Suppose the Bank of Canada pegged the price of gold. If an increased demand for gold caused a recession, would macroeconomists be told they needed to pay more attention to the theory of the demand for gold? Or would the Bank of Canada be told to change its policy?

Suppose the Bank of Canada pegged the exchange rate to the US Dollar. If a fall in the demand for Canadian-produced goods relative to US-produced goods caused a recession in Canada, would macroeconomists be told they needed to pay more attention to the theory of international trade? Or would the Bank of Canada be told to change its policy?

Suppose the Bank of Canada pegged the money supply growth rate. If an increased demand for money caused a recession, would macroeconomists be told they needed to pay more attention to the theory of the demand for money? Or would the Bank of Canada be told to change its policy?

In each of those three cases, the macroeconomic importance of some particular sector of the economy is merely an artefact of a particular monetary policy.

Is the macroeconomic importance of finance, likewise, merely an artefact of a particular monetary policy?