141 replies to this topic

[Explorer55]

Denver has a nightclub called "The Church" because it was at one point.  Now it has a variety of venues/bars/dance floors within its walls.  From the outside, most evidently, and from the inside, you can tell it was a church.  To my knowledge, it's never been hit by lightening....

[AlexPKeaton]

jbr12, on Feb 22 2007, 06:41 PM, said:

Old bus garage?  I lived there my entire life, but I'm not sure what building that is?

Sorry to get off topic folks, my ears always pick up when I hear info from up north

210 Front Street. I don't know much other than that.

[Raildudes dad]

AlexPKeaton, on Feb 26 2007, 11:08 PM, said:

210 Front Street. I don't know much other than that.

Dilworth Marine the current tennant?, east side, north of the bank 1 block north of the river?

[AlexPKeaton]

Raildudes dad, on Feb 26 2007, 11:18 PM, said:

Dilworth Marine the current tennant?, east side, north of the bank 1 block north of the river?

South of the river. And to my knowledge it's currently vacant, though I seem to remember some talk of something in there so I could be wrong. I suppose I could find out easily enough though.

[Raildudes dad]

AlexPKeaton, on Feb 26 2007, 11:39 PM, said:

South of the river. And to my knowledge it's currently vacant, though I seem to remember some talk of something in there so I could be wrong. I suppose I could find out easily enough though.

I should have mapquested the address . I know the building - used to have a sailboard, kayak watersport shop for a tenant. I did't know it was a bus garage at one time.

[omnivore]

Just a few years ago I would have thought renovating a church for another use was awesome. After living through the schism at Bethlehem Lutheran Church the it makes me sick!

--

tSlater, on Feb 26 2007, 12:19 PM, said:

[jbr12]

omnivore-

Having said you are living through the schism at BLC, are you implying that you are a member of the congregation?  Has anyone seen the plans for the Heartside warehouse church yet?

[omnivore]

jbr12, on Mar 9 2007, 10:32 AM, said:

omnivore-
Having said you are living through the schism at BLC, are you implying that you are a member of the congregation?  Has anyone seen the plans for the Heartside warehouse church yet?

They mailed out a proposed layout for dividing the interior space. They are currently meeting with Design+ to finalize the design. I believe they are solving the public urination problem by installing urinals in the narthex. [kidding]

I'm surprised how upset I feel about leaving the current church building. It felt as though the decision to move was forced on us. What really upsets me is that I was out of town the week of the vote and was not allowed to vote. [Members had to be present to vote.]

[joeDowntown]

I'm shocked that the church would leave that beautiful building too. But I am very happy that it will be reused and not simply neglected for years to come.

Joe

[mifunboy]

I am sorry but as a Lutheran I find their decision rather ironic and not in keeping with Luther's thesis.

Edited by mifunboy, 10 March 2007 - 02:22 PM.

[GRDadof3]

There are a couple of articles in the Religion section of the Press today about evolving church architecture, this church project, and the dwindling memberships of the very old cathedrals in Rome (from the exodus of lower and middle class to the suburbs of Rome).  Can't find the articles online though.  Interesting read though, and echoes a lot of what I said a few posts back about recent church trends.

[omnivore]

GRDadof3, on Feb 19 2007, 09:13 PM, said:

A lot of churches today want youth centers [etc.] You just can't do those kinds of things in buildings built 100 years ago in historic areas with strict design guidelines for additions

Westminster Presbyterian did a great job adding on to their building. And they still have their original santcuary with all the integrity one would expect to find in a traditional church building.  Bethlehem Lutheran could have done something similar. I feel the current Pastor didn't like the idea of working with Heritage Hill. I remember he gave up replacing the sign outside because Heritage Hill turned down his proposed plan. I guess he showed them!

[rivegauche]

tSlater, on Feb 26 2007, 12:19 PM, said:

I wouldn't imagine so.. unless Mr. London was the one doing it. =p




That's the former congregational area.. all a dance floor with small stage for DJs, and 3 stories of catwalks and steel spiral staircases winding around the room, with blue lights representing stars floating around on the ceiling (mid-party they added different lights to the ceiling, but that was how they ran it the whole time for the opening acts)

It was a mind-blowing experience just exploring that thing, let alone the actual music.

WWJDD - What would Jack Daniel's do?

[LA Dave]

GRDadof3, on Mar 10 2007, 03:11 PM, said:

There are a couple of articles in the Religion section of the Press today about evolving church architecture, this church project, and the dwindling memberships of the very old cathedrals in Rome (from the exodus of lower and middle class to the suburbs of Rome).  Can't find the articles online though.  Interesting read though, and echoes a lot of what I said a few posts back about recent church trends.

Hate to be pedantic, GRDad (well, not really), but there is only one "cathedral" in Rome, which is where the Pope sits as the Bishop of Rome.  A "cathedral" is simply a church where the bishop sits on his "cathedra."  In GR, that is St. Andrew's, which happens to be big, but it could be a smaller church.  Not all big churches are "cathedrals," including the "Crystal Cathedral," which is officially only a church.

[tSlater]

The pope's cathedral technically isn't in Rome, it's in Vatican ;p

[cnordstrom]

I just saw this, and I can't believe how sad the news makes me. Regardless of the care the developer puts into the building, the idea that condos will be replacing a building where I was baptised, where my parents were married, and where my grandfather's funeral took place is very hard to swallow. To be fair, I haven't been to church in many many years (for that matter, I haven't even lived in GR in many years now!), so maybe I have no right to complain. It just bothers me that the Bethlehem board decided to abandon over 100 years of history. Yes, it is "just" a building, but the building is a source of truly monumental memories for many people.

I'm ashamed of the church board, and hope Ken and his crew treat this building (and by extension, its former congregation) with more respect than the actual church board did.

[ArsEcclesiae]

tSlater, on Mar 12 2007, 04:29 PM, said:

The pope's cathedral technically isn't in Rome, it's in Vatican ;p

Don't mean to be technical myself...but I thought I would just set the record straight.

The Pope is the bishop of the Diocese of Rome...and as bishop of Rome his cathedra (Episcopal chair/seat) is in the Basilica of St. John Lateran in the city of Rome...not St. Peters Basilica in Vatican City.

Quote

St John Lateran...is the cathedral church of Rome and the official ecclesiastical seat of the Pope. Officially named Archibasilica Sanctissimi Salvatoris (Archbasilica of the Most Holy Savior), it is the oldest and ranks first (being the only cathedral in Rome) among the four major basilicas of Rome, and holds the title of ecumenical mother church (mother church of the whole inhabited world) among Catholics.

-from Wikipedia

This is were the Popes used to live (in the Lateran Palace) until the early fourteenth century when the Seat of the Popes was transferred for a while to Avignon in France. When the Popes again began living in Rome, they decided to build a new Palace (due to the disrepair of the Lateran) at the Vatican...hence why today St. Peter's is often, mistakenly, thought to be the "cathedral" of the Pope.

Edited by ArsEcclesiae, 14 March 2007 - 01:09 PM.

[tSlater]

I stand corrected.

[Moore&Co]

cnordstrom, on Mar 13 2007, 02:01 PM, said:

I just saw this, and I can't believe how sad the news makes me. Regardless of the care the developer puts into the building, the idea that condos will be replacing a building where I was baptised, where my parents were married, and where my grandfather's funeral took place is very hard to swallow. To be fair, I haven't been to church in many many years (for that matter, I haven't even lived in GR in many years now!), so maybe I have no right to complain. It just bothers me that the Bethlehem board decided to abandon over 100 years of history. Yes, it is "just" a building, but the building is a source of truly monumental memories for many people.

I'm ashamed of the church board, and hope Ken and his crew treat this building (and by extension, its former congregation) with more respect than the actual church board did.

Just wanted to let you know that, for myself, and I am certain that I speak for Mr. Pentecost (the developer) when I say that we are very sensitive to the history of the building, but even more so, to the history of Bethleham's people. It must be incredibly hard to leave these memories in such a beautiful sanctuary. We hope that the work that we do will be an honor to all of the members who worshiped there and that the transition would become a truly beautiful addition to Heritage Hill as a neighborhood. I sat at the church today on the steps up to the alter and looked at the stained glass window over the center of the balcony. No matter how many times I look at that, I am struck with how beautiful it is. I will truly envy the person that gets to look at that every day. I hope the building becomes a house of peace, in a different way, for those few that will get to call it home. I realize it must be very hard to leave. We'll do our best to do no harm. Kevin Moore

[dragt]

Here's the thing that gets me; aging congregations are selling their beautiful old structures in urban centers everywhere just when people are starting to come back.  A younger Lutheran (or any other for that matter) congregation will never be able to afford real estate like that again.  It is so much more than a building, it's a location smack in the middle of the most impressive (urban) growth this city has seen in a long long time.  Why do you think the developer wants it?

No offense to the developer, I doubt you had to twist anyones arm, but it reminds me of the city selling off it's parking lots for a short term gain...