In view of the high transient populations recorded at religious sites in Paris, it is not surprising that the Church and others have had to address many of the issues outlined earlier in terms of multiple identities and management responses. These issues have been confronted both collectively, for example through the Pastorale du Tourisme et des Loisirs (PRTL), established in 1962 (de Brion 1993), and by individual churches. Père Aucourt, former national delegate of the PRTL, acknowledges that Our churches have become tourist products (1994:153) and contends that for many French people they have become lieux de mémoire (places of nostalgia). Speaking of religious sites in general, Bauer argues churches have traditionally attracted visits from members of two different cults (using this term in a very broad sense), one which worships the beauty, balance, means of construction and its different relationships; the other, God in his house. To these two cults he adds a third, more recent and less passionate group of visitors, the tourists. Other writers also distinguish between the cultuel (religious) and the culturel (cultural), between a sites religious vocation and its tourist role. Within these categories further distinctions can be made from one site to another. Notre Dame, for example, is not a place of pilgrimage like the Sacré-Coeur which is dedicated to the worship of the Sacred Heart, but as the cathedral of Paris it plays a leading national role. As Père Fournier of Notre Dame notes, a cathedral is not like other churches; it is the festive place of prayer for the Christian crowds rather than a place of silent personal meditation.Moreover, cathedrals have always had multiple roles—space in Notre Dame in the past was given over to medieval guilds to hold meetings and History shows that. . . [it] was never isolated and indifferent to the upheavals of the times. The cultural significance will also vary from one site to another depending on its history, art, architecture, literary connotations, and physical setting. Many tourists will come on a short general sightseeing visit or perhaps for a view of the city, for instance from the forecourt of Sacré-Coeur or the towers of Notre Dame; others may have a specialist interest in flying buttresses, stained glass windows, or paintings and devote their visit primarily or exclusively to such features. The spiritual and the cultural are of course inter-related; church art and architecture are replete with meaning, the buildings themselves being constructed to honor the Lord as well as to provide a place of worship. Thus, those who visit religious sites, in addition to the local faithful, do so for different reasons, come with a variety of beliefs and understanding, and are likely to act in different ways. Insights into these different identities can be gleaned from the different markers which now appear in many churches and cathedrals. The mere existence of such markers is testimony to their being recognized as touristic places while the messages they convey highlight some of the issues which multiple use may generate.

The on-site markers in these five churches can be divided into two main types: printed or electronic signs and small publications. Both types of marker are found at the entrance, some signs may be distributed throughout, and in the larger buildings more substantial publications may also be on sale. Two basic and inter-related messages are conveyed by the entrance signs: some statement of identity (conveying simply what the place is) and instruction on how to behave appropriately in such a place. Variations on these themes occur from church to church, but the key message is that this place of prayer is to be respected by silence . Except St Germain-des-Prés, other signs reserve certain sections for silent prayer or indicate no entry to parts of the church when services are being held. In Notre Dame and Sacré-Coeur arrows also indicate the one-way direction to be taken in an attempt to manage visitor flows. Other more specific signs are also found inside particular churches. Thus, one in Notre Dame advises that The Church is the House of God on Earth and elaborates on how art and architecture are used to convey this message. St Germain-des-Prés has a more elaborate display of 11 panels illustrating the history of the construction of the church and concludes with this message in French: Here, through fourteen centuries of shadow and light, men have prayed in Faith and Hope. Passersby, friends, we have recounted this history for you. It invites us all to pursue it.

The Sacré-Coeur, in contrast, has a more immediate building fund appeal, indicating that the basilica was originally built by private subscription, now needs maintenance and advises Foreign currency welcomed, perhaps the most universal of all tourism signs. It is, however, in the texts made available at the entrance that more specific effort may be made to evangelize, the emphasis given to this and the directness or sublety of the message to visitors varying among the five churches. At St Germain-des-Prés, a simple handout gives a short history and architectural plan of it. That for St Eustache sends a strong message of welcome, outlines its history, its services, and parish activities, and concludes, for those entering the church who may wonder perhaps to whom the prayers of the builders were addressed, with the parable of the Prodigal Son. At Notre Dame, texts are distributed giving the theme of the mass, details about services, and advice to non-believers (in English, French, and Japanese), not to join in at communion time. Greater emphasis is given to the evangelical message at Sacré-Coeur where more than two million small multilingual texts are distributed each year stressing the origins and purpose of the basilica and offering three short prayers for non-Christians, non-Catholic Christians, and Catholics, negligent perhaps. As Père Terrien, a former chaplain, notes, the basilicas authorities, far from being content with a simple coexistence between the visitors and worshippers, have discovered an incomparable possibility for dialogue . . . A high place of prayer, certainly, the Sacré-Coeur is also trying to become a high place for meeting. However, the authorities there do not appear to see Sacré-Coeur as a tourism destination because when the author tried to phone for an appointment explaining the nature of this research, he was firmly told We are a church, Monsieur, and have nothing to do with tourism.

In contrast, an appointment was readily obtained at Notre Dame. Other markers, or sources of information, may lay greater emphasis on different characteristics of these places. The Michelin guide, for instance, stresses history and architecture, and gives much more space to descriptions of Notre Dame, St Germain-des-Prés, and St Eustache than to Sacré-Coeur and St Pierre in Montmartre. No study of the message given by group guides has been attempted here; but these would similarly appear to stress art, architecture, and history rather than more religious matters, though this may vary considerably from group to group and guide to guide. Père Terrien suggests few tourist guides make allusion to Sacré-Coeur being a work of faith. Some Montmartre guides, on the contrary, stress the explicit symbolism and citywide dominance of the basilica arising out of conservative Catholic reaction to the Commune along the lines recounted by Harvey; though as with all history, there are different interpretations of the origins and construction of Sacré-Coeur. For all the churches, the messages conveyed by the markers are statements of place identity and attempts to manage the cohabitation of the different users of this space. This involves trying to maintain respect, limiting the disruption of prayer and church services by keeping noise down, directing the flow of visitors, and excluding non-worshippers from certain spaces. Signage may also be accompanied by other management measures, such as the use of physical barriers to restrict the movement of groups and regular contact with guiding associations (advising them of particular events and new developments and generally fostering understanding of the needs of different church users). In the case of Notre Dame, a major review of the Cathedral was commissioned in 1991 by the Caisse Nationale des Monuments Historiques et des Sites (CNMHS), an agency of the Ministry of Culture. In this regard it is important to remember that in France virtually all churches are the property of the State (Sacré-Coeur is one exception), which maintains the buildings while the Church is responsible for their daily running (lighting, heating, and cleaning). In the case of Notre Dame, visits to the towers are organized by the CNMHS while the church is responsible for those to the treasury within the cathedral. The multiple identities of the cathedral are set out in the introduction to the review: Notre Dame de Paris has the difficult privilege of being at one and the same time one of the most visited tourist monuments in France, the capitals cathedral and the parish of the diocese. Major problem areas within Notre Dame identified in the review are shown in which highlights difficulties arising from visitor flows and congestion (over 30,000 visitors on peak days). While some of the measures outlined above have alleviated some of the problems, other proposals such as that to reduce pressure inside by developing a separate reception center on the parvis has not eventuated. Other problems noted in the study include lighting and pollution from the increasing number of candles being burned and the sheer volume of visitors. Moreover, the exhortations to silence and respectful behavior are by no means universally followed here or in other churches; guides continue to raise their voices to make themselves heard by their groups, tourists persist in trying to capture the interior beauty of the buildings by using their flashes. Some of the issues regarding multiple identities and contested places were brought home to the researcher as participant observer when taking part in a 90 minute guided visit of the artwork in the chapels of Notre Dame, the mais, led by a guide from the CNMHS. To appreciate the art better, and to be heard above the other visitors, the party of a dozen was often encouraged into the chapels themselves, something the author as an individual visitor would not have contemplated. While this was apparently acceptable in certain areas, the party was also discreetly led into one at the far end of the cathedral in an area, according to the sign, reserved for prayer. Moreover, the guide was indignant rather than chastened when one of the worshippers, at another spot, tried to hush the guide by reminding her that the party were in a church—to which the guide observed rather caustically that it is sometimes difficult for the history of art and prayer to live together. The guide also related how the poor lighting of some of the pieces was a function of the difficulties which the split responsibility of the state and church sometimes brought, one being responsible for the fittings on the walls, the other for lighting costs. When these incidents were later related to one of the clergy, he nodded in recognition, saying without irony Some of these guides [from the CNMHS] think they own the place.