What does the Liberal Catholic Church teach?

The Liturgy of the Liberal Catholic Church, Third Ed., 1987

Artur Schnabel, Czech pianist, 1882-1951

The Rev. Bennett D. D. Burke (with apologies to Mr. Schnabel)

What does the Liberal Catholic Church teach? Above all else, I value our teaching on intellectual liberty and respect for the individual conscience. And how do we teach it? Not only with words, but with silence.

This may seem odd or unorthodox. Silence as a method of teaching? Or even as a teaching in itself? Yet if we accept the "deep mysticism" cited in our statement of belief, why should we hesitate to accept silence as a teaching, or as a means of imparting wisdom? Consider these views of silence: "Silence is the best response to mystery." (Kathleen Norris, poet); "Well-timed silence hath more eloquence than speech." (Martin Farquhar Tupper, author); and "Silence is as full of potential wisdom and wit as the unhewn marble of great sculpture." (Aldous Huxley, author).

Now, I know there may be those who regard our silence on a wide variety of subjects not as teachings in themselves, but as something like "a lack of sufficiently clear teachings." In this essay, I intend to make the case that in the LCC, our silence is in itself a teaching, and further, is perhaps our most important teaching. I sincerely believe that what we don’t say is just as significant as what we do say.

Think of it this way - most churches have wiped out forests printing volumes upon volumes of teachings. Taught by clergy, committed to memory by members, and repeated forever by generations, the faithful learn not to think, explore and grow, but only to recite. The Liberal Catholic Church, on the other hand, has many fewer written and required teachings, with much more left to the conscience of the spiritual seeker. Here’s another way to think about it - let’s compare the number of pages of Liberal Catholic Canon Law with the Canons of our ancestor, the Roman Catholic Church. Can anyone imagine a more striking comparison of the differences between these two denominations? The Roman Catholic Canons, in multiple volumes, occupy shelf after shelf. But our Code of Canons can be held between thumb and forefinger, with room left to spare! Next, let’s open up our Code of Canons and see what it requires of us as teachers of the faith.

Hmmm…nowhere in the Code of Canons do we see a statement that we "incorporate by reference" the entire Canon Law of the Roman Church. Nowhere in our Canons do we find a statement that we "believe and teach everything the Roman Church teaches, except for those things about which we disagree," such as papal infallibility, open communion, and so on. Could our founders have simply overlooked those inclusions and incorporations by reference?

I think not. Instead, my study of Liberal Catholic theology leads me to believe that our founders had the clear intent to retain the sacraments and the ritual which defines us as Catholics, while stripping away layer upon layer of "teachings," developed over the past two thousand years by fallible men, teachings which many believe not only depart from Christ’s own teachings, but in many ways directly conflict with them.

Consider a few examples, among many others we could cite. We all know what the Roman Church teaches about homosexuality, and about issues of reproductive choice. Let’s see what our Canon Law requires us as members or clergy to believe and to teach about these issues. Hmmm…can’t find any mention of them. Now, using our Concordance and a copy of the Bible, let’s go looking for what Christ Himself said about these issues. Here’s what He said about homosexuality...

...

...

...

That’s right. He said nothing. Now, let’s see what He said about reproductive issues…

...

...

...

Right again. Christ said nothing about artificial methods of birth control. And these are just a few of many examples of the difference between Roman "teachings," and the "silence" of both the Liberal Catholic Church, and Christ Himself.

Perhaps there’s a point in here somewhere. Perhaps we should pursue this mission: teaching about things Christ actually said, rather than spending our time worrying about things He never said, or worrying about what the Roman Church says. Perhaps, by remaining silent about these subjects, we can stay true to our stated intent: to offer to those who seek us out "the widest measure of intellectual liberty and respect for the individual conscience," and "freedom of interpretation of the Scriptures, the Creeds and the Liturgy."

But staying true to our stated intent presents a significant challenge. Acting as spiritual guides certainly takes more time and effort than reciting dogma, since the deeper answers to the mysteries can not be looked up in a catechism, but must be experienced for ourselves. So, what do we say when someone asks us, "What does the Liberal Catholic Church teach about reproductive rights issues?" or "What does the Liberal Catholic Church teach about homosexuality?" I know how tempting it is to quickly return to the teachings of the Roman Church, and to say "Catholics are opposed to artificial methods of birth control, and in regard to homosexuality, we hate the sin but love the sinner." But I believe that by doing that, by automatically connecting our teachings back to those of the Roman Church, we do a disservice to those who ask us for spiritual guidance. Maybe it might help to remember that Thomas A. Kempis wrote a marvelous book entitled "The Imitation of Christ," not "The Imitation of the Roman Catholic Church." Yes, the Liberal Catholic Church descends from the Roman Church, but we are not the Roman Church. Neither are we scribes, endlessly copying doctrines and dogmas, nor ritual-and-tradition-obsessed Pharisees, who "make clean the outside of the cup and the platter," but leave the "inward part full of ravening and wickedness." (Luke 11:39).

Instead, I propose that Liberal Catholic clergy think of ourselves as spiritual guides and facilitators, not as keepers of doctrine and dogma, and certainly not as keepers of Roman Catholic doctrine and dogma. Take a look at this comment on "good teaching" from Laurent A. Daloz, in Effective Teaching and Mentoring: "Good teaching rests neither in accumulating a shelfful of knowledge nor in developing a repertoire of skills. In the end, good teaching lies in a willingness to attend and care for what happens in our students, ourselves, and the space (emphasis mine) between us. Good teaching is a certain kind of stance, I think. It is a stance of receptivity, of attunement, of listening." Change a few words here, like "skills" to "concrete answers," and "students" to "members," and I can’t think of a better way to describe how we should practice our ministry of teaching in the Liberal Catholic Church.

Perhaps we should practice giving answers like this to difficult questions of faith: "The Liberal Catholic Church believes in intellectual liberty. We practice and teach respect for the individual conscience. That means that our members have the freedom to interpret the Scriptures, the Creeds and the Liturgy. But it also means that our members have a great responsibility for their own spiritual growth. So, let’s talk about your view of homosexuality, or reproductive issues, or (…fill in the blank with whatever question you’re asked about the Liberal Catholic Church’s teachings…).

"Let’s discuss your experience with those subjects in other churches, and some of the various ways in which these issues have been debated in spiritual and Biblical contexts from Christ’s time to today. That way, we can help put them in perspective. Together, we can help you come to terms with them. Together, we can see if your understanding of those issues has separated you from Christ and His sacraments in the past, and whether a broader understanding of them, combined with the LCC’s respect for your intellectual liberty, might help bring you back to Him."

Practically speaking, this approach is nothing more nor less than the old advice contained in the "give me a fish and I eat today, teach me to fish and I eat forever" concept.

Now back to the musical analogy with which we began, the analogy of "notes and pauses," and "teachings and silence." Imagine taking a piece of music by Mozart, or Miles Davis, or Hildegard von Bingen. Now, imagine inserting notes of your own choosing, or notes from another musical selection, in the "pauses" between the notes of the original. How would your modification preserve or enhance the beauty of the artist’s original work? Similarly, how can we preserve or enhance the beauty of our great work, spreading the "good news" about the Liberal Catholic Church, by inserting "teachings," not intended by our founders, in the "silence" they created? Furthermore, why would we even try?

I believe our founders, in their wisdom, left us a precious gift, a gift of ritual and mystery, of movement and repose, of sound and silence. Remembering the classical view of "Wisdom" as a feminine principle, hear what two women religious had to say about silence:

"Silence is precious, for it is of God. In silence all God’s acts are done; in silence alone can his voice be heard and his word spoken." (Mother Maribel CSMV, Superior, Community of St. Mary the Virgin, Wantage, England), and…

"God is the friend of silence. See how nature – trees, flowers, grass – grows in silence; see the stars, the moon and the sun, how they move in silence…We need silence to be able to touch souls." (Mother Teresa, Missionaries of Charity, Calcutta, India)

"We need silence to be able to touch souls." Yes, that’s exactly what we need. The written and spoken teachings we handle no better than many churches. But the silence between them – ah, that is where the Liberal Catholic Church makes its mark upon the soul.