Re: [UC] church or mosque SE cor 43rd Walnut Sts

2004-08-05 Thread Craigsolve




In a message dated 8/5/2004 1:23:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
tonight 
  I noticed they're excavating inside the (mosque?) at 43rd and walnut. mini 
  bulldozers coming out of a hole in the wall and dumping dirt into a big 
  dumpster. I think that place used to be a (movie theatre?) and then it 
  became a (christian? church?) of some sort (well, there used to be a 
  'jesus loves you' marquee on the 43rd st side). anyway, maybe they're 
  finally excavating so that the floor ends up 
level?

Yes, it was a movie theatre at one time. For what its worth, I'll try to 
find out the name from some old-timers.

It was an active Christian House of worship with mostly African-American 
parishioners in the 80's. They were evangelical yet friendly. On Sunday mornings 
during nice weather, they would worship with the doors open. They would invite 
my daughter and I to join them, when we watched from the sidewalk.

At what point the Christians departed and Islam entered, I do not know. It 
appears to be an active house of worship that also opens its doors during nice 
weather. As an Islamic house of worship, it appears to be open during the week 
for prayers.

I imagine its disconcerting to be facing east and kneelingup hill 
while praying. With a sense of black humor I hope that is the issue they are 
addressing, rather than building a fallout shelter in preparation for the Nuking 
of the Republican Convention.

Craig


Re: [UC] church Christ Memorial Steeple

2004-08-05 Thread Craigsolve




In a message dated 8/4/2004 9:40:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm going to go with the guess that the 
  heavy rains we've been having  did weaken the structure and the one 
  yesterday was just the last straw.I've been wondering: Mill 
  Creek?anybody?

Both are possibilities.

The steeple by its design takes tremendous punishment from the elements: 


1) Continual freeze thaw cycles attack both mortar joints and the 
stones
2) Additional motion results from winds-very high winds recently
3) The steeple was previously truncated by a lightening strike

With regularity, we Christians fall short of exercising the quality of 
stewardship that the Lord has charged us with.

Craig



Re: [UC] church

2004-08-05 Thread Dan Widyono
I was responding to the annointed bs etc.

Always at your service and ready for dialog.
Dan W.

 Bruce gave us the website. I looked at it. It offered no substantive help  
 whatsoever. Or, if it did, show me what I missed and I'll retract my  statement.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


RE: [UC] church

2004-08-05 Thread Dubin, Elisabeth
William H. Magill wrote:
 So today, you have what's left.  Historic designation or Historic 
 Preservation is utterly meaningless in this context. The simple fact 
 of the matter is -- nobody gives a damn what happens to these 
 structures, except for a few people who want to tell others what they 
 can and cannot do with their properties.  When these few are gone, 
 they're gone, and they won't be an issue anymore.


William, can you please tell me what exactly you mean by this?  This is
the most depressing thing I've read on the list, like, ever.  Nobody
gives a damn about these structures except for a few people?  And only
the anointed?  Tell me, what would you like your neighborhood to look
like?  Only dollar stores and Eckerds?  You are saying you have
absolutely no sense of the sublime looking at these buildings?  No sense
of what came before you or what will come after?  When they tear down
30th Street Station, will you remember what it felt like to walk in that
space?

Personally, when I look at the beautiful churches in our neighborhood,
like the tiled dome of St. Francis DeSales, I feel bigger than I had.
These buildings WILL NEVER BE BUILT AGAIN - the economy we live in will
not allow it.  Labor is too expensive.  Craft is almost dead.  If we do
not protect what we have, that's it.  Maybe you want to live in a bleak
landscape, but you will find it's more than a few people who want to
tell others what they can and cannot do with their properties who
don't.

If I've somehow misunderstood your post, forgive me. 

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church or mosque SE cor 43rd Walnut Sts

2004-08-05 Thread DaveAxler

In a message dated 8/5/04 10:24:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


Incidentally, the Byrd Theater stood in the middle of the the south side of Baltimore Ave. between 47th  48th St.  It was torn down decades ago - another great place for us to enjoy weekend matinees.  Ah - the good old days!



Would that be the location of the current parking lot?


Re: [UC] church Christ Memorial Steeple

2004-08-05 Thread Daniel Aharon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Both are possibilities.
 
The steeple by its design takes tremendous punishment from the elements: 
 
1) Continual freeze thaw cycles attack both mortar joints and the  stones
2) Additional motion results from winds-very high winds recently
3) The steeple was previously truncated by a lightening strike
 
With regularity, we Christians fall short of exercising the quality of  
stewardship that the Lord has charged us with.
 
Craig
No, no, don't be so hard on yourself; you're doing just fine!

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church or mosque SE cor 43rd Walnut Sts

2004-08-05 Thread Craigsolve




In a message dated 8/5/2004 10:04:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, FRByers 
writes:
The 
  former theater at 43rd  Walnut was called the 
Commodore.

What was the layout? Any balcony or mezzanine? Rest rooms main floor, 
upstairs, or down stairs? I never went in, feeling that I should stay for the 
whole service not just to scope out the building.

Thanks for posting the name, especially after my "old timer" comment. Ya 
see Bender, there are still a lot of classy knowledgeable young women in UC! 
Work that into your next Culture poem.

Craig


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Shaera



BGAnderson wrote:

"I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to 
guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. 
How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really 
invest in historic preservation?"


I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church 
anymore, but as a shelter. In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that 
no one was seriously injured or worse.

I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did 
weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw.

Historic preservation would be a good thing, and something that's done 
inplaces here in the US and it seems especially in parts of Europe and 
Great Britain where they really DO have history. Of course, the taxes in 
England, at least, are far higher than ours here. That's what helps pay 
for the preservation. And there is a difference even there as to what is 
preserved/rebuilt/restored...my roommate, who's been to London several times, 
told me about seeing the bombed out buildings from WWII being left as is, with 
new buildings all around them. They didn't tear them all down, but they 
didn't rebuild some of themeither. Maybe their perspective on what 
falls under historic preservation (the Roman wall vs. a building from the 20th 
centrury) is different.

I'm all for preservation, when it is feasible - like the Victory 
Building. I recall spending way too many nights there when the London 
Victory Club was open and it was a beautiful building. I was so sad to see 
it just sitting there rotting away for years. I'm not sure I like all the 
"luxury" high priced living I'm seeing all over the place, but that's another 
story.

To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation. 
The first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along 
with private investors, to restore/rehab/repair. Designation, on the other 
hand,forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to 
restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with 
no help/funding from the government - state or federal.

Wendy



Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread BGAndersen
Someone just sent me this link:

http://www.sacredplaces.org

Partners for Sacred Places is the only national, non-sectarian, non-profit 
organization dedicated to the sound stewardship and active community use of America's 
older religious properties. Partners provides assistance to the people who care for 
sacred places while promoting a new understanding of how these places sustain 
communities. 


In a message dated 8/4/2004 3:46:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Shaera writes:

BGAndersEn wrote:
 
I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to  guess 
the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause.  

How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really  invest 
in historic preservation?
 
 
I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a church  
anymore, but as a shelter.  In that regard it is amazing and wonderful that  
no one was seriously injured or worse.
 
I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having did  
weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw.
 
Historic preservation would be a good thing, and something that's done  in 
places here in the US and it seems especially in parts of Europe and  Great 
Britain where they really DO have history.  Of course, the taxes in  England, at 
least, are far higher than ours here.  That's what helps pay  for the 
preservation.  And there is a difference even there as to what is  
preserved/rebuilt/restored...my roommate, who's been to London several times,  told 
me about 
seeing the bombed out buildings from WWII being left as is, with  new buildings all 
around them.  They didn't tear them all down, but they  didn't rebuild some 
of them either.  Maybe their perspective on what  falls under historic 
preservation (the Roman wall vs. a building from the 20th  centrury) is different.
 
I'm all for preservation, when it is feasible - like the Victory  Building.  
I recall spending way too many nights there when the London  Victory Club was 
open and it was a beautiful building.  I was so sad to see  it just sitting 
there rotting away for years.  I'm not sure I like all the  luxury high priced 
living I'm seeing all over the place, but that's another  story.
 
To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation.   The 
first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state funding along  with 
private investors, to restore/rehab/repair.  Designation, on the other  hand, 
forces an individual to fork over money they may not have to  
restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small group of people decide is right with  no 
help/funding 
from the government - state or federal.
 
Wendy




You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Brian Siano
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think its a shame that the tower collpased last night. I'm going to guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause. 

How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really invest in historic preservation?
 

Well, given the accounts Al's given us, about another church which 
couldn't afford the repairs mandated by the PHC, it's difficult to see 
this as a mandate for the HD proposal. One could argue, with equal force 
and evidence, that the owners would be facing repairs of an extremely 
(and prohibitively) expensive nature.

The fact is this is a huge loss for the beauty of the neighborhood. I'm 
glad no one was hurt... and I hope it can be rebuilt.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Krfapt




In a message dated 8/4/2004 4:23:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.sacredplaces.orgPartners for Sacred Places is the 
  only national, non-sectarian, non-profit organization dedicated to the sound 
  stewardship and active community use of America's older religious properties. 
  Partners provides assistance to the people who care for sacred places while 
  promoting a new understanding of how these places sustain communities. 


Seems long on places that could use help. Short on the help they could use. 
A bunch of anointed preservation fanatics spouting the noblesse oblige but not 
actually doing anything as droll as raising money.

Or, was there a page on this web site I somehow missed?

Al 
Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Dan Widyono

 A bunch of anointed preservation fanatics spouting the noblesse oblige but not 
  actually doing anything as droll as raising money.

You're such a depressing entity on this list, even if you do bring some
useful links once in a while.  What a negative attitude you have, and you
don't even know the institution or the people.  There's more to community
building than raising money or renting apartments.

Disappointed,
Dan W.
-- 
-- Daniel Widyono --
-- www.widyono.net--
-- www.cis.upenn.edu/~widyono --
-- 

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Krfapt




In a message dated 8/4/2004 5:23:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
youdon't even know the institution or the 
people

Bruce gave us the website. I looked at it. It offered no substantive help 
whatsoever. Or, if it did, show me what I missed and I'll retract my 
statement.

And, you can can the personal attacks. They don't do your well-known 
reputation for proportionany justice whatsoever. ("You're such a 
depressing entity," and"What a negative attitude you have," indeed!)

Al 
Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread L a s e r B e a m ®
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having 
did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last straw.

I've been wondering: Mill Creek?
anybody?

.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]











You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread William H. Magill
On 04 Aug, 2004, at 15:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BGAnderson wrote:
 
I think its a shame that the tower collapsed last night. I'm going to 
guess the heavy rains and a lack of proper maintenance were the cause.

 How many other historic buildings are going to fall before we really 
invest in historic preservation?
There are more than two sides to this issue. Especially when the 
edifice involved is or was a church 

I heard on the news that this building wasn't really being used as a 
church anymore, but as a shelter.  In that regard it is amazing and 
wonderful that no one was seriously injured or worse.
Actually, it was still an active Church.  It is a typical 
store-front church, not unlike the Reverend Larry and the 
antil-McPentrafacation folks down the block.

The last I knew, the congregation numbered around 50.
The muti-purpose room of the church was used as a day-care 
Christian Academy during the day and, apparently, as a homeless shelter 
in the evening.

Not that long ago it was an active Episcopal Church with an adjoining 
Seminary. The Seminary building is now a community help organization 
(I forget its name) which built the parking lot across the street.  I 
believe that ownership of the church building was transferred about 10, 
maybe 15 years ago.

I'm going to go with the guess that the heavy rains we've been having 
did weaken the structure and the one yesterday was just the last 
straw.
The property was under repair. No, I don't know exactly what that 
means. I know that one of the stained glass windows in the 
multi-purpose room had recently been removed for work. The scaffolding 
was still in place.

The tower had been a known problem for several months. Pieces of 
facade had fallen, and the entire front of the church was blocked (to 
the sidewalk) with chain link fencing. How extensive the known 
problem happened to be I have no idea. All this is just from sidewalk 
observations.

To me, there is a difference between preservation and designation.  
The first does try, with (I believe?) the help of federal/state 
funding along with private investors, to restore/rehab/repair.  
Designation, on the other hand, forces an individual to fork over 
money they may not have to restore/rehab/repair in a way that a small 
group of people decide is right with no help/funding from the 
government - state or federal.
This particular property is typical of the bulk of the churches in West 
Philadelphia. They were built as exalted edifices 100 to 150 years ago. 
Then, nominally 50 years ago, when white flight was at its height, 
they were abandoned by their congregations. Since then, they have 
typically, been occupied by a succession of too poor to maintain them 
organizations -- either religious or otherwise. Those which have 
remained as religious edifices are in the worst repair... those which 
were not re-uses for religious purposes have long since been torn down, 
or converted into speakeasies.

The unique problem of a religious structure is that when it was built 
it was typically an extremely good structure; representing the best 
that the congregation could conceive. Affordability was not really an 
issue at the time they were built. Organized Religion was growing and 
raising money for a new church was comparatively easy. (No more 
difficult than it was during Franklin's time when they built the 
steeple on Christ Church, which just celebrated its anniversary!)

So today, you have what's left.  Historic designation or Historic 
Preservation is utterly meaningless in this context. The simple fact of 
the matter is -- nobody gives a damm what happens to these structures, 
except for a few people who want to tell others what they can and 
cannot do with their properties.  When these few are gone, they're 
gone, and they won't be an issue anymore.

I am fairly certain that because of the damage done to the main 
sanctuary's roof when the tower collapsed, the entire building will 
come down. For one thing -- tonight's rain simply poured into that hole 
soaking the wooden floors and plaster walls inside, further damaging 
the interior.

Of course, the hulk may simply sit there with a chain-link fence around 
it for 5 or 10 years. I would be very surprised if the congregation has 
no funds to pay for the removal of the ruble of the tower, let alone 
demolition of the remainder of the tower (there is barely one floor 
still standing) and repairs to the roof and the sanctuary. So unless 
the City needs debris for landfill someplace, the pile will sit there 
for quite some time.

T.T.F.N.
William H. Magill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.


Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread Benseraglio2




In a message dated 8/4/2004 9:46:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not that 
  long ago it was an active Episcopal Church with an adjoining Seminary. The 
  Seminary building is now a "community help organization" (I forget its 
  name) which built the parking lot across the street. I believe that 
  ownership of the church building was transferred about 10, maybe 15 years 
  ago.

Actually, *Reformed* Episcopal. Born of a church split in 1873, and from my 
understanding more "conservative" than mainstream Episcopals. We Mennonites 
rented space from them when it was still a seminary, andas the building 
transitioned to a social service agency -- the seminary was in the more modern 
blocky building next store. Behind the main church is a large dormitory which 
used to serve the seminary. At one time we Mennos were considering buying the 
dorm, although not very seriously. I would imagine that's where the shelter 
is.

Also, my understanding is that a concrete ball used to top the majestic 
steeple, but it got hit by lightning and toppled some years back. 

"The Reformed Episcopal Church was organized in New York City in 1873 by 
eight clergymen and twenty laymen who were formerly priests and members of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church. A long debate over the excessive ritualism and 
exclusive attitude of the Protestant Episcopal Church toward other denominations 
lay behind the separation. The immediate cause of the division lay in the 
participation of Bishop George David Cummins, Assistant Bishop of Kentucky, at a 
Communion Service held in the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church in New York City. 
In the face of criticism and with the conviction that the evangelical and 
catholic nature and mission of the Protestant Episcopal Church were being lost, 
Bishop Cummins resigned as Assistant Bishop of Kentucky and transferred his 
Episcopal oversight to a new jurisdiction called the Reformed Episcopal 
Church."

http://www.recus.org/history.htm 




Ross Benderhttp://rossbender.org



Re: [UC] church

2004-08-04 Thread L a s e r B e a m ®
William H. Magill wrote:
So today, you have what's left.  Historic designation or Historic 
Preservation is utterly meaningless in this context. The simple fact of 
the matter is -- nobody gives a damm what happens to these structures, 
except for a few people who want to tell others what they can and cannot 
do with their properties.  When these few are gone, they're gone, and 
they won't be an issue anymore.

tonight I noticed they're excavating inside the (mosque?) at 
43rd and walnut. mini bulldozers coming out of a hole in the 
wall and dumping dirt into a big dumpster. I think that 
place used to be a (movie theatre?) and then it became a 
(christian? church?) of some sort (well, there used to be a 
'jesus loves you' marquee on the 43rd st side). anyway, 
maybe they're finally excavating so that the floor ends up 
level?

in other news, remember that methodist episcopal church on 
33rd and chestnut? asbury? and how penn was going to convert 
it into studio/gallery space for their fine arts dept? but 
it burned down during construction, leaving only the stone 
walls and facade? and now there's nothing there but a 
parking lot?

.
laserbeam®
[aka ray]

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
http://www.purple.com/list.html.