. . . that the Pope would support the use of condoms outside of marriage?
I mean, the previous pontiff’s views on sexuality within marriage weren’t supposed to apply to sex outside of a committed heterosexual relationship in the first place.
Especially given the context of prostitution–and male prostitution at that–I don’t see how anyone can be surprised by this.
Clearly, Roman Catholic doctrines about the role of sex within marriage weren’t meant to preclude taking precautions regarding the spread of disease.
I mean, we can probably argue about how-young-is-too-young to make condoms available in the school nurse’s office (I’m in favor of having them there, but having the nurse try to suss out when there might be a middle-aged man in a young girl’s life). But to suggest that they shouldn’t be available to populations who are at high risk of disease is really odd.
I remember when my husband and I had our “pre-Cana” training so we could get married in the Church. I was quite surprised when one of the anonymous “questions in the hat” had to do with one of the couples there practicing birth control–and I was gratified that someone on the panel pointed out that it was sort of a moot point once the couple was having sex outside of marriage.