What is in Kelvin's Head?

Statement on the fire at Notre Dame

15/04/2019

The fire at Notre Dame Cathedral is a tragedy not only for Paris and the people of France but for the world.

Those who know the building will be unable to see the pictures of the fire without feeling heartbroken.

So many different things that make up the building are priceless – the medieval roof, the woodwork, the organ, the stained glass, the relics. But this tragedy is more than the loss of them all. It is the loss of the heart of Paris, the loss of a place of pilgrimage and the loss of a place of romance.

Every day this week, Christians will be reflecting on the heartbreak of Mary, the Mother of Jesus, to whom Notre Dame was dedicated. Every day as we do so, we will be praying for the Paris its people as they face their own heartbreak.

Notre Dame means Our Lady. Notre Dame doesn’t just belong to Paris, it belongs to us all.

This was a building that is utterly associated with Paris. But it was an utterly priceless treasure for the world.

It was truly ours, and this tragedy is our tragedy.

Our Lady of Paris, pray for us and for all affected locally.

Our Lady of Paris, we pray for you.

10 responses to “Tented Villages”

TIm

28/10/2011

This would be fine & well if one has reason to believe one’s cathedral to be under some kind of threat.

I don’t see that being the case in St Paul’s – the evidence I’ve seen so far is that the various Occupations have been entirely peaceful apart from when the police start bullying them. The published “uh, think of the fire hazard” document reads like the most specious excuse they could invent to justify playing victim – let’s not forget it’s *their own* front door they’ve *chosen* to shut in the face of population, diocesan Mission directives notwithstanding. It’s about being Establishment versus free natives of the planet with a Christian-compatible social & justice message; I see St Paul’s have chosen their side.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  28/10/2011
  
  I must admit that for all my liberal instincts and progressive values, I don’t see this issue as being nearly so clear cut as that.
  
  Reply
Uncle Al

28/10/2011

I wonder what Oscar Romero would have done?

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  29/10/2011
  
  Probably call the nation’s attention to the scandal of poverty. Unlike any of the players in this drama so far.
  
  Reply
william

29/10/2011

Point to explore:
When Jesus said – that the poor we would always have with us – what point do you consider he was making, and therefore would want to make to us today in the UK, about the scandal of poverty?

Reply
Zebadee

30/10/2011

Dear William It is not a question of what others would do about the scandel of poverty the question is what are YOU doing about it? Having worked at a drop in centre and at other places that attempt to deal with this problem in the UK I know that there are no easy answers but have come to a conclusion that it is an individual responce more than a corporate one.

Reply
Agatha

30/10/2011

William, perhaps Jesus was well ahead of himself and was referring to relative poverty. My grandfather’s family were so poor he trapped rabbits, his brother got ends of bread from the vicarage and another brother picked up the vegetables that had got dropped on the ground from market stalls. A century later and the “poor” organise protests via blackberry.

Reply
Ryan

30/10/2011

Agatha,

Isn’t that still progress of sorts, or should we be pining for the days of absolute poverty in the UK? Poverty, absolute or otherwise, is surely always worth challenging?

Gap Yah types and their blackberry diversions will probably be with us always too, alas.

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

31/10/2011

More flat-footedly, Jesus’s remark was in a context – a perceptive woman in a moment of love and gratitude, seeing the cost of her brother’s having been liberated from death, poured an entire jar of expensive anointing perfume over his feet. Judas carped. Jesus defended the woman: the moment was right, the action prophetic. That does not mean Jesus wanted to keep the poor poor. He was saying that if Judas felt that strongly about their plight he would have plenty of time to take action over it. That moment, that particular moment, belonged to Jesus. We no longer have his physical feet, but we do still have his poor. We are not absolved from taking action in the world because we love him.

Reply
Agatha

31/10/2011

Ryan, of course its progress. But lets not forget there are people in the world that are still in absolute poverty. And I know which I would rather champion, those without food and water, not those who can only afford a 32″ TV.

Reply