Is this remotely true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anon1234567
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

anon1234567

Guest
I like wikipedia and very rarely have I seen things that are obviously not true.
Sexual regulation by the church accounted for a great amount of literature and time. The church saw regulation as necessary to maintain the welfare of society.[17] Canon law banned premarital sex, lust, masturbation, adultery, bestiality, homosexuality, and any sort of sex outside of marriage. Ironically, prostitution was occasionally legal and encouraged by the church, mainly in the church because priests were not allowed wives so they typically kept many concubines, although it was considered a form of adultery.[16]
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex,_gender_and_the_Roman_Catholic_Church#cite_note-Brundage2-15

apparently the book that is from is lacking in sources.🤷
books.google.co.uk/books?id=ReIdkk5pEMsC&dq=Sin,+Crime+and+the+Pleasures+of+the+Flesh:+the+Medieval+Church+Judges+Sexual+Offences&sitesec=reviews
 
Yes it is remotely true…VERY remotely…

It is true that many priests kept “concubines” at various times in history…and it may also be true that this was “winked at” within the Church at times.
However the Church has never taught that such behavior was correct…

As to the assertion that Prostitution was legal and encouraged by the Church…I had never heard of such a thing and without some sort of source given it is impossible to verify…So I would reject the claim.

Peace
James
 
I’m sorry! I had to make sure:) wimpers lol I’ll delete it tomorrow
thanks:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top