Missionary position

[Walty]

I'm responding to this only so that I remember to look at all the responses.  I'm interested because I've heard both sides of this debate.

Do you know of any old threads that discussed the topic? I'd be interested to read them, in addition to any responses to this thread.

I can't remember any specific threads, but I know it's been discussed here before. 

[Historian]

If the sex act is procreative and between a married couple then why would the position of the woman/man make any difference?

[Resurrexi]

If the sex act is procreative and between a married couple then why would the position of the woman/man make any difference?

I was under the impression that the missionary position best facilitates procreation.

[Historian]

If the sex act is procreative and between a married couple then why would the position of the woman/man make any difference?

I was under the impression that the missionary position best facilitates procreation.

I'm not sure if that's true but even if it were i'm not sure it'd make much of a difference. Practicing NFP doesn't best facilitate procreation, in fact the entire point of it is to have sex when you probably wont conceive, and the Church allows that.

[Historian]

It was thought in the past that this position was useful for conception, therefore other positions were contraceptive.

This is not true. Contraception and the killing of humans were always known to be wrong. The exact mechanisms of human reproduction were not revealed to us through the Church. This means St. Thomas had errors in application, but the principles were true.

[3Sanctus]

It was thought in the past that this position was useful for conception, therefore other positions were contraceptive.

This is not true. Contraception and the killing of humans were always known to be wrong. The exact mechanisms of human reproduction were not revealed to us through the Church. This means St. Thomas had errors in application, but the principles were true.

So any position is okay as long as only vaginal intercourse is engaged in?

Being vague for the sake of charity...are there other things that can be done during vaginal intercourse to ensure both parties enjoy the act as fully as possible?  It's easier for a male to fully enjoy the marital act than it is for his wife...are there licit ways to do something about this disparity?

[LatinGuy]

So any position is okay as long as only vaginal intercourse is engaged in?

Being vague for the sake of charity...are there other things that can be done during vaginal intercourse to ensure both parties enjoy the act as fully as possible?  It's easier for a male to fully enjoy the marital act than it is for his wife...are there licit ways to do something about this disparity?

The general rule as I've always understood it is that as long as things "complete" in the correct fashion, then anything else except for sodomy is allowable.  I base this upon JPII's "Theology of the Body" (not Christopher West's interpretations thereof), and I am aware that this source may not be worth much to many here.

[miss_fluffy]

I can see that if you felt different positions would thwart conception, then it would be sinful to engage in them.  But if you knew better, like we do now, it follows that all positions are licit.  I remember reading in everyone's favorite moral theology by Fr. Jone, that it would be sinful for a woman to engage in vigorous activity (ie. jumping) immediately following the marital act.

[ardens]

So any position is okay as long as only vaginal intercourse is engaged in?

Being vague for the sake of charity...are there other things that can be done during vaginal intercourse to ensure both parties enjoy the act as fully as possible?  It's easier for a male to fully enjoy the marital act than it is for his wife...are there licit ways to do something about this disparity?

The general rule as I've always understood it is that as long as things "complete" in the correct fashion, then anything else except for sodomy is allowable.  I base this upon JPII's "Theology of the Body" (not Christopher West's interpretations thereof), and I am aware that this source may not be worth much to many here.

What if the wife "completes," but the husband finds himself unable to complete, as in times when they have completed the marital act once or several times previously that day?

[LatinGuy]

What if the wife "completes," but the husband finds himself unable to complete, as in times when they have completed the marital act once or several times previously that day?

If this situation occurs unintentionally, then I don't see how it could be sinful.  If there is a reasonable expectation on the husband's part that he will be unable to complete, then the prudent thing to do would probably be to abstain from further "acts" that day.  It's probably an issue better taken up with a good confessor, though, since things get sticky in this area (pardon the pun).