I’ve heard that during most of the middle ages the Church condoned and even encouraged prostitution. I’ve also read quotes from Sts. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas that making prostitution illegal would be very imprudent. Why though? Isn’t prostitution a grave moral evil? If the Church could’ve “tolerated” prostitution back then, can it “tolerate” homo marriage and abortion today?
I am only aware of one passage in St. Thomas Aquinas’ writings where toleration and prostitution are mentioned together. Here is that passage:
"Human government is derived from the Divine government, and should imitate it. Now although God is all-powerful and supremely good, nevertheless He allows certain evils to take place in the universe, which He might prevent, lest, without them, greater goods might be forfeited, or greater evils ensue. Accordingly in human government also, those who are in authority, rightly tolerate certain evils, lest certain goods be lost, or certain greater evils be incurred: thus Augustine says (De Ordine ii, 4): ‘If you do away with harlots, the world will be convulsed with lust.’ (
Summa Theologica 2-2 Question 10 Article 11)
I do not think that passage by itself implies that prostitution ought to be explicitly allowed for by the law, and I don’t think it implies that it should simply be overlooked by the police. I think a government could forbid prostitution and prosecute it and still not “do away with” harlots. The comparison to God’s government seems insightful. God’s law does not explicitly allow for prostitution, and God does not overlook it. But neither does He do away with them. He forbids prostitution, He punishes it, and yet it remains. I’m not sure what else to say about that because I haven’t given it much thought, but I certainly think there is more to the story.
Re: St. Augustine’s comments, I think it is helpful to look at the context of the remark. It appears in De Ordine Part 1 Book 2 Chapter 4 Paragraph 12. De Ordine means On Order. I know of two translations of this book:
one by Fr. Robert Russell and
another by Silvano Borruso. On Scribd I found the
complete text of Borruso’s translation.
Part 1 Book 2 Chapter 4 Paragraph 12, in that edition, is on pages 64-67. Augustine and his companion have been discussing how God assigns order to the world and human social life, and yet there are some things in it that are disordered. Augustine’s companion says: “I say that the whole life of a fool, though running in fits and starts and in perennial disorder, is nevertheless inserted into the order of things by divine providence. God’s ineffable and everlasting law has set aside a definite place for it, not allowing it to operate outside it.”
A few sentences later, Augustine begins Paragraph 12:
“Isn’t it great and wonderful how that unfathomable order responds to me through you! It must be God himself, as I am more and more led to believe. I neither understand how you manage to say things that cannot be said without seeing them, nor how you actually see them. That is I think they are true inspirations. You were looking for an analogy to illustrate your thoughts. I can think of countless ones, all leading me to agree with you. What is ghastlier than a savage and terrible public executioner? Yet he holds a necessary office in law, and is inserted in the social order of a well-governed state. His personal noxious character is ordered by others towards punishing other noxious characters. What is filthier, uglier, and more disgraceful than whores, procurers, and such-like plagues of humanity? Remove prostitutes from the social order, however, and lust will destroy it. Let them rise to the same status as married women, and you will dishonor matrimony with an unseemly stain. This most unchaste lifestyle, therefore, places its practitioners at the very bottom of the social order. Equally, we are repelled by the shape of some animal organs on looking at them in isolation. But the order of nature wanted them where necessary, without however giving them undue prominence. Ugly as they are, they occupy their appointed place, leaving better places for better ones. Wasn’t that fight between two cocks for the favor of their hens, mentioned in the previous book, a great sight? But, appropriately, we enjoyed it in a country setting. Wasn’t the ruffled, vanquished cock a sorry sight? Yet it fitted within the perfection and overall beauty of the fight.”
Again, I don’t think this context implies that prostitution should be explicitly allowed for by the law or that the police should simply ignore it. Right before he gives the example of prostitutes, St. Augustine mentions that certain “noxious characters” are rightly punished by the law. St. Augustine also says that prostitutes are “at the very bottom of the social order.” If criminals are included somewhere in the social order (e.g. in prison), and if prostitutes are at the very bottom of the social order, it would seem likely that he includes prostitutes as a type of criminal. Unless I’m misunderstanding St. Augustine, which is quite possible, he is not saying that prostitution should be legal. “Prostitutes should not be removed” does not seem the same as “Prostitution should be legal” or “Prostitution should be overlooked.” Again, I haven’t given this sufficient thought to explain it completely, but I think there is more to the story.
Perhaps others have other insights now that we have additional context?
