by Jessawhy
In countless posts about single women in the church, bloggers emphasize the point that these women need something in addition to promises of marriage in the next life. Living a celibate life can be difficult and sometimes depressing. Many of my friends, sisters, and cousins are single and in their late 20s or early 30s struggling without a mate and without sex. As a woman who married young, I try to listen and sympathize, but I really don’t know how difficult it is for these women to remain morally pure and maintain hope for marriage. Some wait to have sex and some don’t, but I try to support them equally.
However, I don’t know that it’s realistic to think that this is the best for everyone, especially women who marry later. There seem to be many reasons for women to save sex until marriage: emotional costs, risks of STDs, HIV, and unplanned pregnancies. But, some women see the benefits of sexual fulfillment outweighing the potential costs.
So I’m wondering if single women who are torn between celibacy and premarital sex are masturbating? Maybe it’s a good idea. For the last few weeks, I’ve been pondering the risks, benefits, and doctrinal issues associated with this practice. Maybe I’m crazy and all of you single women out there are already participating in this individual pleasure, or perhaps you would never even try, but hear me out.
I got started thinking about it from a thread at the Visitor’s Center (funny, from a guy’s perspective) and a link to a very thorough research paper/post by Momonzero (he has 15+ links at the bottom of his post). He argues that the history of how masturbation has been treated by the church has varied widely, and it more complex than most realize.
I also heard a rumor that the church may be changing its attitude toward masturbation as a sin, although the For Strength of Youth still cautions about awakening desires in oneself. For many years, the medical community has seen it as a normal practice, and perhaps the church is heading that direction. While I know of some wards (including mine) that do still ask YM and YW about masturbating during recommend interviews, apparently the CHI is silent on the subject. This father has instructed his sons, if ever asked about the topic, to answer, “It’s not an appropriate topic between a non-parent adult and a minor” or leave the interview. I would suggest that it’s probably not an appropriate topic between a single woman and her married bishop, either.
So perhaps some of the sexual tension surrounding singleness would be avoided if masturbation was accepted as a healthy part of a person’s sexuality.
Maybe some people would say it could increase porn use, or become addictive as with other kinds of pleasure (like eating, for example), which I’m sure is possible. However, the potential for abuse must be weighed against the potential for benefits, and I’m beginning to fall on the side of benefits.
One source even goes so far as to claim that the LDS teachings are damaging youth and causing them emotional and spiritual harm, especially the YM who are given the “For Young Men Only” pamphlet. As the mother of 3 boys, I’m really glad to hear this side of the coin and hope to help my sons understand that their sexuality is good and important, not dirty and burdensome.
According to Mormonzero, here are some of the benefits to female masturbation. (Here’s his source)
“Women who masturbate have higher self-esteem than those who don’t.” (Although, this relationship is probably a correlation, not necessarily a causation.)
Health benefits
Some of the known health benefits of masturbation are,
* Reduces stress
* Enhances self-esteem.
* Muscle relaxation
* Helps one to fall asleep
* Promotes release of the brain’s opioid-like neurotransmitters (endorphins), which cause feelings of physical and mental wellbeing.
* Female masturbation relieves menstrual cramps
* Eases some of the symptoms of premenstrual syndrome
* Relieves depression
* Improves blood flow in the human body.
* Frequent masturbation by males appears to help prevent the development of prostate cancer.
* An effective, natural cure for insomnia.
* Burns calories during the session.
* It lowers blood pleasure and relieves headaches and muscle aches throughout the body
Sexual benefits
* Masturbation is also seen as a sexual technique that protects individuals from the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy.
* Research states that through masturbation, ones sexual tension is released. Masturbation allows a person to express sexuality in various situations, for instance, if they don’t have a partner or if sex with their partner isn’t available, or if they want to (or have to) abstain from sex for any reason.
* Masturbation helps to communicate their sexual needs better to their sexual partner. With enough practice, one will be able to coordinate pleasure with their partner’s pleasure and make sex better for both of them
* Masturbation is a popular treatment for sexual dysfunction. For Instance, men who suffer from premature ejaculation can use masturbation to practice control.”
Here‘s a thread on Beliefnet where Mormon women discuss this topic.
So what do you think? Is masturbation a reasonable way to handle being single and LDS? Is there more to the issue than I’ve considered?
PS. For a funny take on this subject, watch this episode of Mr. Diety.
Special thanks to Mormonzero for his help with resources.
Sorry =(, that was ridiculously long.
Double sorry, it appears some of the quotations are not present.
If you click on mormonzero to the right it will take you to my blog where the quotations and the comment will make more sense. Just be sure to make your comments here rather then my blog.
Wow – comment firestorm.
I don’t have much to add, except that I appreciate Jessawhy’s thoughtful post on the topic, which is clearly a much more complicated topic than we sometimes give it credit for.
Also, that the VC post was really funny.
Also — I do think that in some relationships, being a Seinfeld-style, master of one’s own domain can cause problems. Particularly if it’s used to escape relationship issues.
But, damn. The amount of stress and guilt and shame that is often heaped on this issue — that seems to be much more potentially damaging.
(Plus, weird stuff like Pres. Kimball’s statement that if you masturbate, you’ll become a homosexual. (!))
What about within the context of marriage? Solo? Phone sex?
I know my marriage would be a lot easier if that were an option.
mormonzero,
On one hand, I think you don’t really understand my position. I don’t disagree with the quotes you include. I simply just don’t agree with you on how you have applied them or the position you take on masturbation. But hey, I’m used to agreeing to disagree.
I also don’t disregard personal guidance and revelation. I’ll say that again. I’ll say again that I just think we need to be really careful about 1) making sure what we are doing really is in line with God’s will (people often talk about prophets being wrong, but what about individuals?) and secondly that we don’t take personal revelation beyond its limits and then turn around and generalize it to the Church.
So if you want to defend personal revelation, I understand that. I understand how life is a journey and a process and unfolds a little differently for everyone. But that doesn’t make our line-upon-line choices higher or more correct than the general counsel or standards or principles taught. The Lord can take us step by step, but that doesn’t mean He is telling us absolutes about the Church and its positions. It’s how revelation works. There are limits to it, and personal revelation simply cannot be interpreted to then interpret or undermine or minimize general Church counsel or standards or teachings.
So I agree and disagree with you all at the same time.
And Kaimi, I also appreciate that this is difficult. When I comment, I tend to speak to general standards. As I said before, I’m not unsympathetic to individual trials. But again, individual trials don’t erase general counsel. FWIW.
I’m really not trying to be difficult here. It’s hard to navigate topics like this, but if we are talking about something that the prophets take a stand on, we simply shouldn’t dismiss that for opinion or study or even personal experience. It should have a significant place in the conversation, imo.
I’ve been thinking about this some more, and I have started to believe that perhaps the idea of masturbation’s being part of the law of Chastity originated with President Kimball. He seemed to be irrationally fearful of homosexuality, and overly concerned that “(sexual) immorality” would damn a personal eternally if not truly and agonizingly repented (he often stressed how bloody and painful it needed to be to be sincere).
It was during his tenure that Elders Packer, Peterson and Featherstone made outlandish pronouncements against homosexuality and masturbation, respectively. President Kimball warned that “(M)asturbation is the introduction to the more serious sin of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality.”
It was during President Kimball’s tenure that bishops and stake presidents began to ask young prospective missionaries whether they masturbated. Leaders at the LTM, later the MTC, also asked and chastised, as did mission presidents all over the world.
I do think this will be an ugly blip in the Church’s social history. Countless young people have been damaged by repressive techniques and fearmongering such as this.
With regard to President Kimball, this was also the time period during which married couples were asked about their oral sex practices during their temple recommend interviews.
In answer to bbh:
I’m not sure how I can answer this without getting too graphic but I’ll try. The physical sensations of masturbation versus intercourse are completely different. They’re different because there are different body parts involved. (Your hand versus their *ahem*). Then there’s the differences in the nervous system involved. Did you know that you can’t actually tickle yourself? Your body processes the things YOU do to your body differently than the things your PARTNER does.
That’s one side of things. The other side is that intercourse is hard. It takes a lot of physical effort and it takes a lot of communication for both people to enjoy it. Peoples’ bodies and desires are different and as none of us are telepaths, there’s no other way but experimentation and talking for anyone to learn how to please their partner. If, through years of masturbation, you’ve trained your brain to expect your bio-chemical reward to come easily, then actual intercourse is going to be a rude awakening. You will likely find yourself turning more to masturbation than to intercourse because it seems so much easier. Or you’ll find your spouse doing so, leaving you unfulfilled and feeling rejected. It’s simply not fair to anyone.
M&M…I just want to apologize if I came across as overly aggressive about this issue. Truly, I hope I did not come across as someone who just wanted to push forth an agenda. I believe in Elder Richard’s words when he said one is free to explain his/her beliefs w/ others as long as it is not seeking to undermine the core/essential doctrine. I really don’t seek to condone a particular behavior as much as I just seek to ensure that proper motives are emphasized…i.e. faith, hope, charity and love; no matter whether one decides to masturbate or not, or whether one decides to have one or two earrings in each ear, or whatever other example you can think of–w/o those key attributes it is irrelevant which commandments you obey…the Pharisees are/have learning(ed) this the hard way.
You say we both agree and disagree…but to me the most important thing is that we agree on the key essential principles, which it appears that we do.
Eh? Nony Moose…
Honestly, after a lot of research, using strictly a secular opinion here and letting go of all my religious beliefs for a moment, I will just say that the benefits far outweigh the negatives…most sex therapists actually advise masturbation as a way to help fix many of the marital sex problems you are alluding to and ascribing to masturbation.
If a person always wants to masturbate rather than have sex w/ a spouse then that is a problem that should be dealt w/ accordingly.
Now, putting my religious helmet back on I would just advise that you do what you feel is right…who cares what the doctors say?
I am grateful for the wise counsel about not masturbating.
Two years into my marriage, I had my first orgasm. I had sexual pain issues and, as some women on a Christian intimacy board had suggested, I was dutifully trying to “relax” with a vibrator. It accidentally hit the right spot and when I realized what was going on, I prayed it would work. Yes, that’s right. I prayed for my first orgasm.
And then felt guilty about it, even though I felt like I had actually been given a gift. (And it really was. Being able to orgasm made my body finally “get” sex and it greatly enriched my marriage.) Part of me spent a lot of time resenting that I had religious beliefs that made me feel guilty about something that obviously helped me in the long run. But now, I am so grateful that I was always referencing what I had been taught by the Church because it led me to ponder very carefully the potential consequences of my behavior. I quickly told my husband and made sure to involve him as much and as soon as I could so that my pleasure could rightfully stay within the bounds of our couple relationship. It took a year or two for him to be able to bring me to orgasm by himself, but we worked diligently because sex is supposed to be between husband and wife, not self and vibrator/hand/whatever.
Obviously, I have had an experience where I was an “exception” to the “rule”, so I have empathy for those who cry “personal revelation”. But by holding as close to that rule as I could, I was able to respect the fact that I was dealing with something so powerful that it would be easy to fall into any number of traps. I know my experience isn’t everyone’s experience, but if I had allowed myself to discover orgasm before marriage, I would’ve been fornicating like crazy! “Awakening desires” (obviously I had a lot, but I wasn’t actively cultivating them with masturbation) would’ve been a disaster for me. I am glad that the Church leaders warned me.
No, I don’t think masturbation is a reasonable way to handle being single and LDS. Granted, I realize that not everyone who masturbates will go off and fornicate, like I am sure I would have, but any kind of active sexuality like that is A BIG DEAL, precisely because we can’t know how everyone will respond to orgasm. The potential traps are many and Satan would love to grab us in any way he can.
Thanks for taking the time to answer, Nony Mouse. I see why I didn’t get your point…what you describe doesn’t match my experience at all.
I’m married and have been very happily getting it on with my honey for 20 years. Even though he has been my only sexual partner, I was not a stranger to the wonderful world of orgasm when I got married. I’ve always felt that this familiarity with my own body enhanced our shared sexual experiences from the very beginning.
Just my experience.
So many assuptions here, I don’t know where to begin. “sex is hard” “M* leads to certain expectations,” “this and that will happen if you masturbate,” you’ll want your spouse less.”
Wow, everyone’s an expert on what everyone else’s sex life should be like. Please, don’t deny it, most everything posted reflects that.
After 35 years of marriage, good sex, bad sex, no sex for months at a time after the death of two children, no orgasm, discovering orgasm thru M* I can say, do whatever works for you. Sex with my husband is better than it ever was when we were in our 20′s, 30′s and 40′s but I have no guilt masturbating when he’s not available as he did when we were younger and I was not available b/c sex meant having children and we shouldn’t have anymore. Sex is less frequent–once a week now–but of much higher quality. However, I still can get myself there much easier and faster than he can–my poor communication skills,perhaps–and he has no trouble working on other areas and watching. If M doesn’t work for you, don’t do it but don’t tell other people how to have a fullfilling sexual relationship and intimacy with their spouse.
My husband is also my bishop and says there are no references to M in the handbook and he never asks the youth about it. P*rn yes, M no.
Very easy for married people to tell singles not to. I think of my mother who has been alone for many years and wonder how she’s gone so long without that physcial affection.
Do we expect widows and widowers to go without too?
I think the church is clear that masterbation is wrong. Is it as serious as adultery and fornication? No.
Jks, I think the point is that various leaders have given their opinions based on a combimation of gut feeling, tradition, ignorance, superstition, and prejudice.
For those who have the impression that the church has been consistent in condemning masturbation, please read my timeline which is based on Historical Development of New Masturbation Attitudes in Mormon Culture.
(If you’ll pardon the expression, I feel like I’m whoring my blog because I keep linking to it. Please forgive me. I’m just trying to inform.)
At orgasm, we release a hormone, oxytocin, which creates strong feelings of attachment. Ideally, we attach to the person who helped us get to the big O. In masturbation, there’s only the self to attach to. Does masturbation make one a self-absorbed narcissist? Probably not. But, I do think 2 person sex requires a lot more work than 1 person sex (communication, patience, etc.)
As an woman who didn’t marry until her late 20s I struggled mightily with morality issues. I have total compassion for singles in the church, and am glad I don’t have to be in a position of judgment.
mormonzero, to be honest, I did feel like you have an agenda.
I do think we need both basic principles as you state and efforts toward obedience. I should have charity no matter what. I should care about people no matter where they are on the path. And I try to. But that doesn’t change what the standards are, ya know?
To be honest, I am still not sure exactly where you stand on all of this, but I do appreciate your follow up comment.
I have probably said enough for this thread, though. Thanks again for the comment, mormonzero.
My opinion can be easily summed up in saying that I don’t believe the church belongs in the bedroom of married or single persons; if the spirit abides then that is all that matters…if I had a masturbation agenda I would be trying to persuade you to change your mind…I am not…If there is an agenda that I have it is that ppl have the necessary facts to study it out in one’s mind and pray about it themselves…If you do not feel satisfied w/ a prophet or apostles teaching then you should as BY explained w/draw from the idea…If you read my blog posts I make it fairly clear that all I recommend is that you are aware of the necessary information to make a proper decision…All sides need to be presented to make a proper decision…I hardly believe that when we chose God’s plan over Satan’s that we did not know what Satan’s plan was…we were aware, had a war of words, and decisions were made.
As Kaimi said, this has been somewhat of a firestorm, so I won’t attempt to respond to everyone at this late hour.
I am interested in people with personal experiences about church leaders and interview questions including masturbation. It seems to me that there is more literature that alludes to masturbation (For Strength of Youth, etc) than there are leaders asking about it in interviews.
My sincere hope is that there will be some clarity on this subject from the church leaders in the future. It seems to be applied so unevenly that it is easy to question the seriousness of the sin.
Elizabeth W described oxytocin, which is a chemical that does many things, including enhancing relaxation. If it does create attachment, perhaps that is where the benefit of self-esteem comes from.
m&m and mormonzero: I’m glad you guys are working through your differences. I think you are both trying to win longest comment for next year’s Nacle Number’s post at ZD.
Seriously, though, I’m grateful for the open discussion and I hope that people can think about this subject in a new way.
As far as calling the prophets wrong, I would submit that sometimes they don’t ask God if something should or could change. I don’t believe that God reaches down and shakes the prophet to instruct him on some specific matter. I think the prophet goes to God and asks about issues the same way we do. Perhaps this is one of those issues that isn’t getting face-time with God.
Married: My guess is that most married people would say that their decisions about their sex life are up to them, not to their church leaders (including masturbation, phone sex, etc) Like Jana, I don’t think the church has any place in the bedroom of consenting adults. There is a thread at Visitor’s Center called “For Married Mormons, Where does OK end and Sin begin?” It’s a multiple choice test, and it’s pretty varied.
Lastly, not to make light of this serious discussion, did anyone watch the Mr. Diety clip?
Well, mormonzero, I think net net you and I probably disagree more than we agree. I think it’s a little too convenient to say, “I don’t like what the prophets say” and then withdraw from it. If it was always easy, or always made sense, or always squared with what our natural inclination was, I don’t see that we would really need prophets at all. I think trust in the prophets goes a long way, although I understand people’s desire to study more than that. I just think we shouldn’t expect that their counsel will square with secular studies or even personal experiences of some people. I trust them explicitly, and I have my own personal experience with their counsel that has convinced me that I can trust their counsel. I don’t need to know everything to know that following them is best for me.
But like I said, I’m pretty accustomed to agreeing to disagree.
Jessawhy, similarly, I am also definitely not a fan of the ‘well, prophets haven’t struggled through this issue enough’ position. Again, that seems far too convenient to be able to use that argument whenever one comes up against some counsel or position that is inconvenient, hard, etc. Following prophets isn’t supposed to be easy, or even logical. Scriptures prove that time and time again – the parting of the Red Sea, the serpent in the wilderness, the widow of Zaraphath’s oil and meal, the day and night and day of light…and the list could go on and on.
All of that said, I realize that part of our journey is to each choose how to interact with and implement and regard prophetic counsel. Agency and accountability and all of that.
wow… well done jessawhy!
multiple lengthy comments later… I now have nothing to add, except thank you for addressing this “touching” subject (yes, pun intended.)
Jessawhy,
I think most of us who were questioned about masturbation by bishops and stake presidents (and I’m a woman!) were children of the ’70s and ’80s–again, while President Kimball was prophet, and maybe a little beyond that. i do think it has to do with missions and prospective missionaries. This is probably when teens in the MIA/YM/YW program were asked about it by their bishops, probably in preparation for when they would be asked about it for missions.
I was also single until I was almost 40, and I attended ten or fifteen singles wards, in addition to the five student wards I belonged to at BYU. IN EVERY WARD, and IN EVERY CASE, I was asked about masturbation. This was in the early and mid 1980s (BYU) and up until 2000, when I stopped attending church.
“Well, mormonzero, I think net net you and I probably disagree more than we agree. I think it’s a little too convenient to say, “I don’t like what the prophets say” and then withdraw from it.”
M&M…Wow! In all honesty I think it is sad that you say this. If masturbation is your measuring stick as to how much we agree then I find that disappointing.
“I think it’s a little too convenient to say, “I don’t like what the prophets say and then withdraw from it.”
I never withdrew any comment…Never for the rest of my life will I simply accept something because the prophet said so…I am not going to “force it down like a pill.” His opinions and thoughts I hold as a guide to build my own study. When he speaks authoritatively on doctrine I look into it and look for confirmation and satisfaction and if I “do his will, [I] shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether [he] speak[s] of [him]self.” (John 7:17) I have honestly lived both ways of life…I have come to a different conclusion than you on ONE behavior…I am sorry that my choice offends you so but I am not sorry about the process by which I came to my conclusions.
I believe in God the Eternal Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost; I believe in the Fall and Atonement; I believe a persons life should be established on good principles and virtues including but not limited to…faith, hope, charity, love, honesty, chastity, obedience, honor, weakness, and humility. I believe in the Bible and BofM. I think there is a lot more that we could agree on than disagree.
However, I believe righteousness is about the desires of one’s heart and what actions those desires lead us to…I don’t believe that righteousness is defined by ritualistic and traditionalist standards and behaviors…I believe this is what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 5. This is why I also believe that there will be ppl who make it to heaven having done all that is necessary while emphasizing obedience but they won’t be accepted by the Lord because their obedience was not fueled by the proper desires…i.e. pharisees
I believe if a person has faith, hope, charity and love w/ an eye single to the glory of God and decides not to ever masturbate then he/she will be fine…if a person has these same characteristics and masturbates then he/she will be fine.
Considering all the health benefits of masturbation maybe it would be wise to add it as a part of the word of wisdom and taking healthy care of one’s body…I’m j/k
Hey Jessawhy, you wanted examples, here you go:
Didn’t even learn about masturbation or the concept of pleasure until age 27 (am regretting the lost time). Racked with guilt over a couple of minor “joy rides” I confessed to my bishop (a fan of discussing the topic annually in our east coast ward-although I have to say the woman always assigned to teach it in RS spoke to the Problem of your husband/future husbands “M”). Anyway, will spare you the sad details of my humiliating interview including the porn interrogation (no-didn’t use)but after my Temple recommnend was suspended, he asked me to e-mail him weekly about my habits/issues (talk about weird) this went on for about 3 months. (Luckily only fell of the wagon once out of shame/fear for having to articulate in an e-mail) imagine my rage when years later in a discussion with a close male friend (one of his former counselors) found that the fellows usually only got a “few weeks” suspention from the temple for lesser discretions (think frequency) and “who the hell e-mails”…
mormonzero,
I think we are talking past each other, but I’m not sure that more talking is going to help. I, too, believe in the desires of the heart, but I also believe that we are expected to ‘do all we can do’ and strive for obedience — not as a hedge or fake, Pharasaical righteousness but because obedience can be tied to the heart and humility.
I also can’t really fully separate this conversation from our general positions because you just seem a lot more willing to dismiss prophetic counsel than I will ever be comfortable with, even though I have never suggested it should be forced like a pill. I dunno. Something just doesn’t gel with your position, even though I think we might find that there is some agreement there. I just still don’t really feel like I know where you really stand, so I’m not sure how much we really agree. Thanks for trying to explain anyway.
Well…I understand. I probably don’t articulate my position very well. However, I will make one last ditch effort, not to convince, but simply to attempt to explain where I stand.
I don’t believe that one’s obedience lies in obeying traditional behaviors. To me, obedience lies in obeying the principles and ordinances of the gospel (AoF 1:3; Moses 6:60) not specific behaviors…but these doctrinal principles most surely will influence those behaviors for “teaching doctrine will change behavior faster than teaching behavior will change behavior.” This is not to say that certain behaviors are not evidence of disobeying certain principles. But, imho, I don’t believe killing someone is the sin but I believe the anger to be the sin. Thus, Nephi did not sin when he killed Laban, when defending family you do not sin, when defending freedom, country, etc. you do not sin; I don’t believe the adultery to be the sin (simply a manifestation of sin); I believe that for the most part the 10 commandments were used as a foreshadowing of the higher law which he taught. God used those commandments to symbolically teach love and the avoidance of hate, anger, and lust. The problem was that the pharisees made the “commandment of none effect by [their] traditions.” (Matt 15:3; read vs. 1-9) I do believe the lust, coveting, or wanting of another person’s spouse or another individual w/ whom one is not married is a sin. As black and white as many ppl believe masturbation to be I personally don’t see masturbation as being synonymous w/ lust. If for an individual the masturbation is a symptom of their lustful pursuits and engagements then yes, they have sinned…not in masturbating but in lust.
I realize that my perceived ambiguity is perhaps what makes it difficult to discover where I stand; as the strict “Follow the prophet” types would cry blasphemy, while otoh, the not so strict prophet adherents perhaps would say that I am outwardly manifesting some form of cognitive dissonance, to these possible claims I cannot apologize.
Well…I need to get to class.
Just a thought…
I have read in one of my many manuals about female sexuality, that clinically speaking, more than 70% of women are only able to orgasm through direct clitoral stimulation and not vaginal penetration. My BIG concern, having spoken to legions of women who have not experienced orgasm after 1,2 years or gasp decades of marital sex, that by spiritually criminalizing masturbation we deny these individuals what most of us consider an essential part of sexual connection with our partners because as many of my manuals direct (and several of my medical colleagues as well) women must often learn about the response and control of these sensations by self-exploration first. It breaks my heart to hear women dismiss “oh orgasm isn’t the most important part of sex” as a demure and passive coping mechanism. If nerve endings and mechanics were the same for males and lets say there were an epidemic of married men who had “loving sex” but in years (or decades) had not been able to ejaculate that the bretheren or whoever would treat this issue the same? Hell no I say…I also think that any man who goes for years (or decades) without working towards orgasm in his wife on some level seems to be just using her as his own mastubatory object…(with love and tenderness of course)
Jessawhy,
another important consideration that I hope the church is taking if they are truely reconsidering thier stance on masturbation, if not for “singles” than at least for homosexuals. Our religion is already cruel in its denial of basic relationship and love needs for gays, but to doom them to a life time of asexual existence just seems cruel. I don’t even think that celebate religions take such an extreme approach (read a book once w/ interesting thoughts about nuns and masturbation. I’m glad most of my gay friends do the deed while they figure out if they want to live a limited life within the religion…If staying in the church is what they really must have, masturbation might help the pain a little more palpable.
m&m says:
Oh, I see the difference. Members should keep their personal opinions to themselves and not say that the previous policy was a mistake.
I find that attitude just as horrifying. Wait. Maybe a little more horrifying.
Beekeeper,
That’s my concern as well. If the only way a woman is going to learn to orgasm is self stimulation, then I say go for it. I think a loving God will totally understand.
John with an H – There has not yet been a formal repudiation of the racist folk doctrines which were once rampant in our church. But my hunch is that it is coming, I’d say within the next decade or so. I will rejoice on the day that happens.
And church leaders may not ever formally come out and say the priesthood ban was a huge racist mistake (unfortunate – I wish they would) but you can bet that several of the GAs have been kicking themselves in the backside mentally for not being in the forefront of civil rights issues. (I know this from an insider who is friendly with many of them.) Our church really missed the boat on that one. IMO.
mormonzero,
I think we are going in circles. I have reread most of your comments and come back to the same point — as long as you undermine the prophets, it undermines your position in my mind. I don’t feel you are malicious in your intent (I get the sense that you are a sincere study-er and seeker), but from where I sit, even though you say you aren’t, it feels to me like you ARE trying to convince others (maybe yourself?) that what you have decided to do is ok. If you had stopped at ‘I felt this was right for me for where I am in my life’ and still recognized and upheld the standard as it is taught, that would be one thing. But you have crossed a line that makes me uncomfortable and makes it hard for me to really continue a conversation. Sorry.
And I will say I have appreciated your willingness to try to explain your position. I’m not trying to dismiss that, nor the good that I think can come from trying to understand others’ positions. I have just reached a point where I really don’t have much left in me (plus I’ve been ill for nearly two weeks) that I think it’s time for me to be done.
I have really tried to present my thoughts, leave others to their own, and crawl back into my little hole. However, I feel like someone keeps coming up and kicking dirt back into my hole.
“I think we are going in circles. I have reread most of your comments and come back to the same point — as long as you undermine the prophets, it undermines your position in my mind.”
If you had ended your comment here I would have felt zero inclination to respond because for the most part you are solely explaining your pov…that said I honestly don’t believe that I am undermining the prophets especially when I have established more than enough prophetic precedence for how and why I believe what I do. Your sole position w/in the confines of this blog is that m* is wrong–again w/ prophetic precedence…to which there are only a handful of statements made by GA’s who specifically state masturbation as being wrong (all of which can be found and read on my blog…so it is not like I am trying to disregard what they say but simply presenting as much info as possible so that an objective person can choose for themselves) and who use incorrect information to explain why it is wrong.
“I don’t feel you are malicious in your intent (I get the sense that you are a sincere study-er and seeker)”
Thank you =)
“but from where I sit, even though you say you aren’t, it feels to me like you ARE trying to convince others (maybe yourself?) that what you have decided to do is ok.”
Okay…this is the statement that made me feel an obligation to respond. You are indirectly attempting to explain away everything I have said because I wish to rationalize my choices to either/both others or/and myself. However, nearly every thought or opinion I have expressed was developed and thought out b4 I ever masturbated even once.
That said, your point is irrelevant. Even if my views are founded in apologetic rationalizations, all that really matters is whether the doctrine is sound. Also, if this is my motive is it any different than what FAIR, FARMS, and BYU studies do when they apologetically explain things like mistranslations in the BoM and BoA, the kinderhook plates, Adam-God theory, etc. There is nothing wrong w/ someone trying to understand better why they believe what they believe and then protecting those beliefs from others who would attack or discredit them. The beauty of what I have tried to say is that it allows the ppl w/ both viewpoints to still maintain their thoughts and opinions while being firm in the core doctrines found w/in the church. What is so wrong w/ that? The only way you could find this at all distasteful is if you find “no masturbation” as a core and essential principle/law, which to me seems about as legitimate as counting the number of steps you take on the sabbath.
“If you had stopped at ‘I felt this was right for me for where I am in my life’ and still recognized and upheld the standard as it is taught, that would be one thing. But you have crossed a line that makes me uncomfortable and makes it hard for me to really continue a conversation. Sorry.”
Me too…cuz from where I sit, it feels to me like you are using a minority of prophetic statements that were assimilated into the doctrines on mormon culture as a mask for not having to rethink your position no matter what facts or truths might be presented. Under your apparent logic you would have been unable to support or even acknowledge the protests and societal and editorial pressures that non-members put on the church and BYU (especially atheltics) for their policies and doctrines about the black ppl. If a church member disagreed w/ the prophet in regard to blacks b4 1978′s revelation and openly stated his opinions, was he undermining the prophet? This is w/ an issue that I believe has much more doctrinal relevance than masturbation.
Crud, again, I gotta go to class.
I feel like someone keeps coming up and kicking dirt back into my hole.
mormonzero, I’m sorry I offended you.
The beauty of what I have tried to say is that it allows the ppl w/ both viewpoints to still maintain their thoughts and opinions while being firm in the core doctrines found w/in the church. What is so wrong w/ that?
My whole point has been that I don’t see it this way. I don’t think your position keeps doctrinal integrity, because I believe this counsel is doctrinally sound.
In a sense, though, opinion doesn’t really matter. It’s not our place to decide what is doctrinally sound teaching. That is the prophets’ place. In the privacy of our lives, we can determine what we feel we should do about their counsel, but I think public undermining of their counsel is inappropriate, and I will continue to take that position. There may be those out there who need this counsel to protect and help them (think of ABC’s comment above), but any excuse to dismiss it could influence their decision not to follow it.
Look, I have said before that there are likely some things we agree on. As I look at your paper, I agree with some of the more general things you have said. But since we have clear and current counsel about that states “Do not arouse those emotions in your own body.” We have been told these standards as taught in For the Strength of Youth apply to all of us. It really is that simple. If your personal experience differs, that doesn’t change what is from the prophets. It’s one thing to say, “This is what happened to me.” I understand the desire to want to empathize with others who struggle. It’s another thing to write papers and such that want to suggest that the prophets are wrong or that their position has no doctrinal foundation.
Mr. Realistic writes:
I’m unfamiliar with the scriptural basis for watching R-rated movies being a sin. Can someone elaborate?
If a church member disagreed w/ the prophet in regard to blacks b4 1978’s revelation and openly stated his opinions, was he undermining the prophet?
I just saw this part of your comment, so FWIW, so you understand where I stand, my answer would be yes, if that person said, “The prophets are wrong.”
I’m not anti-discussion. But there is a difference between wondering about something, or wanting to sort through it, or even expressing personal struggle with it. I think discussion has value in helping people work through things, consider different opinions, etc.
I just think there is a line there that goes from opinion to taking on a position of authority that isn’t ours to take, declaring prophetic positions undoctrinal, unnecessary, inappropriate, whatever.
I don’t know if I’m clarifying, or just annoying. I’m sorry if it’s the latter.
M&M…FWIW I didn’t find anything you said to be annoying, well…except the part where you tried to explain what my motives were when you don’t really know me, in the which I counteracted by doing the same to you and I apologize. But overall I found the discussion to be constructive rather than negative…I hope you think so as well.
“In the privacy of our lives, we can determine what we feel we should do about their counsel”
This is doctrinally sound, we agree! Yippee! This is actually what I was trying to say the whole time. If you re read the GA quotes I used I might actually make a little more sense now. =)
“but I think public undermining of their counsel is inappropriate, and I will continue to take that position.”
As you should…and I assure you that is not my goal. To echo the words of Elder Richards, “I fear I may be misunderstood” because of the nature of the background topic (in this case being masturbation; his being the WoW and smoking). I will admit that my blog post and my comments hear are slanted to explain a personal perspective and opinion but if you follow my blog post to the end you see that I invited everyone to study it out for themselves w/ the necessary spiritual tools…I have honestly attempted to do my best to remember to use words such as…”my opinion,” “my belief,” etc. My point is that “men are permitted to hold individual views and express them w/ freedom so long as they are not seditious to the basic doctrines, practices, and establishments of the Church” (Elder Richards). Just as “some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice.” (LDS website) I would hope that you do not perceive my thoughts and opinions to be an attempt to undermine core doctrines.
“It’s another thing to write papers and such that want to suggest that the prophets are wrong or that their position has no doctrinal foundation.”
Well…please don’t tell me you think them infallible, otherwise they will eventually let you down in such a way that your testimony will flutter away w/ the wind. I don’t think you believe this though.
It’s not that I don’t think their opinions don’t have doctrinal foundation, it is that their explanation of the “masturbation doctrine” have been shrouded in fallacious comments such as masturbation makes you turn gay or that masturbation turns up semen production.
Does it matter if they were wrong on masturbation…no, I don’t think so…no more than when JFS said that man would never go to the moon. If there was a change in masturbation teachings I don’t think members would leave the church in mass exodus, so because of that I don’t think it wrong or undermining the prophets to believe contrary to the GA’s on this issue and publicly express my opinion. If you don’t agree w/ that then I wouldn’t know what else to say and my jaw will just drop to the floor.
“Do not arouse those emotions in your own body.”
You know…as a teenager I read this and I applied it, I applied it so well that I never even would permit myself to have an erection and I considered it a sin if I did have one. Maybe I was just a nut, but to me that seems to be implied.
“We have been told these standards as taught in For the Strength of Youth apply to all of us.”
For the most part I believe the standards to be extremely worthwhile especially when explained w/ the logic by which they were acquired and the ensuing consequences of doing or not doing what the standards state.
However, there is a difference between standards and laws/principles. A standard is when numerous situations have a prevailing quality or characteristic to which they are then set up as a standard for action or practice.
A law, oth, is the principles of right custom frozen into imperative form, with provision against disobedience, by legislative enactment.
Is masturbation a standard or a law? 20-30 years ago you would probably have to say that it was a law as many if not all missionaries were asked about and were not allowed on a mission if they were involved in such a practice. Now, it may just be a standard as legislative enforcement has greatly dissipated…there is lack of conformity here…Some are not allowed on their mission others are told to not worry about it. This only helps fuel the confusion.
I feel it imperative to discuss this topic because there are so many ppl who wonder, the entire research paper I wrote was done for a friend because he asked me about it and he knew that I research about everything else so why not this. To which I replied, “No I know little about it, but I’ll look into it.” I have shared my findings. If people don’t share what they find amongst themselves and w/ their leaders then oftentimes GA’s don’t have a catalyst by which they can inquire to the Lord about change. This is what happened w/ beer (which originally was not part of the WoW) but it was largely w/ the personal experiences of members that helped get beer incorporated into the word of wisdom. As time went on the Word of Wisdom went from a simple standard of wisdom to an actual law w/ legislative oversight. This is what happened w/ blacks and the priesthood, this is what happened w/ polygamy, etc. Each one appears to have had a catalyst that inspired the leader to re think the current position, which helped help instigate the revelatory process. And these were w/ really important doctrines (please don’t misconstrue this as me saying that they were previously wrong on each of the just mentioned topics; this is not what I am attempting to point out) …masturbation…imperatively important? I’m not so sure.
M&M, to close I only wish to say that I have appreciated the balance that you brought to this blog post…it helps keep everyone honest.
except the part where you tried to explain what my motives were when you don’t really know me,
I’m sorry. I shouldn’t have done that.
Can I suggest that in a similar sense, we shouldn’t do that with the prophets’ words, either? We don’t know why they teach what they do, analysis of history or whatever else notwithstanding.
Thanks also for being willing to engage. I do think there is some benefit in two people being able to talk through different perspectives, so thanks for engaging.
“but I think public undermining of their counsel is inappropriate, and I will continue to take that position.”
As you should…and I assure you that is not my goal.
OK, then maybe I could just share some of your comments that really leave me scratching my head and that are examples of comments that I believe undermine the prophets, and some thoughts about why I feel that way:
“I think it’s crossing a line for ppl to create and/or interpret the law” [it's inappropriate for you or me to do that (although we will each do that for ourselves to some degree, and personal revelation can help us do that), but it's well within the stewardship of prophets, seers, and revelators to do any of these things! -- also to elaborate with standards, or to clarify principles, or to give us specific behaviors that fall under keeping a law, and it's not within our stewardships to dismiss those things in public for others, even if for whatever reason we might feel we are the exception. Exceptions don't change rules. Also it's not our job to determine in a general way if prophets are 'crossing a line.' We only can determine in our personal lives how to respond to what they say.]
“I don’t believe the church belongs in the bedroom of married or single persons” [on standards like this, the prophets would disagree, and yet they do so little in this regard anyway. Again, it's not up to any person to decide for everyone what is or isn't appropriate for prophets to do. Also, none of us really knows all that comes into their positions on things. You have taken a *guess* at why they have taught this principle (thinking it's only Puritan tradition or whatever) but the truth is that you were not there in the meetings or whatever else might have transpired to come up with these standards or to decide to continue to teach them. If you really want to just let people decide, then let them decide for themselves how inspired this is. Giving people 'the other side' in my mind undermines prophetic position.]
“For those who struggle w/ the morality of masturbation and have been unable to stop then you have a few options”
[you then go to interpret Paul in a way that is not consistent with prophetic teachings or has no basis in doctrine or Church teaching -- if you felt *you* had options, that is between you and God. But that is not generalizable, and I think it's really risky to do that -- haven't you ever struggled with something, ready to take anyone's word who would justify your wrong behavior? And what if you really are wrong with this at a general level? Would you want to end up being a catalyst that encouraged someone to pursue something they shouldn't have, your personal choice notwithstanding?]
“If one feels masturbation to be okay, then that is fine. If one feels it is wrong, then that is fine too….If God inspires us then it is not sin.” [You cannot determine this, as that is not your stewardship to do, and again, do you really want to go there for other people's choices? That means I could come in and offer my opinion about your choice...nah, you don't want to go there. You can't. Only God and His authorized servants can determine if someone is in sin or not, or the Spirit for one's self. An individual can make a choice to pursue a path or behavior, but that doesn't mean it will be 'fine' by the standards of the Church, for temple attendance, etc. That doesn't take away a person's agency, but we can't just jump to relative definitions of sin simply by personal choice, even if a person thinks that his/her choice is via revelation. Personal choice or even revelation is not the only determinant of what is sin. Otherwise, we could all determine for ourselves if we were worthy for reception of ordinances (baptism, temple, sealing). There is a reason there are judges in Israel and prophets to define and determine these things.]
“I perceive masturbation as not being part of the law of chastity [um, there you are interpreting the law -- which you said people shouldn't do!
] but as a tradition that men have accepted as part of the law of chastity. There is no scripture that deals w/ this issue.” [If you call something 'tradition' that prophets teach, that to me undermines what they teach, even if it's just your opinion or perception. It's one thing to lay out the history, even your own experience. It's another thing to interpret the history for others or generalize your experience in a way that minimizes what the prophets teach. If you assert that 'it's only tradition' that implies that it doesn't really matter. (I really don't see how you can think this isn't undermining their position.) The risk is that someone who needs the counsel will not take it seriously because of what you have said. (Elder Oaks warns against public criticism of church leaders -- in part because we could make their leadership less effective for others.) You also say there is no scripture that supports this standard, but only prophets are authorized to interpret the law and scripture for others. Lines of stewardship must be carefully kept in order for us to stay within the order of the Church.
"I also believe one need be careful to not explain traditional perceptions and ideas as sin" [Like I said before, you simply can't know for sure if this is just tradition, or if they really did feel inspired in council with each other and as a result of their prophetic mantle to keep this specific counsel there for us. Personal revelation is for personal choices on how to apply prophetic counsel in one's life, not to decide if something prophets teach is valid, or doctrinal, or inspired, or whatever else, for everyone else.]
“Even w/ other issues I make sure that I feel right about it between me and HF b4 agreeing w/ the prophet or any apostle. They are not infallible.” [Of course they aren’t. But that’s irrelevant. The humanness of prophets has never changed the expectation God has for us that we take their words very seriously. We will be accountable for how we engage with and respond to their counsel. I feel like your conclusions seek to decide for others how seriously they should take the counsel. I don’t think that is appropriate.
I should add that I’m not a fan of extensive historical study to try to determine the legitimacy of or discredit prophetic position on something, because I think it’s usually quite unnecessary. The Spirit can help us know if it’s legitimate and how we should implement it. That said, I wouldn’t have had as much of an issue with your approach had you only given the *information* and left your personal ‘therefore, I think this is only tradition’ type of conclusions out. Again, you simply haven’t been with the prophets as they have made decisions to teach these standards, or to include them in Church materials up to the present day. Let people decide through the Spirit for themselves if the counsel is legitimate and if it has valid doctrinal purpose.
This is probably enough to give examples of what has concerned me and left me feeling like you are undermining the prophets. I also am concerned that you have contributed to extolling the supposed virtues of something the prophets have discouraged.
As a parallel example: Just because drinking wine may have health benefits and there isn’t anything in ancient scripture that says we shouldn’t drink wine (quite the opposite, even!) does not mean we should drink wine or say that it doesn’t matter if people choose to do so. Prophets say it does, and they are the only ones who can speak to issues and standards like these in a general fashion.
Again, if personal revelation exempts you for some reason, that is one thing, and we each will have to answer to God for our choices. Going to ‘the other side’ of the issue to try to show benefits or whatever is inappropriate to me and potentially could influence someone to go down the wrong path.
Maybe I should just ask how you think you *aren’t* undermining the prophets’ counsel on this issue, given all that you have said to indicate that you think (as I read you) it’s an unnecessary, inappropriate, uninspired hedge? All I can say is that I would feel undermined if I said something to you and you labeled it thusly.
I’m going to re-title this thread:
“Must have the last word”
(still, keep it coming, folks. I’m hoping to hit 100 comments!)
So tell us mormonzero and Jonathan Blake, just exactly how many times a week did you masturbate as a kid? Or should I say how many times do you now?
By the way you justify things, it must have been a ton.
canthelpwondering,
LOL. You make me feel like I’m in a temple recommend interview with a pervy bishop. (No offense to you, or to bishops.)
I don’t think answering your questions would change the basis of what I’ve said. Your question is a thinly veiled ad hominem logical fallacy.
Those who think that I’m rationalizing my sins misunderstand my motives. I simply don’t recognize masturbation as a sin. I don’t feel any guilt when I masturbate. Therefore, I don’t need to rationalize my behavior as a defense mechanism against guilt.
In other words, what I say here isn’t really for my benefit. I don’t comment here to help resolve an inner conflict so that I can revel in sin.
Instead, I hope to promote better understanding by sharing my experiences, and to perhaps give someone a reason to reconsider their ideas about this topic. I suffered a lot because of what I believe are unhealthy attitudes toward sex in the LDS community. I hope sharing my thoughts and experiences can spare someone similar suffering.
Hmm. Sorry for the runaway italics.
I am sorry if I come across as a somewhat belligerent here but this comment touched a nerve for multiple reasons…I probably should ignore it but…
Canthelpwondering said…”So tell us mormonzero and Jonathan Blake, just exactly how many times a week did you masturbate as a kid? Or should I say how many times do you now? By the way you justify things, it must have been a ton.”
You really want to know? or is this some form of despicable rhetorical question? From what I have read of JB’s blog I am fairly sure that this is not even an issue for him and has no motive whatsoever to be trying to rationalize whatever previous or current masturbation habits he may of had due to his current beliefs.
Now, why in heaven’s name do you even want to know? What relevance does this have to you personally? How does this distort any information that is provided? You know many non-members look at Mormons and can’t believe to what lengths we go to rationalize our religious beliefs in spite of all the evidences that would show that Joseph Smith had links to the occult, didn’t use a urim and thummim, translated the Book of Abraham wrong, made mistakes in his own translation of the Book of Mormon, that we go off funny fuzzy feelings that other ppl claim to get while walking through nature, that our leaders didn’t have the prophetic and revelatory abilities to see the Hoffman forgeries for what they were, leaders occasionally teaching false doctrine (I’ll reference later), of certain leaders publicly saying they don’t know or don’t receive revelations.” Do you feel okay in rationalizing or in the very least explaining why you believe the way you do? If a man be asked why he thinks polygamy is “doctrinal” and then explains what he believes would you find it appropriate for one to question him, “So tell us, how many wives do you have or how many wives to you think you are going to have in heaven?
Your comment grossly reeks of over zealous pompousness and arrogance.
So your question….How many times did I masturbate as a kid? ZERO
Now? Occasionally, due to a health issue that arose during my mission where I would have spontaneous ejaculations, which naturally led to masturbation. I confessed to my mission president 5-6 times in a 2 month span. The health issue continued. I received my first taste of mental, psychological, and emotional HELL that drove me mad w/ shame, guilt, depression, and sorrow. In response to this situation I fasted (One time for 48 hours) and prayed continuously for strength, I memorized countless scriptures, and much more. All of this caused so much pain that I could never put in words how I felt. This all went down shortly b4 returning home from my mission; I felt like a dishonorable wreck of a missionary and not worthy of the honor of the title of Returned Missionary. When I got home I sought refuge in the words of the prophets and apostles…No comfort was found as all I could find were quite destructive statements like the factory analogy, the factory is speeding up, wet dreams solve everything, I might turn gay, tie your hands to the bedposts etc. After a year of obsessive guilt I went to the Internet where I discovered Mormon blogs and found a discussion on the CULTURAL HALL where I posted under the name of “Struggling” on a thread about masturbation. The comments there were of some help and comfort…however, the pain continued. During the transpiring of these emotional events I served as Elder’s Quorum President and as a teacher…I constantly felt unworthy to serve despite my obsessive drive to serve God well and do the right thing. Later, a friend of mine brought this issue up w/ me because it was brought up in a Celestial Marriage class he was in and his knowing that I had done a lot of “hobby apologetics” both as a teenager and also after the mission. I told him I would look into it (up to this time I had never looked into this issue from an apologetic pov) and so I did. I did not expect to find the information that I did. Shortly thereafter, I learned from a doctor that I was having the “issue” (I will refrain to going into elaborate explanation because it is awkward to explain) b cuz the male body, especially one w/ a high sex drive, is not meant to go 21 years w/o any ejaculations especially if he is not having nocturnal emissions. So did you really want to know all of that? Knowing all this does this change the relevance of my opinions…does it change the relevance of the information that I have provided? NO!
What else would you like to know?
How many R-rated movies have I seen? 1
How many times have I had sex? Based on the above story I don’t think I need to answer
How many times have I said a cuss word? Zero
What else should I tell you so that you will just listen to what I have to say w/o trying judge my personal actions and righteousness? You don’t have to believe or even agree w/ a single word I say but cut w/ the personal attacks! Judge the information and not me! Now you might say well I am judging the prophets…well, I am sincerely trying to only judge the information and words they say, not their character (I believe the vast majority of statements, even incorrect ones, were made w/ the best of intentions), at least not beyond the fact that they are not infallible…the which is readily admitted by the authorities themselves.
M&M said…
“Can I suggest that in a similar sense, we shouldn’t do that with the prophets’ words, either? We don’t know why they teach what they do, analysis of history or whatever else notwithstanding.”
I do not attempt to judge their motives…I believe their motives to typically be sincere. However, I cannot help but look to their words and make rational analysis of them. JFS did say that polygamy would cure masturbation…BKP did say one’s factory will speed up…SWK did say masturbation leads to homosexuality. Analyzing what they say is a lot different than being critical of their character and intentions.
“but I think public undermining of their counsel is inappropriate, and I will continue to take that position.”
As you should…and I assure you that is not my goal.
“OK, then maybe I could just share some of your comments that really leave me scratching my head and that are examples of comments that I believe undermine the prophets, and some thoughts about why I feel that way: I think it’s crossing a line for ppl to create and/or interpret the law” [it's inappropriate for you or me to do that (although we will each do that for ourselves to some degree, and personal revelation can help us do that), but it's well within the stewardship of prophets, seers, and revelators to do any of these things!"
Wow, at first I could not believe I said that but I looked back and saw that you took me out of context…I said, "I think it's crossing a line for ppl to create and/or interpret the law to encompass everything from masturbation to oral sex, which have never been specifically addressed in scripture or HAS NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED…WHILE ONLY USING TRUTH TO SUPPORT THEIR CLAIM!"
If their teachings are based on the relative truths of the times then the teachings should be applied on an individual and relative level. If it is absolute truth then it should be declared absolutely w/ absolute truth and applied accordingly by the individual who must seek out a personal testimony of this absolute truth. I don’t really have time to go into all the GA statements on this or all scriptures and doctrines in this regard but if you like you could do you own personal study on this and I am sure you will find some many amazing things. Thus, I will stick to the statements I have already used, "…the judgment of a presiding officer holding the priesthood is GENERALLY an inspired judgment. It is the product of noble motive and fervent prayer…in matters of individual guidance to members, THEIR COUNSEL IS DIRECTORY AND PERSUASIVE ONLY."
"-- also to elaborate with standards, or to clarify principles, or to give us specific behaviors that fall under keeping a law, and it's not within our stewardships to dismiss those things in public for others, even if for whatever reason we might feel we are the exception. Exceptions don't change rules. Also it's not our job to determine in a general way if prophets are 'crossing a line.' We only can determine in our personal lives how to respond to what they say.]
You now, thinking on this now, I don’t think it is the Prophets who cross the line…it is the general membership that crosses the line by making the Prophets statements into a traditional doctrine or standard.
“I don’t believe the church belongs in the bedroom of married or single persons” [on standards like this, the prophets would disagree, and yet they do so little in this regard anyway. Again, it's not up to any person to decide for everyone what is or isn't appropriate for prophets to do."
I simply stated that I don’t believe they should get involved in such things. I don’t wish to regulate their offerings of opinion on any issue. However, it is dangerous to try to assimilate everything a GA says as canon.
"Also, none of us really knows all that comes into their positions on things. You have taken a *guess* at why they have taught this principle (thinking it's only Puritan tradition or whatever) but the truth is that you were not there in the meetings or whatever else might have transpired to come up with these standards or to decide to continue to teach them. If you really want to just let people decide, then let them decide for themselves how inspired this is. Giving people 'the other side' in my mind undermines prophetic position.]”
When the issue was first address JFS concluded that polygamy would be a good stop-block for solving the masturbation problem. If that is an answer that is not based on tradition then I do not know what would be. You cannot truly make a choice or decide anything w/o opposition or opposing views (2 Nep. 2). You did not need to read this information if you did not want to…if you can digest the information and make a choice accordingly why can’t others do the same? Do you not trust them to figure it out for themselves?
I wasn’t there, I only have the words of the prophets themselves who explained their decision by way of the traditions of their time. Go look it up. I never told anyone what to do or how to do it. I only stated what I concluded and that my thoughts were subject to change upon further light and knowledge. They are also encouraged to study it out for themselves.
“For those who struggle w/ the morality of masturbation and have been unable to stop then you have a few options”
[you then go to interpret Paul in a way that is not consistent with prophetic teachings or has no basis in doctrine or Church teaching -- if you felt *you* had options, that is between you and God. But that is not generalizable, and I think it's really risky to do that -- haven't you ever struggled with something, ready to take anyone's word who would justify your wrong behavior? And what if you really are wrong with this at a general level? Would you want to end up being a catalyst that encouraged someone to pursue something they shouldn't have, your personal choice notwithstanding?]”
The Paul statement was simply used as an analogy to show a congruence of similar thought between myself and him on 2 separate sexual matters. There was no interpretation of Paul…his words stood on their own. They were simply similar to what my conclusions about a different issue.
Justifying oneself is fine if he does it in truth and not in fallacies. The church does this all the time…as they should. When a teaching doesn’t hold up anymore they typically just stop talking about it.
“If one feels masturbation to be okay, then that is fine. If one feels it is wrong, then that is fine too….If God inspires us then it is not sin.” [You cannot determine this, as that is not your stewardship to do, and again, do you really want to go there for other people's choices? That means I could come in and offer my opinion about your choice...nah, you don't want to go there. You can't."
I don’t even know what you are talking about. If God lets you know by PR that something needs to be done or that it is nothing to worry about then how in the world can that be a sin? This is completely in line w/ prophetic and scriptural statements. Stating opinions and conclusions on masturbation have nothing to do w/ me exercising stewardship over anybody.
"Only God and His authorized servants can determine if someone is in sin or not, or the Spirit for one's self."
BINGO!
"An individual can make a choice to pursue a path or behavior, but that doesn't mean it will be 'fine' by the standards of the Church, for temple attendance, etc. That doesn't take away a person's agency, but we can't just jump to relative definitions of sin simply by personal choice, even if a person thinks that his/her choice is via revelation. Personal choice or even revelation is not the only determinant of what is sin. Otherwise, we could all determine for ourselves if we were worthy for reception of ordinances (baptism, temple, sealing). There is a reason there are judges in Israel and prophets to define and determine these things.]”
Now, as far as I can tell, and I hope it is true, the church generally is not asking if one is masturbating or not. They ask about the law of chastity and there seems to be some confusion about whether masturbation does or does not pertain to this law.
I don’t claim stewardship over anybody. They can think the way they wish.
“I perceive masturbation as not being part of the law of chastity [um, there you are interpreting the law -- which you said people shouldn't do!
] but as a tradition that men have accepted as part of the law of chastity. There is no scripture that deals w/ this issue.” [If you call something 'tradition' that prophets teach, that to me undermines what they teach, even if it's just your opinion or perception. It's one thing to lay out the history, even your own experience. It's another thing to interpret the history for others or generalize your experience in a way that minimizes what the prophets teach. If you assert that 'it's only tradition' that implies that it doesn't really matter. (I really don't see how you can think this isn't undermining their position.)"
I am saying that traditions are not doctrines and therefore are subject to our own PR.
"The risk is that someone who needs the counsel will not take it seriously because of what you have said. (Elder Oaks warns against public criticism of church leaders -- in part because we could make their leadership less effective for others.) You also say there is no scripture that supports this standard, but only prophets are authorized to interpret the law and scripture for others. Lines of stewardship must be carefully kept in order for us to stay within the order of the Church. I also believe one need be careful to not explain traditional perceptions and ideas as sin" [Like I said before, you simply can't know for sure if this is just tradition, or if they really did feel inspired in council with each other and as a result of their prophetic mantle to keep this specific counsel there for us. Personal revelation is for personal choices on how to apply prophetic counsel in one's life, not to decide if something prophets teach is valid, or doctrinal, or inspired, or whatever else, for everyone else.]”
Yes you can know if it is tradition. Don’t limit God’s power. I have spoken of personal conclusion, which I have shared w/ others. Criticism and analytical conclusions are separate things. If being critical is disagreeing then I suppose I am guilty as charged.
“Even w/ other issues I make sure that I feel right about it between me and HF b4 agreeing w/ the prophet or any apostle. They are not infallible.” [Of course they aren’t. But that’s irrelevant. The humanness of prophets has never changed the expectation God has for us that we take their words very seriously. We will be accountable for how we engage with and respond to their counsel. I feel like your conclusions seek to decide for others how seriously they should take the counsel. I don’t think that is appropriate.”
Precisely…but their infallibility is partly why it makes it so important how we respond to counsel and why we are especially accountable for our decision. It is on us…not them to decide w/ help of PR and other tools to make correct choices.
The very fact that I so highly tout the importance of search, ponder, and pray should make it all but apparent how seriously I take the words of the prophets.
“I should add that I’m not a fan of extensive historical study to try to determine the legitimacy of or discredit prophetic position on something, because I think it’s usually quite unnecessary. The Spirit can help us know if it’s legitimate and how we should implement it. That said, I wouldn’t have had as much of an issue with your approach had you only given the *information* and left your personal ‘therefore, I think this is only tradition’ type of conclusions out.”
The spirit comes after proper study and prayer.
If I did not have an opinion there would be no point to my blog post. Information means nothing till one thinks. The very fact that the leaders use the common thoughts of their day makes it quite obvious that they were using the traditions, ideas, theories, or the whatever of their day.
” Again, you simply haven’t been with the prophets as they have made decisions to teach these standards, or to include them in Church materials up to the present day. Let people decide through the Spirit for themselves if the counsel is legitimate and if it has valid doctrinal purpose.”
I do…that is my point. Provide the members the information and doctrine and I believe they will come up with the right answers—they are fully capable of governing themselves. This does not mean the answers will be the same for everyone to the which we should respect those who have different beliefs—even inside of the church. I make this clear at the end of the blog post.
“This is probably enough to give examples of what has concerned me and left me feeling like you are undermining the prophets. I also am concerned that you have contributed to extolling the supposed virtues of something the prophets have discouraged.”
If health benefits, is the virtue to which you charge me of extolling then I am guilty as charged again.
“As a parallel example: Just because drinking wine may have health benefits and there isn’t anything in ancient scripture that says we shouldn’t drink wine (quite the opposite, even!) does not mean we should drink wine or say that it doesn’t matter if people choose to do so. Prophets say it does, and they are the only ones who can speak to issues and standards like these in a general fashion.”
For me personally the big difference here is that there is no such thing as an alcohol drive. One’s sex drive needs to be regulated to some level as does hunger (a definite need). It is not healthy to starve oneself continuously and neither is it healthy to unnaturally abstain oneself of sexual expression.
“Again, if personal revelation exempts you for some reason, that is one thing, and we each will have to answer to God for our choices. Going to ‘the other side’ of the issue to try to show benefits or whatever is inappropriate to me and potentially could influence someone to go down the wrong path.”
Again, there is no choice w/o opposition. This is hardly an issue that is going to define one’s mortal existence. The possibility of going down the wrong path is always possible no matter whom you decide to follow.
Bruce R. McConkie said while commenting on the teaching of Brigham Young “I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church and that such teaching is part of the sifting process of mortality”
So again it falls on us. If you feel you are receiving blessings by not masturbating then don’t do it. But others may find that there are blessings as well by doing it and accepting it…namely physical health.
M&M said… “Maybe I should just ask how you think you *aren’t* undermining the prophets’ counsel on this issue, given all that you have said to indicate that you think (as I read you) it’s an unnecessary, inappropriate, uninspired hedge? All I can say is that I would feel undermined if I said something to you and you labeled it thusly.”
Okay, well…I think I will drive home my point w/ the following and from there you just gotta do what you feel right. I don’t know what you want me to say but here it goes…
“President Charles W. Penrose…once wrote, ‘We do not believe in the infallibility of man. When God reveals anything it is truth, and truth is infallible. No President has claimed infallibility.’…Not only were Biblical prophets sometimes wrong, but often they believed in the prevailing—and at times incorrect—views of their day. Likewise, early Mormons understood things differently than we do today. Just as Biblical figures had a strange view about the shape of the earth (Isa. 11:12) and the motion of the planets (Josh. 10:12-13) so likewise some early LDS leaders had some incorrect views…Prophets are not raised in cultural vacuums. Moses wasn’t, Abraham wasn’t and neither were Joseph, Brigham, or Hinckley…Not every utterance by every general authority constitutes “official” doctrine…Statements by leaders may be useful and true, but when they are ‘expressed outside the established, prophetic parameters,’ they do ‘not represent the official doctrine or position of the Church.” This includes statements given in General Conference. Conference talks—while certainly beneficial for the spiritual edification of the Saints—generally focus on revealed, official truths. They do not—by nature of being given in Conference—expound “official” doctrine. As Harold B. Lee said, “It is not to be thought that every word spoken by the General Authorities is inspired, or that they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost in everything they write.” To claim that anything taught in general conference is “official” doctrine, notes J.F. McConkie, “makes the place where something is said rather than what is said the standard of truth. Nor is something doctrine simply because it was said by someone who holds a particular office or position. Truth is not an office or a position to which one is ordained.”
How do we know then, what is “doctrine”, and what is not? First it must generally conform to what has already been revealed. ‘It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said,” wrote J. Fielding Smith, “if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside.’ The standard works, he explains, are the “measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine.”
Harold B. Lee expressed similar thoughts when he taught that any doctrine, advanced by anyone—regardless of position—that was not supported by the standard works, then “you may know that his statement is merely his private opinion.” He recognized that the Prophet could bring forth new doctrine, but ‘when he does, [he] will declare it as a revelation from God,’ after which it will be sustained by the body of Church.’
(OH MY GOSH! Are the prophet undermining themselves?)
The Prophet can add to the scriptures, but such new additions are presented by the First Presidency to the body of the Church and are accepted by common consent (by sustaining vote) as binding doctrine of the Church (See D&C 26:2; 107:27-31). Until such doctrines or opinions are sustained by vote in conference, however, they are “neither binding nor the official doctrine of the Church.”
How can we know if teachings, which have not been voted upon, are true? J. Reuben Clark explains that when “we ourselves, are ‘moved by the Holy Ghost,’ then we know that the speakers are teaching true doctrine. ‘In a way, this completely shifts the responsibility from THEM to US to determine when they so speak.”
It is likely that the Lord has allowed (and will continue to allow) his servants to make mistakes—it’s all part of progression and the growing process. We are not forced to accept teachings with which we disagree. We’re supposed to receive confirmation from the spirit if what is taught is the doctrine of God, and of course we’re the ones who put ourselves in jeopardy if we fail to accept things which will bless us.”
You let me know when I am to sustain Section 139–the “the masturbation doctrine.”
To which I conclude that “Men are permitted to hold individual views and express them w/ freedom so long as they are not seditious to the basic doctrines, practices, and establishments of the Church…if anyone holds views and gets satisfaction from them, I say let him have them, and for one I won’t abuse him for them.”
Jessawhy…We almost have 100.
Because the wonderful author of this post is out of town — and not much good happens after 100 comments — I’m closing comments for now.
Pingback: The Confession « The Exponent