Jump to content

Notre Dame on Fire


matty40s

Featured Posts

37 minutes ago, Athy said:

I didn't know that. Isn't it unusual for fire to spread downwards? Perhaps it was noticed only when it reached the roof, thereby becoming more visible.

I have seen a shot from inside the cathedral showing part of the vaulted ceiling burning while the rest of the cathedral seems untouched.   Can't remember where I saw it sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The EU is asking all member Governments to contribute.

 

I guess 400 million Euros will go a long way towards rebuilding the fabric, the contents will of course be irreplaceable.

 

Individuals and groups are mobilising to help rebuild Notre-Dame. Hundreds of millions of euros have already been pledged.

Billionaire François-Henri Pinault, chairman and CEO of the Kering group that owns the Gucci and Yves Saint Laurent fashion brands, pledged €100m (£86m; $113m) towards rebuilding Notre-Dame, AFP news agency reports.

Another €200m was pledged by Bernard Arnault's family and their company LVMH - a business empire which includes Louis Vuitton and Sephora - on Tuesday morning, according to Reuters news agency.

Total, the French oil giant, has also pledged €100m.

The way they're rallying round is most heart-warming.

I wonder if Britain's top businessmen would do the same if Westminster Abbey or St. Paul's suffered a similar catastrophe. I'd like to think so, but I suspect not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Athy said:

The way they're rallying round is most heart-warming.

I wonder if Britain's top businessmen would do the same if Westminster Abbey or St. Paul's suffered a similar catastrophe. I'd like to think so, but I suspect not.

The story is often called the story of the widow’s mite or the story of the widow’s offering. One day, Jesus was sitting with His disciples near the temple treasury watching people depositing money into the offering receptacles. The court of women held thirteen such receptacles, and people could cast their money in as they walked by. Jesus watched as the rich were contributing large sums of money, but then along came a widow with two small coins in her hand. The ESV calls them “two small copper coins, which make a penny” (Mark 12:41). The KJV calls the coins “mites.” These were the smallest denomination of coins. The widow put her coins into the box, and Jesus called His disciples to Him and pointed out her action: “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on” (Mark 12:43–44; cf. Luke 21:1–4).

There are several things that the story of the widow’s mite teaches us. First, God sees what man overlooks. The big gifts in the temple were surely noticed by people; that’s probably what the disciples were watching. But Jesus saw what no one else did: He saw the humble gift of a poor widow. This was the gift that Jesus thought worthy of comment; this was the gift that the disciples needed to be aware of. The other gifts in the treasury that day made a lot of noise as they jingled into the receptacles, but the widow’s mites were heard in heaven.

Second, God’s evaluation is different from man’s. The widow’s two mites added up to a penny, according to man’s tabulation. But Jesus said that she had given more than anyone else that day (Mark 12:43). How could this be, when “many rich people threw in large amounts” (Mark 12:41)? The difference is one of proportion. The rich were giving large sums, but they still retained their fortunes; the widow “put in everything—all she had to live on” (Mark 12:42). Hers was a true sacrifice; the rich had not begun to give to the level of her sacrifice.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mite agree with the sentiments of this parable, But the building companies, stonemasons etc. who will require paying for their work won't.

"'ere are your two mites, Pierre".

"For a quarante-deux heure week at the top of a saignant great tour? Wot a comédien. On yer vélo,, rayon de soleil."

"TOUT LE MONDE OUT!"

 

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

First, God sees what man overlooks. 
 

 

I can recognise proportional contributions...

 

Am I god?

 

Religious people are always doing themselves a disservice by denying themselves abilities that are easily achievable.

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

3 minutes ago, carlt said:

 

Am I god?

 

 

I am sure you are in some ones eyes.

5 minutes ago, carlt said:

Religious people are always doing themselves a disservice by denying themselves abilities that are easily achievable.

Bit like my old school report "sets himself extremely low targets which he consistently fails to achieve"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, carlt said:

Two, one of which is whining at me for no apparent reason at the moment.

 

Perhaps I am not answering his prayers...

Dogs (apparently like gods) often do odd acts for no apparent reason.

 

Even if you don't answer his prayers at least you are mutually convinced of the others existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Athy said:

Yes, of course. Apart from anything else, he can afford to make generous donations to worthy causes, such as the rebuilding of one of his country's most admired buildings. Good on him.

Am I alone in thinking that, perhaps, he should have had that vast wealth taxed out of him?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Victor Vectis said:

Am I alone in thinking that, perhaps, he should have had that vast wealth taxed out of him?

 

No, you are not alone. That's exactly where I came into this controversy this morning.

2 hours ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

Given that you find high levels of wealth obscene, I was wondering, what level of wealth is acceptable for you?

 

If he took no more than, say, 20 times the pay of his lowest-paid full-time employee it would probably be acceptable. Then if he wanted to draw megaeuros out of the company he would first have to give all the clerks, cleaners and packaging workers a pay rise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A campaign for higher taxes would be refreshingly different.

Some people might feel that if someone has risen to a senior, responsible and highly-paid position, they ought to be allowed to take home more than the minimum wage. Otherwise there would be no incentive to work hard and rise to such a senior position.

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

Am I alone in thinking that, perhaps, he should have had that vast wealth taxed out of him?

 

3 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

 

No, you are not alone. That's exactly where I came into this controversy this morning.

 

Had it occurred to you that that is what he has left after paying all the necessary & relevant (French) taxes ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Had it occurred to you that that is what he has left after paying all the necessary & relevant (French) taxes ?

 

Yes, I did wonder, but we all know that those who can afford accountants can afford clever tax avoidance schemes too.

The quick answer is that we don't know, but the obscenity is still there regardless of its legality.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I know that I pay all my taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Had it occurred to you that that is what he has left after paying all the necessary & relevant (French) taxes ?

A good point: that makes the donation (which I have read elsewhere as 100 million euros rather than a million, don't know which, if either, is correct) all the more generous, as he has already given a considerable slice of his earnings to the state. We should all warmly applaud him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Victor Vectis said:

 

 

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?

 

 

I've always understood it to be a unit of currency.

 

Of course, the one who invested it and made it grow did better. But I always felt rather sorry for the prudent one who buried the money to keep it safe, only to be berated by the boss.

 

The boss, it must be said, is not portrayed as a very honest man - how that detail is supposed to affect the story's moral I'm not sure.

Edited by Athy
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.