then the church could become a church instead of a liberal secularist society
Congratulations. That may have been the least sensical statement I've seen all day.
The church has changed and not for the better
OK, well, whatever. Let me break down that statement instead of being lazy:
Are you actually implying that the Church ignored the gay priests because they wanted to be accepting of gays or paedophiles (the later of which is a mainstream liberal position now?) as opposed to covering their own collective asses, a phenomenon which knows no political boundaries?
What does any of that have to do with secularism?
