4 ms·

> After the fire, they were some neat proposals for a glass roof, or a walkable vegatalized one. We're talking about a medieval catholic cathedral. How many c

> After the fire, they were some neat proposals for a glass roof, or a walkable vegatalized one. We're talking about a medieval catholic cathedral. How many cathedrals in the world have glass roof or walkable garden? Do you think a walkable garden at the top of a cathedral would be respectful of the christian faith or do you think only other religions deserve respect? Put it this way: you put your walkable gardens on top of christian cathedrals, I build up tennis courts on top of mosques and swimming pools on top of synagogues.

seszett 2y ago
That cathedral is property of the state and the Catholic church is only allowed to use it for its office, to be clear. Private (owned by the church) churches, synagogues or mosques are not under that statute. But then they have to pay the maintenance themselves. Notre Dame is paid by public taxes so its fate and purpose are decided by the French public, not by the church, although of course its opinion is taken into account. It's the same reason many churches in other countries and up transformed into apartments, libraries or destroyed altogether when the Church can't pay for them anymore. It's not a question of "respect" for a religion or another.
CogitoCogito 2y ago
> Do you think a walkable garden at the top of a cathedral would be respectful of the christian faith or do you think only other religions deserve respect? Personally I find nothing disrespectful about putting a walkable garden on top of a cathedral. > Put it this way: you put your walkable gardens on top of christian cathedrals, I build up tennis courts on top of mosques and swimming pools on top of synagogues. I don't understand what you compare a hypothetical walkable garden on a cathedral to a tennis court on a mosque or a swimming pool on a synagogue. I think it better to compare a walkable garden on a cathedral to a walkable garden on a mosque or a walkable garden on a synagogue. Whether that is disrespectful is up to the individual.
- amadeuspagel 2y ago
  A swimming pool on the roof was literally proposed for Notre-Dame[1]. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/swimming-pool-roof-notre-dame-architect-proposals-shock-traditionalists https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/swimming-pool-...
krapp 2y ago
>Put it this way: you put your walkable gardens on top of christian cathedrals, I build up tennis courts on top of mosques and swimming pool on top of synagogues. Sure, why not? They're just buildings, and that sounds like fun. And I'm pretty sure that as far as the Christian faith is concerned, one isn't supposed to put value in the temporal universe or its constructs, and a grand cathedral is as meaningless to God as a mud hut.
thrance 2y ago
Why try to frame me as some rabid anti-christian? I respect the opinion of the majority which clearly wanted to keep it as it was, I am merely expressing a slight disappointment over the final decision. Also, why would adding more modern features to the church be disrespectful to christians?? And no, the church has been rebuilt many times since the middle ages. Each time differently, reflecting the era.

seszett 2y ago

That cathedral is property of the state and the Catholic church is only allowed to use it for its office, to be clear. Private (owned by the church) churches, synagogues or mosques are not under that statute. But then they have to pay the maintenance themselves. Notre Dame is paid by public taxes so its fate and purpose are decided by the French public, not by the church, although of course its opinion is taken into account. It's the same reason many churches in other countries and up transformed into apartments, libraries or destroyed altogether when the Church can't pay for them anymore. It's not a question of "respect" for a religion or another.

CogitoCogito 2y ago

> Do you think a walkable garden at the top of a cathedral would be respectful of the christian faith or do you think only other religions deserve respect? Personally I find nothing disrespectful about putting a walkable garden on top of a cathedral. > Put it this way: you put your walkable gardens on top of christian cathedrals, I build up tennis courts on top of mosques and swimming pools on top of synagogues. I don't understand what you compare a hypothetical walkable garden on a cathedral to a tennis court on a mosque or a swimming pool on a synagogue. I think it better to compare a walkable garden on a cathedral to a walkable garden on a mosque or a walkable garden on a synagogue. Whether that is disrespectful is up to the individual.

amadeuspagel 2y ago
A swimming pool on the roof was literally proposed for Notre-Dame[1]. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/swimming-pool-roof-notre-dame-architect-proposals-shock-traditionalists https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/swimming-pool-...

krapp 2y ago

>Put it this way: you put your walkable gardens on top of christian cathedrals, I build up tennis courts on top of mosques and swimming pool on top of synagogues. Sure, why not? They're just buildings, and that sounds like fun. And I'm pretty sure that as far as the Christian faith is concerned, one isn't supposed to put value in the temporal universe or its constructs, and a grand cathedral is as meaningless to God as a mud hut.

thrance 2y ago

Why try to frame me as some rabid anti-christian? I respect the opinion of the majority which clearly wanted to keep it as it was, I am merely expressing a slight disappointment over the final decision. Also, why would adding more modern features to the church be disrespectful to christians?? And no, the church has been rebuilt many times since the middle ages. Each time differently, reflecting the era.