You're an idiot. Ruth writes a piece with no proof and you call it historic fact.Ruth Karras, author of Common Women: prostitution and sexuality in medieval England, discusses how some bishops ran and owned brothels in England during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.Ecclesiastical institutions and individuals owned brothels . Several individual clerics also managed brothels in London and Westminster. She mentions also that they were not only owners, but many were clients as well. Karras is not the only one to show that the clergy were clients of prostitutes. in the cases of procuration and brawling in the brothel or the bathhouse, members of the clergy are listed as present, named and given as residents of the city , clergy still made up twenty per cent of the clientele of the bathhouses and the private bordellos of Dijon.
Not only was the Church involved in ownership, but in France during the mid thirteenth century, they accepted alms from prostitutes.In accepting the prostitutes alms, the Church recognized that she had acted out of necessity. The Church supported this institution because they believed it to be a necessity. They owned and ran brothels, accepted money from prostitutes, and used Mary Magdalene as an example of a prostitute who redeemed herself by repenting. Many were tolerant of prostitutes by acknowledging them as a future Mary Magdalene.
The church followed the philosophy regarding prostitution as a necessary evil and often participated in it, since it had been justified. The medieval public followed the same philosophy. They kept and welcomed prostitution into their communities.
JETHRO:i'm not surprised at all about this.anything for a buck.
You searched for something to smear the Catholic Church with; it doesn't matter if its true or not; then you 'put it out there' to feel better about yourself for rejecting Christ.
You remind me how I indeed belong to the only Church started by Jesus Christ- Himself the victim of slander and lies.