Notre Dame Reopening Sparks Row: Church Stands Firm on Free Entry, Rejecting Tourist Fee Proposal

Published on December 6, 2025

The triumphant return of Notre Dame de Paris—five years after the devastating fire—is a deeply emotional victory for France and the world. However, this moment of architectural and spiritual renewal has been overshadowed by an intense and highly charged political debate: Should tourists be charged a mandatory entrance fee to enter the cathedral?

French Culture Minister Rachida Dati proposed a symbolic charge of just €5 for non-worshipping visitors. Her rationale was compellingly pragmatic: such a fee could generate an estimated €75 million annually, a massive windfall that she argued could be entirely dedicated to a national fund for the preservation of France’s other 40,000 crumbling religious buildings, many of which are owned by the State under the 1905 law separating Church and State. “Notre Dame would save all the churches of France. It would be a magnificent symbol,” Dati declared.

The Catholic Church, through the Archdiocese of Paris, swiftly and firmly rejected this proposal, reaffirming its “unchanged position” on the principle of free access to all churches and cathedrals.⁴ This refusal has ignited a philosophical and human debate over the balance between preserving priceless national heritage and upholding the core mission of unconditional welcome that defines a place of worship.

The Church’s Defense: A Moral and Legal Stand

The Church’s opposition is rooted in both legal tradition and spiritual mandate, viewing the proposed entrance fee as an “uncharitable” tax that betrays the very essence of a cathedral.

The Law of 1905 and Unconditional Welcome

The core legal argument rests on the 1905 Law on the Separation of Church and State. This law ensures that, while religious buildings built before 1905 are state property, they must be assigned to religious communities for worship and must remain “open to the public” without charges or dues.

Beyond the legal text, the Archdiocese emphasises the fundamental mission of the Church: to “welcome unconditionally and therefore necessarily free of charge every man and woman, regardless of their religion or belief, their opinions and their financial means.” Imposing a fee, they argue, creates a barrier that would inevitably deter those who are financially struggling or who might be seeking solace or simple curiosity.

The Unity of Pilgrims and Visitors

The debate often attempts to draw a clean distinction between the “tourist” (who pays) and the “pilgrim/worshipper” (who is free). The Church counters that such a separation is practically impossible and spiritually detrimental.

• Practicality: Given the narrowness of the space within the cathedral, physically segregating people for ticketing or verification is extremely challenging.
• Theological Unity: As the Archdiocese press release noted, “Pilgrims and visitors have never been distinguished: services are celebrated during visits and visits continue during the services.” The essence of Notre Dame is the “communion between all”—the unity of those seeking God and those simply marveling at human creation. Instituting a physical and financial division would “deprive them of the communion between everyone that is the very essence of the place.”

For proponents of the fee, the choice is clear: The Notre Dame restoration was funded by an unprecedented surge of over €840 million in donations. With its reopening, the cathedral is projected to welcome up to 15 million visitors annually—a significant increase over pre-fire numbers. To let this golden opportunity to sustainably fund national heritage slip away is seen by some as fiscal negligence. Why should French taxpayers or small municipal budgets be solely responsible for the upkeep of 40,000 national churches when a tourist at a globally iconic site is willing to pay €5?

The Philosophical Crossroads: Heritage vs. Accessibility

The debate highlights a critical philosophical tension in modern France:

• Cultural Democratization: Opponents, like certain French historians, argue that charging a fee—even a small one—represents a “philosophical break with cultural democratization.” French culture, unlike others, often champions the right of all citizens and visitors to access its most symbolic sites freely.
• The Burden of Success: The vast numbers (up to 40,000 visitors per day) have forced the cathedral to implement a free, but mandatory, online time-slot reservation system to manage the crowds. This system, while free, has created its own barrier to spontaneity and is a concession to the practical reality of massive tourism.

Ultimately, the Church’s position holds firm: the interior of Notre Dame, the space of prayer and history, will remain free to all. The focus is now on finding alternative funding mechanisms—such as increased tourist taxes on accommodations or greater reliance on the revenues from the already-charged-for crypt, towers, and treasury—that do not compromise the fundamental mission of welcome.