Charles, I tried to check what he really said, but there seem to be conflicting versions.

The Italian version only speaks of “una prostituta”. Since there is no male version of “prostituta” in Italian, it would need a qualifier in Italian if the term was meant to ONLY design male prostitutes.

So it would be interesting to know at what point the “male” came into play. It is NOT in the original Italian versions, but I note that the English and some German reportings have the “male”. The first German reportings do not have the male and say “Prostituierte” (which means both sexes)

Could it be a conflict in the Vatican? There is no audio available.

Actually I think the version without the male makes more “sense”. Why should only male prostitutes be allowed condoms and not male couples?

I don’t think it’s correct to reduce the Catholic version of “sex and love” to making babies. What this Pope and others have been saying for some time is that love is more than sex. Love should be moral, and this includes corporal love. The Church doesn’t hold the view anymore that sex ONLY serves the purpose of procreation, but that Love (including the corporal part of it) should be a moral, responsible action. Sex with condoms (so they say) fosters “immoral” and “irresponsible”, “casual” sexual relations.

Again, I’m an agnostic. But given the fact, that in some very Catholic nations the word of the Pope still has consequences I believe it’s important.

And I believe that the Pope’s concern is about “responsibility for others” as a moral act. Using condoms can be seen as being irresponsible, because it enables people to have casual sex. But there are instances in which the use of condoms may be more responsible than not using one.

And that’s a line of thinking that future Popes may work on.