c. 1999 Religion News Service

(Andrew M. Greeley is a Roman Catholic priest, best-selling novelist and sociologist at the University of Chicago National Opinion Research Center. Check out his home page at http://www.agreeley.com or contact him via e-mail at agreel(at)aol.com.)

UNDATED _ Logically, the Roman Catholic Church’s punishment of the Rev. Robert Nugent and Sister Jeannine Gramick should mean that all ministry to gays and lesbians must cease.

After more than a decade of investigation, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has ordered them not to minister to gays and lesbians because they have refused to say that every homosexual act was intrinsically evil. Nugent, who has accepted the ruling, said he was willing to say such acts are objectively immoral, but that was apparently not enough.

If everyone who engages in gay ministry is bound to take such a public stand, then clearly the ministry is finished. Most gays and lesbians will not accept ministry from those who tell them their actions are intrinsically evil. Nor would most who try to minister to gays be willing to assert intrinsic evil.

However, it is not likely this case is intended to set a precedent. Rather the decision is probably ad hoc. Nugent and Gramick must have offended some powerful people, perhaps because their work was so well publicized. Thus, other ministries may well continue although no doubt with diminished effectiveness because gays and lesbians will be angry at the church’s treatment of Nugent and Gramick. To them and to many heterosexuals the distinction between”intrinsically evil”and”objectively immoral”will not seem all that great.

Still, the reason given for the decision is strange.

The priest and the nun, according to the Vatican, have caused”confusion among the laity.” This is an explanation frequently offered by bishops and the Vatican. I always find myself wondering who the laity are that are confused and how church authorities know they are confused.

It is an argument creating an image of uneducated, anxious, and troubled lay folk who fret and stew about what’s happening the Catholic community. I confess I find the image patronizing and demeaning, perhaps even insulting. More important, it simply does not fit the facts.

Repeated studies show the Catholic laity have remained remarkably resilient through the last three decades of turbulence in the church. Nor do they seem to be confused about homosexuality.

Quite the contrary.

In the last decade there has been a considerable change in the attitudes of Catholics about the issue. Less than half now believe homosexuality is always wrong, a decline of 20 percentage points. I doubt the change can be blamed on Nugent or Gramick.

Indeed, most Catholics had never heard of the pair until their recent condemnation. The dynamics of the change are different.

With gays and lesbians increasingly likely to admit their sexual orientation, many Catholics have discovered sons and daughters, friends and neighbors, colleagues and co-workers are homosexual. These men and women do not seem intrinsically evil. Catholics are not confused by this discovery. Rather, they are sympathetic and wish the church would be sympathetic too.

Most Catholics who realize a son or a daughter is gay do not reject them or love them any less, however painful the experience might be. They surely do not believe that their children are intrinsically evil. One imagines they are not pleased the recent Vatican denunciation.

The church has lost the support of the majority of its people in every country on which data are available on homosexuality, just as it has on birth control, pre-marital sex, and the legality of abortion.

It should be obvious that the strategy of condemnation and denunciation does not work. Perhaps it is time to rethink not necessarily doctrines, but strategy. Most of the parish clergy have in this country have already done so.

What would a new strategy look like?

Perhaps church leaders might be quiet for awhile and strive to listen and understand. Such a style does not mean compromise on doctrine. It means rather the leadership has begun to realize that statements from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith do not automatically change the minds of the laity.

DEA END GREELEY