About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

9 Replies to “Architect on the Restoration of Notre Dame talks about the fire”

    Yesterday, Al Mohler wrote a piece lamenting the loss of the building and even suggested that the Reformers would be in tears – “Indeed, the Protestant Reformers themselves would have mourned the loss of this great cathedral – a symbol of the Christianity they sought to reform.” Yeah, no they wouldn’t. The Reformers – rightfully so – saw the Roman Catholic church as the enemy of the gospel and the enemy of the Church and the papacy as the anti-Christ. No. Just no. Pagans worship the work of their own hands. Not Christians. And certainly not Baptists. We would expect the idolaters of the Roman Catholic religion to attribute the handiworks of man to “God’s glorious vision for his church,” but not Christians. A historic reminder of how the gospel has been suppressed by the Roman Catholic Church for hundreds, thousands of years – if you want the Church to be restored in Europe, preach the gospel there. Jeff Maples

    • Please it is UNITY that is needed now. Such rubbish as you post may be understandable but it is splintering and damaging to any survival effort and I am NO lover of the RC church. I can criticize almost EVERY Christian sect/denomination but now is not the time. Think!.

      • Don’t worry! It will be rebuilt in 18 years for 15000 billion euros given by the whole world. Meanwhile 5,7 million muslims 8,2 million black african will immigrate to western europe and they will breed 2,7 million children for the time Notre Dame will be rebuilt to provide possibility for the new imams to serve. And during this time 182 churches will be attacked or demolished for coal from Germoney to France to UK. Gays and Feminists take care of you. Express your opinion in internet comments. Don’t worry.

  2. More complete subtitled version of the interview there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5QO5dP_NSk

    Many interesting points I think. The most obvious is indeed the way the architect keeps saying he is amazed by what happened, though he doesn’t want to venture into suggesting anything. I may be paranoid about it but I was struck by some of the words he choose : “Quelle hypothese on pourrait DIRE?” – litterally “what hypotheses could I SAY”, which is not a french way of speaking (normal ways would be using the verbs “emettre” or “suggérer” une hypothse, not “dire une hypothese”. As if it was just something that was unsayable…*
    The journalist, too, when pushing for him to answer, says at some point something like “Je comprends que c’est DELICAT”. “Sensitive”. Not “c’est trop tôt”, or “c’est trop difficile”. Delicat…
    Another point, in the second half… the lady journalist who says basically it’s so great that it wasn’t worse, that civil servants were so efficiant, etc etc, just making a lot of hot air to try to mitigate the disaster…
    Another yet, when Mr Mouton is asked “if he is relieved” – what a stupid question for this man! – and the journalist again insists that it “could have been worse as people believed the towers would fall” – pointing, I think, to one french officials who told that the building was “15 minutes to collapse” – which the architect answers that he doesn’t believe that and explains why…

    * Unsayable, unspeakable: that’s the gist of what a close relative living there told me when I asked him what people were thinking, were saying about all of this. That it was too awkward, too sensitive, too unspeakable, not deemed suitable of discussion… Even though he thinks most people fear they are lied to. O_o

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *