Strokate outfits, obscure symbolism... Controversies during the beginning of Notre-Dame Cathedral

The beginning ceremony of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris has sparked any controversy. Among them was the question of grumpy ornaments, which any have more associated with “the rainbow outfits”, others with the costumes of medieval troubadours and clowns. On the Internet, many Frenchmen have vented their outrage. Especially since the robes worn by the Archbishop of Paris, and designed by Jean-Charles de Castelbajac, were subject to criticism on social networks.

Colored, prowl, not serious. Others defended “a bold combination of colors” and pointed to Christian symbols of bile, blue, red, and green. There was no deficiency of malice. A regional councillor from Brittany, Christian Lechevalier wrote that he was certain to “prevent a fresh fire, Bishop Ulrich placed a flashing firelight on his outfit.” There were and more clear comments that stated that "The Archbishop looked like a circus clown...". It has been suggested that the colours are approaching the "broadway", there have been allegations of succumbing to ideology and playing in the "world of fashion shows". There were quite a few associations. any have even seen the colors on the priests' robes... Ukraine and Palestine and Google logo.

The clothes of the priests almost frightened many of the faithful. The translation of their meaning only partially helped. The author is fashion designer Jean Charles de Castelbajac, who created akin ornaments for John Paul II during the Youth Days in Paris in 1997. But what is different is the gathering with contemporary youth, and what is different is the gathering with the seriousness and dignity of Gothic and mediate Ages. It was said that the first plan looked completely different, but it was the Archbishop of Paris who was to press for the liturgical garments to be “simple and very modest”. The designer utilized the method "decoupage" (the fabric was applied to colored veluru flakes) and this was to be a mention to the aesthetics and symbols of the early centuries, but besides to the erstwhile knightly banners. Coloring was to mention to the Christian tradition – red is the sacrifice of Christ, the symbol of fire and the Holy Spirit; blue is the mention to the Virgin Mary; green is hope, yellow is the Christmas color, and besides the symbol of wisdom. An additional argument was that specified colors happen in the stained glass windows of Notre Dame. The designer added “king and prophetic” gold to this. Castelbajac says that the colour – the “child of light” – is present on white ornates, as is the flickering of stained stained stained stained glass reflected on the walls of the cathedral. The designer explained that these "colours besides make a river of religion and hope".

This was besides meant to be a mention to the full symbolism of the cathedral, which is “a light for the night of humanity”, as French art historian Paule Amblard said, specializing in medieval iconographic language. Notre-Dame as a "spiritual landmark" is simply a kind of "stone book", which teaches us by the symbolism depicted in statues, stained glass and architecture," he adds. It is simply a “religion lesson” as well as a hint that the past precedes us, greater than us, which teaches humility towards tradition and roots. This is simply a "parafia of the past of France", as he called the Cathedral of Paris a contemporary historian from Sorbona, Guillaume Cuchet.

But do specified modern additions not “insult” the dignity of the cathedral and fit the medieval Gothic? Is there any continuity or a desire to item a fresh context? I'm certain it's an aesthetic ceremony. The explanations of the symbolism of the outfits are religiously acceptable, but for many they will stay a “colour cacophony”, an unnecessary prying which clashed with the classical sense of harmony and the temple’s own color.

Besides, not only the liturgical outfits caused confusion. besides any another "modern inserts" in interior architecture, although it must be admitted that Notre Dame "almost" was rebuilt according to the original. Let us remind that we managed to fight e.g. the temptations to give modern form to the needle. However, the altar table, futuristic seats and modern furniture, or the level give emergence to further controversy, and again comes the issue of aesthetics, and any see here almost "mason inserts".
Since we are at the masonry, the publicist of the weekly "Valeurs" Fr. Danziec noticed another paradoxes and wrote that "the benches were more utilized to sitting in the lodges than in the church benches." Historian and writer Michel De Jaeghere in the peculiar issue "Le Figaro" wrote in a preliminary article that during the reopening ceremony there is “inconsistency”: “those who present push each another in front of the cameras are the same people who turned their backs on Christian France, that France, whose cathedral is simply a symbol.”

Fr Danziec, however, is simply a small "absolution" for politicians, for "if individual looks into the sky at the ceremony, they can already be congratulated." He adds that it may have been a “improvement of the fallen reputation of the President” or an chance to show himself to politicians, but Notre-Dame, Our woman is “for all”, although above all for those “poor, discreet and anonymous”. The publicist added that it could besides be a ‘start point for spiritual adventure’, even for those who focused on making selfies or felt little comfortable in this temple. Notre-Dame is simply a "certificate", and the Patroness of the Cathedral is to "enhance courage and give the French people the essential religion in his recovery," Danzig concludes. So, could it be worthwhile to postpone and observe the details of the beginning ceremony, whether this event will truly bring a gift of conversion to France, or will it end up expanding the "attractiveness of the monument" and improving tourism statistic in Paris?

Bogdan Dobosh