Schuller's Crystal Cathedral bankrupt

[Jerry Biggers]

Robert Schuller's, the super-positive-possibility thinker and flamboyant televangelist's mega-church declares bankruptcy.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/10/19/crystal-cathedral-files-for-bankruptcy-protect-us-from-our-debt/

I used to think that, since Schuller had rejected the "hellfire, damnation, and brimstone" for basing his messages on "possibility thinking" and encouraging his listeners to reach for the best within themselves, that he marked a positive change for Protestantism. But then I heard him say the following:

1) Immediately after the 9-11 disaster caused by radical Muslim's, Schuller finds the real culprit,,...."We've got to get rid of secularism!. That is the real killer in the world!"

2) Schuller announces that God will forgive any sin, EXCEPT ONE: "lack of faith, questioning the existence of God."

There you have it, his real feelings about the role of religion in Man's life. The rest was slick window-dressing.

Supposedly, he had a real "positive, upbeat" message. Right.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Jerry Biggers

[James Heaps-Nelson]

Robert Schuller's, the super-positive-possibility thinker and flamboyant televangelist's mega-church declares bankruptcy.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/10/19/crystal-cathedral-files-for-bankruptcy-protect-us-from-our-debt/

Two choice cuts from Schuller's sermons:

1) Immediately after the 9-11 disaster caused by radical Muslim's, Schuller finds the real culprit,,...."We've got to get rid of secularism!. That is the real killer in the world!"

2) Schuller announces that God will forgive any sin, EXCEPT ONE: "lack of faith, questioning the existence of God."

Supposedly, he had a real "positive, upbeat" message. Right.

Thank you, Jerry. This crystallizes some things for me :-).

Jim

[9thdoctor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS7TbVuHtRI&feature=related

[Reidy]

Footnote: the building was by Richard Neutra, whose vonSternberg house Rand lived in for several years.

[Brant Gaede]

Footnote: the building was by Richard Neutra, whose vonSternberg house Rand lived in for several years.

The linked story said Philip Johnson. My Dad had some acquaintance with the man prior to WWII before he became an architect. He was active in the America First anti-war movement. Maybe the creditors will turn it into a produce market.

--Brant

[Jerry Biggers]

Some people are really gloating over this announcement of the bankruptcy of Schuller's Crystal Cathedral. See the news article on the MSNBC website about this, and the many hundreds of reader comments that follows. Some nasty stuff!

Of course, to those creditors that the Crystal Cathedral Mimistries owed $8.5 million, they could probably use a lot of "possibility thinking" right now! The actual debt of the church is around $55 million.

I suppose that I should add here that there was a "positive message" in some (probably most) of Schuller's sermons. Of course, he would lard it up with appeals for funds from his viewers. Annoying many in the clergy, he would offer his viewers who contributed, copies of his books or other "trinkets" (as his critics called them). He responded by quoting them to his audience and beaming, stated "Actually, I like to think of them as Possibility THINK-ets!" Probably further enraging his critics.

It is indeed possible to find "uplifting," almost secular, messages in some of his many books (which were mostly re-written sermons from his broadcasts), if they were read selectively. Most of what he said had already been stated by many "motivational" speakers before him. However, besides being a clever coiner of phrases, whether his writings actually helped people to achieve their own personal goals, is hard to say. I don't think that there has been much published research by academic psychologists to test whether the claims of motivational speakers (i.e., Napoleon Hill, Schuller, Peale, Anthony Roberts, etc.) actually do cause their adherents to be more successful than their counterparts.

As Schuller grew older, his sermons became more religious and he seemed to be emphasizing a more severe Calvinist theology (his denomination is the Dutch "Reformed Church in America"), rather than "achievement through Possibility Thinking," hence his increasing attacks on "secularism." Perhaps that played a role in his losing considerable numbers of contributors.

The other major factor in the financial downfall of the Schuller empire was a family feud that became increasingly hostile and bitter. His heir-apparent son, Robert A. Schuller succeeded to the Crystal Cathedral pulpit. The son's sermons were long on sacrifice and giving, whereas his father had emphasized personal achievement (with Jesus as a silent co-partner). That's not what people wanted to hear, and they started losing support. Finally the Church Board asked for the son's resignation. His father resumed his sermons but could not turn it around. Then, a suicide on the church alter by a distraught parishioner, which received national media attention, did not help the chuch's image. Finally, Schuller retired and his daughter became the Church's leader. Whatever her message was, it didn't work.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Jerry Biggers

[kiaer.ts]

[BaalChatzaf]

2) Schuller announces that God will forgive any sin, EXCEPT ONE: "lack of faith, questioning the existence of God."

Interesting. Apparently the reverend has not read the Gospels. The only unforgivable sin mentioned therein is cursing out The Holy Ghost. Matthew 12:30-32.

So the reverend apparently has misunderstood or misread his own Gospel.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Edited October 21, 2010 by BaalChatzaf

[Rich Engle]

Bankrupt. You KNOW? Beyond ludicrous, pulling that off. Anyone who has any experience struggling with (legitimately-operated) church budgets is going to look at this thing and just ~SIGH~.

Since I'm one of the only church boys around here, I might as well give you my take on the guy.

In terms of modern Protestant thought, and in terms of coming up with a TV empire/thingy-doo to compete against the charismatic/pentacostal showmen who were taking it down well, the rev here came up with a somewhat more digestible product--particularly for somewhat civilized, intelligent senior citizens who needed/wanted to watch church at home. THIS IS A BIG MARKET. In his early days he did this, and I guess you could have called that somewhat refreshing (if you watch that sun. stuff at all for anything other than quick entertainment fixes). In his younger days, I think he was more or less trying to be a decent evangelist, in that he was teaching a lot of things from the personal improvement, and rational thought areas. My measure of denominations and preachers and such revolves around looking at things like their levels of reason, reverence, and tolerance.

So, ya'know, a lot of the oldster protestant crowd got him, and a fair amount of younger adults who dug inspirational/motivational speakers in general.. "If you want the change, start from inside. . ." whatever. Followed by, in his case, the Pitch. And yeah, that would mean when his kid came in the other way, your repeat customers are definitely going to ditch.

The background on this whole thing is pretty by the book for any of us who keep tabs on this stuff. Or have read Heinlein, for that matter.

My personal thing with him has always been deeper than that. At one time, I was doing a great deal of study in the area of public speaking, and self-improvement. Presentation skills, Branden's work, all of this--I had business reasons to do so, and there were things to be learned. I would check in on just about anyone working a big crowd to see what they were doing. With the preachers, I had to be careful because I would get caught up in the comedy and not learn. How many creepy moments I savor in memory, from Ernest Angley alone!

THIS guy, yeah, he had some content. But my GUT INSTINCT always came up disturbed and on guard after listening to him for awhile. I was watching his eyes/face very carefully, and viscerally, I did not like what I saw, whatever it was. You know, there are all different kinds of greed, and I think one of the worst ones is what you see in a person that has become a very lecherous invididual, but may or may not be fully aware of it. Motivators, TV Evangos, any pitchman can fall into that.

Whatever the fuck it was, it disturbed my moral compass. There was a real meanness, a hardness, that would flash out of him and that is not my taste in preachers.

You can study this stuff in his videos. The other move in question is his charismatic glance. In real preaching, these moments have to come out naturally. He turns his on and off like a switch--beaming it out here and there to stress points (and you can imagine which One Point was of great interest to him, nudge-nudge-wink-wink $).

Creepy.

rde

Edited October 20, 2010 by Rich Engle

[anonrobt]

A building like that would be mortifyingly expensive to maintain...

[Reidy]

A bit of checking shows that both Neutra and Johnson contributed to the complex.

[Starbuckle]

Interesting. Jerry's initial post didn't explain very much how he got the "window dressing" conclusion. But the background later about Schuler's evolution or devolution paints a more detailed and plausible picture. Engle's perception also rings true.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Starbuckle

[Rich Engle]

"Don't just sit there--DO SOMETHING." --(Rev. R. S.)

(And if you can't think of anything to do, here's an idea--dial this number!)

When he was on top, I always imagined the back story looking sort of like this scene (from one of my all time favorite huckster movies):

[Starbuckle]

Wow. Andy Griffith as the creepy bad guy? Reminds me of Henry Fonda in "Once Upon a Time in the West."

Never heard of "A Face in the Crowd." Looks interesting.

[BaalChatzaf]

Wow. Andy Griffith as the creepy bad guy? Reminds me of Henry Fonda in "Once Upon a Time in the West."

Never heard of "A Face in the Crowd." Looks interesting.

That was a mordant satire on radio and celebrity. It was also Lee Remick's first movie.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

Great movie.

Andy Griffith is an extreme left wing marxist and a rude prick.

"Real-life inspirations It is possible that Schulberg superficially based the Rhodes character on Tennessee Ernie Ford, a country singer and storyteller who had a popular weekly half-hour program on NBC called "The Ford Show" in the 1950s. But despite a lifelong private struggle with alcohol, Ford was well liked in show business and never a controversial personality in the Rhodes mode.^{[citation needed]}

Other aspects of Rhodes were clearly inspired by 1940s and '50s CBS radio-TV star Arthur Godfrey. The scene where Rhodes, on TV in Memphis, spoofs his sponsor echoes Godfrey's reputation for kidding his own advertisers. Godfrey claimed he would not advertise products he did not believe in, and routinely ridiculed both the sponsors' stodgy ad copy and occasionally, the companies' executives. The more Godfrey did this, the more sales increased. Arthur Godfrey's immense popularity began to deflate following his 1953 on-air firing of singer Julius LaRosa, which opened the gradual exposure of his less lovable, often controlling off-camera personality. Though he remained on radio, TV and even films for several years afterward, Godfrey's mass appeal and popularity had passed its apex, and were never the same. At one point in the film, Rhodes telegraphs Jeffries that he's going to miss a broadcast and requests that Godfrey fill in for him.

Rhodes's mocking of his audience, assuming he was off the air when in fact his audio was fed back onto the airwaves, is taken from an alleged incident in which a children's program host on New York's radio station WOR, "Uncle Don," is said to have thought he was off the air. He supposedly said, "This is Uncle Don, saying good night (good night). We're off. Good, that will hold the little bastards." A "recreation" of this incident was included on Kermit Schaefer's "Bloopers" album; however, despite repeated inquiries and research, there is no proof that this incident ever took place, and may have been a prank pulled by recording engineers.^[3]

Some have suggested that the Rhodes character may have been inspired in part by John Henry Faulk, a country comedian who was long blacklisted as a result of the "Red Scare," although Faulk was arguably never really a national figure. Schulberg himself claimed to have based a significant part of the character's facade on that of Will Rogers, adding a distinctively un-Rogers-like level of amorality and cruelty. In Richard Schickel's 2006 biography of director Elia Kazan, Schulberg explained that he had met Will Rogers, Jr. during the latter's run for Congress and discussed his famous father. The younger Rogers supposedly told Schulberg that his father socialized with the very establishment types he mocked in his public pronouncements, adding that his father was actually a political reactionary in private life.

The film marked the debut of actress Lee Remick, who plays a teenage baton-twirling champion from Arkansas, one of Rhodes's love interests whom he marries instead of Marcia Jeffries. To underscore the sway of television media in America, Kazan cleverly incorporated several cameos by popular "talking heads", including: Sam Levenson, John Cameron Swayze, Mike Wallace, Earl Wilson, and Walter Winchell."

[Brant Gaede]

Andy Griffith is an extreme left wing marxist and a rude prick.

For real? Isn't he the guy who's appearing in TV ads extolling the benefits of Obamacare? He looks like, ugly.

Your postings are much better than they used to be.

--Brant

[Rich Engle]

Andy Griffith is an extreme left wing marxist and a rude prick.

Heh. Sure!

We ought to just start calling this thread "Wikipedia Lite! A Place For Re-Quoting."

In a lot of ways, I thought it was the best film he ever did, and he was competing against some big boys back then. Plus, he could play guitar and sing! Yes! All three chords! I've analyzed it, dammit: I SAW THOSE C, F, AND G7 CHORDS, AND EVEN MORE!!

Somebody needed to do that film, and Elia Kazan (COMMUNIST COMMUNIST COMMUNIST) did it, splendidly.

Maybe, just maybe, it explains the weird homoerotic sexual tension between Andy and Barney, later on. You just never know . . . Wait, wait! ! ! This should be a movie over on the UNAPPROVED GUILTY STUFF YOU WATCHED thread.

Yes!

Next out of me: Weird Snake Handling Videos. For now, what I put up with every week when I play music shows; the COMPETITION. acK! I Challenge You All: SIT THROUGH 45 SECONDS!

rde

Surrounded by the Creepiness.