Crystal Cathedral board endorses offer from Diocese of Orange

  • Thread starter Thread starter SonCatcher
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Arkadin said:
But why does a church need to cost that much? It doesn’t.
Click to expand...
A lot of the price goes to meet codes, particularly earthquake codes. I believe that was a huge portion of the cost of the ugly cathedral in L.A.
 
Arkadin said:
I’m looking at the economic struggles the state is having.
Click to expand...
Orange County is actually one of the least hit areas in the state. Yes, the Crystal Cathedral is not in a well off area, but the county (the diocese shares the county lines as far as I know) did not suffer as much as other (especially the surrounding completely dioceses) counties.

Plus, there isn’t exactly a lot of available land in the area. This is especially true for land the size that would be needed for a cathedral.
 
Arkadin said:
And, for starters, a church that follows Christ would never have accepted the artworks or commission them or the buildings in the first place. In Christ’s reality, the church would not have all these fancy looking buildings and poverty in this world would hardly be where it is at today.
Click to expand...
While that seems like a nice sentiment on the surface, it’s unbiblical AND not rooted in any kind of historical reality. It’s also a straw man argument. Let’s look at why:
  1. First, we can look at the situation at the time of Jesus. Surely the Jews didn’t spend a great deal on decorating their sacred structures… or did they? As it turns out, the Temple of Solomon was so ornately decorated, that it almost bankrupted the state. It even caused the Canaanites to rebel in what today is Lebanon, because of the huge tax and work burden. Yet Jesus still supported the temple and worshiped according to Jewish principles. He condemned many of the corrupt leaders, but not the beautiful buildings dedicated to God. In fact, that’s one of the reasons He gave us the passage from Matthew above. There is NOTHING wrong in having nice things dedicated to giving glory to God. In fact, it was God Himself that ordered the ornate decorations on the Ark of the Covenant.
  2. You also have to remember that what are priceless works of art now were not always so. Many paintings were simply done by the faithful for free, and the art and artists only gained a reputation and became valuable later.
  3. As mentioned above, the church actually SAVED money by building grand cathedrals. They benefited whole towns in countless ways. There is a good argument to be made that the very economic engine spurred on by cathedral building helped end the poverty and chaos of the Dark Ages, and helped lead to the Renaissance and the modern world.
  4. ALL of the other Churches that date back as early as the Catholic Church are equally as richly decorated. Look at examples of any Eastern Orthodox church, Oriental Orthodox church, or Assyrian Church of the East, and you will see similar, if not MORE elaborate designs. Many of these buildings date to very early periods in history, not far removed from the apostles. Why do the Orthodox generally not get asked these same questions?
The splendor of the Mass helps us to engage the mystical, and elevates our thoughts to the idea that we are participating in something that is otherworldly. The Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Church subscribes to this philosophy even more so. This is one way in which Catholic / Orthodox philosophy differs from Protestant philosophy that is often overlooked. We put the emphasis on the Eucharist during Mass, so everything we use goes toward elevating and enhancing our experience with God. Protestants focus on the sermon and the Bible, so they focus on simple churches that do not distract one’s attention. In many respects, THAT, as opposed to charity and money, is the real issue.
 
Arkadin said:
Essentially, ignore the poor and focus on me.
Click to expand...
Man does not live on bread alone! Don’t put words int he Lord’s mouth either! He didn’t say ignore the poor, everything in its time he says.

So what good is money that will last a week, when the act of Mary Magadalene using the burial oil with NO HESITATION was a transcendent act of faith that still has effects to present day; you think we’re going to feed the poor, all by ourselves!

God first, then feed the poor!

Usually the social justice stuff is a subversion of the spiritual or a reflection of guilt for one’s personal sins (look at celebrities attempts to call attention to social justice causes) Eventually the Material world takes precedence over the spiritual. It does not work that way! By forgetting God in the equation. This leads to a false belief that man alone can bring heaven on Earth, and that being poor is worse than being dead.

You are not talking from a position of knowing what you are talking about.,
Especially since you focus on one relative numerical value and neglect to look at the fact THAT THE CHURCH is continually giving alms and sending missionaries and trying to aid the poor; instead you are just looking to complain like Judas.
Originally Posted by Arkadin View Post
Essentially, ignore the poor and focus on me.
Click to expand...
God is first. Jesus says, "the poor you will have always, but you will not always have me "

Priorities.

John 12
Mary therefore took a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 4 Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said: 5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? 6 Now he said this, not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and having the purse, carried the things that were put therein. 7 Jesus therefore said: Let her alone, that she may keep it against the day of my burial. 8 For the poor you have always with you; but me you have not always.
Click to expand...
You are doing the same song & dance of other detractors before you, and future ones will continue to do so…

Your complaints are without weight. It’s like when people complain the Vatican is too beautiful.
I suppose for a loved one, we might as well not try our best, to adore them or as others have mentioned only give utilitarian efforts.

Too much emphasis on money, on the Material, as if money is the panacea, as if material wealth is the key to heaven! As if money will provide happiness for the poor.

Sorry, Christ is the one that needs emphasis first, and it is not a sin to revere him if rightfully giving glory to him. And I don’t want to hear the arguments against Christ. It’s been 2000 years already, you have to open your eyes eventually.
In Christ’s reality, the church would not have all these fancy looking buildings and poverty in this world would hardly be where it is at today.
Click to expand...
Everything needs to bland and humble. You are focused too much on the superficial and being too literal.
So when God asked The Israelites to adorn seraphim and the Temple with statues, and fashioning the ark, he was wasting Gold that could have been going to the poor. So too was he wasting 300 denari on HIMSELF.

We should also throw away the musical compositions that came from the Church influence, as well as the Universities. In favor of more “humble” music and needless expenses on buildings for Church schools. We might as well just hold class in an open field and make books for free!

Ridiculous position, out of misplaced attempts to accuse any monetary sign of prosperity as an evil and a contradiction to Christ.
Did you know God has used both the high and the low, as his instruments, throughout his Church he has raised saints from the humblest backgrounds and feeble intelligences, in the lowest impoverished places, to others from highest privilege, great intellect and high society rankings to Kings, all of them shared the virtue of humility.

So this emphasis that anything that has to do with prosperity is antithetical to Christ is a false notion!

It’s not the presence of wealth or “fancy” buildings, it’s what is being DONE with them. And this is just a general refutation. Since I don’t think the value of this particular Cathedral applies.
So a beautiful building that encourages more reverence and piety in a town, as well as one that gives glory to God, in a town that was sorely lacking in the otherworldly, would that be against Christ??? A refuge that provides tears for vagabonds, and business men alike, as they look upon it as reminder – As well as “fancy” Church improves an area and encourages more and more to get involved in alms-giving as well as service in the Community, is that against Christ? As long as it is a reasonable expense toward a good, then it is a waste to rashly accuse or charge hypocrisy, when it may not be the case…
Just as using 300 denarii on oil, was relatively seen as a “WASTE” when it was NOT SO.

Both humble churches and glorious ones alike, can do well for God. Ugly ones too, that may cost too much.

There will always be the impoverished. WE LIVE in a fallen world. There will be no amount of money no matter how much we sell that will eradicate poverty as long as Man in his original sin has free will.
We must continue to be vigilant in alleviating the impoverished, but from the position of a cynic like Judas, it will NEVER BE ENOUGH.
 
Arkadin said:
I’m looking at the economic struggles the state is having.
Click to expand...
So reusing a building that suits the needs of the diocese (and love it or hate it, is a landmark) for HALF the cost of the building they were going to build isn’t economically good for the state?
 
Arkadin said:
And, for starters, a church that follows Christ would never have accepted the artworks or commission them or the buildings in the first place. In Christ’s reality, the church would not have all these fancy looking buildings and poverty in this world would hardly be where it is at today.
Click to expand...
The long and short of it is that the economic benefits of a cathedral to medieval towns (through construction, tourism, etc.), plus the educational benefits brought by using these as centers of learning, combined with the architectural breakthroughs made in their construction, and added to the inspiration given to the many poor, who had nothing but the pride they felt for their God and their great gift they gave to Him through architecture… this probably benefited the poor FAR more than had a simple structure been built and the extra money given to charity. Rather than keeping the people poor, Cathedral towns created JOBS that sustained people and improved their lives.
 
psr13 said:
A lot of the price goes to meet codes, particularly earthquake codes. I believe that was a huge portion of the cost of the ugly cathedral in L.A.
Click to expand...
Thanks the criticism is coming from a relative monetary value.

lol, doesn’t matter if the Cathedral is ugly, as long as it is a faithful Church and the Eucharist will be present, it can only be good!
kimmielittle said:
Hmmmm… Wasn’t it the state of California who brought on their economic problems?

Should the Church bail them out?
Click to expand...
lol,
Yes kimmie, I don’t know how we got on California’s ‘problems’

relative to the Church…
40.png
psr13:
Orange County is actually one of the least hit areas in the state. Yes, the Crystal Cathedral is not in a well off area, but the county (the diocese shares the county lines as far as I know) did not suffer as much as other (especially the surrounding completely dioceses) counties.

Plus, there isn’t exactly a lot of available land in the area. This is especially true for land the size that would be needed for a cathedral.
Click to expand...
Seems to be moving the goal posts around now, first it was just relative to the Church’s monetary cash on hand.
Then to the Vatican.

Now its in light of California’s struggles, which has to do with its own fiscal irresponsibility…

It’s not to say that there hasn’t been abuse of wealth, St. Francis dealt with it in his day, but this criticism is less in line with St. Francis, and more in line with Judas, hence “for the sake of the poor” is just a cloaked attack on the body of Christ’s Church. Hence, the comment,
a church that follows Christ would never have accepted the artworks or commission them or the buildings in the first place. In Christ’s reality, the church would not have all these fancy looking buildings and poverty in this world would hardly be where it is at today.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church doesnt’ follow Christ. :rolleyes:

And yet one of their replies to scripture, accuses Christ of not following Christ’s “reality”
Essentially, ignore the poor and focus on me.
Click to expand...
And yet they invoke Christ a few posts later to perpetuate their false hypocrisy charge. Go figure. 🤷
 
Rolltide said:
So reusing a building that suits the needs of the diocese (and love it or hate it, is a landmark) for HALF the cost of the building they were going to build isn’t economically good for the state?
Click to expand...
Thanks for pointing out those specifics. Rolltide.

Essentially they threw out an unnecessary hissy-fit, over a relative monetary value.

It’s okay. Sometimes there might be cause for pause in what Arkadin was attempting criticize, but seems to me from the contextual information, there is no cause for pause.
I believe the presence of the Holy Sacrament can only repay the community infinity, compared to when the Eucharist was not present.
 
Rolltide said:
While that seems like a nice sentiment on the surface, it’s unbiblical AND not rooted in any kind of historical reality. It’s also a straw man argument. Let’s look at why:
  1. First, we can look at the situation at the time of Jesus. Surely the Jews didn’t spend a great deal on decorating their sacred structures… or did they? As it turns out, the Temple of Solomon was so ornately decorated, that it almost bankrupted the state. It even caused the Canaanites to rebel in what today is Lebanon, because of the huge tax and work burden. Yet Jesus still supported the temple and worshiped according to Jewish principles. He condemned many of the corrupt leaders, but not the beautiful buildings dedicated to God. In fact, that’s one of the reasons He gave us the passage from Matthew above. There is NOTHING wrong in having nice things dedicated to giving glory to God. In fact, it was God Himself that ordered the ornate decorations on the Ark of the Covenant.
  2. You also have to remember that what are priceless works of art now were not always so. Many paintings were simply done by the faithful for free, and the art and artists only gained a reputation and became valuable later.
  3. As mentioned above, the church actually SAVED money by building grand cathedrals. They benefited whole towns in countless ways. There is a good argument to be made that the very economic engine spurred on by cathedral building helped end the poverty and chaos of the Dark Ages, and helped lead to the Renaissance and the modern world.
  4. ALL of the other Churches that date back as early as the Catholic Church are equally as richly decorated. Look at examples of any Eastern Orthodox church, Oriental Orthodox church, or Assyrian Church of the East, and you will see similar, if not MORE elaborate designs. Many of these buildings date to very early periods in history, not far removed from the apostles. Why do the Orthodox generally not get asked these same questions?
The splendor of the Mass helps us to engage the mystical, and elevates our thoughts to the idea that we are participating in something that is otherworldly. The Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Church subscribes to this philosophy even more so. This is one way in which Catholic / Orthodox philosophy differs from Protestant philosophy that is often overlooked. We put the emphasis on the Eucharist during Mass, so everything we use goes toward elevating and enhancing our experience with God. Protestants focus on the sermon and the Bible, so they focus on simple churches that do not distract one’s attention. In many respects, THAT, as opposed to charity and money, is the real issue.
Click to expand...
👍

Thanks Rolltide, you said it b etter! Especially more specifically addressing the OT.
 
I think they should go for it. I like the look of it and think that we need more huge Churches in order to attract new members.
 
Arkadin said:
And, for starters, a church that follows Christ would never have accepted the artworks or commission them or the buildings in the first place. In Christ’s reality, the church would not have all these fancy looking buildings and poverty in this world would hardly be where it is at today.
Click to expand...
:rotfl: Sorry, but this is a really ironic argument considering the Catholics are going to buy it from the Protestant denomination. I guess there are no Christian Churches which follow Christ. :rolleyes:
 
Well look at what is already erected at the Crystal Cathedral.

Now all we need is a Tabernacle, Crucifix and Our Lady of Guadalupe image 😛

“I consider Fulton Sheen to be the brightest, the most brilliant, and the most beautiful Christian in mind and heart that I have known in the 20th Century. No one inspired me more than Fulton Sheen to use television to reach the unbelieving word for Christ.”
 
JPUSC said:
Well look at what is already erected at the Crystal Cathedral.

Now all we need is a Tabernacle, Crucifix and Our Lady of Guadalupe image 😛

“I consider Fulton Sheen to be the brightest, the most brilliant, and the most beautiful Christian in mind and heart that I have known in the 20th Century. No one inspired me more than Fulton Sheen to use television to reach the unbelieving word for Christ.”
Click to expand...
Looks like he’s a step ahead of the Vatican then - from memory no moves from them to beatify Archbishop Sheen as yet 😦
 
LilyM said:
Looks like he’s a step ahead of the Vatican then - from memory no moves from them to beatify Archbishop Sheen as yet 😦
Click to expand...
Is anyone promoting his cause? I’m not sure of the exact process, but I think before the Vatican will move on the matter, the local bishop where he died needs to formally submit the name. And before a bishop will do that, there needs to be evidence that he is being venerated by Catholic worshipers…
 
SonCatcher said:
Catholic Church interested in Crystal Cathedral
By DEEPA BHARATH / THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

GARDEN GROVE – The Roman Catholic Diocese is exploring the idea of buying the Crystal Cathedral, which has been struggling financially for the last four years and is in bankruptcy.

The Diocese of Orange released a statement Wednesday morning saying that Bishop Tod D. Brown has authorized The Busch Law Firm and other diocese advisers to “explore the possibilities” regarding Garden Grove’s glass cathedral.

…

“While we continue to develop plans for a cathedral in Santa Ana, it is prudent to evaluate the opportunity to engage in the pending auction of this property and to mitigate the chance that it ceases to function as a place of worship, if acquired by others,” Bishop Brown said in the release…

ocregister.com/news/cathedral-307174-diocese-million.html
Click to expand...
YES!!

With a little work this campus could be AWESOME!
 
choliks said:
Is it hot inside? Looks like a giant green house.
Click to expand...
Nope – but it would be with stained glass.

It’s cooled by natural convection – a huge amount of air flows in, up and out of the crystal cathedral without blowers or pumps. It’s an engineering marvel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top