The Masturbation Chronicles

Last updated on: September 16, 2019 at 1:17 pm by Peter Hammond Schwartz

The Masturbation Chronicles 2019-09-16T13:17:50-08:00 Peter Hammond Schwartz

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

great-masturbator-dali-1930-natural law-contraception-masturbation-Catholic

The Great Masturbator (Dali, 1930)

I just read the Patheos post by Catholic apologist Dave Armstrong, entitled Masturbation: Thoughts on Why it is as Wrong as it Ever Was. Which I initially thought might be a joke. But it is not.

At the end of Armstrong’s essay, you’ll see a long list of citations for other articles on the sin of self-pleasuring, which encompasses both the prohibitions on masturbation and on contraception. The canonical statement on the origins of these prohibitions is of course, Genesis 38:9-10, wherein Onan “went in to his brother’s wife [and] he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother.” Wherein a much-displeased Lord “slew him also.”

Amidst all of this spilling and slewing, exciting though it may be, the retelling of the Onan story in the Armstrong masturbation essay makes clear the enduring sexual obsessions of the 21st-century traditionalist Catholics who have (weirdly) so endeared themselves to the sexually heathen Donald Trump (who presumably spills his own misbegotten seed with lusty abandon). These obessions speak to the emphasis of my own recent essay on the structure and logic of Catholic natural law moral philosophy, with its focus on organizing social and spiritual order around that which is “natural.” Which logically displaces any behavior that violates the naturalistic prinicples as deviant, alien, and evil.

Here is how Dave Armstrong characterizes this naturalistic prohibition on sexually deviant behavior. “The bottom line is this: some things are wrong in the nature of things, and contrary to God’s will. This is how we view masturbation and contraception and sodomy and fornication and any other grave sin. We arrive at these judgments based on revelation, Christian tradition, human experience, sociological and scientific and anthropological data, philosophizing, etc. And we know things from natural law and moral intuition and instinct, and how we feel after we do them (a little phenomenon called “guilt” that our society comprehends less and less these days).”

Of course, many paths exist to explore the implications of naturalistic perspectives on behavior. So it remains striking the degree to which Robby George, Dave Armstrong, and other traditonalist adherents to the newest (but least modern) formulations of natural law philsophy can only seem to follow the naturalistic path that leads them into the pit of sexual license and depravity. More on this in my next essay, which discusses the emergence of the New Natural Law of Germain Grisez and John Finnis in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council and Roe v. Wade.

Previous Post

August 14, 2019

The Liquid Dream of Governor Moonbeam

Next Post

August 15, 2019 American Jeremiad / Random Desecrations at the Altar of Impurity (2)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category American Jeremiad Complexity Cosmology Creation Project Culture Demography Economics Education Elections Family History Humor Journalism Language Law Literature Media Migration Nature Philosophy Poetry Politics Psychology Race Religion Science Sexuality Sports Substack Technology Travel Uncategorized War

Select a Month October 2020 July 2020 June 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the mother of Jesus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ruth Mary Sarah Elizabeth