Notre Dame, Symbol of Western Christendom, Burns in Paris - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#14999760
SolarCross wrote:That is interesting that a Christian cathedral might also be a symbol of the French national identity. It would be a stretch for the buildings of another faith to be seen that way.

I wonder if being Christian is really part of the French national identity while the French state is required to be strictly secular, so it's a strictly secular state being in complete solidarity with a religious institution. However, when the average French see Notre-Dame, they don't consider it a symbol of Christendom, and if anyone hurt Notre-Dame, they don't hurt French Catholics only, they rather hurt France as a nation, as much as they care. So I don't think this is a religious attack.
#14999763
SolarCross wrote:@Atlantis
I wasn't saying it was strange, I am saying that in contrast to Beren's attempt to separate out the religion from the national identity that the national and the religious are intimately interwoven, just for the very reasons you mention.

You mean historic reasons? Sure, nobody tries to deny history, however, I really doubt the French consider their Frenchness as a Christian thing. Being French doesn't mean being Christian and they're actually strictly separated.
#14999764
Beren wrote:You mean historic reasons? Sure, nobody tries to deny history, however, I really doubt the French consider their Frenchness as a Christian thing. Being French doesn't mean being Christian and they're actually strictly separated.


History but also the present. If I may inject some actual facts into the discussion: 63-68% of the French identify as Christian, 23-28% having no religion and 7-9% are muslim. Like it or not France is still a predominately Christian country.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/rel ... rance.html
#14999767
SolarCross wrote:History but also the present. If I may inject some actual facts into the discussion: 63-68% of the French identify as Christian, 23-28% having no religion and 7-9% are muslim. Like it or not France is still a predominately Christian country.

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/rel ... rance.html

They may identify themselves as Christians, but it doesn't have anything to do with their Frenchness. You can be as much French as a Muslim or Atheist as a Christian. However, the main argument here is that Notre-Dame is not a religious symbol in France in the first place, it's a national symbol and tourist attraction.
#14999769
Beren wrote:They may identify themselves as Christians, but it doesn't have anything to do with their Frenchness. You can be as much French as a Muslim or Atheist as a Christian. However, the main argument here is that Notre-Dame is not a religious symbol in France in the first place, it's a national symbol and tourist attraction.

I think at the very least a Christian Cathedral built by and for Christians actually is a religious symbol in the first place and it becomes a national symbol and a tourist attraction as a consequence of that.
#14999770
SolarCross wrote:I think at the very least a Christian Cathedral built by and for Christians actually is a religious symbol in the first place and it becomes a national symbol and a tourist attraction as a consequence of that.

It's a tourist attraction in the first place, because that's how most people consider it in the world. It's a national symbol in the second place, because that's how it's considered and treated by the French nation as a whole as well as the French state. And it's a religious symbol in the third place, because it's still an active religious institution used by some people for religious purposes. And it's also a historic and architectural relic.
#14999774
If only the Christians who built it back in the 12-13th century would have known that they were only building it because it became a national symbol and it only became a national symbol because it became a tourist attraction. Beren as usual has realised that the horse really does go behind the cart. :lol:
#14999780
SolarCross wrote:If only the Christians who built it back in the 12-13th century would have known that they were only building it because it became a national symbol and it only became a national symbol because it became a tourist attraction. Beren as usual has realised that the horse really does go behind the cart. :lol:


What are canals in the UK to you today? Transportation of goods highway or a waterway? The means of Notre Dame is a religious building. That hasn't changed. But I think the case that it is primarily a tourist attraction to sell Paris to the world over a building to sell God to the world is a fair one. After all, symbolism changes with time.
Last edited by B0ycey on 17 Apr 2019 21:19, edited 2 times in total.
#14999781
B0ycey wrote:What are canals in the UK to you today. Transportation of goods highway or a waterway? The means of Notre Dame is a religious building. That hasn't changed. But I think the case that is primarily a tourist attraction to sell Paris to the world over a building to sell god to the world is a fair one. After all, symbolism changes with time.


If you can't beat them steal them.
#14999793
SolarCross wrote:If only the Christians who built it back in the 12-13th century would have known that they were only building it because it became a national symbol and it only became a national symbol because it became a tourist attraction.

The nation state in today's sense didn't exist at the time; however, the reason for building these hugely symbolic edifices was always more political than religious. Religion served to legitimize worldly rulers. That's why rulers built cathedrals. The bigger the cathedral, the more powerful the ruler was considered to be. People from near and afar would admire the magnificence of the cathedral as a symbol of the ruler's power. Today, people from near and afar admire the magnificence of the cathedral (or the Eiffel Tower) as a symbol of the country's prestige. Thus, the idea of a "tourist attraction" is in no way contrary to its original intention.

Anyways, the good news is that the French cockerel has risen like phoenix from the ashes and will keep on crowing to the annoyance of every Brit. :lol:

Meanwhile, a copper statue of a cockerel - a symbol of France - that topped the spire has been recovered from the rubble "battered but apparently restorable", the culture ministry said. The cockerel contains holy relics, but it is not yet clear if these are still intact.


Notre-Dame fire: International call for architects to design new spire
#14999795
Atlantis wrote:The nation state in today's sense didn't exist at the time; however, the reason for building these hugely symbolic edifices was always more political than religious. Religion served to legitimize worldly rulers. That's why rulers built cathedrals. The bigger the cathedral, the more powerful the ruler was considered to be. People from near and afar would admire the magnificence of the cathedral as a symbol of the ruler's power. Today, people from near and afar admire the magnificence of the cathedral (or the Eiffel Tower) as a symbol of the country's prestige. Thus, the idea of a "tourist attraction" was there from the very beginning.

Secular rulers built palaces and castles, cathedrals were built by the church. Notre Dame was commissioned by Bishop Maurice de Sully. What is your agenda that you need to revise history away from itself in order rob Christianity of its monuments? I am not even a Christian myself but all these vultures hovering over the corpse of notre dame are even making me sick.
#14999800
SolarCross wrote:If only the Christians who built it back in the 12-13th century would have known that they were only building it because it became a national symbol and it only became a national symbol because it became a tourist attraction. Beren as usual has realised that the horse really does go behind the cart. :lol:

Are we still in the 12-13th century? Well, maybe you are.
#14999807
Beren wrote:@blackjack21, just because Notre-Dame is an active church, it doesn't mean it matters more as such than it matters as a tourist attraction. I wouldn't consider France such a religious country as you seem to and even Macron tries to exploit it as a symbol of French national identity, so he doesn't even treat it as a religious institution.

Macron is a puppet of the Rothschilds. He doesn't care about religion at all. By contrast, there is more than a cottage industry of religious and pseudo-religious tourists following the works of Dan Brown alone. Here's an app you can download for that alone: The Da Vinci Code Walking Tour, Paris.

B0ycey wrote:I have already told you that I do not care for your views to be upset.

Yet you have accused me of insulting Islam and lumping all Muslims into one basket, and you have yet to substantiate your accusation.

B0ycey wrote:It isn't really idiotic to highlight that Notre Dame is a tourist attraction for historic reasons - some of which you have pointed out - but instead idiotic to think it's attraction is solely down to religion.

There are lots of examples of fine stone masonry in Paris. The reason that Notre Dame is famous is because people in the Middle Ages sacrificed so much to build the cathedral as a place of worship.

B0ycey wrote:Nonetheless I have told you it is a religious building but it should be obvious to most people that the building heritage rather than religious sentiment is why people visit the building at high numbers.

I was raised Catholic. I visited Notre Dame when I was 18 years old after my senior year at De La Salle High School in Concord, CA. Our motto was Le Hommes de Foi. The movie, When the Game Stands Tall was based on our football team. It is a Christian Brothers school. The Christian Brothers were known for education and for making sacramental wines among other things. Perhaps you have heard of Christian Brothers Brandy. I actually went to boarding school at Mont La Salle where Brother Timothy was the cellar master for a time along with a buddy who just retired from the FBI last year. Incidentally, St. Jean-Baptiste de La Salle's mother was Nicolle Moët de Brouillet, a relative of Claude Moët who was a founder of Moët & Chandon. They make a pretty fine champagne. Anyway, the next church I went to see was in Chartres. Then, we went to Mont St. Michel. I saw Sagrada Familia not a week later. This would be in 1986. I remember, because I cut my trip short due to all the terrorist activity in Paris from Abu Nidal and Hezbollah. Attributing all Notre Dame's visitors to a compelling interest in "building heritage" is comically incorrect, but I suppose you are entitled to your delusions. You had to change currencies all the time and use passports between countries back then, and the Berlin Wall was still up. Different times.

B0ycey wrote:After all, Christians do not need to go to Paris to praise God.

You are wise beyond your years... However, there is such a thing as pilgrimage. You might have heard John Wayne refer to people as "pilgrim" in his movies.

B0ycey wrote:I am not going through your posts to show you where you have been critical of Islam. But I will point one out to you next time if I must.

Then why are you accusing me of lumping all Muslims into one group? Why not withdraw your accusation until you can support it?

B0ycey wrote:You still haven't really explained why you mentioned the comment I highlighed in the first place if you didn't want a reaction such as mine.

I mentioned it, because there are those who want to stamp out Christianity in Europe, some who want to see Christian sites replaced with Islamic sites, and literature written to that effect. Clearly, my remark struck some sort of chord in you, but you don't seem to be able to articulate why it has you all atwitter and why you are focused on the Islamic aspect of my remarks.

B0ycey wrote:I do not care for your ramblings or other subjects that should be a topic on their own but why you felt you needed to mention that there are people (who?) wanted Notre Dame to burn so they can turn it into a mosque - especially as you didn't want this thread to have anything to do with Islam.

875 Catholic churches were attacked in France last year. I wouldn't expect you to know that, because there is a general black out on the topic in the establishment media. Some of those attacks are attributed to Muslim extremists and some to radical secularists. I mentioned both in my post. I didn't single out Islamic extremists or even conclude that they had something to do with Notre Dame burning.

875 Catholic Churches in France Were Vandalized in 2018 by Radical Secularists and Muslims

Why are you so exorcised about Muslims, but not secular extremists?

B0ycey wrote:The cynic in me thinks you were hoping for deliberate arson rather than carelessness to spring your opinions to light that this was religious motivated attack on the West and Christianity.

Maybe you should consult an exorcist to expel the cynic in you, because I clearly said that there was no conclusion yet whether the fire was accidental or deliberate and related in some way to the vast crime wave of vandalism against Catholic churches in France.

Atlantis wrote:Why is that strange? Catholicism has formed the French national identity just as much as the French Revolution. Ever since the Crusades, in which French noblemen took a prominent role, France has always been known as "the first daughter of the Catholic church".

Joan of Arc anyone?

Image

Beren wrote:Being French doesn't mean being Christian and they're actually strictly separated.

The government is secular. The people are not strictly secular.

SolarCross wrote:63-68% of the French identify as Christian, 23-28% having no religion and 7-9% are muslim. Like it or not France is still a predominately Christian country.

I think they don't like it...

Beren wrote:However, the main argument here is that Notre-Dame is not a religious symbol in France in the first place, it's a national symbol and tourist attraction.

For you, I'm guessing The Hunchback of Notre Dame comes to mind... :lol: Were you hoping Quasimodo got out okay?

SolarCross wrote:I think at the very least a Christian Cathedral built by and for Christians actually is a religious symbol in the first place and it becomes a national symbol and a tourist attraction as a consequence of that.

Until Napolean's era, there was no separation of church and state. There isn't such a separation in the UK.

SolarCross wrote:Beren as usual has realised that the horse really does go behind the cart. :lol:

Funny. :lol:

There are people who look at this stuff as having great significance: Notre Dame: The Da Vinci Fire

Atlantis wrote:Religion served to legitimize worldly rulers.

Like courts do today, and why they still wear black robes, while senators do not.

SolarCross wrote:Secular rulers built palaces and castles, cathedrals were built by the church. Notre Dame was commissioned by Bishop Maurice de Sully. What is your agenda that you need to revise history away from itself in order rob Christianity of its monuments? I am not even a Christian myself but all these vultures hovering over the corpse of notre dame are even making me sick.

This is why I indicated that the fire was relevant, as Notre Dame is a symbol of Western Christendom.
#14999849
Nonetheless I have told you it is a religious building but it should be obvious to most people that the building heritage rather than religious sentiment is why people visit the building at high numbers. After all, Christians do not need to go to Paris to praise God.


You completely misunderstand Christians and that is no surprise to me. You particularly misunderstand orthodox Christians such as Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and High Church Episcopalians.

Suppose one granted that Notre Dame was primarily a tourist destination. This does not say anything about the effect it has on people once they walk through the door. It was designed to awe people in the first place. It is a mistake to believe that Medieval people were all flagellants kneeing their way around their daily lives. They were not. The builders of this cathedral knew that quite well. They knew that people would be deeply moved by the church as are a great many people today.

You would scoff at the relics contained in the church. Over a billion people would not. Half of all of the worlds two billion Christians are Roman Catholic. This is not a building to them. It is not a historical curiosity. It is not Catholic Disneyland. It IS a parish church to some people and a profound symbol of the faith of a billion more.

After all, Christians do not need to go to Paris to praise God.


No. They don't. But many do go to see the church and once inside do exactly that.

It seems to me that you are eager for a church not to be a church. You seem to have some odd notion that if you can relegate Notre Dame to tourist attraction status that somehow you have struck a blow for atheism. You should not feel that way.

Perhaps you should understand and internalize this. A very great many, if not the majority of people who visit Notre Dame may not consider it their church; but they have a church. Whether they attend weekly or not they have a church. They are believers of the message the cathedral exults. Visiting Notre Dame is not simply a tourist excursion to them.
#14999859
Drlee wrote:Right? So wrong.

First it is not an irrational fear.


Yes, it is irrational.

Even if we assume that Muslims are as evil as the phobes claim, they do not have the demographic numbers to take over, nor do they have the economic or military might to do so.

As a threat to the existing power structure in the west, they are not significant.

It is not about skin color. It is about profound ideological differences. It is about the subjugation (not subordination) of women and codification of all manner of practices that are against those that all Christian Europeans hold sacred. Or should.

As Blackjack pointed out, the right is not hammering on Islam. It is, in my opinion all too tolerant of its more repressive aspects.

I criticize the left for the same thing. In the misguided worship of multiculturalism it excuses practices that are anathema to modern left thought. The aforementioned denigration of women for example. YOU should be condemning the sexist homophobic and other unacceptable aspects of Islam rather than pointing at the right and shouting racist. Or Islamophobe.

The Christian far right could at least claim an excuse for supporting Islamic thought on Biblical grounds and some do. I do not but that is just my flavor of Christianity. One could also praise the right for its opposition to the spread of Islam into our respective countries (Or in the case of the EU that conglomeration that used to be countries). In doing so it is attempting to avoid the influence, again, of practices and beliefs that are contrary to our laws, customs and way of life. Wouldn't it be fun to take driving licenses away from California women? Or beat a girl in Ohio for going out without an escort? How about hanging a homosexual or two in Calgary? There is absolutely nothing outrageous about these things in Ryiadh. They are not only acceptable but worthy of spreading throughout the world.


This seems like a long winded spiel about how you feel like conservative westerners are not like conservative Muslims.

:lol:

Sure. :roll:


Yes.

Besides what I already mentioned about Viollet-le-Duc, the flying buttresses and other stone structural work are some of the most impressive works from the Gothic era.

Notre Dame has everything to do with religion and European identity. I know you find this inconvenient but it is first and foremost a church. The vast majority of people who visit it do so just for that reason. People do not visit curious architecture very often. Something else draws them to cathedrals throughout Europe and even in the US.

There is a marvelous modern Cathedral in San Francisco. It is loaded with tourists most of the time. They are not there to see the windows.


13 million visitors a year, 30 000 a day. While I am certain that a disproportionately high number of those are Catholic, and there is nothing wrong with these people enjoying their quaint superstitions, the reasons for rebuilding the cathedral do not need to depend on religion.
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

@JohnRawls No. Your perception of it is not. I g[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I'd be totally happy for us to send ground troop i[…]

Any of you going to buy the Trump bible he's promo[…]

There were formidable defense lines in the Donbas[…]