Jump to content

Notre Dame on Fire


matty40s

Featured Posts

22 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

There's quite a lot of the cathedral still there, so the present tense is probably still correct.

I'd suggest there is likely to be a clause along the lines of 'fit for use' that would absolve the church of the requirement to pay any rent just now. I guess you could argue that the tenancy agreement is likely to still be in place, so they are still renting it (in layman parlance), just not paying any rent.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Boater Sam said:

If its let, it should be insured. Why should the public of all faiths in the European Union pay for a French vanity project?

I must have missed the announcement that there was going to be some kind of levy.  I thought currently it was up to individuals as to whether they gave or not, I suppose the French state will be contributing as they own the building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moving back on topic...

On 16/04/2019 at 12:49, Boater Sam said:

Cause?  Act of god? Lightening? 

 

Or the devil's fork?

The fire at Windsor Castle was caused by a work light being too close to a flammable curtain. It’s quite possible that this fire had a similar cause. I guess we’ll all know quite soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

Or maybe those mediaeval builders just knew what they were doing?

The spire is not Mediaeval, it was added in the mid 19th century, as was a lot of the interior decor.

 

 

 

Edited by David Schweizer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jerra said:

An interesting comment.  There is a thread on the forum where the opinion of experts is regularly debunked.

Is that the thread were the minority cannot accept that fact? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jerra said:

I must have missed the announcement that there was going to be some kind of levy.  I thought currently it was up to individuals as to whether they gave or not, I suppose the French state will be contributing as they own the building.

 

I understand that contributions to the rebuild fund are to attract tax relief. That is certainly a levy on the generality of French taxpayers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ray T said:

Just been on the news Notre-Dame is owned by the state, not the Catholic Church, they just lease the building.

 

Edit due to deliberate misinterpretation of my original words.

Since 1905 all religious buildings were property of the state and local governments in France apart from  Alsace-Lorraine which was part of Germany when the act come in to force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

Since 1905 all religious buildings were property of the state and local governments in France apart from  Alsace-Lorraine which was part of Germany when the act come in to force.

There's irony there considering their obsession with separating state from religion. 

 

Edited to add : A very healthy obsession in my opinion. 

Edited by carlt
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎16‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 16:01, Victor Vectis said:

And, sticking to the theological theme, can anyone explain the parable of the talents?

It has always struck me as a biblical justification for capitalism.

 

I suppose it hinges on what the word talent was translated from.

Is it a unit of currency, as in 'Genuine Hudson spare false rivets for sale. Only 6 talents apiece'

 

Or is it a skill one is born with or develops?

 

If the latter, then I can understand the parable. It would be a shame if not a sin not to use, say, a talent for music.

But the former just seems to give biblical permission for money making more money.

I've found it is a complex one to grasp, but I don't think the parable is to be taken literally, rather the broader meaning is to use the talents/gifts that you have wisely and to good effect, particularly for the help and benefit of other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Jerra said:

An interesting comment.  There is a thread on the forum where the opinion of experts is regularly debunked.

 

I think you might mean "disputed"!

 

13 hours ago, Boater Sam said:

If its let, it should be insured. Why should the public of all faiths and none in the European Union pay for a French vanity project?

No insurance company would accept the risk, or nobody would pay the huge premiums. Note my addition above.

 

Louis Vitton, TAG Heuer, Chanel etc probably aren't stumping up vast amounts of cash for no return.  Where were all the British billionaires when Grenfell Tower was gutted by fire? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

I think you might mean "disputed"!

 

No insurance company would accept the risk, or nobody would pay the huge premiums. Note my addition above.

 

Louis Vitton, TAG Heuer, Chanel etc probably aren't stumping up vast amounts of cash for no return.  Where were all the British billionaires when Grenfell Tower was gutted by fire? 

In this country, churches are insured, You find that the York Minster fire was covered by insurance. In France the state has self-insured in other words the taxpayer has to cough up. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesiastical_Insurance

https://www.ecclesiastical.com/church/insurance/church-insurance/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nbfiresprite said:

In France the state has self-insured in other words the taxpayer has to cough up. 

 

Yes - as I suggested.  I do wonder if the contractors on whose watch the fire started were carrying liability insurance, though.

2 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

According to the Torygraph today the French millionaires making those donations will get tax breaks for them.

 

My point exactly. They will also get the PR benefit and kudos (though not from me).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/04/2019 at 09:41, David Schweizer said:

No not really, I was thinking of all the uncouth, overweight people who walk around the town centre in the middle of the week, smoking, eating pies and swearing, whilst wearing oversized jogging bottoms and baggy  tshirts.

You have covered the women, i think - what about the men of Trowbridge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nbfiresprite said:

In France the state has self-insured in other words the taxpayer has to cough up. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesiastical_Insurance

https://www.ecclesiastical.com/church/insurance/church-insurance/

 

Many UK public bodies self-insure and some have been nearly bankrupted as a result (Liverpool Council with highway defect claims for example) so it isn't unusual.

 

The difference is that in our country over 50% of property and land is owned by 1% of the population (including churches) so let's hope they haven't eschewed insurance in favour of profit.

Edited by carlt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, carlt said:

There's irony there considering their obsession with separating state from religion. 

 

Edited to add : A very healthy obsession in my opinion. 

Did it change in Napoleonic times? His views on canals were very positive: Canals are the first need of the Republic… There is no palace or building that the Empire needs more than canals and navigable rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

I do wonder if the contractors on whose watch the fire started were carrying liability insurance, though.

 

I'd say almost certainly not. 

 

My own liability insurance excludes water damage working in buildings higher than four stories, and for fire insurance I have to comply with impractical conditions like covering all combustible materials within 5m of the work area with fire blankets, and to stay on site for an hour after the use of heat has finished. Or did last time I read it!

 

I can't imagine any contractor being able to afford liability insurance to work on the roof of a building like Notre Dame.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.