I. The Notion of Pollution

322. - In the first place there occurs for remembrance the sin which, from the ordinary circumstance of the agent, is called solitary; from the weakness of soul which it betrays, effeminacy; from the more frequent manner in which it is committed, masturbation ¹; and from the liquid secretion then emitted, pollution.

¹ At least under the rationale that they are accustomed, not very scientifically, to explain the word masturbation as though it were stuprum committed by the hand.

As is easily gathered from the anthropological part ², the man, in pollution, regularly emits semen specifically necessary for generation, but which is available in such quantity that the greatest part of it does not in fact serve generation; but the woman emits a liquid, or rather is moistened inwardly by a liquid which contributes nothing directly to generation itself, yet assists active generation or copulation. (It is entirely accidental if, because of arousal or excitation, an ovum descends.)

² Nos. 7, 8.

But of itself, in either sex, this effusion accompanies the arousal by which the one wonderfully completes the other physically, and both become one flesh for the generation of a new human being.

Therefore pollution, separated from copulation, is the solitary effusion of this liquid.

Moreover, for the production of pollution, every person can contribute by his threefold life: the vegetative life, which prepares the liquid and, in definite circumstances of the excited organ, pours it forth; the sensitive life, which enjoys the conjoined pleasure, depicts it for itself in an image, and desires it by a pursuing passion; the rational life, which, recognizing a certain pleasurable human good in this enjoyment, accepts it by the will or deliberately seeks it.

Then the mind itself is so occupied in these things that it is prevented from thinking of others.

That pollution can be called complete which is thus perfected by the participation of the threefold life.

But it can exist partially.

The non-pleasurable emission from which those afflicted with spermatorrhea often suffer pertains merely to the vegetative life. A "secretion" of this kind can be compared with the "secretion" of tears or the emission of urine.

Pollution in which, without the cooperation or assent of the mind, the sense alone is delighted is to be ascribed to the animal or sensitive life: as if it were to occur during the day apart from the will.

In a certain manner intermediate is the pollution in which the higher faculty participates, but while impeded by sense. Such is that to which, in sleep, the will seems to give assent.

Let us call complete pollution by the name of psychological pollution in the full sense, insofar as the higher psychic powers act in it; we call the pollution of the sensitive life psychological in a diminished signification, or even animal, since it pertains to the lower psychological life common to us with animals; finally, the pollution of the vegetative life would well be called physiological, if today several authors did not call physiological a fully voluntary pollution which is procured for the sake of health, real or pretended, without approval of the pleasure ³. Wherefore, to avoid confusion, we shall instead call it corporeal.

³ Cardinal Lehmkuhl, I, 1042, note.

Corporeal pollution lies outside the rationale of sin. As St. Thomas says ⁴, "that which is on the part of the body... stands accidentally in relation to the moral act, which is considered of itself only according to those things which belong to the soul." "Pollution," says Sanchez ⁵, "arising by a natural way in sleep is in no respect a human act nor subject to his will, but is a certain natural act and evacuation, like sweat."

⁴ II-II, question 152, article 1.

⁵ In Decalogum, book 1, chapter 2, no. 18.

The second pollution, that of the sensitive life, at least in the waking state, presents matter to be governed by reason: "for the sensible passions are the matter of moral acts ⁶." Wherefore, when a man who is in possession of himself and not excused by inconvenience does not impede animal pollution, he commits a venial sin because of the rebellion of sense tolerated without cause and a certain danger of consent. But to repress by a positive effort, which is somewhat painful, a pollution which has already arisen is praiseworthy but not necessary.

⁶ St. Thomas, II-II, question 152, article 1.

Finally, the third pollution, fully psychological or complete, insofar as the higher reason participates in it, constitutes a mortal sin. Cf. the demonstration set forth below.

Therefore observe, which must be well noted, that these three pollutions differ in their physical rationale, since complete pollution does not signify merely a certain mental approval of a physiological phenomenon, but the participation of the sense which is delighted and of the mind which as it were penetrates the pleasure and cooperates toward it.