I want to throw my two cents in here.

I used to be a Novus Ordite.  If I still was, Blessed Be God for What I Have Now, I would probably be heartbroken over this large fire.  As a Novus Ordite, I used to always think of how nice it would be if the new churches being built could have statues and beauty and not look like public houses or banal bus stations. 

As a Novus Ordite, I mistakenly thought that the old church had beauty and that was what the Novus Ordo lacked.  I never could figure out why the new churches were like public bathrooms and very banal, I thought in a lackadaisical manner that the cost of construction today was the reason for all of that.  Ugh.  I shun at what I used to think. 

By the Grace of Our Lord and Love of Our Lady, I am now a Traditional Catholic and know that the beauty of the Catholic Mass in the Blessed Sacrament, consecrated by the Priest, on the Altar and the Prayers of the Priest and prayers and devotion of the Catholic Faithful.  A pre-Vatican II alter in a very humble edifice, properly consecrated, possesses much more actual beauty than the post-Vatican II Notre Dame Cathedral. 

Today, as a Traditional Catholic, I do not feel the pains of any sense of loss of Notre Dame Cathedral.  The loss in the Novus Ordo Church in all it's monstrosities. 

Without a Catholic Altar, the Notre Dame Cathedral is just a place for visitors - now if Our Lord so blesses one of those visitors to find his way to Tradition, then Deo Gratias.  Blessed be the Name of Our Lord and Savior. 

There's no doubt that the Novus Ordo would wish to modernize, [....]

I'd be surprised if various architectural and construction firms weren't already assembling business plans to compete for contracts to rebuild the Cathedral of Notre Dame, probably in a style most resembling an indoor stadium.  And would be discouraged from designing places of honor for statues of national favorite sons, e.g., Bishop & Frankish patron St. Martin of Tours (founder of Gallic monasticism [*]), and noble native Abbot St. Bernard (founder of Clairvaux), but be explicitly required to provide places of honor for statues of Pope Paul VI and John Paul II.

Opportunistic owners of professional sports teams might already be scheming to obtain & install discarded gargoyles in their home stadiums.

But in the context of the continuing sex & embezzlement scandals in the institutional church of the Novus Ordo, how many people or organizations with money to contribute would trust that same institutional church to use their contributions only for the purposes given--and no other?

Well, I suspect it's in better hands owned by the state.  [....] whereas the State might be more interested in restoring it to its historical state.

I agree with Laudislaus that the French government would likely do a better job of restoring Notre Dame Cathedral than the Novus Ordo leadership.

Isn't it somewhere in this topic that someone posted a claim (unquantified as I recall) that the Cathedral of Notre Dame is the single most popular tourism destination in France?

The French have historical societies and some perspective.

A secular national government could have its collective feet more effectively held (may Our Lady forgive me!) to the fire not only by historical-preservation societies, but even more so by its national tourism industry.  The combination could publicly raise potent issues for restoration that might evoke only yawns and callous dismissal from a national council of bishops.  Secular  priorities are more consistent with President Macron's claim that restoration could be completed in 5 years: That's much more like public pandering to panic in France's tourism industry than a credible engineering estimate.  Straightforward restoration not only should be faster to accomplish, it also ought to satisfy tourists and the tourism industry much better.

Under more ordinary circuмstances, isn't the financial support by France for its various religious denominations limited to distributions from national income tax in proportion to declarations on individual tax returns or some comparable form of national religious registration?  I've read that declarations of Roman Catholicism have declined substantially during the Novus Ordo scandals.  So might the (Arch?)Diocese of Paris have become financially dependent on also getting a share of proceeds from visits & tours of the cathedral?

-------
Note *: Or at least founder of mainland-Gallic monasticism.  I thought there was someone, perhaps St. Pachomius, who had established a monastery many years earlier, but on an island that's somewhat offshore of modern France.

Don't they have an obelisk at the Vatican dating back from ancient times?

That's exactly what he said. 

Do you think that the French government would allow them to build a 'modern' Notre Dame?

Yo, Poche!  It's you who is billed as a "Hero Member".  So how's 'bout you giving us your august opinion on the issue, hmmm? 

Or won't Novus Ordo diocesan handlers, which some of us CathInfo members suspect are behind ‘poche’,  be it flesh-&-blood or A.I. project, allow it to express any opinions about "modern" Novus Ordo architectural "renovation"?  Perhaps because thinking ahead, those handlers would realize that even the most modest of endorsements from this ‘poche’ would provoke some other C.I. members to remind readers of notorious examples of such projects: They consumed millions of dollars from devout donors, but produced abominations like Abp. Rembert Weakland's [×] at the Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist, up in Milwaukee.  Even the, um, secular-at-best Wikipedia has not only a section, albeit conspicuously understated, about the controversy in that cathedral's article [*], but also has a separate article devoted to the newish word that's been coined to describe such projects: "wreckovation" [**].  For photos that clearly show the abomination, see Tradition-In-Action's page "The Mighty Weakland Comes to Bat" [†].  But far be it from me to risk sidetracking this topic and CathInfo's own share of the international debate over Notre Dame. 

-------
Note ×: In this instance, my reference to Abp. Weakland's "abominations" does not include his overt personal sodomy scandal.  E.g., "Archdiocese defends controversial sculpture of Archbishop Weakland".  Milwaukee, Wis., Jan 9, 2010[,] 10:03 am (CNA).  <https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/archdiocese_defends_controversial_sculpture_of_archbishop_weakland>.

Note *: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_of_St._John_the_Evangelist_(Milwaukee)#Renovation_and_controversy>.

Note **: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wreckovation>.

Note †: Marian T. Horvat: "The Mighty Weakland Comes to Bat".  Tradition-In-Action, © 2002 but otherwise undated (an obnoxious practice on any Web site with historical value, but typical for postings on this Web site).  <https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/c002ht.htm>.