Onanism

  • Thread starter Thread starter thinkandmull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thinkandmull

Guest
Since this is being debated on different threads, it was recommended that I start a new thread.

Here’s the question:

**Where has the Church taught that onanism is a sin in the case of infertile couples, old couples, and regular couples during the infertile period? **
 
The teaching of the Church is that contraceptive actions are intrinsically evil. That means evil in and of itself. Therefore, it is not contingent on circumstances such as those you describe but is always wrong. Such actions always profane the marital embrace.
 
Since this is being debated on different threads, it was recommended that I start a new thread.

Here’s the question:

**Where has the Church taught that onanism is a sin in the case of infertile couples, old couples, and regular couples during the infertile period? **
I don’t believe that the Church uses the term Onanism in official documents, at least the ones that I am familiar with and are commonly referenced (Canon Law, CCC, Humanae Vitae, etc.). The likely reason is there is a great big problem with applying a situation involving a person with a particular obligation to have children under a circumstance that no longer exists to an 80-year-old infertile couple.

Masturbating, contraception (including coitus interuptus), etc. are referenced in these documents. Most of the Church’s opinions on these matters is based on Tradition, and in some cases solely on Tradition. The Church claims to have always taught such things were sinful.
 
Yes on the above response. Also see here:

catholic.com/tracts/birth-control

The biblical teaching that birth control is wrong is found even more explicitly among the Church Fathers, who recognized the biblical and natural law principles underlying the condemnation.

In A.D. 195, Clement of Alexandria wrote, “Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted” (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2).

The apostolic tradition’s condemnation of contraception is so great that it was followed by Protestants until 1930 and was upheld by all key Protestant Reformers. Martin Luther said, “[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him.”

John Calvin said, “The voluntary spilling of semen outside of intercourse between man and woman is a monstrous thing. Deliberately to withdraw from coitus in order that semen may fall on the ground is doubly monstrous. For this is to extinguish the hope of the race and to kill before he is born the hoped-for offspring.”

John Wesley warned, “Those sins that dishonor the body are very displeasing to God, and the evidence of vile affections. Observe, the thing which he [Onan] did displeased the Lord—and it is to be feared; thousands, especially of single persons, by this very thing, still displease the Lord, and destroy their own souls.” (These passages are quoted in Charles D. Provan, The Bible and Birth Control, which contains many quotes by historic Protestant figures who recognize contraception’s evils.)

The Magisterium

The Church also, fulfilling the role given it by Christ as the identifier and interpreter of apostolic Scripture and apostolic tradition, has constantly condemned contraception as gravely sinful.

In Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI stated, “[W]e must once again declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun, and, above all, directly willed and procured abortion, even if for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as licit means of regulating birth. Equally to be excluded, as the teaching authority of the Church has frequently declared, is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or temporary, whether of the man or of the woman. Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” (HV 14).

This was reiterated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: “[E]very action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible is intrinsically evil” (CCC 2370). “Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means . . . for example, direct sterilization or contraception” (CCC 2399).

The Church also has affirmed that the illicitness of contraception is an infallible doctrine: “The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative.aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive.aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life” (Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, Feb. 12, 1997).
 
My question had nothing to do with contraception. If fertility is present, contraception hasn’t happened. The Church has possibly failed pastorally in not making it clear that Onanism is a sin only when fertility is present, but I don’t see how this is not an open issue still.

And certainly, statements like being “open to life” are bizarrely inappropriate. Ejaculating into your wife when she is infertile is not being “open to life”. Words mean something; the words don’t make sense that way, its not logical
 
My question had nothing to do with contraception.
Actually, it does.
If fertility is present, contraception hasn’t happened. The Church has possibly failed pastorally in not making it clear that Onanism is a sin only when fertility is present, but I don’t see how this is not an open issue still.
The Church cannot make that clear because it is not true.
And certainly, statements like being “open to life” are bizarrely inappropriate. Ejaculating into your wife when she is infertile is not being “open to life”. Words mean something; the words don’t make sense that way, its not logical
That is not what the Church teaches. What the Church teaches is that each act of intercourse must be properly ordered to both unity and procreation. That means it must be a completed act of vaginal intercourse or it is improperly ordered and profanes the marriage act.
 
Actually, it does.

The Church cannot make that clear because it is not true.

That is not what the Church teaches. What the Church teaches is that each act of intercourse must be properly ordered to both unity and procreation. That means it must be a completed act of vaginal intercourse or it is improperly ordered and profanes the marriage act.
You just said “That means”. Your interpretation of the Church’s?
 
IMHO, this is an area that the Church needs to clarify. We all know what the Church means, but the explanation is confusing. Catholics not being able to make sense of Catholic doctrine/dogma is not a good thing.
 
IMHO, this is an area that the Church needs to clarify. We all know what the Church means, but the explanation is confusing. Catholics not being able to make sense of Catholic doctrine/dogma is not a good thing.
“what the Church means”. WHo’s the Church in that sentence? The hierarchy. Where has the hierarchy said “we all know what this means”? It hasn’t
 
My question had nothing to do with contraception. If fertility is present, contraception hasn’t happened. The Church has possibly failed pastorally in not making it clear that Onanism is a sin only when fertility is present, but I don’t see how this is not an open issue still.

And certainly, statements like being “open to life” are bizarrely inappropriate. Ejaculating into your wife when she is infertile is not being “open to life”. Words mean something; the words don’t make sense that way, its not logical
It is still a sin because the term “open to life” means that you are not willingly and purposefully inhibiting the possibility of conception. A woman deemed infertile can still possibly conceive by means of a miracle (it has happened in the bible). By not ejaculating inside the woman, you are even preventing such a miracle from being possible. Being infertile is also not purposeful because it can come with age, and for a while each month for the woman. This is why NFP isn’t a sin when used to avoid conception with good reason.
 
well bzkoss236, that is a possible interpretation, but the words of the Church are not definite on this matter. The Church may not have taken miracles into consideration when chosing Her words. This issue effects the sexual satisfaction of men who’s wives may for a time be unable to have vaginal intercourse without pain. I don’t see why people on here are so quick insist on their interpretation of the Church’s words
 
well bzkoss236, that is a possible interpretation, but the words of the Church are not definite on this matter. The Church may not have taken miracles into consideration when chosing Her words. This issue effects the sexual satisfaction of men who’s wives may for a time be unable to have vaginal intercourse without pain. I don’t see why people on here are so quick insist on their interpretation of the Church’s words
Because we research what the Church teaches. It’s easy to three if you understand one and two.
  1. Onanism is a form of contraception
  2. The Church teaches that contraception is always wrong
  3. Therefore, Onanism is always wrong
 
Premise 1 is wrong. If fertility isn’t present, it isn’t prevented. Contraception is the prevention of conception
 
Premise 1 is wrong. If fertility isn’t present, it isn’t prevented. Contraception is the prevention of conception
Your opinion does not match with the Church. If you that it does, then provide official proof that this is the teaching of the Church.
 
My position isn’t the Church’s; I am saying it is an open question. “My” definition of contraception is, well, what contraception means: contrary to conception
 
Premise 1 is wrong. If fertility isn’t present, it isn’t prevented. Contraception is the prevention of conception
This is actually correct, and part of the confusion on the matter. IMHO, and my interpretation, the theory was formulated with the thought of fertile couples in mind, and the rest added later as these questions arose.

However, the Church has been clear on how the couple finishes the act, regardless of the confusing reasoning to get there. Various papal encyclicals and speeches have confirmed this.
 
My position isn’t the Church’s; I am saying it is an open question. “My” definition of contraception is, well, what contraception means: contrary to conception
Then I guess that begs a bigger question. Why would a guy want practice onanism while their is infertile?
 
This is actually correct, and part of the confusion on the matter. IMHO, and my interpretation, the theory was formulated with the thought of fertile couples in mind, and the rest added later as these questions arose.

However, the Church has been clear on how the couple finishes the act, regardless of the confusing reasoning to get there. Various papal encyclicals and speeches have confirmed this.
Can you give some quotations?
 
Then I guess that begs a bigger question. Why would a guy want practice onanism while their is infertile?
when the wife had surgery, for example, and it is painful to have vaginal penentration
 
when the wife had surgery, for example, and it is painful to have vaginal penentration
It seems your definition of onanism differs from everyone else’s. Onanism implies that vaginal penetration has already occurred. Are you talking about masturbation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top