From: vek@allegra.att.com (Van Kelly)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Sexuality (was: Re: REFRESH)
Date: 22 Nov 92 23:23:50 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, USA

<Somebody ????> wrote:
> >it's true that we are sexual beings, and it's true that there is a normal
> >exploratory phase of sexuality where mastubation is not a matter of right 
> >or wrong since the participator is unaware of their physiology.  Associating
> >guilt with such normal behavior is harmful

Link Hudson replied:

> There are other things that we might consider "normal" that are sinful.  
> How many of us have never told a lie?  How many times have we been boastful?
> Or contentious?  

First of all, as a Protestant, I must raise an eyebrow at a grouping
like this where vices condemned in Scripture are lumped together with
something that isn't even mentioned there.  Now, I'm not being
dismissive of non-Protestants who have normative traditions against
masturbation.  I recognize they have a special issue of conscience
that `sola scriptura' Protestants need not face.  But for most
Protestants, the sin of masturbation is *defined* by its use in actively
promoting illicit or unhealthy thoughts and intentions, and that is my
base assumption.

Second, in children, early sexual arousal and self-exploration are not
*inherently* linked with sexual thoughts. That connection is normally
learned only later (barring sexual abuse, etc.).  I think that is what
the original post above was trying to say, and I strongly agree.  I
myself remember noticing, at a certain tender age, that I could
intensify sexual arousal (as I would *much* later learn to call it) by
fantasies of taking warm baths. Now, go find prurient lust in THAT!

Third, even for some mature adults, thoughts accompanying masturbation
need not be illicit, lustful, or even overtly sexual; it depends
strongly on *why* you masturbate and on *how* you initially learned
it.  The middle-aged, sexually inactive bachelor with a `G' rated
imagination who needs to masturbate occasionally to suppress recurrent
prostatitis is a different case from the guy who ejaculates
compulsively during porn movies.  But old stereotypes die hard.  
[Pet peeve: why can't certain speakers on male sexuality at 
Christian singles conferences read just one basic text on urology?]

Finally, I don't mean to be insensitive toward those whose spiritual
battles against sexual compulsions rule out all masturbation.  We all
have different battles to fight and different histories. I hold it
very important to wage and win the inner battles for purity of thought
and conscience, both sexual and otherwise.  Sexual obsessions and
compulsions, like substance abuse, are serious moral issues with
obvious spiritual overtones.  For some who struggle sexually,
masturbation may be extremely hurtful, just as that first glass of
beer can be one too many for the alcoholic.  We should support each
other in all our struggles.  But please recognize that just as not
everyone who sips wine with dinner sins in drunkenness, so not
every one who masturbates is self-absorbed in lust.  Different sins
beset different people.  We're *not* all wired the same.

Sorry to have to state the obvious.

> If you really think about it, do you think that Paul and Barnabas 
> performed this act on themselves on their missionary journeys?  

"Performed *this act* on themselves", eh?  Sounds pretty serious, Link. ;-)

Well, they sure weren't children on their missionary journeys, so I
don't catch their relevance to the original issue of juvenile
self-exploration.  On the other hand, if long-term sexual inactivity
during those trips brought on bouts with uncomplicated "mechanical"
prostatitis, I sincerely hope they did the obvious thing to get simple
relief.  Not to do so could be both painful and embarrassing.  Other
than that, I couldn't care less whether they did or didn't.  I would
like to think, though, that they appropriated the grace necessary to
master their own thoughts, and acted accordingly with clear
consciences, however they judged it.

> Or do you think that Jesus did this?

Objectively, I don't know.  I wasn't there.  I'm not really sure how
such private matters were treated in a typical 1st Century Galilean
upbringing.  I think it's safe to assert, theologically, that he never
gave in to sexual lust.  But that most assuredly does *not* answer your
question.


Van Kelly
vek@allegra.att.com

Disclaimer:
The above opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.