npub1canuxxljuglgceuy2zj3097x0a0jc842dkezzyumatp8hjqwfx2q39nnu2 (npub1can…nnu2) npub14xqzmdqns4z8tcz4qlpxtflmyxtt8vmspsgydvf2wd0nvqd8mwzsvc67d4 (npub14xq…67d4) npub1xl3k59e8lmn99y9w0dx07d8kgrp9k5sqan4uqfen6a7zrwsqt04stlw9t5 (npub1xl3…w9t5) Analogously, I suppose it could be argued it's "better" for a man to regularly rape only one woman than to regularly rape many women. But it's still not a loving act; even with just one woman, it is a mortal sin that will send a non-repentant person to hell. It's the same with the topic at hand, regardless of the number of men a homosexual might sodomize.
We should read the Bible according to how the writers intended its books to be understood. Sometimes (not always, but very often) that means literally. For example, it would go against the Gospel writers' intent if we were to understand the Resurrection in a spiritual sense that merely elevates Jesus' memory in our hearts. They clearly meant to express that His corpse came back to life and was glorified.
The Church defines dogmatically that a pope does not exercise the gift of infallibility unless he invokes his Petrine office to solemnly declares a matter of faith or morals to be believed by the entire Church.
The idea that anything he says goes -- that is a Protestant caricature of Catholicism. That's not what Catholicism teaches.