OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 06:14:50 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: RC/EO pastoral response to Masturbation?  (Read 11755 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #135 on: July 21, 2011, 08:35:51 PM »

Don't exaggerate. She slept the whole time.  Cheesy Grin

You, sir, have crossed the line, and I demand satisfaction!  Cool
Can't get no satisifaction?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #136 on: July 21, 2011, 08:38:27 PM »


My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

Crap. No way I can beat that. But I only have five fingers on my right hand... so really you're not even looking for me... why don't we just forget about fighting?  angel
« Last Edit: July 21, 2011, 08:38:49 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,029


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #137 on: July 21, 2011, 08:40:09 PM »

Quote from: Asteriktos
Most people try to imitate logs as much as possible anyway, who would notice the difference?  Tongue Lay down, let your significant other go at it, get up, move on.

You just make it sound so wonderful.  Roll Eyes  Angry

Part of the reason for the "imitating logs" part might be that she was often sleeping when I started. Too much information?  Tongue  Grin

Good grief!  Angry
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #138 on: July 21, 2011, 08:44:17 PM »

I'm starting to get more and more thankful that I'm single.   Shocked
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #139 on: July 21, 2011, 08:47:49 PM »

Good grief!  Angry

My first reaction is to laugh, I'm sorry... but really I can't help it. Your reactions are killing me.  Cheesy  My wife's sex drive was about 3 times higher than mine, and she was more than happy to be awoken in that way (with nice dream slowly becoming nice wake up call).  However, I don't mean to offend, so I apologize if it offends you or makes you uncomfortable. Also, the "log" comment was mostly meant as a joke.
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Warned
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 14,029


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #140 on: July 21, 2011, 08:48:39 PM »

I don't think you're funny.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #141 on: July 21, 2011, 09:04:03 PM »

I don't think you're funny.

Saying that is different than saying that you are offended or uncomfortable (which I think is the case). In any event, I'll stop.
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #142 on: July 21, 2011, 09:52:17 PM »

I don't think you're funny.

Saying that is different than saying that you are offended or uncomfortable (which I think is the case). In any event, I'll stop.

I thought it was good fun. Oh well.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,827



« Reply #143 on: July 21, 2011, 11:28:11 PM »

I don't think you're funny.

Saying that is different than saying that you are offended or uncomfortable (which I think is the case). In any event, I'll stop.

I thought it was good fun. Oh well.

I LOL'd.  In the most literal definition of the word.
Logged
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #144 on: July 22, 2011, 01:24:27 PM »


Perhaps, but even that is not in line with the basic asceticism of Christianity. We don't just go and fulfill every urge that comes along. If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself. Just like we don't go and eat every time we want to, or go and flirt with every attractive person we see.

 

Well really?  That is your opinion.  One could easily say that there is no excuse for the wife “not being interested” since there is a clear command for the wife (and this also applies to the husband) not to deny the husband in these matters.  So, it would seem that scripturally it would be more acceptable to tell her “sorry, but it’s your duty” than to tell her “I’ll take care of it myself”.  BTW – I do eat when I am hungry.  I refrain from flirting because I read that is also forbidden for us married fellows.


The is no variation of the fuehrer that could display the degree of disappointment here.

So we are back to plucking out eyes again . . .

Fast much?

No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky.  And don't insult the Fuehrer. 
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #145 on: July 22, 2011, 01:57:39 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.
Logged

Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #146 on: July 22, 2011, 02:20:25 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

That made me smile.  Good comeback!  I respect a quick mind and sharp toungue.  Really.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #147 on: July 22, 2011, 02:26:59 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

That made me smile.  Good comeback!  I respect a quick mind and sharp toungue.  Really.

I was hope hope hopin' for that kind of reaction!!... Wink

As my spiritual father says to me "With you I grab my free shots where I kin git 'em!!"... laugh
Logged

orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #148 on: July 22, 2011, 03:13:39 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

Nice! I like a little spark. Thank God, punch can take it in the spirit it is meant.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #149 on: July 22, 2011, 03:27:26 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

Nice! I like a little spark. Thank God, punch can take it in the spirit it is meant.

I think some of us would get on pretty well face to face...
Logged

Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #150 on: July 22, 2011, 04:09:27 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

Nice! I like a little spark. Thank God, punch can take it in the spirit it is meant.

I think some of us would get on pretty well face to face...

More than might be imagined.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #151 on: July 22, 2011, 04:21:23 PM »



No.  Found it only made me self-righteous and cranky. 

Seems to me you fast constantly, if those are the defining elements.

Nice! I like a little spark. Thank God, punch can take it in the spirit it is meant.

I think some of us would get on pretty well face to face...

More than might be imagined.

The one thing that I notice about people to whom I am particularly drawn here is the fact that they believe...I mean really and truly and genuinely believe the teachings of Scripture and the Church and live their lives to the best of their immediate abilities in that belief.

That to me is the rarest of treasures...to be able to walk that path in good company!!...scufflin' all the way, but in some strange way united.

M.
Logged

bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #152 on: July 22, 2011, 04:24:50 PM »

What happens if the wife doesn't take care of it? How far are we permitted to go to avoid letting our spouse commit such a grievous sin. May we resort to physical correction?

No, but we may raise the issue with our spiritual father. The wife must carry out her marital duties as well, I never said anything to the contrary. But her failure to do so does not give the husband license to masturbate. Two wrongs don't make a right.

What about those of us who are single?  We just have to sit around and suffer, huh?

Pretty much. Christ didn't come to free us from suffering.

Christ came to free us from death and corruption. Misuse of our bodies (or "self-abuse" as the Church calls it) is part of death and corruption.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2011, 04:34:52 PM by bogdan » Logged
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #153 on: July 22, 2011, 04:28:15 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
Logged
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #154 on: July 22, 2011, 07:59:12 PM »

No, but we may raise the issue with our spiritual father. The wife must carry out her marital duties as well, I never said anything to the contrary. But her failure to do so does not give the husband license to masturbate. Two wrongs don't make a right.
"Marital duties"....how romantic.  Roll Eyes

Pretty much. Christ didn't come to free us from suffering.

Christ came to free us from death and corruption. Misuse of our bodies (or "self-abuse" as the Church calls it) is part of death and corruption.
You have a point there. I suppose abstinence can be a cross that one must take up just as many other things are.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #155 on: July 22, 2011, 08:16:01 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #156 on: July 23, 2011, 10:17:59 AM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.

I am operating from the assumption that it is a sin, since everything that we think, do, or say is a sin.  However, I am also operating from the standpoint that it falls in one of those "fallen man" areas.  Wouldn't it be better if we could all become Monks and spend our entire day praying and praising God instead of spending all day at work?  Wouldn't it be better if none of us married and dedicated our life completely to the Church?  Wouldn't it be better is none of us toiled all day to grow food, but waited in a ravine for the ravens to bring us bread because we trust in God and believe that He will supply us our daily bread?  Yes, it would.  But that is not the way things work.  Even the Monks would not exist if someone did not give birth to them, and the word of God would not have spread had someone not built roads and ships.  So when it gets down to it, would it not be better if all of us had nice marital relationships where both parties always lovingly and willingly took care of each others needs and questions such as these never came up?  Yes it would.  But life is not that way.  Since about everything we do is a choice between the lesser of two evils, I have a lot less problem with a person spanking . . . oh well, I got in trouble last time I used a euphemism so let me rephrase that . . . I have a lot less problem with someone masturbating than I do with someone relieving themselves through fornication, adultery, or by using their spouse as a sex doll.  Now, if someone is really all torn up about it, they should see a priest.  You should always follow your conscience, particularly if it is telling you not to do something that is fun, exciting, tastes good, makes you feel good, or anything else that might bring the slightest twinge of human pleasure.  After all, God put us on this Earth to be miserable and suffer for the sins of our race, and only through this suffering and austerity can we achieve Salvation.  But since you are pretty well screwed anyway, you might as well go ahead and masturbate.


In case nobody noticed, the above was written pretty much as satire.  I am just in one of those moods today.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #157 on: July 23, 2011, 10:25:08 AM »

In case nobody noticed, the above was written pretty much as satire.  I am just in one of those moods today.

Maybe I am indeed grown too old, but I think you make far better sense when you play these things straight.  It sounds more compelling to these old ears, and I am drawn to what you say in earnest mode.  "Satire" is a tough style to play without making it sound too bitter or stereotyped and inauthentic.

M.
Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #158 on: July 23, 2011, 10:27:43 AM »

In case nobody noticed, the above was written pretty much as satire.  I am just in one of those moods today.

Maybe I am indeed grown too old, but I think you make far better sense when you play these things straight.  It sounds more compelling to these old ears, and I am drawn to what you say in earnest mode.  "Satire" is a tough style to play without making it sound too bitter or stereotyped and inauthentic.

M.

Yah. Needs more funny creatures and odd wardrobes for good satire. Maybe some talking horses, too.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #159 on: July 23, 2011, 01:26:51 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #160 on: July 23, 2011, 03:28:37 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This issue ain't so simple.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 03:33:43 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #161 on: July 23, 2011, 03:35:08 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation, though I think I know what you are getting at. It is possible to use your spouse solely for selfish purposes (the sin of lust) rather than allowing sexual relations to be the mutual self-giving that God intended it to be, but that isn't the same as masturbation. Masturbation, in the broadest sense, is any non-vaginal sex acts, although that is irrelevant because you know as well as I do that that is not the subject of this thread. This thread pertains to solitary acts and typically amongst people outside of marriage.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #162 on: July 23, 2011, 03:36:53 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
Yeah, that masturbation really has the making of sin, but not discussed so much.  On the contrary, a married couple engaging in mutual masturbation to please each other lacks the characteristics of sin, despite what the Vatican, HV, and even some Orthodox (e.g. Fr. Josiah Trenham) state otherwise.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #163 on: July 23, 2011, 03:49:26 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.

though I think I know what you are getting at. It is possible to use your spouse solely for selfish purposes (the sin of lust) rather than allowing sexual relations to be the mutual self-giving that God intended it to be, but that isn't the same as masturbation.
Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Masturbation, in the broadest sense, is any non-vaginal sex acts, although that is irrelevant because you know as well as I do that that is not the subject of this thread. This thread pertains to solitary acts and typically amongst people outside of marriage.
That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
"gravely disordered act" hmmmm.

I once asked a fomer Jesuit seminarian on female masturbation, given the claim of the Onan incident as the scriptural basis of the teaching.  He was utterly dumbfounded, and it was very amuzing to watch him go through the scholastic method to come up with an answer.
So why do you think it is wrong?
Besides what lust is involved, I don't think it is.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #164 on: July 23, 2011, 03:52:42 PM »

No, but we may raise the issue with our spiritual father. The wife must carry out her marital duties as well, I never said anything to the contrary. But her failure to do so does not give the husband license to masturbate. Two wrongs don't make a right.
"Marital duties"....how romantic.  Roll Eyes

Marriage isn't about romance and happy joyful bliss. If one thinks it is, one is on the fast road to misery and divorce unless one changes one's expectations.

The priest who catechized me, who is actually rather liberal on many issues (liberal for Orthodox people, that is), made that abundantly clear in his 8 hours' worth of catechesis on the subject of marriage. Marriage is about the mutual salvation of the couple and creating children. That doesn't deny the existence of happiness and joy in marriage, because there should be, but happiness is not the point and should not be an overriding factor or a make-or-break point.

And to add my 2¢, from what I gather mutual masturbation between a husband and wife is still misuse of sex, as would be husband-wife phone sex or virtual sex. It's no different from sodomy between a husband and wife, and the Church has ruled that to be a perversion of sex. At least that's what the above-mentioned priest said, as did the canons he cited. Vaginal intercourse is the only form of sexual activity the Church blesses.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 03:54:35 PM by bogdan » Logged
Punch
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,568



« Reply #165 on: July 23, 2011, 04:04:36 PM »

In case nobody noticed, the above was written pretty much as satire.  I am just in one of those moods today.

Maybe I am indeed grown too old, but I think you make far better sense when you play these things straight.  It sounds more compelling to these old ears, and I am drawn to what you say in earnest mode.  "Satire" is a tough style to play without making it sound too bitter or stereotyped and inauthentic.

M.

True.  But also consider that it is impossible to write satire unless one struggles with the very things he writes.  Don't think those thoughts never crossed my mind, and do not be too sure that they have been completely overcome.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #166 on: July 23, 2011, 04:15:50 PM »

No, but we may raise the issue with our spiritual father. The wife must carry out her marital duties as well, I never said anything to the contrary. But her failure to do so does not give the husband license to masturbate. Two wrongs don't make a right.
"Marital duties"....how romantic.  Roll Eyes

Marriage isn't about romance and happy joyful bliss. If one thinks it is, one is on the fast road to misery and divorce unless one changes one's expectations.

The priest who catechized me, who is actually rather liberal on many issues (liberal for Orthodox people, that is), made that abundantly clear in his 8 hours' worth of catechesis on the subject of marriage. Marriage is about the mutual salvation of the couple and creating children. That doesn't deny the existence of happiness and joy in marriage, because there should be, but happiness is not the point and should not be an overriding factor or a make-or-break point.

And to add my 2¢, from what I gather mutual masturbation between a husband and wife is still misuse of sex, as would be husband-wife phone sex or virtual sex. It's no different from sodomy between a husband and wife, and the Church has ruled that to be a perversion of sex.
Just to focus on this for a moment: the Church, or monks and monk wanna-bes?

Somewhere Aristokles posted a thread or something from the book I refered to here:
I just was looking again through "Sex and Society in the World of the Orthodox Slavs, 900-1700" By Eve Levin, which has this interesting observation:
Quote
Medieval Slavic episcopal letters include considerable discussion of the question of sexual abstinence for priests during fasts.  The discussion paralleled that on abstinence for the that laity.  Archbishop Ilja of Novgorod espoused the most liberal view, ordering priests to give communion on Easter to those who engaged in marital intercourse during Lent.  He inquired sardonically of the conservatives who demanded strict observance, "And you, being priests, how many of you wnat to serve, and on how many days do you seperate yourselves from your wives?"  Bishop Nifon argued that restraint was recommended for the "white," or secular, clergy, if not for the laity, in imitation of Christ's fast, but it was not essential.  The most conservative view required total abstinence for clergy and laity alike during the forty days of Great Lent.  Atlhough this view originated aong the Greek Fathers, it was not included in the Greek nomocanons.  The compilers of the Slavic version deliberately added it.  This strict interpretation of the Lenten rules for the parish clergy became dominant in the Slavic Orthodox tradition in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
http://books.google.com/books?id=IL382sYaohkC&pg=PA251&dq=%22it+was+not+included+in+the+Greek+nomocanons%22&hl=en&ei=UZ6gTaqkBcjDgQfGkbTaBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22it%20was%20not%20included%20in%20the%20Greek%20nomocanons%22&f=false

Such ideas it seem failed to take root in the pastoral canonical praxis of the old lands of Orthodoxy, but they were cultivated in monastic gardens whence they were transplanted (via monks, the only literate class in society) in the new lands of Orthodoxy, where they were farmed out in the mistaken notion that they were staple in Old Orthodoxy, and spread eventually like Kudzu.

The fact that the monastic class were the predominant literate class, writing by, to and for monks, with the laity as an afterthought (all too often to extol the monastic estate before the married, to keep the latter humble-and in submission) has skewed much of Tradition, resulting in the large gap between the theology of the marrige rite, and much litereature touching on marriage.


Thank you both for your replies.  That is how I see it in EO circles today.  Many modern writers (priests and theologians) like Fr. Hopko have a more positive view of sexuality.  As I study the Fathers and older writings in general I see the more negative views that I was not aware of before.  

I have been reading a book, "Sex and Society in the World of the Orthodox Slavs, 900-1700" that goes into great detail about the penances the Church imposed for such things as not using the "missionary" position (one of the opposite positions incurred a penances ranging from 600 prostrations up to denial of communion for 30 years).  One regulation even prescribed between 8-50 prostrations if a man dreamed about relations with his wife.

It makes me wonder if what we have today is a "watered-down" Orthodoxy.

P.S.  I prefer to agree with the views of Hopko and others, yet I don't feel comfortable saying that the early Fathers were "wrong".

Not watered down, just fuller: we are not restricted to monastic literature, but now have writings by the Faithful Fathes (and Mothers!) who actually have experience of marriage.  I suspect that the penitentials you speak about were written by monastics who had little or no experience of marriage.  St. John Chrysostom was not totally able to get out of that context, but he did consider the issue of sterile couples, and fully endorsed them making love.  He also stated that because of overpopulation (!), marriage was no longer needed, but stated that it continues as it is a good in itself.

As pointed out, it shows how the "canons" you refer to equate intercourse with the wife on top as "sodomy."
http://books.google.com/books?id=IL382sYaohkC&pg=PA199&dq=Sex+Slavs+sodomy&cd=1#v=onepage&q=Sex%20Slavs%20sodomy&f=false
as well making no distinction between anal intercourse and vaginal intercourse from dehind
http://books.google.com/books?id=IL382sYaohkC&pg=PA173&dq=%22Oriface+used+or+the+potential+for+conception%22&hl=en&ei=ZCsrTsrmOe79sQKhlvy0Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
which makes-(for instance, some women can't otherwise conceive, because of a tipped uterus; and in any case it is a position that enhances the chances of conception)-absolutely no sense. So too classifying contraception worse than abortion
http://books.google.com/books?id=IL382sYaohkC&pg=PA176&dq=%22higher+penance+for+the+use+of+contraceptives+than+abortion%22&hl=en&ei=3S8rTqyhJ4OOsQLCsLHLCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 04:33:41 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #167 on: July 23, 2011, 04:44:13 PM »

Somewhere Aristokles posted a thread or something from the book I refered to here:

You've been here 4 years and you still can't get my name right?  Tongue
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #168 on: July 23, 2011, 05:02:09 PM »

Somewhere Aristokles posted a thread or something from the book I refered to here:

You've been here 4 years and you still can't get my name right?  Tongue
You know, if that dipsey Q on top of your avatar were a wee bit longer, it wouldn't look like a drop of water Shocked
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #169 on: July 23, 2011, 05:40:06 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation. Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse. I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.

though I think I know what you are getting at. It is possible to use your spouse solely for selfish purposes (the sin of lust) rather than allowing sexual relations to be the mutual self-giving that God intended it to be, but that isn't the same as masturbation.
Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.

That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 05:41:46 PM by Wyatt » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #170 on: July 23, 2011, 05:43:23 PM »

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #171 on: July 23, 2011, 05:45:40 PM »

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #172 on: July 23, 2011, 05:50:00 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).

Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?

That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #173 on: July 23, 2011, 05:52:27 PM »

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #174 on: July 23, 2011, 05:54:38 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).
It's not intercourse but it's still wrong.

Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Quote?

That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Sodomy

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
You must know more rape victims than I do.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #175 on: July 23, 2011, 06:04:38 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).
It's not intercourse but it's still wrong.
OK, and anal intercourse?
Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Quote?
I'm asking YOU for the quote.
That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Sodomy
You mean vaginal intercourse from behind.

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
You must know more rape victims than I do.
Comes with experience I suppose: I used to work in a psych hospital where such things were common in patient histories.

Perhaps we should continue this cheery subject on another thread, as this is no longer pastoral it seems. Or not.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 06:06:23 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #176 on: July 23, 2011, 06:12:12 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).
It's not intercourse but it's still wrong.
OK, and anal intercourse?
I was referring to both in my answer.

Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Quote?
I'm asking YOU for the quote.
I don't have one. Since you brought it up I figured you had one in mind.

That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Sodomy
You mean vaginal intercourse from behind.
No...I mean what I said.

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
You must know more rape victims than I do.
Comes with experience I suppose: I used to work in a psych hospital where such things were common in patient histories.

Perhaps we should continue this cheery subject on another thread, as this is no longer pastoral it seems. Or not.
Fine with me, though the thread was already way off topic before this conversation began. I'm not the one who expanded the term masturbation to include all the diverse sex acts besides just sex acts with oneself, which is the typical usage of the word and the topic that the OP had in mind.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2011, 06:12:41 PM by Wyatt » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #177 on: July 23, 2011, 06:33:12 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).
It's not intercourse but it's still wrong.
OK, and anal intercourse?
I was referring to both in my answer.
So in your statement
Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
vaginal is redundant?
Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Quote?
I'm asking YOU for the quote.
I don't have one. Since you brought it up I figured you had one in mind.
Your the one claiming the narrow definition of "masturbation," "intercourse," etc.  Just thought I'd ask your authority on that.
That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Sodomy
You mean vaginal intercourse from behind.
No...I mean what I said.
You said "sodomy."  Up the thread I linked to where that included vaginal intercourse from behind.
Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
You must know more rape victims than I do.
Comes with experience I suppose: I used to work in a psych hospital where such things were common in patient histories.

Perhaps we should continue this cheery subject on another thread, as this is no longer pastoral it seems. Or not.
Fine with me, though the thread was already way off topic before this conversation began. I'm not the one who expanded the term masturbation to include all the diverse sex acts besides just sex acts with oneself, which is the typical usage of the word and the topic that the OP had in mind.
No, that's not the typical usage of the word, as "mutual masturbation" and other things are normally included.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #178 on: July 23, 2011, 06:49:29 PM »

If a husband is feeling aroused one night but his wife is not interested, then the husband has to live with it—not go and "take care of it" himself.
How about his wife taking care of it?

If he feels his wife is not fulfilling her marital duties, then they should go to their priest and talk about it.

But her sin does not give him permission to sin.
That presumed it is a sin.
So you don't think masturbation is a sin? How do you figure that?

Just for fun, do you know what masturbation is? I mean outside the the parlance of a high school looker room.

OK, to be fair, to those who study human sexuality?

And to use the general parlance, I am sure you can see what people mean by using their partner as tool to masturbate, even when they are having vaginal intercourse?

This question issue ain't so simple.
You insult my intelligence. Of course I know what it is, although vaginal intercourse is not masturbation,
you just demonstrated you don't know what masturbation is.
It's committing the sin of lust within marriage, yes...but it's not masturbation. Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
And anal sex? Oral sex? (Clinton became famous with stating that's not sexual relations).
It's not intercourse but it's still wrong.
OK, and anal intercourse?
I was referring to both in my answer.
So in your statement
Vaginal intercourse =/= masturbation.
vaginal is redundant?
No, I was clarifying what I meant by intercourse. Since you like to equate masturbation with pretty much any sex act I figured I better clarify. It's laughable that you say Humanae Vitae creates an artificial distinction between artificial contraception and natural family planning, yet you yourself claim that even marital intercourse can be masturbation. Umm wut?

Obviously some secular authorities would equate oral and anal activity with being intercourse as well, but it is at that point that I would object on theological grounds since, at least from a Catholic standpoint, those activities are disordered (except for oral which is acceptable in the context of foreplay). I have heard oral and anal sex being referred to as a form of masturbation in moral theology, but I have never heard of regular ol' vaginal intercourse ever being referred to as masturbation in any context.

Not all acts of lust and selfishness are masturbation. Masturbation is the manipulation of the sex organs for pleasure outside of intercourse.
So anal intercourse isn't masturbation. Got it.  Nor, for that matter then, homosexual male intercourse.
I've heard some people classify oral sex and anal sex as masturbation, but I think even that is a stretch from the usual meaning. To me, those are separate sexual sins altogether.
LOL. What does Aquinas say?
I'm not sure what you are referring to. Quote?
I'm asking YOU for the quote.
I don't have one. Since you brought it up I figured you had one in mind.
Your the one claiming the narrow definition of "masturbation," "intercourse," etc.  Just thought I'd ask your authority on that.
I'm not appealing to theologians. I'm appealing to common sense and the common English usage of the words. You mind telling me why you think masturbation has such a broad meaning? I can give you quotes, but it comes from Merriam Webster:

masturbation noun - erotic stimulation especially of one's own genital organs commonly resulting in orgasm and achieved by manual or other bodily contact exclusive of sexual intercourse, by instrumental manipulation, occasionally by sexual fantasies, or by various combinations of these agencies

sexual intercourse noun - heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis : coitus

That is how the OP started, but we've gone beyond that, e.g.
You can't classify any sin of lust as masturbation. Masturbation is one type of sexual sin, but there are others.
yes, like homosexual intercourse.
Sodomy
You mean vaginal intercourse from behind.
No...I mean what I said.
You said "sodomy."  Up the thread I linked to where that included vaginal intercourse from behind.
That's not sodomy...that's "doggie style."

Yes, it is, if you are using a person as a sexual tool.
Again, sin of lust and masturbation are not synonyms. If that was the case then rape would be masturbation, and I don't know anyone that would classify it as such.
perhaps the survivor/victim.
So you think a if a rape victim went in to report what happened, they would say "a man attacked me and used my body to masturbate himself"?
Sometimes they do.  I'm speaking from experience, as hearing the crime related by real live people. Not angels dancing on a pinhead examined by a pinhead.
You must know more rape victims than I do.
Comes with experience I suppose: I used to work in a psych hospital where such things were common in patient histories.

Perhaps we should continue this cheery subject on another thread, as this is no longer pastoral it seems. Or not.
Fine with me, though the thread was already way off topic before this conversation began. I'm not the one who expanded the term masturbation to include all the diverse sex acts besides just sex acts with oneself, which is the typical usage of the word and the topic that the OP had in mind.
No, that's not the typical usage of the word, as "mutual masturbation" and other things are normally included.
Yes...but mutual masturbation is a far cry from claiming that even standard vaginal sexual relations can be masturbation, which is completely ludicrous.
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #179 on: July 23, 2011, 07:25:32 PM »

You guys are building little pyramids out of quote boxes. Is there even a point to your argument, or are you just fighting for domination?
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Tags: scrupulosity OCD masturbation ialmisry's b.s. 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.258 seconds with 72 queries.