I once had a professor who had converted from the Catholic Church to the Russian Orthodox Church. One of his complaints about the Catholic Church was what he called the “legalism” of her spiritual structure. Although I would not entirely agree with that assessment, I think the Church’s teachings on masturbation is a case of that “legalism”. Legalism to me is when Church teaching and theology become abstractly, intellectually and minutely divorced from the realities of human growth and behavior. A series of exact rules are created, the violation of which have certain and clear consequences for one’s soul. Call it Orthodox Judaism on steroids.
One of the things that is not considered permissible is masturbation. It considered a serious sin. Now, for those of you who are not Catholic, the Catholic Church divides sin into two categories: mortal and venial. Mortal sin is serious sin, which, if you die unrepentant, can lead to hell. For instance, murder is a mortal sin. Venial sin is a lesser sin, such a telling a white lie. You can die in sate of venial sin and still make it to heaven, after of course many eons undergoing the cleansing fires of purgatory. Read Dante for more details on that. According to the Church, any act of masturbation, conducted with full, free consent of the will, and complete knowledge of the sin, is a mortal sin, and as I said a mortal sin, unless you confess it, is a one way ticket to hell. I am not embellishing this: according to the Church, if you die in a state of mortal sin, unrepentant, you will go to hell. No questions asked. Case open and closed. God is a stern judge. Now perhaps there is a certain justice to that for those who commit serious sin and die without repenting, but the question is what constitutes a serious, or mortal sin. Does masturbation?
So what does the Church actually say about masturbation? Two examples will suffice.
Popes speak with authority on these types of issues and in 1975 Pope Paul VI published a declaration on human sexuality called: “Persona Humana – Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics”. When it came to masturbation he stated: “Masturbation constitutes a grave moral disorder…” and, “Masturbation is an intrinsically and seriously disordered act.”
Even more authoritative than Pope Paul’s statements is The Catechism of the Catholic Church. For those of you who are not Catholic, the Catechism is a book which outlines in detail the theology and teachings of the Church, and what constitutes sinful acts. The Catechism 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.”
So now lets apply these teachings to the every day lives of flesh and blood humans such as myself who want to have a spiritual life without becoming sexual neurotics obsessed over what is and what is not sexual sin and might cause you to be eternally damned by God.
So, does the phrase “deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure” mean that if I am sleeping, and wake up with a hard on, while lying on my stomach, and that feels good, and I lay there for a few seconds because it feels good, that I have committed a mortal sin and am now going to hell, to spend all eternity being tortured by lusty little devils? Yeah, it feels good when I am aroused. Why is that a mortal sin to pleasure oneself? Why is it even wrong at all? Why did God give me such easy access to sexual pleasure? Only to send me to hell for enjoying it a little bit?
The Catholic Church: probabably the most important and influential institution in the history of Western Civilization, if not the world, with over one billion members today, yet not without her problems. There is too much divide between what the Church teaches and what her many members actually practice.
Now I am not here to bash the Church. As a Catholic, I love the Church and I need the spiritual structure the Church offers me. The entire sacramental system is appealing to me. The contemplative mysticism inherent in Catholicism is intoxicating for me, and leads me to a deeper relationship with God. I believe that the Church is the body of Christ and the ultimate instrument leading us to Him and salvation. However, on this one issue of masturbation, I have serious qualms.
Why is something which is so common, which is practiced by so many people, both men and women, and used as form of pleasure and sexual release, sinful? Why is it an “intrinsically and gravely disordered action?” I just don’t believe it. Why is it mortal sin, a sin which leads to the death of the soul? Is this comparable to murder, stealing, lying, cheating or abuse of others? Sure, I can see where masturbation can become a problem in people’s lives, especially if it is used as a substitute for real relationships, or even worse, as substitute for sex within marriage if you are married, but beyond that, I don’t see why it is such a problem. Most men masturbate, and many women do, at least at some point in their lives. Yet there is such a divide between what the Church teaches and what people actually do. Does not this divide have the potential to distract people from the essence of Christianity, namely, following Christ? If someone is obsessing over something as minor as masturbation, as I have known many to do, constantly going back and forth in an endless cycle of pleasure and guilt, sin and repentance and then returning to the pleasure and guilt soon afterward, is this not bad? I have known many people who have lost their faith over these issues and struggles. I mean, most serious or mortal sins are not things that people cycle in and out of. Usually they are simply bad, and are recognized by most, if not all, of society as being seriously wrong and harmful. Yet masturbation is a mortal sin under certain circumstances. As a matter of fact, all sexual pleasure outside the bond of marriage, and (within the bond of marriage) which does not have the potential for procreation, is considered a mortal sin by the Church. This is the kind of legalism which I think can be dangerous for one’s faith, and for spirituality in general. It can become, like the law, a cold, punitive system which instills fear more than anything else in people. It seems more like a system created by cool, sexually repressed intellectuals devoid of true spirituality, rather than something that reflects the mystery, magnificence and ultimately incomprehensible nature of God. It seems so divorced from the reality of who we are as humans, as creations of God, and that is sexual creatures who long for intimacy with others, who long for love and yet who may not always be in a position of marriage to express that love or enjoyment or even simple sexual release.
Christianity in general is more restrained than the culture around us when it comes to sexual matters, this is simply part of following Christ. I believe this is a good thing, a counter witness to the decadence of much of modern society. But does this restraint have to include an complete prohibition on masturbation. Sure, I can see the problems and sinfulness of fornication. This often constitutes the abuse of others, lying and manipulation, pain and heartbreak and unwanted pregnancy and children. Just look at the ugliness and nihilism of the PUA world to see the destructive, corrosive nature of unbridled sex, sex for mere conquest by men, or sex used as a form of self validation by women (and men). But masturbation? There are many thoughts on this subject, and, despite the official teachings of the Church, there seems to be no clear consensus about this among theologians and priests, those working with people out in the world. Some say it is always a mortal sin, others say it is not a serious sin at all, still others try to take the middle position, which is sort of where I stand on this.
For me I have to take what Fr. John Ruffo said: “What is the Church’s stance on masturbation? Mortal sin in what circumstances?,” Catholic Q and A, 2002-MAR-11, http://www.catholicqanda.org/ He states:
“Can masturbation be sinful? I think the only time masturbation could be considered seriously sinful is if someone is using this activity to avoid one’s obligations to one’s spouse. Modern moral theologians tell us that masturbation is a normal part of one’s psychosexual development. Most people go through phases of masturbation, during adolescence, for example, individuals separated from their spouses in war time, the elderly, and others in unique situations of life. It’s hoped that individuals not become fixed or stuck in only this form of sexual expression, but rather develop a relationship with another person with whom one can express one’s own sexuality in an appropriate loving and intimate way.”
This is one of the most reasonable things I have read on masturbation. Yet this theologian would be condemned by the Church for saying it.
Again, I am not bashing the Church here. I am simply raising questions that have troubled me my entire life, for which I have never gotten a clear answer that seems consistent with the reality of the world I see around me, or my own personal experiences. I have seen too many people, good and conscientious people, fall away from belief in God, or following Christ, because of these legalisms regarding sexual behavior, and to me that is a great tragedy.
Thag Jones said:
I suppose the point is that all sin dulls our receptiveness to God, even the “small” sins, which can lead the way into more serious sin (like gateway sinning). At the same time, we’re not angels, we don’t really know the condition of our own souls much less anyone else’s, and it’s a mystery how forgiveness or absolution works. The problem is, if we try to find ways around our sinning aren’t we just using the religion rationalization hamster? Not that I don’t do that, I just don’t want to encourage others to do that because it might not be the best plan.
Another consideration is all the stuff you don’t see – like if you masturbate to porn, there’s all the degradation that industry causes, the suicides of porn “actors,” the fact that a lot of them were abused as children and are essentially willing victims of further abuse, and that is what we expose ourselves to when we view pornography. (I say this as someone who has viewed a fair bit of it myself, not as a sanctimonious a-hole who thinks I’m better than everyone else). We take what should be an act of communion between two people (at its best) and turn it into garbage. And again, this deadens our ears to God.
At the same time, I suppose I have a vested interest in rationalizing having sex outside marriage because I’m not that keen on celibacy nor do I want to get married again, so my comments might not always be impartial, lol. Of course, all of this does make me take it a bit more seriously and to see in some ways where feelings of guilt that tend to manifest in other ways (fight picking might be one) comes from, which is not being right with God yet being sort of helpless about it too.
Anyone who says religion is the easy way out really has no idea! Oh, and while I suppose some kind of sublimation is possible, it’s hard not to end up repressing instead, which doesn’t do anyone any good. (Not that “but it’s haaaaaard” is much of an excuse, but it does make a good pun).
Thag Jones said:
Have you seen this? WTF?
http://www.speroforum.com/a/46390/The-Circus-at-the-Vatican-Reflections-on-how-it-came-to-be
And we’re worrying about the occasional whacking off? Oy!
Racer X said:
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Thag. Yes, I pretty much agree with what you are saying, especially your “I suppose the point is that all sin dulls our receptiveness to God, even the “small” sins, which can lead the way into more serious sin (like gateway sinning)” statement. As I said in the post, I am merely questioning things, not offering answers. The problem I see is the seriousness applied to masturbation, which is officially categorized as a “intrinsically and gravely disordered action.” I believe, although I could be wrong, “grave” is usually a buzzword for “mortal sin”. I can’t quite see masturbation in that light.
And for your second comment on that fiasco at the Papal audience…what can I say? Clearly there is a homosexual clerical subculture within the Church, as that event proves. It was not an accident that happened. As I said in my Maciel and LC post, the divide between what the Church teaches on celibacy and the actual, underground sexual practices of so many of the clergy is a contradiction that cannot be sustained, especially in this age of rapid and pervasive internet communications. The truth always comes out, eventually.
I won’t despair though. As many have stated throughout the centuries, an institution which is filled with so many rogues and degenerates as the Catholic Church would have long ago collapsed if it were not for divine guidance and protection. God will work all these things out, in his own good time.
Rebekah said:
I know your post is about masturbation and sex in the context of the Catholic Church, but having a primarily protestant background, my understanding of why it’s a sin is a little different. I went to Mass with my grandmother quite a bit in her later years, and have a deep respect for the Catholic Church; however, to me one of the most confusing differences is the dependance on the Pope to interpret scripture and all the additional texts that are passed down.
The way I understand the issue of masturbation is that it’s not the physical act, but the thoughts and lust which accompany it. I don’t have exact verses, but I know it says in scripture that just thinking about having sex with someone is the same as doing it. None of us can control all the thoughts that come to us, but to entertain a fantasy would be to lust. Also, I think the goal is for the thoughts themselves to become less frequent through enough prayer and reading of scripture. So while masturbation is not specifically referenced in scriptures, adultery and fornication are, and if thinking about it is the same as doing it, therein lies the sin?
There are different interpretations within the protestant faith regarding hierarchies of sin and whether it’s possible for a person who is a believer, a Christian, to go to hell for his/her sins. To be safe, I tend not to tempt my fate.
“As a matter of fact, all sexual pleasure outside the bond of marriage, and (within the bond of marriage) which does not have the potential for procreation, is considered a mortal sin by the Church.”
I don’t understand this idea that sex in marriage is only to be perfunctory. Are you sure about this? I don’t see how a theologian could come to this conclusion having ever read Song of Solomon. It seems contradictory for one of the books of the Bible to be about nothing but the pleasures of it if sex is meant only for procreation.
Rebekah said:
I say I don’t temp my fate, but I confess (haha) that I do struggle with the issue of masturbation. In all honesty. I see it as a lesser of two evils, which is a slippery slope, I suppose.
Rebekah said:
Scripture reference: Matthew 5:28-30
Racer X said:
Rebekah,
Thanks for your insights. I always wonder what the Protestant view on these matters is, which I can imagine is quite multifarious given the wide diversity of Protestant denominations.
I think you are right about the subtle connection between lust and masturbating. So I suppose there is that slippery slope there, and that could lead to other, more serious things. Then again, who does not have sexual thoughts and lust when they do masturbate? It is sort of the whole point.
And yes, the whole concept of no sexual pleasure outside of marriage, and no sexual pleasure within marriage unless it is at least open to the possibility of procreation is indeed Catholic doctrine. In other words, birth control is prohibited. You can have sex at any time in marriage, so long as it is open to the possibility of conception. So ALL sexual activity must be open to that, which means that all sexual pleasure should lead to intercourse, which should be open to conception.
Most Catholics don’t follow this though, which is one of the great divided between what the Church teaches and what her members practice, at least in the area of human sexuality. Most Catholics use contraception in one form or another. Whether this is a good thing or not I really don’t know; there are strong arguments on both sides.
And thanks for your confession…haha. I am sure God has forgiven you!
Thag Jones said:
I’ve found this site to be quite useful: http://www.beginningcatholic.com/christian-sex.html
Natural Family Planning is fine – which is sort of like the rhythm method but more accurate as you chart basal temperature and monitor for ovulation, at which time, you can abstain from sex if you don’t wish to conceive. Of course, it’s not totally fool proof and so does leave conception as a possibility – i.e. fertility isn’t deliberately withheld – but also allows for child spacing. Although it’s during ovulation that a lot of women become raging horn dogs so without any form of birth control, eventually it’s probably going to happen anyway.
I’d heard that about Protestants’ idea that it’s more about what’s in your heart, but then you can get to an extreme position like John Paul II talking about a man not looking at his wife with lust, which seems to most people living in the real world to be pretty ridiculous. That level of chastity is probably beyond most human beings, though perhaps it is possible. I do think the Protestants are on to something with that thought, though I don’t know that there’s a sliding scale of evil – evil is evil, sin is sin. Back to square one!
Thag Jones said:
Another thought I had a while back, I asked myself, what’s worse, regular fornication with one partner where the two of you actually care about each other (i.e. LTR), or masturbation? It might sound like a ridiculous question on the surface, but if you think about it on a spiritual level, two people providing some human need for each other (even if it’s a bit non-committal and unsanctified) versus auto-erotic stimulation in isolation from other humans, possibly watching a simulated act of fornication, one could make masturbation seem worse. I don’t know, I never really answered it, but I thought about doing a post on that and then got sidetracked and didn’t get around to it.
Rebekah said:
Thag,
The way I think of “levels” of sin is that different sins carry different consequences, with some having the ability to bring about really unfortunate events. The consequence of fornication (ANY sexual activity between two people) could include unwanted children, a deep emotional toll, a greater amount of guilt, etc. There are fewer consequences to masturbation than fornication. You could probably call this the gospel according to Rebekah. 🙂
Racer,
So it is acceptable for Catholics to enjoy a spouse for reasons other than procreation, only to be aware of and not do anything to prevent, the possibility of conception (other than NFP).
And I don’t think the whole point of masturbation is the fantasy; a lot of it is the unique sensation the body experiences. If how it feels physically could be the source of the pleasure, then I don’t think it should be a sin — at least if a person isn’t married.
Racer X said:
Thag,
You have a good point about masturbation in a sense being worse than two people who love each other having sex, even if it is outside of marriage. Even though most people masturbate, I think most people still would chose a partner over that.
But for those without a partner, or who are open to a partner but have not found one yet, masturbation does not seem all that bad. Perhaps I am wrong about that, but those seem to be my impressions. The sexual act of masturbation, isolated from other humans, is probably the basis of a lot of issues regarding masturbation.
But what if two people masturbate together? Don’t know the answer to that, just asking.
Rebekah,
Yeah, you pretty much summed the Catholic teaching! NFP explains a lot of this. Many people are satisfied with NFP, so I think it is something that should be taken more seriously than a lot of people do. Contraceptives do have their risks.
And yes, fantasy, physical pleasure and masturbation always go together. Well I can only talk from personal experience here…So you can never really separate those elements. But I think one of the elements of masturbation that makes it so common is the fact that it is pure physical pleasure at relatively little cost. Right or wrong, most people cite that fact that they can enjoy sexual pleasure, simply for the pleasure of it, without any complications. Perhaps it is selfish, which is what the Church would argue. But sometimes people don’t have the choice of being with someone else; yet they need some sexual pleasure and release.
Rebekah said:
From my comment above *fornication (ANY sexual activity between two people who aren’t married)
Last comment about fantasy and masturbation! I think for many, the first exploration of our bodies that led to autoeroticism was without fantasy. It was purely what we were experiencing physically in the moment, and perhaps the emotion that came from that. It’s kind of like yoga and being aware of what is happening with each movement, stretch, or pose…just acknowledging those sensations within the body can be a very powerful thing.
I completely agree with you that it would be very selfish to pleasure oneself over sharing pleasure with a spouse. I am strictly thinking about masturbation and the single person.
Racer X said:
It interesting, Rebekah, what you just said. I have heard many women say that they don’t really fantasize while they masturbate, they just enjoy the sensation. Or at least they don’t fantasize all of the time. I think for most men, however, they almost always think about a girl they want, or a past sexual experience, or look at porn. I don’t know of any data on this, but I wonder how different the experience of masturbation is for men and women. Perhaps for women it is more emotional, and for men it is more fantasy driven, beyond the obvious physical pleasure you derive from the act. Not sure, but just wondering.
Thag Jones said:
Racer,
I suppose for me, masturbation just gets a bit boring and soulless, not that that stops me, lol. Actually, it does after a point. For me fantasy does take centre stage, but I might just have seen way too much porn and thereby skewed the results.
Two people masturbating each other? I suppose most people do some of that in foreplay, but I can’t see just doing that, or each person doing themselves while together – that seems worse than just doing it by yourself, kind of icky, to use a technical term. I could see it if there is some temporary separation and you’re having phone sex….
Rebekah,
Definitely true about the consequences of sex, but then, if the couple has discussed the what ifs and the methods of preventing unwanted pregnancies and all, and is willing to accept the risks and consequences…these risks are present in a marriage as well, which these days doesn’t seem to be much more than a glorified LTR for a lot of people anyway. Then again, a lot of LTRs aren’t much more than glorified extended one night stands.
Rhen said:
Hmmm. Interesting that it does seem to need fantasy for men, but women can sometimes do it without. I bet it’s much more exciting & satisfying WITH the fantasy, though (Isn’t that what hot romance novels are for?)
Also, I think bringing each other to orgasm without intercourse is a very good thing early in a relationship*You can delay sex more without both going crazy and being able to think of nothing else! So they can get to know each other better before taking that step which I think for most girls is the one where the serious wave of god-I-love-him-so-much emotions kicks in. At least I’ve been told by a couple of women that mediocre penetration sex is more bonding than a great foreplay orgasm!
Sinfulness: maybe churches concentrate too much on sex & not enough on other sins–aren’t there 7 deadly ones? I’d bet women on average do a lot more harm to other people through Greed and Pride than through Lust.
Thag Jones said:
Rhen, with all due respect, you are fooling yourself if you think bringing each other to orgasm without penetrative sex doesn’t create the same oxytocin high and all that jazz – you can’t make something less about sex by adding more sex. The idea of “venting” in this way is one of those new agey concepts that ought to have had its day by now – like pillow pounding to supposedly “release” anger, when all it does is rehearse the anger (in the same way that masturbation rehearses sex).
Getting naked together is hardly going to stave off the emotional wave you talk about – surely you can see that this is highly faulty reasoning. The less I have sex, the less I think about it; if I’ve just had a hot sex session I’m likely spend the next several days greedily wanting more. That is what lust does, and you can’t “vent” it without some consequences, especially if another person is involved.
As for the other sins, lust is a big one for a lot of people so it does tend to get discussed, but I don’t think most churches are leaving out the others. Don’t forget, this is the Internet, not church. 😛
Oh, and romance novels? Blech! Don’t get me started on that junk.
Thag Jones said:
Or I should say, masturbation rehearses lust.
Rebekah said:
Racer,
I would guess there’s a difference in the experience for men and women; however, I assumed the physical sensation was the same. But I really have no idea.
Thag,
I’ve always thought of unexpected pregnancies in married relationships as more unplanned than unwanted, but maybe I’m wrong. I think there are many more unfortunate circumstances for a child born to a single mother than to a married couple.
The consequences of sex outside of marriage vs. masturbation are all in the context of the church, influenced by social mores, and mainly just my opinion.
Racer X said:
Thag,
As you said, “The less I have sex, the less I think about it; if I’ve just had a hot sex session I’m likely spend the next several days greedily wanting more. That is what lust does, and you can’t “vent” it without some consequences, especially if another person is involved. ”
So true. If I go without sex for a long time, I get used to not having it. I have to say though, I cannot go without masturbating for a long time, after a while I feel like I am going to explode, so I need that release.
When I do have sex, especially after a dry spell, I will burn with lust and desire for days after, wanting it again. So you are right, you don’t “get it out of your system” by simply having sex. You end up wanting even more.
Rhen,
“Sinfulness: maybe churches concentrate too much on sex & not enough on other sins–aren’t there 7 deadly “ones?
Very true. There are other sins that sexual ones. Pride is the worst of all.
Rebekah,
Yeah, I think the physical sensation is similar, but the emotional response might be different.
Rhen said:
TJ…re sex and bonding, I obviously have no direct experience with what it’s like for women, but am relaying what I’ve been told by a couple of them and also some comments on the Internet.
re sin and religion, churches do of course talk about other sins, with the emphasis changing from church to church, but I doubt if many women are suffering extreme guilt about spending too much money shopping or demanding their husband buy them a bigger house than they can afford or treating lower-status women rudely. (Greed and Pride, respectively) WHereas quite a few women and some men DO suffer such guilt about sex, even about fairly harmless behavior.
Thag Jones said:
Good points Rhen. I think a lot of people fool themselves with the old “well we haven’t had penis-in-vagina intercourse so it’s not actual sex,” which is so obviously silly if you’re doing everything else to bring each other to orgasm. People can rationalize all sorts of things, and women seem to be particularly adept at this. If a woman can rationalize killing her own offspring for the sake of “convenience” then it’s not much of a leap to rationalize certain sexual practices as “not counting” (some even think of anal sex as a way to preserve their virginity!)
Nevertheless, I would concede that full on intercourse (particularly without condom) is a special bonding experience, but without all the other stuff it might not be so much. It all goes together, naturally. Open mouth kissing is bonding too, and each progression down the line is more intense bonding. Sometimes kissing the right person without even having sex with them is pure bliss in that moment, so the idea that having someone bring you to orgasm isn’t, well, I suppose it depends on your mindset and if your mindset is that you’re just using each other as breathing whack off machines then I suppose it’s only a little more pleasurable than doing it yourself. It’s impossible to separate the soul from the body though, no matter how fit one’s rationalization hamster is.
Racer X said:
“breathing whack off machines”
Haha…nice way to put it. Never heard the “everything but” approach to sex quite expressed that way before!
“It’s impossible to separate the soul from the body”
Agreed. I also agree about your different levels of intimacy and bonding. It is really hard to have sex and not feel some intimacy, or even do other things, unless you are just a kind of shallow person.
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Big Breasted Edition