Talk:Christ Cathedral (Garden Grove, California)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Text and/or other creative content from this version of Crystal Cathedral was copied or moved into Crystal Cathedral Ministries with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Untitled
This article is clearly not NPOV since it treats its subject with glowing praise. From my own point of view I have often wondered why such devoutly spiritual folk would blow huge amounts of money on an ostentatious edifice instead of giving it straight to the poor and hiring an old hall to preach in. Lee M 02:38, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Took a crack at NPOVing it. How's it look? Header can go? Bryan 00:49, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- I thought this article looked pretty good after Bryan's cleanup, so I fixed one or two last details and removed the dispute header. Is this ok?
This is not very NPOV: In a sermon in spring 1991, shortly after the end of the Gulf War, the minister of the Crystal Cathedral, in a Sunday sermon, prayed to thank God that no one had been killed in that war. This prayer of thanks, interpreted as a statement of history, ignores, then, the demise of several tens of thousands of Iraqi military and perhaps 2,000 civilians, as well as, apparently, a few hundred U.S. and allied soldiers. --Dd42 22:07, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
Not many can judge what goes on at the Crystal Cathedral, because only the people who have relationships with the people can know what really goes on and what the minsters really have a heart for, against what most of the public gossips about. Only one from experience and relationship can judge and truly evaluate what the Crystal Cathedral actually is should be writing anything on this page. Me, for example is the one that has a voice that should and will be heard. Dr. Schuller from personal experience, is a great person, and truly loves the Lord with all of his heart, the rest would make sense if someone knew his intentions. Nov. 13, 05 A Crystal Cathedral student.
- We'd appreciate your contributions to the article, but please make sure that they rely on verifiable sources and maintain a neutral point of view. Thanks, -Willmcw 04:13, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
US$ 17 million in 2005 dollars
"that's around US$ 100 million in 2005 dollars" - where does this data come from? I've found inflation and CPI data that indicates 17 million in 1980 would be less than 50 million in 2005; even calculating from 1977 would only bring that up to 55 million or so. Zhwj 15:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
All numbers and informations were quoted from the History Channel's program Building in the Name of God. I also believed that US$ 100 million was quite high, but I wanted to quote the History Channel. Please, correct the information then...
And I also believed that the total end cost of US$17 million was quite low for a project of that size, but Time Magazine backs up History Channel data. See the link:
Robert Schuller, 59, a bland-looking but calculatedly theatrical performer, presides over the vast, glittery Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, Calif. Finished in 1980 at a cost of $18 million http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101860217-143137,00.html Herbert Alves 02:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- I've checked a newspaper archive for coverage from 1980. The reported cost varies a bit, from $17-20 million, but $18 million is the most common. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 05:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
denomination
Bit silly for such a big article to not even list the denomination / movement this church belongs to.--194.81.255.254 (talk) 17:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
interior of the church
why is the same picture in the article twice? surely there must be another picture somewhere —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.84.125 (talk) 19:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Crystal Cathedral Ministries
No official word on a name of the future cathedral by the Diocese of Orange yet. Suggestion is to move parts pertaining to its former use to the new article Crystal Cathedral Ministries.
Rebel shadow 12:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebel shadow (talk • contribs)
Let's wait until the dust settles and some more definitive word on the transition to the Catholic diocese is established. Once that happens, I'm pretty sure that we'll go with one article on the building and one article on the Protestant church organization. Remember that Wikipedia is not news, and it is preferable to get information right than to get it first. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)- I take that back, as I have found better sourcing for two stand-alone articles. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Recent disruptive editing
It will be appreciated if editors stop editing this article on the basis of what they think will become the situation in the future with this church. It is a matter of policy that articles only reflect the present situation and not the future regardless of how likely that may be. The facts are that this church will remain a Protestant one for the near future and that until the process is completed the church is not yet sold to the Diocese of Orange. Any edits that violate this policy will be removed or reverted. Anglicanus (talk) 01:43, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think that part of the issue/misunderstanding here is that another user (see above) decided to fork out an article on the church organization at Crystal Cathedral Ministries. At first I disagreed, but after thinking about it I thought that we could make a case that as it stands today both the organization and the building are sufficiently notable for two stand-alone articles. So I went ahead with turning this article into an article about the building and made Crystal Cathedral Ministries about the Protestant organization that built and still occupies the building. If you look at my last edit to this article, I tried as much as possible to write the article from the standpoint that it has been a Protestant building since its inception, it currently is a Protestant church building, but that it is in the process of being sold (not that it has been sold) to the Diocese of Orange. Yes I did state what the diocese plans to do with the building, but most of what I stated was cited and I was going to come back with references for what I didn't cite. As always, I concede that my wording could have been better, but I never once edited this article to state that the Crystal Cathedral is currently a Catholic building. I can't say the same for these edits: . Though I never spent much time on the Crystal Cathedral Ministries article, I made sure that it says that the organization is currently headquartered in the Crystal Cathedral building and that it did not say that the building has been sold. I would greatly appreciate a revert of this article to the version I gave above (my last edit). If you don't agree, I would at least like the lead section to be replaced with the lead section of my last edit to this article, as the lead section before I started editing this article was excessively detailed and gave undue weight to recent events. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. I don't have any objections with what you are trying to do and, under the current circumstances, making this article primarily about the building seems sensible. I found it too difficult at the time to untangle your edits from those of other editors who were taking a time-travelling approach to editing. If you want to edit the article back to the version you suggested I won't object. Cheers, Anglicanus (talk) 15:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I also agree with reverting to that version (but please keep my reference formatting). Thanks, 72Dino (talk) 15:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will revert momentarily. I will continue to WL this article and do my best to keep the article writen from the point of view I described above without crossing the WP:OWN line until the situation changes (i.e., the sale is completed, definitive lease terms are publicized, etc.). If you disagree with anything I do feel free to discuss here or on my talk page and revert if necessary. 72Dino, the proposed revert version already has the bare URL ref corrected (I assume that's what you were referring to as "my reference formatting"), but it still has two other bare URL refs. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:23, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- I also agree with reverting to that version (but please keep my reference formatting). Thanks, 72Dino (talk) 15:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. I don't have any objections with what you are trying to do and, under the current circumstances, making this article primarily about the building seems sensible. I found it too difficult at the time to untangle your edits from those of other editors who were taking a time-travelling approach to editing. If you want to edit the article back to the version you suggested I won't object. Cheers, Anglicanus (talk) 15:11, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Pardon the question, but doesn’t it seem a bit heavy-handed and misleading for the sixth word and first adjective in the article to be Protestant when the article is about a building and that building is currently owned by a Roman Catholic diocese? Buildings rarely profess particular religious views and can often be used by multiple sects. When the character of a building is critically changed by the faith that worships there (for instance, the Salt Lake Tabernacle), fine, but even the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, St. Peter's Basilica and Cathedral of Christ the Saviour are satisfied with "church", eschewing even the "Christian" adjective; Canterbury Cathedral, the seat of the leader of Anglicanism worldwide, doesn’t mention the Church of England until the second paragraph. The facts that the Crystal Cathedral was built by and is currently used for worship by a Protestant denomination are important facts, but the current status makes the initial adjective inappropriate in context. I don’t want to enter this particular edit war, but rewording to "The Crystal Cathedral is a Christian church[1] in the city of Garden Grove, in Orange County, California, United States" seem like a sustainable plan in line with similar Wikipedia articles. I'd even lose Christian but I have a feeling I'd get flamed for the suggestion... Kevin/Last1in (talk) 01:28, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- The simple answer to all of this is that the building is *still* owned by the Crystal Cathedral Ministries and has not yet been sold to anyone. So that is its "current status". Therefore, until such time as the approved sale to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange or anyone else is legally finalised (if it ever is) the building remains a Protestant church. Wikipedia articles reflect the present - *not* what may happen in the future. Anglicanus (talk) 07:22, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- It's possible that you missed my point. Who owns it right now, and who worships there right now, are pertinent to the article but not descriptive of the building, which is the purpose of an adjective. The unmodified term, church, is used for buildings as iconic as St. Peter's and Christ the Saviour. Applying a sectarian adjective to the building, especially six words into the lead sentence, is unlikely to improve the reader's understanding of the article's subject. The proposed sale to the Diocese is also important and is presented lower in the article. I am not advocating replacing Protestant with Catholic; I am advocating the removal of denominational adjective entirely. It is inaccurate (buildings don't have sects; people who worship in them do) and misleading in the context of the building's current situation.Kevin/Last1in (talk) 14:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Incubated reference
I'm incubating this reference here because it doesn't fit with the sentence it was supposed to reference, but I don't want to outright delete it as we might be able to use it elsewhere on the article: —KuyaBriBriTalk 21:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Diocese of Orange section
I removed the recently added new section on the Diocese of Orange as it was far too long and most of the details were not especially relevant. I am happy to discuss this but I think all that needs mentioning at present about the diocese's plans is already in the article. If and when it actually becomes a RC cathedral then some of this information may be more appropriate to include. Anglicanus (talk) 07:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I added that section to establish the backstory; that is, to say that "this is the history of the diocese's cathedral and its attempts to build one, and the CC is a step in that direction". I was basically trying to explain how the two parallel histories converged into the current "transitional" state of the building. As I've said before, I completely understand that the sale is not a foregone conclusion, and the text will definitely need to be revisited if the sale doesn't go through. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Escrow closed Feb. 3, 2012
Escrow closed on Feb. 3, 2012, and the Crystal Cathedral is now owned by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange (see here). The article will need to be revised to reflect this. I will start but may miss some wording. Thanks, 72Dino (talk) 18:08, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- While it is now owned by the RC diocese it will still be used by the original church for at least some reasonable time. I have reworded the article to accurately reflect the current known situation. Afterwriting (talk) 14:55, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
