Join the discussion 12 Comments

  1. Stefan Gabel August 3, 2013 at 2:02 pm — Reply

    Hi all,
    I used to write travel guidebooks, end of the ’80s, beginning of the ’90s http://tinyurl.com/mdagufu for the German speaking market and also worked in the tourism industry. From what I know, not to rebuild the Cathedral Church will be the most silly and costly thing Christchurch’s tourist industry will have ever experienced.
    Regards
    Stefan
    Christchurch

  2. James Ahern March 9, 2014 at 10:47 am — Reply

    In relation to the churches standing that it can not restore the Christchurch Cathedral would they consider giving up there rights on the building and let the people rebuild it ,if they haven’t the foresight to believe in its futhure they should give up on their care taken role that they inherited . I’ll give then $1 for the building when its finished I’ll sell it back for the same amount they can keep the insurance money they get ,its win win for everyone they get a church back in earthquake proof handover ,the world get a heritage building back ,
    James Ahern bricklayer /builder Ireland

  3. Barry Clark April 16, 2014 at 9:51 am — Reply

    The church has turned down overseas offers to restore the Cathedral at no cost, they declined.
    It is my opinion that the Square therefore be forfeit to the Crown forthwith.
    Keep the Cathedral, sack the bishop

    (Capital letters used where deserved)

  4. Margaret Phillips September 14, 2014 at 10:09 am — Reply

    It is quite clear the Anglical church is NOT prepared to give up the site but the Cathedral is not just a church asset, it is an important landmark & focus for Christchurch, it is very important for tourism. It also belongs to the people of Christchurch who have previously funded its maintaneance, before the earthquakes & by way of the Council, with millions of dollars — the Anglican church by itself has no right to make this decision.
    The Bishops statements to the effect that no-one wants to see a “replica”, that is restored, Cathedral are unacceptable. All over Europe we appreciate restored buildings, which took many decades to restore after the war.

  5. Kelley December 5, 2014 at 8:41 pm — Reply

    I am a kiwi that was there throughout the earthquakes and recently this year moved to australia but i still keep an eye on what is happening to the cathedral and to Christchurch city. i think it is INCREDIBLY STUPID if the cathedral is not (as they say it can be) restored to its former glory AND up to seismic code it is the heart of the city and the heart of all Cantabrians. there are so many things people say they can do with it but the only smart thing to do is to restore it from all the pictures i have seen the most damage to the building is the rose window, the spire and the roof where the spire came through. they not many years before gotthe cathedral up to “seismic code” and spent milions and now they dont want to spend a couple more to get christchurch’s heart beating again. the The Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament is as i believe being slowly taken apart brick by brick to be rebuilt half of that building was more damaged than the front of the Anglican cathedral so why cant that happen if anything more than full restoration doesnt happen to it i feel that christchurch wont have the same feel nor will any cantabriens be able to say that it is the heart of our city but a transplant that the government forced upon us.

  6. Nicholas Schumacher January 31, 2015 at 11:08 am — Reply

    It seems that Bishop Matthews cannot still grasp the true meaning of what our beloved Christchurch Cathedral means to us. Christchurch Cathedral is and will always be a very specific landmark, a symbol that defines our town with a name that is embossed within our hearts, a place we call home, Christchurch.
    By replacing the Christchurch Cathedral it is not an option that we should be embracing because by doing so we will not just be wiping the past but also our true identity. For Christchurch Cathedral epitomises our identity, whether religiously or not, one we do not want to lose should the Cathedral be replaced. We must restore the Christchurch Cathedral and in doing so make it more stronger than before and more accessible for we owe it to our forebears to preserve our history and our identity. Let’s restore the Christchurch Cathedral to preserve our identity. Let’s hope Bishop Matthews understands that.

  7. Jeremy Beatson August 29, 2015 at 11:41 am — Reply

    Why don’t they just put in support beams where the’re needed and tidy it up a bit and then open it back up to the public?

    • Jeremy Beatson August 29, 2015 at 11:45 am — Reply

      It’s been done in bombed-out buildings in Europe.

  8. FideliaSellh April 15, 2016 at 1:32 am — Reply

    I see, that your page needs fresh & unique content.
    I know it’s hard to write posts manually everyday, but there is
    solution for this. Just search in g00gle for- Atonemen’s tips

  9. Hugh Farr September 12, 2016 at 10:00 am — Reply

    no

    • Gina Louise September 12, 2016 at 10:01 am — Reply

      No what bruv

  10. rosemary November 16, 2016 at 4:44 am — Reply

    As an Australian spending 8 weeks in New Zealand prior to the earthquake, I must say I spent almost a day in and out of the cathedral. It was the most beautiful place, full of history, a gracious building respectful of those who served and generous of those who built it. I have visited some of the cathedrals in England and one in France. The Christchurch Cathedral stands equal to the best. I can only hope that the idiot who was saying no to the rebuild, so the light.
    I would love to know, perhaps someone could let me know
    Rosemary

Leave a reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>