This past week I was on facebook when I mistakenly commented on a picture my brother had posted. The picture was of a concert that had taken place at the (fill-in-the-blank-adjective) new Cathedral in Saskatoon. In my comment (with a typical snarkiness that I usually get in trouble for) I mentioned the regulations regarding charging for a concert at a church, and then gave a link to the document. I was wondering what my brother (a priest) thought of the document. Just as a bit of a backstory, concerts-for-pay at churches is an extremely controversial issue in many areas. It doesn't help that, unfortunately, the document regarding concerts is not crystal clear. On one hand it kinda-sorta leaves room for the bishop to decide things. On the other hand, and in the same breath, it speaks on such things as performers being dressed in a fitting manner. So... can a bishop decide that a performer doesn't have to be dressed in a fitting manner?.. Yikes! In other words, its not very clear about things.
Now there's nothing wrong with seeing what my brother thinks of the whole issue. I've honestly been caught on both sides of the debate before. And again, it is a pretty big issue, especially in parts of Ontario. Nevertheless, I usually try to refrain from such conversations via facebook. Blogs are bad enough for seeing ridiculous comments (Becca and I have had to delete some very cruel comments before... not YOURS of course!), but facebook is just a stupid place to engage the world in a theological debate. Anyway, I responded to the photo without thinking. Whoops. Dumb dumb. Oh well, pas la fin du monde, or something like that.
Seeing that it was on facebook, though, I did get some reaction to my insinuation that there are bigger, more important, issues at stake with money-charging concerts in churches (i.e. it is somewhat theologically inconsistent with the whole idea of Old Testament Divinely instituted temple worship, and subsequent Christian practice of liturgy in God's sacred space). Some of the reaction I got, and what is ultimately the crux of this blogpost, is what I would call: The Medjugorje Argument.
Essentially someone responded that the concert in question was a beautiful, most prayerful, event. The people who attended were inspired and raised in praise of God. Therefore,
what could possibly be wrong with that?
The Medjugorje Argument. That's what.
What is the Medjugorje Argument? It is the argument that: "see, look at all the tremendous blessings and conversions and faith inspiring things that are happening.... therefore Medjugorje must be authentic!"
And I say relativism.
To say that much good is being done, and therefore it must be the right thing, is to say that: a) you can judge exactly what good is being done, b) your seeing this apparent visible good trumphs anything that the wisdom of the Church says.
Example 1: "I see many conversions at Medjugorje. People are really truly growing in their faith! How is it possible that this is unauthentic, or that we are actually not permitted to pilgrimage there under the pretext of celebrating the sacraments as believers in the 'apparitions?'"
Response 1: Yes, God can work much good out of any situation. Even if the situation has a severe deprivation, or is outright untrue. However, likewise, the devil can also gladly allow some conversions and building of faith in order to achieve a greater evil end. What happens if Medjugorje is definitively declared as unauthentic? Then its followers will have a decision to make: stay with Medjugorje or stay with the Church? The division in the Church could be enormous. You can't be half pregnant.
The devil loves division, and will sacrifice a few to get hold of many.
Example 2: "Paying to attend concert at church must be right, for all in attendance were so blessed!"
Response 2: Maybe they were. Maybe they
felt they were. Maybe they felt they were, but deep down their understanding of what constitutes worship in the church was cheapened? Maybe many began to associate worship more with feelings than actual faith? Maybe they're willingness to accept, either way, what the Church declares on such issues was damaged? As one of my professors always likes to say loudly: "WE DON'T KNOW." Ultimately I don't know or care about what the concert was about. For all I know everyone was truly blessed. My point is, though, that we can't use relativistic reasoning to argue for/against such things.
Why not?
Let's ramp this up even more...
Example 3: "Look at this! One billion people worshiping Christ in their own churches! One billion! What could be wrong with this? Praise God!"
Response 3: We speak here of one billion non-Catholic Christians. In other words, one billion Protestants. Is it better that there be one billion Protestants than one billion atheists? YOU BET!!! Does this mean that God wills to have one billion Protestants, to go along with 1.2 billion Catholics? Even my good friends at Redeemer would admit that this is absurd. This is a huge division of faith! What about one billion Protestants spread around over 40,000 plus denominations, often with severe differences in doctrine and dogma? Of course not. Just because there are one billion Protestants praising Christ does not mean that God wills Protestantism.
The point is this: we are to above all seek to follow the wisdom of the Church, and not what we feel, or even think, is true. We must get past The Medjugorje Argument and instead seek the mind of Christ, through His Church. We can't do it on our own. We can't simply say we see good being done, and therefore what is being done must be correct. That is relativism: to personally decide what is right or not.
Bottom Line:
We need the Church. The WHOLE Church. And nothing but the Church
P.S. For the record, my brother responded to my facebook query by focusing on the actual Church document. This is what we need to do. Look to not only what the Church says, but why.
P.P.S. I'm not taking sides either way on the whole paying for concerts in a church debate. The document is somewhat muddled. There are many good arguments on both sides. I do, however, hope that we can take these opportunities to re-examine the bigger picture of the argument, and to study the entire theological, biblical, and historical importance of the church as a sacred place of worship.
P.P.P.S. I do truly hope people were blessed and moved to deepen their faith via that concert in question. How nice of me.
P.P.P.P.S. In the spirit of inviting dialogue on these issues... I am closing the comments box for this. Hypocrite! I know. But then again, I never did say that blogs were the best place to have such debates. They're better than facebook, but only by a little bit. Come on over for a cup of coffee and we'll have a good old chat! We'll pull up our Catechisms and Summas and get right down to it!
