§ 1. On The Notion And Malice Of Conjugal Onanism

699. Notion. Onanism is distinguished as twofold: solitary and conjugal. Solitary onanism (so called chiefly by modern physicians) is nothing other than mollities, or pollution.⁴⁰⁶ We do not treat of it here. Conjugal onanism, however (so called from the sin of Onan described in Genesis 38:9), is customarily perpetrated in two ways: a) by interruption of intercourse or complete withdrawal before ejaculation, so that the semen is poured out outside its due place;⁴⁰⁷ it is called interrupted or preventive intercourse; b) by diverse instruments and means invented by human malice, which are employed either on the part of the man or on the part of the woman for the purpose that the semen be prevented from reaching its due place;⁴⁰⁸ it is called preservative intercourse. Onanism performed in the first manner is sometimes called onanism strictly so called; but that performed in the second manner is said to be onanism broadly so called. Each kind of onanism, however, is not rarely called "neomalthusianism."⁴⁰⁹

⁴⁰⁶ Cf. above, II, n. 705.

⁴⁰⁷ To break off intercourse after it has begun, if semen is not emitted, is not onanism; and therefore, although spouses are to be exhorted to abstain from a thing of this kind because of the danger of pollution, if they nevertheless assert that pollution follows only rarely, it cannot be forbidden to them under pain of grave sin. Cf. Noldin, loc. cit., n. 67.

⁴⁰⁸ Such instruments and means are diverse, for example, pessarium (pessary), praeservativs (preventives), condoms, capote anglaise ("English hood"), rubber goods, Frauenschutz ("women's protection"), Fischblasen ("fish bladders"), and so forth. Vaginal washings are also often employed by women after intercourse to guard more or less against conception. These washings indeed are not accustomed to render conception totally impossible, as do the instruments just indicated. For already in intercourse itself the male semen is accustomed sufficiently to enter the uterus, nor can it thereafter be washed out by a vaginal washing. Nevertheless, this manner of acting is evil if the sole end intended is the prevention of conception; the matter is otherwise if bodily cleanliness or some other honorable end is intended and the washing is not performed immediately after intercourse.

⁴⁰⁹ In the work Essay on the Principle of Population (London, 1798), Malthus contended for the diminution of the human race (to be obtained by means lawful in themselves). The neomalthusians, however, advocate the limitation of generation even by illicit means.

700. Malice. Conjugal onanism, in whatever manner it is freely performed, is always a mortal sin.

Thus right reason teaches; thus the Church has declared. Right reason dictates that onanism is true pollution and directly conflicts both with the good of offspring and with the good of fidelity. For the Creator has prescribed a determinate use for each thing and for each human power. If man acts contrary to that prescribed manner, he acts contrary to the will of God and therefore sins more or less according to the greater or lesser gravity of the matter. Thus, for example, animals according to the intention of the Creator ought to serve man; if he abuses animals by unreasonably tormenting or torturing them, he commits a venial sin, since that abuse is not so grave. Food and drink ought to serve for the nourishment of man; if man abuses food and drink, for example, by trampling bread underfoot, he sins venially. Similarly, the generative faculty was given to man so that he may use it according to the intention of the Creator, that is, for fitting generation. If man abuses this faculty, he sins, and indeed gravely, since that abuse is very grave. The Angelic Doctor writes to the point:⁴¹⁰ "It is evident that every emission of semen in such a manner that generation cannot follow is against the good of man; and if this is done from intention, it must be a sin. I say, however, a manner from which generation cannot follow of itself, as every emission of semen without the natural commingling of male and female: for which reason sins of this kind are said to be against nature. But if generation cannot follow from the emission of semen accidentally, it is not on this account against nature or a sin, as if it should happen that a woman is sterile.... Nor, nevertheless, ought it to be reckoned a venial sin if someone procures the emission of semen outside the due end of generation and education, on account of the fact that it is either a venial sin or no sin if someone uses some part of his body for another use than that to which it is ordered according to nature, as if someone, for example, walks upon his hands or works with his feet at something to be worked with the hands; because through disordered uses of this kind the good of man is not much impeded. But the disordered emission of semen conflicts with the good of nature, which is the conservation of the species. Hence, after the sin of homicide, by which human nature already existing in act is destroyed, this kind of sin seems to hold the second place, by which the generation of human nature is impeded."

The malice of onanism can moreover be perceived from its evil effects. For the bodily health of each spouse is accustomed to be gravely harmed by it, offspring is not generated, families and states are depopulated, and the reins are loosened to lust of every kind.⁴¹¹

Finally, the malice of onanism is evident from declarations of the Church. Thus, on May 21, 1851, the Holy Office declared the proposition, "For honorable reasons spouses may lawfully use matrimony in the manner in which Onan used it," to be "scandalous, erroneous, and contrary to the natural right of matrimony." - To the question, however, "Whether the imperfect use of matrimony, whether performed onanistically or condomistically, as in the case, is licit?" it responded on April 19, 1853: "Negatively, for it is intrinsically evil." - The Sacred Penitentiary responded on November 13, 1901: "A penitent who is unwilling to abstain from a manner of acting of this kind, which is onanism pure and simple, cannot be absolved."

⁴¹⁰ St. Thomas, Contra Gent., l. 3, c. 122.

⁴¹¹ Georges Surbled writes in the very well-known book La morale dans ses rapports avec la médecine et l'hygiène (I, 182): "Unfortunately no one can deny the extreme frequency of onanism, which makes it a veritable social scourge, the mark of the shameful blight of modern marriage. This sad habit is known among all ranks of society in the cities and is already beginning to spread in the most remote countryside.... The dire balance sheet of onanism from the purely medical point of view has not yet been entirely established, but one day it will be known: it is formidable." - All physicians agree with Surbled. Thus, for example, Löwenfeld writes (Die psych. Zwangserscheinungen, 467): "According to Freud, interrupted intercourse figures chiefly among the causes of anxiety neuroses." Cf. also Familler, Pastorale Psychiatrie, p. 37.