Diocese of orange gets $20 million donation to renovate crystal cathedral

[otjm]

While it may not be traditional, it is strikingly imposing. As a stated above, there is a holiness in simplicity. I am not saying that the Cathedral is “bad”. Just to recall that faith isn’t about how large or creatively designed the building is.

I guess you missed all the cathedrals in Europe - or course, many of them are 600 to 1200 years old and architecturally different, but hardly simple.

 

[Patti_M]

Who gets the check if it actually had been made out to Crystal Cathedral?

I’ll bet the lawyers would be all over that one. Maybe the guy still thinks the Hour of Power is going strong.

LOL, maybe they should confirm that with the donor.

 

[ProVobis]

LOL, maybe they should confirm that with the donor.

Come tax return time, I’m sure he or she or corporation will be disclosed.

As Ed Norton once said on the Honeymooners when they were wondering who would leave a caseful of money on a bus, “Gee, I hope it wasn’t some poor guy who could use the money.”

 

[Della]

The Church does not sanction people for donating/spending their own money for whatever they please because she upholds private property as one of the basic human rights.

By making such a large donation for renovation, the diocese is freed to spend money on other worthy projects that help those in need. It’s one less financial burden for the whole diocese to bear.

The diocese did not build the building/campus when it needed to expand–it bought a ready-made one that will cost far less to renovate than the cost of building a new cathedral/campus, especially with today’s building prices, architect fees, etc.

As for the poor not being welcome, a good many of the largest, most ornate churches/cathedrals were built with donations from ordinary working people, not large donations from the wealthy. The working class people were the one who wanted to honor God with the best they could offer of gold, frescoes, paintings, statues, altar pieces, vestments, etc. As another poster cited, they did not think of the cost any more than Mary Magdalene thought of money when she anointed Christ with her ointment and her tears. The sweat of ordinary working people were the tears and their money and talents (many worked on their churches gratis) were the ointment.

We all ought to do all we can for the poor, of course, but we must not set up a false dichotomy between donating to the Church and giving to/aiding the poor.

 

[Brendan]

$20 million. The Crystal Cathedral.

So much for a Church for the poor.

Take a look at Exodus 36 and you can see what God Himself commanded for the tent that stored the Ark.

All that gold, fine woods, richly dyed linens for storing a metal box that carried prefigurements of His Son. So having something similar for the Tabernacle that contains His Son.

or the commands for building the Temple in Jerusalem. (1 Kings 6)

Look at all those precious materials that God commanded David to gather.

They had poor people in Israel at the time of David, yet God though it important that the people gather rich materials to build His Temple

 

[ProVobis]

By making such a large donation for renovation, the diocese is freed to spend money on other worthy projects that help those in need. It’s one less financial burden for the whole diocese to bear.

The diocese did not build the building/campus when it needed to expand–it bought a ready-made one that will cost far less to renovate than the cost of building a new cathedral/campus, especially with today’s building prices, architect fees, etc.

Don’t forget the diocese had to compete with Chapman University et al to purchase that building.

From a financial standpoint, one-time donations don’t change budgets and such. Not unless that money is invested or converted into some kind of constant revenue stream. In this economy that would be tough.

But in any case I hope the Church doesn’t meet the fate of many of those who win lotteries and find six months down the road they end up poorer than they were before.

 

[Della]

Don’t forget the diocese had to compete with Chapman University et al to purchase that building.

True, but although the diocese offered less, still they were awarded the purchase. I see God’s hand in that. Although I make no claim that the building itself has God’s personal endorsement–merely that from a financial point of view it was a blessing for the diocese to get it.

From a financial standpoint, one-time donations don’t change budgets and such. Not unless that money is invested or converted into some kind of constant revenue stream. In this economy that would be tough.

Again, true, but it can’t hurt, either.

But in any case I hope the Church doesn’t meet the fate of many of those who win lotteries and find six months down the road they end up poorer than they were before.

In getting the buildings/campus, you mean? I really don’t see how that could happen. Is it perfect or to everyone’s liking? Probably not. But I shudder to think what other modern horror might have been built instead. At least Christ Cathedral is a soaring structure that lets in a lot of natural light–like some of the best cathedrals of Europe. Having never seen it “live” I can’t say how it will enhance the celebration of the Mass. That’s more for those who experience it to say than I.

 

[ProVobis]

In getting the buildings/campus, you mean?

No, just talking about this one donation. I presume financing of the building, etc. has already been accounted for. I presume too that this is an unconditional donation.

At least Christ Cathedral is a soaring structure that lets in a lot of natural light–like some of the best cathedrals of Europe.

That’s true, but they had to experiment a lot with some baseball stadium roofs (Astrodome, for example) so that it wouldn’t affect ability to perceive objects such as baseballs in the air. They ended up painting all the glass white and playing games under artificial light anyway. Almost all homes have shading of some kind. There’s a reason for that.

 

[SWolf]

As for the poor not being welcome, a good many of the largest, most ornate churches/cathedrals were built with donations from ordinary working people, not large donations from the wealthy. The working class people were the one who wanted to honor God with the best they could offer of gold, frescoes, paintings, statues, altar pieces, vestments, etc. As another poster cited, they did not think of the cost any more than Mary Magdalene thought of money when she anointed Christ with her ointment and her tears. The sweat of ordinary working people were the tears and their money and talents (many worked on their churches gratis) were the ointment.

Yup. In my home town, we were settled by dirt-poor farmers. Even to today, most of the houses are old, simple, and just get the job done. In the middle of the town is a gorgeous Church, statues, frescoes, you name it. The poor farmers put their measly earnings where they wanted it, to give glory to God.

 

[Della]

No, just talking about this one donation. I presume financing of the building, etc. has already been accounted for. I presume too that this is an unconditional donation.

It appears the donation was meant for the renovation. I don’t know if all the funds needed had already been raised. If they had been, it can’t hurt to have a large donation for refurbishing–the building needs maintaining, as well, an ongoing need. I don’t really know the specifics, and since it’s not my decision to make I’ll leave it to those for whom it is their responsibility.

That’s true, but they had to experiment a lot with some baseball stadium roofs (Astrodome, for example) so that it wouldn’t affect ability to perceive objects such as baseballs in the air. They ended up painting all the glass white and playing games under artificial light anyway. Almost all homes have shading of some kind. There’s a reason for that.

I’ve never heard it was a problem for the former congregation. If it will be for the rearranged interior it’s one of the things that a good architect will take into consideration. The position of the building makes a big difference how the light enters the building and where it falls. My parish was poorly designed regarding some of the windows, IMHO. The stained glass ones defuse the sun, but there are several clerestory windows that let the sunlight fall on the pulpit, blinding the reader/homilist. Curtains had to be hung to block the light. Clearly the architect didn’t take into account the placement of altar furniture when he designed those windows. Each building has its own design features that can either be an enhancement or a negative. Christ Cathedral is no different in that regard.

 

[ProVobis]

I’ve never heard it was a problem for the former congregation.

That’s just it. If it’s of no problem, why fix it?

But I’ve never seen the place, just on TV and past tapings of the great music they had there. Once the hype is over (and an EF is said there ) I might even come attend.

 

[Patti_M]

No, just talking about this one donation. I presume financing of the building, etc. has already been accounted for. I presume too that this is an unconditional donation.

That’s true, but they had to experiment a lot with some baseball stadium roofs (Astrodome, for example) so that it wouldn’t affect ability to perceive objects such as baseballs in the air. They ended up painting all the glass white and playing games under artificial light anyway. Almost all homes have shading of some kind. There’s a reason for that.

I recently read on their website that the light & heat created by all the glass was to be controlled by a series of little shutters that open and close. I think the tempature may control the opening & closing. Perhaps someone else on the forum knows more about that.

 

[ProVobis]

I recently read on their website that the light & heat created by all the glass was to be controlled by a series of little shutters that open and close. I think the tempature may control the opening & closing. Perhaps someone else on the forum knows more about that.

Then we’re messing with the acoustics. What exactly was the problem when Rev Schuller ran the place? Was it too much of a greenhouse and no one noticed?

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

Some people have an issue with the costs involved. All I can say is that compared to the Los Angeles cathedral, it’s a lot less expensive. Way less expensive. You really want your eyes opened, check out “Taj Mahony” sometime in Google, the gory details will blow your mind. I have family there and they just rolled their eyes every time the subject came up. Don’t get me wrong, I’m told it’s a nice facility inside, but the costs that went into that …

Further, read up on how Mahony tried to steamroller the old cathedral (St Vibiana) into the ground following the Northridge earthquake. Kept claiming it was much too expensive to restore. So it was up to the secular Los Angeles Historical Society (iirc) to step in and save the building. They actually had to go to court against the Archdiocese to do that. They won and they did restore it for a lot less than Mahony claimed it would cost. The too bad part is that the building ended up being bought by some LA redevelopment outfit and donated to some secular charitable organization so there have been some definitely non-Catholic things happening in there in recent years. Which is a shame, if they didn’t want a full parish there, they could have turned it into a shrine.

Also some have an issue with the Christ Cathedral architecture … just remember that the Church didn’t have anything fancy for a few centuries at its beginning. To have something fancy isn’t a requirement, just a nice thing to have. Also you really want to see an off the wall Cathedral? Go check out La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, Spain.