this:

1. why would God do this?
2. why would God simply NOT give people the sexual drive, or only give it to some of the population in order to continue the species, and allow the others to exist without it?
3. why does God want to inflict medical problems on people who follow the dictate of “you must do this”? for what purpose?

Is there any logic here at all?

 

[DrFloyd]

Nobody said it’s okay for rules to be followed inconsistently.

No, but the church applies this. Two situations:

1. A lay person masturbating a few times a week will end up burning in hell for not confessing it and feeling properly contrite, according to the church’s own rules.
2. An ordained priest caught engaging in sexual molestation is caught, rebuked, and quietly moved by his bishop and other church officials to another parish where he continues to administer Sacraments. Is he also going to burn in hell? According to the church’s own rules, he will. Why is he still being permitted to administer Sacraments? Why didn’t the church can him, as they should have, for his violation of the rules?

Now tell me, in the wider scope of things, of the two situations above, which is more the moral wrong? 1) or 2)? And if you believe it to be 1), then why?

 

[DrFloyd]

What would the intent of this be? To pleasure yourself? Well, then you’re in it for the wrong reason. It should be about both the wife and the husband.

Are you doing this to prevent finishing inside your wife? Well, then that’s a sin as well.

I guess I can’t see why masturbating during sex would be a good thing?

Maybe the man is old and needs to do it to provide the proper reaction (i.e., an erection) so the sexual act can occur? There are a variety of possible scenarios here.

 

[DrFloyd]

That’s not always the case…if the person is a true alcoholic it has become a biological urge. I am married to a recovering alcoholic and and I can say for sure, that during a period of our relationship, drinking was absolutely a biological urge.

Fair enough.

I have to say that masturbation is a problem for a lot of people and I think it detracts from the marital act. It allows the person to become completely consumed with themselves and think nothing of another person-at least not in a lustful way-…which is the opposite of what true giving is about.

What if a person is unmarried, and is simply doing it to relieve the biological urge that God programmed into us, in order to prevent a medical problem?

 

[whm]

Or, rephrased:

1. God gives humans a sexual drive
2. God expects humans to relieve the sexual drive only in certain proscribed ways
3. failure to relieve said sexual drive causes medical problems, and relieving the sexual drive outside of those ways is sinful
4. relieving said sexual drive outside of the proscribed ways, to stop the medical problems, is a sin that will cause one to burn in hell eternally

Questions raised by this:

1. why would God do this?
2. why would God simply NOT give people the sexual drive, or only give it to some of the population in order to continue the species, and allow the others to exist without it?
3. why does God want to inflict medical problems on people who follow the dictate of “you must do this”? for what purpose?

Is there any logic here at all?

You presumption about the sexual drive is incorrect. If one does not fixate on sexual thoughts, and lives a pure life, these types of urges are properly ordered and greatly reduced. Our immoral society we live in today makes this difficult to do, but you can’t blame God for western civilization’s ungodliness.

Some of the “medical” issues mentioned such as “blue ___” only results when somebody is regularly “stimulated” without completion. Once they stop putting themselves in this stimulated position, it doesn’t happen anymore.

I attest to this because I have lived it both ways.

 

[MtnDwellar]

I get prostatic congestion, the so-called “priest’s disease”, if I don’t masturbate. I don’t think that looking at masturbation like an addiction is quite right - and the many, many threads about it on this forum illustrate something, I think.

How long does it take before symptoms occur? Is orgasm once a week or once a month enough to prevent the symptoms? What have priests told you? If you really have a health issue with abstinence, I think that you should not abstain. I have not had any health issues with abstinence - still hoping…

 

[DrFloyd]

You presumption about the sexual drive is incorrect. If one does not fixate on sexual thoughts, and lives a pure life, these types of urges are properly ordered and greatly reduced.

I put in BOLD the operative word here – GREATLY reduced. You didn’t say “eliminated”, you didn’t say “ends”; you said “greatly reduced”. According to your logic up to that point – live a proper life, don’t focus on sexual thoughts, etc – then the end result SHOULD be “no sex drive”. You didn’t say that. You reaffirmed my position here by indicating that the sex drive IS a natural, biological urge.

Our immoral society we live in today makes this difficult to do, but you can’t blame God for western civilization’s ungodliness.

I don’t focus on sexual thoughts, and I am not corrupted by the immoral society of Western civilization…in fact, I constantly battle against it.

As I mentioned several posts above, I am a male, 33 years old, a virgin, AND I have extremely close intimate friendships with a number of women, two of whom I find quite physically attractive. I don’t think about them sexually at all. However, I DO have a biological urge – the sexual drive – and masturbation a few times a week is a way to relieve it. And, for the record, those women are not the focus of the masturbation; frankly, thinking of them in such a way is highly repulsive, especially since one of them is someone who should have been my sister.

Some of the “medical” issues mentioned such as “blue ___” only results when somebody is regularly “stimulated” without completion.

I disagree. I am not regularly sexually stimulated, yet the biological urge is still present.

Once they stop putting themselves in this stimulated position, it doesn’t happen anymore.

I attest to this because I have lived it both ways.

In what position were you in where you had NO sex drive, whatsoever?

 

[Bbigam]

This comparison fails because getting drunk is NOT a biological urge. The sex drive is.

Breathing is a biological urge, but it’s death to breathe in the wrong context, such as under water. If sex is a biological urge, it’s death to the soul to indulge it outside of the proper context of marriage.

This proves my point, and it also illustrates even further why the alcoholic comparison fails. If you don’t relieve sexual pressure, then definite, documented medical problems result, as indicated here. Does God give us the biological urge present in the sex drive, only to then dictate to us to abstain from it, causing the result to be a medical problem? Is that logical at ALL? Why would God choose to do this to us?

This doesn’t happen to everyone. There are lots of medical problems that people have that come from genetics or other conditions beyond our control. God didn’t give us the problems, they came as a result of the Fall, the choice of our first parents to sin. Continuing to sin is not the answer.

If this rationale is true, a priest can then masturbate as much as he likes, as long as he confesses to it and asks for absolution.

Absolutely not. For one thing, confession is invalid without true contrition and a firm purpose of amendment. For another thing, even when it is valid, sin is still sin - it’s not okay just because we confess it. Sinning, figuring we can just go to confession, is adding on the sin of presumption on God’s mercy.

No, but the church applies this. Two situations:

1. A lay person masturbating a few times a week will end up burning in hell for not confessing it and feeling properly contrite, according to the church’s own rules.
2. An ordained priest caught engaging in sexual molestation is caught, rebuked, and quietly moved by his bishop and other church officials to another parish where he continues to administer Sacraments. Is he also going to burn in hell? According to the church’s own rules, he will. Why is he still being permitted to administer Sacraments? Why didn’t the church can him, as they should have, for his violation of the rules?

Now tell me, in the wider scope of things, of the two situations above, which is more the moral wrong? 1) or 2)? And if you believe it to be 1), then why?

I’m certainly more offended by number 2! But you are blurring the lines between the Church’s actions and disciplines - the way people in the Church respond to various types of sin - and Church teachings on morality, which are Truth, Sacred Tradition, unchangeable. The Church may or may not discipline properly, may or may not apply things consistently. But that does not change the fact that Truth is Truth, and much more than just rules. The Church’s teaching that masturbation is sinful and that molestation is sinful - these aren’t just rules, they are Truth. What the Church does procedurally with people who engage in those sins is a matter of discipline and is changeable (and not always handled correctly, obviously).

 

[whm]

I put in BOLD the operative word here – GREATLY reduced. You didn’t say “eliminated”, you didn’t say “ends”; you said “greatly reduced”. According to your logic up to that point – live a proper life, don’t focus on sexual thoughts, etc – then the end result SHOULD be “no sex drive”. You didn’t say that. You reaffirmed my position here by indicating that the sex drive IS a natural, biological urge.

I don’t focus on sexual thoughts, and I am not corrupted by the immoral society of Western civilization…in fact, I constantly battle against it.

As I mentioned several posts above, I am a male, 33 years old, a virgin, AND I have extremely close intimate friendships with a number of women, two of whom I find quite physically attractive. I don’t think about them sexually at all. However, I DO have a biological urge – the sexual drive – and masturbation a few times a week is a way to relieve it. And, for the record, those women are not the focus of the masturbation; frankly, thinking of them in such a way is highly repulsive, especially since one of them is someone who should have been my sister.

I disagree. I am not regularly sexually stimulated, yet the biological urge is still present.

In what position were you in where you had NO sex drive, whatsoever?

Life is not easy. What do you expect, everything to be easy and to get whatever you want when you want it ?

 

[whm]

Also, doc, you mention that you do it twice a week, I submit that you are focused on sexual things by definition. I’ve been there.

You mention that you are single, God plan includes marriage for many people. Perhaps you are resisting a call to marriage?

 

[Lews_Fathoms]

Hey guys,

I’m gonna ask for some advice here. I’ve been studying like crazy for exams and honestly I am sick and tired of it. So…I go on Wikipedia and look at some articles. Somehow I end up on the articles dealing with sex and all that; given its Wiki there are sexually explicit pictures. So…yeah I end up starting to masturbate, but I manage to stop before I “get there.”

This isn’t the first time its happened, it happened for the first time two nights ago, only that night I accidentally ended up seeing pornography (not any videos, but screenshots) for a minute or so. I think I was curious…

My problem is that in my mind I have no idea why I was so engrossed into it. I’ve been clean for over 3 weeks now and these sorta “relapses” just broke me…I’m not sure if I’ve done mortal sin. In the first time I never started feeling sexual pleasure, but this time I had begun to, so I’m really confused as to whether I committed sin.

I guess I’m lucky enough to have gotten a grip of myself before I actually went through the whole thing. I don’t know what my purpose was in looking through those articles, but I wasn’t just looking at the pictures, I was actually reading the articles.

So…in summary, can anybody advise me on whether I actually committed mortal sin?

I should mention that I am a recovering addict, but as I said, by the Grace of God, after my Easter Baptism I managed to entirely shove it and have never actually masturbated to the point of orgasm.

Ben

PS: Mods please move this if I’m in the wrong forum.

I can’t imagine anyone actually bringing this up on a Catholic forum at all. Like being in church and sitting next to an old lady and asking her if she does “the deed” BLASPHEMY

 

[MtnDwellar]

I put in BOLD You reaffirmed my position here by indicating that the sex drive IS a natural, biological urge.

Is the question whether or not the sex drive is natural? I don’t see how anyone can argue that it is not. Look around - every animal has it. Of course it is natural.

If the question is whether being natural makes it good, the answer is no. The desire for venereal pleasure stems from our lower faculties as do the desires for food, air, and almost all pleasure. The way of Christ is about overcoming the natural desires. That is what separates us from animals.

God gave our higher faculties will, reason, and a powerful intellect. He also created us with a soul and free will. All of these things and the lower faculties are gifts from God. The lower faculties are completely necessary, but must be kept in check. They have to be used appropriately.

Our lower faculties are always sending us messages. “Food is good and satisfying. Eat more.” “Lying on the couch is pleasurable. Don’t mow the lawn.” “John did not deserve that promotion. I hate him.” All of the vices and the seven deadly sins originate naturally from our lower faculties. We experience these messages to a greater or lesser extent. It is incumbent upon us, with the help of God, to manage them.

 

[DrFloyd]

Life is not easy. What do you expect, everything to be easy and to get whatever you want when you want it ?

Of course not. But you evaded my question, which was:

DrFloyd:

In what position were you in where you had NO sex drive, whatsoever?

 

[DrFloyd]

Also, doc, you mention that you do it twice a week, I submit that you are focused on sexual things by definition. I’ve been there.

I never actually said “I do it”. But what is your point?

You mention that you are single, God plan includes marriage for many people. Perhaps you are resisting a call to marriage?

A “call to marriage” would imply the desire to be married and have a family, wouldn’t it? I have never had such desires. I am perfectly content and happy being single. I do not understand why people WANT that; it is a concept foreign to me. Thus, I conclude that a “call to marriage” can definitely NOT be something I am resisting.

 

[DrFloyd]

Is the question whether or not the sex drive is natural? I don’t see how anyone can argue that it is not. Look around - every animal has it. Of course it is natural.

Then, by extension, it is natural to relieve it. It is inherently UN-natural to deny oneself the ability to relieve it, an ability which is safe and alleviates potential medical problems.

If the question is whether being natural makes it good, the answer is no. The desire for venereal pleasure stems from our lower faculties as do the desires for food, air, and almost all pleasure. The way of Christ is about overcoming the natural desires. That is what separates us from animals.

Following your logic here, we should also immediately stop eating and breathing. If those are natural desires, and the way of Christ is about overcoming said desires, then we should all overcome the natural desires to eat and breathe, too.

God gave our higher faculties will, reason, and a powerful intellect. He also created us with a soul and free will. All of these things and the lower faculties are gifts from God. The lower faculties are completely necessary, but must be kept in check. They have to be used appropriately.

God also gave us the ability to use chemicals and surgical equipment, which can be used to castrate certain body parts, thus resulting in the complete elimination of those sexual desires. Why aren’t we using them for this purpose? Wouldn’t that be the logical thing to do? If the church truly wants their clergy and believers to use sexual desires in the proper way, then it is sensible they should mandate the use of such God-given gifts. Why aren’t they?

Our lower faculties are always sending us messages. “Food is good and satisfying. Eat more.” “Lying on the couch is pleasurable. Don’t mow the lawn.” “John did not deserve that promotion. I hate him.” All of the vices and the seven deadly sins originate naturally from our lower faculties. We experience these messages to a greater or lesser extent. It is incumbent upon us, with the help of God, to manage them.

Agreed, and that is why masturbation is a much better and safer alternative to relieving the natural sexual urge than, for example, having pre-marital sex, or taking advantage of young people of whom one has charge.