Last night at our film club in Dublin we watched The Agony and the Ecstasy, while reflecting on the relationship between the Church and art. It is a wonderful movie with two great actors, Charlton Heston and Rex Harrison who spent most of the time pulling the hair out of each other, metaphorically speaking. It was an opportunity to get reacquainted with the work of the great Florentine artist, sculptor, architect and poet, Michelangelo.
One criticism that tends to made against the Church is her patronage of the arts and her preservation of artistic works. Critics tell us that the Church should sell all her art and treasures and give the money to the poor. I remember a story from the life of Archbishop Fulton Sheen. Once, in conversation with a priest, the priest complained to Sheen that the Church should sell all her riches and property and give the money to the needy. Sheen looked him straight in the eye and asked him, "How much did you steal?" The priest was shocked, but apparently he did steal - he had been taking funds out of his parish for his own use. Sheen maintained that those who zealously propose this argument are hiding something themselves.
That said, we can ask the question, why doesn't the Church sell all her art and treasures? Having lived in Rome and had the opportunity to get inside the Vatican I can assure you that the riches of the Vatican are concentrated in the basilicas and chapels - for the glory of God, the museums, for the preservation of culture and to share with the world, and in some state rooms to dignify audiences. The rest of the Vatican is quite simple and austere. The pope's bedroom is said to be very simple, certainly video evidence shows that his apartment is very understated. The various Vatican offices are anything but grandiose.
So why so many treasures? What about the Church's mission to the poor? Well most of the treasures and art are either in the churches or museums. First they beautify the house of God - while many modernists will complain about that, not even Jesus objected to it - he did not condemn the woman who poured expensive perfume over his feet - when Judas (remember - it was Judas the betrayer and thief who first raised the question!) objected the Lord did not agree with him. Our churches are meant to be beautiful places - they are to be worthy of the worship of God. Now of course, art in a church is not the great beauty of the Church - the holiness of her members is, but art is the fruit of man's creative work and his engagement with the beautiful: that too must be offered to God and used to worship him, and so the Church commissions art and decorates her churches with it. I notice when various movements in the Church objected and denuded the churches of art, this art ended up in private homes - they take from God to keep for themselves. Such was the way with the Protestant Reformation.
Secondly, the Church preserves art to make it available to the world, and this is the role the Vatican museums play. These pieces, if sold, would for the most part end up in private collections, and so be taken away from the world. As the fruit of God's inspiration and man's labour, these pieces belong to the world.
But there is another reason why the Church keeps them - to raise money. Yes, she has to be practical. The Vatican does not run on fresh air - and the donations of the faithful may not be enough to cover the cost of a world-wide mission - the entry fee to the museums helps finance that mission. When speaking with those who say the Church should sell the art, I always ask them if they would be prepared to make up the loss of income - they always say "Absolutely not!" - relying on such charity, then, it is no wonder the Church has to have a reliable source of income.
And what about the poor? The Church is THE biggest charity in the world - her charitable works are part of her world wide mission, and so the monies earned from her various incomes goes to assist the poor in numerous projects around the world. If she sold all her art, yes, a huge amount of money would go to the poor and then, when that was gone, it's gone. As it is, with the world coming to see these treasures and paying admission, the Church can continue to finance her many charities year after year.
So when you're next facing interrogation about the Church and art, remind the critics of these arguments, and then ask them if they are prepared to personally finance the Church's mission. You'll find they'll not be too keen to do so, in fact with many of them they are not really interested in the Church's mission, may even be opposed to it, perhaps not even understand it. Remind them, then, that Judas was the first to raise this question. That should bring the conversation to an immediate end!
No comments:
Post a Comment