Well, yes. The French press, for example, never speaks of “the churches”; always, « L’Église. » They may hate her, but they know that she is unique and, above all, that she is not a mere sect; that, in Belloc’s words, “She proposes to take in men’s minds even more than the place taken by patriotism; to influence the whole of society, not a part of it, and to influence it even more thoroughly than a common language. Where She is confronted by any agency inimical to Her claim, though that agency be not directly hostile, She cannot but oppose it.”

The Edict of Milan was a compromise; what made Europe was the Edict of Thessalonica of IMPPP Gratian, Valentinian and Theodosius AAA on 27 February 380 – “We will that all the peoples ruled by the moderation of our clemency should profess that religion that was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter, as it has been preserved by faithful tradition, and which is now professed by the Pontiff Damasus…” No further identification of the religion prescribed was vouchsafed, or necessary.

From its point of view, wouldn’t it be better if the pope’s “conservatism” (which is no different than John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI, and John XXIII–who was no “liberal”–) drove more Catholics out of the Church, which then would have less influence? Wouldn’t it beneficial if the Catholic Church went out of business?

I always wondered why the legions of lapsed Catholics never become members of the many mainline Protestant denominations that support contraception, legalized abortion, gay marriage, and female clergy. Does the Catholic Church ruin religion forever with some people?