Where Should The Money Go?

The Notre Dame Cathedral

A fire broke out in Notre Dame on April 15th. It didn’t take long for more than a billion dollars to pour in from organizations and independent wealthy donors to fund the recreation of Notre Dame. Many of them were French billionaire families and companies. Other companies pledged rebuilding supplies or flights for professionals.

Notre Dame was built beginning in 1163, taking two centuries to be fully constructed. It has been a site for the coronation of important historical figures like King Henry VI and Napoleon Bonaparte. On top of that, Notre Dame is a living museum full of religious artifacts like the Crown of Thorns, said to have been on Jesus’ head at his crucifixion and the Blessed Sacrament. Other artifacts, however, were lost and damages in the fire.

Yearly, around 13 million people visit the 850-year-old monument. The French government is aiming to have the monument rebuilt in five years, which coincides with France being slotted to host the Olympic Games in five years. But not everyone thinks that this philanthropy is an overall beneficial thing.

A main part of the controversy is the motive of the Yellow Vest Protests, which escalated after the donations kept coming in. Because the Yellow Vest Protests were about the wide difference in the concentration of wealth in France, the large donations from independent French billionaires seemed like more proof to their claim.

Other criticism came from claims that other historically important monuments, like the National Museum of Brazil in Rio de Janeiro or donors not paying taxes. Critics also said that the French government has denied funding to the social emergency present in France. But if there is a set law, as in what tax breaks you gain from donating or how governments and organizations use the money donated to them you shouldn’t be able to change those for a specific event.

Why are people so upset about philanthropy? People are offering money to a cause that will keep this history preserved for another hundred years. These billionaires are giving of their own choice to help something that they feel is right. If people begin to criticize giving in this form, what’s to say criticism won’t be placed on large donations to other causes?

These philanthropists donated because they cared about a monument to European history. It is good for people to care that much about such an important part of history. Why should people be upset at where they put their money when it is clearly for a good cause? They are freely giving money for something they believe in. Notre Dame is an incredibly influential part of European history that has been a cornerstone of the Church’s and Europe’s history for hundreds of years, and these donations will help uphold that history for even longer.

Other World Issues

The burning of the iconic cathedral was devastating to many because it not only holds the beauty of Paris history but also many treasures of the Catholic religion. In April during reconstruction, the cathedral caught fire due to electrical problems. The cost to repair the cathedral is estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of euros. Fortunately, even though there was a great loss, many artifacts, artwork and religious treasures (such as the crown of thorns) were saved.

Incredibly, within the first 24 hours after the fire, there were donations totaling over $700 million dollars. One large donation came from Bernard Arnault, the richest man in Europe and chief executive of the luxury goods of LVMH, for $226 million dollars. More donations continue to come in for the reconstruction of this cherished cathedral and Paris landmark.

Seeing such support and monetary generosity opens a question; is it right to be able to raise all of that money to rebuild a cathedral that was intended to be a sanctuary versus using the money to actually save people? Imagine what that kind of money could do for causes like feeding and sheltering the homeless or researching cures for illness. Everyone has the right to give their money wherever they want, but it seems that the Catholic church or the French government would not have wanted to exploit charitable donations for a building, but rather the people.

Billionaires who are donating want to help out, but should that money be spent elsewhere? There are so many more dire issues in the world and if people can just bring out millions of dollars to help with a building, shouldn't they be able to donate to the millions of people in poverty? It seems that the power of the wealthy benefactors while appearing philanthropic to donate money to fix a burned church, could actually be more of a strategy to advance their brand. This does not mean that donating to the cathedral rebuild is not good but beckons the question of what else are they doing to solve important issues with their powerful financial strength.

Some criticism was aimed at donors for not paying their fair share in taxes and which deprives the French government to repair Notre Dame itself. Some denounced the reputation boost bestowed on philanthropists at a time of national tragedy. And some attacked the giving of so much to a damaged cathedral when that money could better benefit social service organizations that could provide food, shelter or better education to needy citizens.

With the money that's been donated, you could clear out the ENTIRE Pacific ocean of trash and implement news way to avoid pollution. If it costs $.50 a day to feed one starving child in Africa thru the United Nations World Food Program, imagine how many lives could be saved with the donation of $226 million dollars. The cost of one mosquito net is about $2.00, which lasts 3-4 years, protecting two people from contracting malaria. These are just a few examples that should make us pause and consider what we should be donating to.