No more orange-squeezer churches.
No more crystal cathedrals.
No more bomb shelter churches.
NO MORE MODERN GARBAGE!
Thanks. I fell better now.
Posted on 09/13/2013 8:33:37 AM PDT by marshmallow
Once the symbol of a congregation founded by Robert Schuller, the cathedral is now part of a church with rites and traditions that span centuries.
Towering like the Emerald City, the cathedral formerly known as Crystal sits at what might be Orange County's nucleus, a trinity of confluencing freeways, the Angels and Ducks stadium and a glimpse of a sacred place of a different kind — Disneyland
From that gleaming sanctuary, evangelist Robert Schuller delivered sermons that were beamed to television sets around the world. His ministry became synonymous with the megachurch, designed so the light and the breeze could stream through, a grand replica of his humble beginnings preaching on the roof of an Orange drive-in's snack shop.
The Crystal Cathedral was to Schuller what Graceland was to Elvis. Now it has been bought by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange, which has long coveted having a cathedral that sat at the center of its vast footprint of 1.2 million Catholics.
The name has already been changed to the Christ Cathedral. But the work of liturgical consultants, priests and architects to transform a temple so closely identified as a symbol of Schuller's sunny, uniquely Southern Californian theology into one that conforms to the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church has just begun.
"The exterior will always be the Crystal Cathedral, at least for a while," said Duncan Stroik, a professor of architecture at Notre Dame and editor of the publication Sacred Architecture Journal. "Catholic on the inside, but kind of Protestant on the outside."
Those who have taken on the project recognize that their assignment is a intimidating one, but they also have faith:
They can turn the Crystal Cathedral into the Christ Cathedral.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
You are the church, smvoice, and your home is where the church gathers to study the bible.
Amen, say it again!!
This is so true. There is not even a word such as "church" in the Scriptures. Somewhere along the line, overly needy men (yes, blame the men) made up a new word to justify their need for an "organization" to which they could ascribe power, authority, prestige, and (you guessed it) MONEY. Today, you see where this has led.
But, as you said, the assembling of Jesus' body is simply a gathering of the elect and you are doing that in your home. Paul would give you a "good job". Fantastic stuff. Thanks for sharing this.
Okay, but the food fight will surely start. There is no building which houses God. His Spirit inhabits his children, here, while we await our final redemption. Jesus is at the right hand of the Father, until all of the enemies have played out their given scripts and He smashes all evil (can't wait for that). The Father is of course seated as the Great Judge until this is all over.
Then begins the Marriage Feast of the Lamb and all the elect will celebrate being found in Him, not having a righteousness of their own, but granted His merit. It all makes buildings seem kind of silly.
I see incoming pizza.
I have a question regarding Bible study. The one in my house began with my 2 sisters, a couple of their friends, and a couple of great neighbors. All women. We had and still have great fellowship and study. But a few husbands decided they wanted to attend, too. And of course, they are all welcome. According to smvoice. But I also understand the Scriptures regarding who teaches whom. This is my conundrum. It will make for an interesting discussion here, I think. And I would love to hear your opinions on this. God Bless, smvoice
No more orange-squeezer churches.
No more crystal cathedrals.
No more bomb shelter churches.
NO MORE MODERN GARBAGE!
Thanks. I fell better now.
Of course the Catholic denomination one of the Christian denominations, don’t let anyone tell you different.
An "excuse"??
The event described in Acts clearly indicates how disputes, and questions of dogma were settled in the early Church; not by reference to a book. That is your point, isn't it? We should conform to how things were done in the early Church, right?
There was no book. Paul and Barnabas conferred with the Apostles.
This also clearly indicates that before the book, there already was the Church. That is, the Church gave us the Scriptures and not vice versa.
That is why Paul and Barnabas had no need of a book when it came to resolving the dispute over circumcision. They consulted the "apostles and ancients". Likewise, evangelists had no need of a book. They were sent by the Apostles in the name of Jesus.
This is precisely the model used by the Catholic Church.
Pictures and tapestries were used to teach Bible as most people were unable to read. Do not know if that’s correct, it does make sense though
Yes. Until Gutenburg, a Bible cost the equivalent of three years' wages, so few people had a Bible, or any other book. So stained glass windows and paintings told stories to the illiterate.
Additionally, the structure itself had its own logic, an example being the overall cruciform shape.
The Cathedral from the Romanesque to the Gothic - The Theological Background
Another interesting thing is the difference between the West and the East. In the West, lofty church interiors are intended to lift our gaze to heaven, whereas dome-covered Eastern churches are meant to connote God looking down on us.
Wrong. Paul had direct revelations from the risen Christ. He did NOT receive it of man, neither was he taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal. 1:11,12.
I can understand the conundrum. I think the scriptures are rather clear on women in public/church teaching or preaching. The cases where women were teaching were with women only or with husband. Even the passages that seem to show women in public ministry are rather unclear as to what they did other than assist he man.
With that said comes the conundrum. If men have abdicated their role of leadership one wonders about the void that has been created.
An intersting discussion indeed.
Exactly, CB. I had one husband say he didn’t like “church” because he never got anything from it. I can surely understand that. He says the Bible has come alive for him, and he is as excited about the Word of God as anyone I’ve ever seen.
Most people, even Catholics, don't know what indulgences are. Indulgences only remit the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven (through confession), by the merits of Christ, dispensed by Christ's Church, the minister of Redemption, under conditions prescribed by the Church.
Therefore, it is impossible for a Catholic to "buy his way into heaven."
In order to remit the temporal punishment due to a particular sin, the Church might prescribe prayer, fasting, or the giving of alms. During the period of the construction of the Vatican, this power was abused by some clergy, who offered indulgences in exchange for donations to the building of St. Peter's, although if such donations were done for the right reasons, and with the right intention, such donations would not be inherently evil.
There is no Catholic denomination. Only Protestants and the groups that came fro them can have denominations.
I’m assuming you mean no documents that were considered scripture? If so, Peter, how apropos, would disagree and did consider Paul’s letters scripture.
Peter believed the writings of Paul to be scripture as he included them with scripture.
2 Peter 3:15b. As also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given him, [16] as in all his letters, speaking concerning these matters, in which some things are hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES. [17] You then, beloved ones, being forewarned, watch lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being let away with the delusion of the lawless.
"If he will not listen to the church, treat him as a heathen or publican." --Jesus
Protestants should take note of the following.
Jesus did not say, "listen to the Scriptures."
He did not say, "listen to your local church."
He said, "the church."
The church that He founded.
The church that the gates of hell would not prevail against.
The church which St. Paul calls, "the pillar and foundation of truth."
We know that 2 TIm. 1:5 tells us that Timothy was first taught by his grandmother Lois, and his mother Eunice. And there was Priscilla in Acts. And someone else, I can’t remember right now. So there is a record of women teaching men.
As Monty Python once said, "The Catholic Church broke away from the Church of England." ;-)
I believe in these last days given the apostasie of most organized religions today it’s becoming more and more important to get back to the New Testament age idea of what the assembly was, is, and should be. We experience the same thing. The comment is often “why don’t they teach this stuff in church”?
ROTFL, no, the Catholic denomination is just one of many Christian denominations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.