Notre Dame cathedral is on fire.

[Anonymous]

So sad. Glad I was able to visit it

[Anonymous]

Catholic Churches have been damaged and vandalized recently: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/spate-attacks-catholic-churches-france-sees-altars-desecrated-christ-statue-1370800%3Famp%3D1

The article is so ominous.

[Anonymous]

I’m in disbelief. We are losing centuries of history before our eyes. Heartbreaking.

[Anonymous]

It's terrible- it was such a magnificent cathedral that won't be able to be replicated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely and historic place. Hopefully they can save quite a bit of the art. I know they are trying. But it’s not a tragedy. It’s a building. Lives lost are tragic.

Why can’t human death AND the loss of a cultural icon both be tragic?

Because I think had the church spent more of that money helping the common folk instead of building iconic churches then perhaps the institutions would have themselves been better organizations. Just my two cents.

Yikes. Way to be totally ignorant of history. The Gothic cathedrals were vehicles for teaching the illiterate masses about the Gospels and the glory of God. The notion of "helping the common folk" was just not in play then. Feudalism was the prevailing way of society when the Gothic cathedrals were built. The Protestant Reformation changed some things for lower caste folk, but "helping" them didn't enter into the picture until hundreds of years later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's terrible- it was such a magnificent cathedral that won't be able to be replicated.

Of course it can. We haven’t lost the knowledge. It’s stone and wood and glass. It won’t be likely due to cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely and historic place. Hopefully they can save quite a bit of the art. I know they are trying. But it’s not a tragedy. It’s a building. Lives lost are tragic.

Why can’t human death AND the loss of a cultural icon both be tragic?

Because I think had the church spent more of that money helping the common folk instead of building iconic churches then perhaps the institutions would have themselves been better organizations. Just my two cents.

Yikes. Way to be totally ignorant of history. The Gothic cathedrals were vehicles for teaching the illiterate masses about the Gospels and the glory of God. The notion of "helping the common folk" was just not in play then. Feudalism was the prevailing way of society when the Gothic cathedrals were built. The Protestant Reformation changed some things for lower caste folk, but "helping" them didn't enter into the picture until hundreds of years later.

I’m not ignorant of history. You just made my point. Churches like that were built for mens’ egos

[Anonymous]

A little good news - works of art and the treasure of the Cathedral - including what is said to be the Crown of Thorns worn by Jesus - have been saved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This photo.

This one, , you mean:

During the 19th century restoration, Eugène Viollet-le-Duc decided to recreate it, making a new version of oak covered with lead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:my child arrived to Paris this morning on a school trip and was supposed to visit the Louvre and the cathedral, so when I saw the news I was at first worried. came out that the Louvre was today and the visit to the cathedral was tomorrow morning (I guess it will not happen)

watching the fire online was heartbreaking. the fire looks like it stared in the roof, which is made of wood. people don't understand how fast something like that can spread and given the height of the cathedral, it is really not easy to put the fire out right away. years ago the opera theater iun Venice went down in flames in a similar manner, works in place, somebody left something plugged in under the roof and by the time the fire was detected it was too late and the entire building burnt. I lived in Paris years ago and I saw at least a couple of time how good French firefighters are, got superquickly and acted very quickly. in this case it is a very, very difficult situation, only a proven idiot like Trump can give advice from 3000 miles away

This is Deal, right? We know some kids on that trip--I'm glad they're safe. I'm sorry they won't be able to see Notre Dame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely and historic place. Hopefully they can save quite a bit of the art. I know they are trying. But it’s not a tragedy. It’s a building. Lives lost are tragic.

Why can’t human death AND the loss of a cultural icon both be tragic?

Because I think had the church spent more of that money helping the common folk instead of building iconic churches then perhaps the institutions would have themselves been better organizations. Just my two cents.

Yikes. Way to be totally ignorant of history. The Gothic cathedrals were vehicles for teaching the illiterate masses about the Gospels and the glory of God. The notion of "helping the common folk" was just not in play then. Feudalism was the prevailing way of society when the Gothic cathedrals were built. The Protestant Reformation changed some things for lower caste folk, but "helping" them didn't enter into the picture until hundreds of years later.

I’m not ignorant of history. You just made my point. Churches like that were built for mens’ egos

You're trying to enforce today's ideas of what is "right" on the past, not taking into consideration the way society was structured at the time and the fact that modern notions of "human rights" did not exist at that time. It's a thing nowadays.... recontextualizing history. And I see you've embraced it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little good news - works of art and the treasure of the Cathedral - including what is said to be the Crown of Thorns worn by Jesus - have been saved.

This is good news. Glad I was able to see the Cathedral way back when. Would have liked for my kids to see it. Hope there are no injuries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little good news - works of art and the treasure of the Cathedral - including what is said to be the Crown of Thorns worn by Jesus - have been saved.

A needed sliver of good news.

But this fire is just so awful; so much lost

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a lovely and historic place. Hopefully they can save quite a bit of the art. I know they are trying. But it’s not a tragedy. It’s a building. Lives lost are tragic.

Why can’t human death AND the loss of a cultural icon both be tragic?

Because I think had the church spent more of that money helping the common folk instead of building iconic churches then perhaps the institutions would have themselves been better organizations. Just my two cents.

Yikes. Way to be totally ignorant of history. The Gothic cathedrals were vehicles for teaching the illiterate masses about the Gospels and the glory of God. The notion of "helping the common folk" was just not in play then. Feudalism was the prevailing way of society when the Gothic cathedrals were built. The Protestant Reformation changed some things for lower caste folk, but "helping" them didn't enter into the picture until hundreds of years later.

I’m not ignorant of history. You just made my point. Churches like that were built for mens’ egos

So you think we shouldn't call this a tragedy because 80-0 years ago, the church built this cathedral rather than helping the poor?

OK.

I hope you don't work in an occupation that calls for critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

“Vatican reporting the fire can’t be stopped.”

— BBC