I never really appreciated the whole online dating scene. The closest I ever got was filling out the free online profile, answering the questions as vaguely as possible and then waiting as the “we’re almost finished uploading your page” message kept blinking, along with a desperate request for a photo because, as the company kindly counseled, “your chances will be much greater” — which translated as “Seriously, cow, do you think anyone is going to buy your milk sight unseen?”

When I saw what was available to me before I signed up for a three-month deluxe package that sounded like a Chinese buffet, only without the MSG, I decided that my little noontime lark was over. You know the products you can choose from in the “day old” section at your local bakery? Yes.

I came away from the experience realizing that people, myself included, will always be choosier than we initially think we are, and far less tolerant. Forget that feminist feel-good mantra of “He’s lucky to get you, so hold out for the best.” In life, we need to compromise even though it feels like settling. The fact that I was unwilling to compromise to the tune of $600 for three fun-filled months is beside the point. We all have our idea of what is perfect, and we idealize people even though there are very few breathing specimens that will ever respond to all of our needs. And yet we keep trying.

I thought about my nanosecond in the online dating world this past week with the arrival of Pope Francis. I know it might seem a bit sacrilegious to compare the head of one of the world’s greatest religions to a participant on Match.com, and get your mind out of the gutter because that’s not what I’m doing. It simply occurred to me that between the conservatives and the liberals, both groups had the perfect pontiff profile all prepared in their minds, and were unwilling to consider that perhaps Pope Francis couldn’t comfortably accommodate those demands.

From the moment he was selected by his peers in March 2013, the liberals seemed to think that they’d struck papal gold. He was much more charismatic than his scholarly predecessor and a bit of a loose cannon when it came to impromptu press conferences. One of the first signs that this was not your grandfather’s pope was when Francis said, rather offhandedly during a flight, “Who am I to judge?” This was in response to a question about gay priests. The liberal world went gaga (including, I’m assuming, Lady Gaga). Here was the head of a church that had historically said homosexual acts were a grave sin, acting as if he was willing to adopt a gay priest. It was one of those “aha” moments for the guys on late-night TV who love to attack Christians, and Catholic Christians in particular, as being intolerant monsters. Here, at last, was a reason to hope that the answer was blowing in the tail winds of Shepherd One.

Of course, this rankled conservatives, who were a bit shocked to see church teaching on homosexuality being radically altered. Except, of course, it wasn’t being altered in the least. The only thing that was happening was that the Pope was using kinder words to say what had always been the policy of the church: hate the sin, not the sinner. In other words, being homosexual was not a sin. Acting on homosexual urges was the problem. Same message, different messenger. Still, social progressives conveniently blocked out the substantive message and clung to the sweet tones in which it was now being delivered.

And then the pope issued his encyclical on the environment, Laudato Si. It was as if the Vatican had decided to add Al Gore’s face to one of the murals on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. It was complete validation for those who truly believed that human beings were negatively impacting the environment and endangering the quality and number of our natural resources. Pope Francis made a lot of Sierra Club folks extremely happy with his pronouncements and sent more than a few conservatives to Internet search engines with queries like “impeachment” and “Roman Catholic Pontiff.”

And then came the announcement that women who’d had abortions would not automatically be excommunicated and could, in fact, be absolved from sin without recourse to a bishop. This was not a radical change in policy, especially here in Philadelphia, where parish priests already had the authority to grant absolution to post-abortive mothers. But for certain people, this writer included, it seemed as if the church were taking some serious steps backward on the evil and sinful nature of abortion.

So you can imagine how excited liberals were that Pope Francis was coming to the United States. They were finally going to have that first date with the fellow they’d been courting over the past couple of years. They were going to get a firsthand glimpse of the man who’d filled their dreams, fulfilled their desires, made them think of some perfect future union.

And the dream continued during his first few days in the country. He chastised Congress for its position on the death penalty (sure, he made some veiled reference to abortion, too, but since he never actually said the word “abortion” they were able to put that in the category of “negotiable annoyances,” like rooting for the Dallas Cowboys.)

When he got to New York, he exhorted the United Nations to be more vigilant to the plight of refugees. He made a lot of statements about the poor, which always makes liberals smile because they are of course the only ones who actually know poor people. He got some liberals so excited they actually stole his utensils, dusted them for fingerprints, took DNA samples and essentially stalked him.

And then, finally, he was here in Philadelphia. The first big date was at Independence Hall. It went very well, especially when he spoke in Spanish about the value of immigration to this immigrant society, and about the dangers that unchecked globalization could cause to the worldwide economy.

You could actually hear the sighs of delight, and see thought bubbles rising over the heads of liberals with the words “Love of My Life!”

At the same time, you had conservatives grumbling and grunting about the Commie Pope. Apparently, they had somehow input their data into the computer incorrectly, and instead of getting tall, dark and Republican they got St. Bernie of Sanders. What in the world, they thought, had happened to their church?

And then, after the Pope was safely back in Rome, with the promise of a long distance relationship, word slipped out that he’d met with Rowan County, Kentucky, Clerk Kim Davis before leaving the United States. Davis was the lady who’d made headlines earlier this summer by taking a religious stand against issuing same-sex marriage licenses.

Liberals acted as if the pope had cheated on them. This wasn’t the man they’d fallen in love with? What the heck had happened to their perfect mate? Was it all just a mirage?

Conservatives, on the other hand, smiled smugly and took a closer look at Francis, thinking that perhaps he was better looking than his profile picture.

And the pope, in Rome, just canceled his subscription because he realized these Americans were way too demanding when it came to personal relationships.

By Christine M. Flowers

Christine M. Flowers is a lawyer and columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News. — Ed.

(Philadelphia Daily News/Tribune Content Agency)