![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The purpose of this section is to collect the "critical reviews" of Calvary Chapel. Right now, references to the critical articles are presented throughout this page, as well as in the archives. The goal would be to have sections on the "calvary chapel" Wiki entry that describe many of the problems with the organization, as presented in the published works. If you come across additional critical references, please post them here, as well as on the "calvary chapel" Wiki entry.
Looking through the history and archives, the Calvary Chapel wiki article has a history that has caused some editors to believe it is being Fanpov protected by Calvary proponents as a marketing tool instead of allowing the article to grow as a neutral Encyclopedic entry. The current protection is being presented as "consensus says". This Talk page alone has three dozen references to "consensus". In addition, there are numerous entries on the Article history that identifies reverts based on "consensus".
One of the more recent Fanpovs presented an Opinion Poll. This practice was discouraged by multiple users, yet the warning was ignored by the Pollster.
Sliceofmiami ( talk) 05:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Mojo, I understand what you mean about Bluemoonlet, but someone needs to push to have this page NPOV. People come to "research" an organization, not to read about the propaganda or marketing material that is already available. Currently, this site is almost exclusively Calvary Chapel marketing material -- what use is that, other than for additional marketing?
What happens is there are Fans who go to this page (just like any Religious organization's Fans), and they will inherently change the page to what they have been told to believe, or have come to believe themselves -- basically, all original research. Any information that compromises Chuck's Church is quickly removed. I'm not saying the fanboi's are unique, they are only doing what they are grown to do, and I know other organizations enjoy the same kind of fanboi behavior.
Walter, you are right, not every editor here is a fan boi. But some are. And reading through the history logs, those that are Fans are more entrenched than the rest who finally give up. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 16:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay Blue, you win. I identified a number of sources on the Talk page, requesting that all of us take a look a the articles to make this Calvary Chapel entry a little more reliable. Your response? "Um, that would be your job, not mine. --BlueMoonlet (t/c)".
In making this page more NPOV (and less Fanpov), it is all of our jobs who have expressed an interest.
Your "complaint" or "references" about the Catholic church's page? You obviously didn't even read the article. You were just looking to justify your position about Chuck Smith. The Catholic_Church page has an entire Criticism_of_the_Catholic_Church referenced page. Do you really want to build a separate "Criticisms of Chuck's Church" page? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 03:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Well Blue, I think you said it best when you said, "it isn't my job to make this page NPOV" -- and then you go off and remove other people's edits to make sure only your Point of View is heard. You win the Incorrigible trophy. Your "I Love Chuck" zeal is more powerful than my current resolve. Drink that Koolaide, you'll be fine.
In regards to the Catholic Criticism page, why did you remove almost all of the criticisms of Chuck's organization? Many years of editors came before you, and in one unfailed swoop, you removed almost all of it? Even when more than one editor (including Moderator page editors) suggested additional criticisms need to be on this page, you still removed the information. And then, your retort of "Um, that would be your job, not mine. --BlueMoonlet (t/c)"? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
BlueMoonlet, you just removed a quoted article reference, and wrote something like, "you should put it somewhere else" -- stop taking referenced material out of the article! If you think it belongs in some other area of the article, CONSTRUCT the article instead of destructing it! Please stop reducing the effectiveness of other contributors, it appears to me that your actions are Fanpov. If my assumption is incorrect, by all means, help me and others understand why you would do this. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 20:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
You don't read, Blue. "If you think it belongs in some other area of the article, CONSTRUCT the article instead of destructing it!" Sliceofmiami ( talk) 13:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Hey guys and girls, I want you to know that I would be just as fervent about making any page NPOV and non Fanpov. It just so happens that this Religious page caught my attention about a year ago, because someone at work discussed Chuck's Church with what seemed to be unrealistic & unwarranted mystical "love" towards the leadership. As I looked over the page a year ago, it was like, "what is going on?" In what was supposed to be an encyclopedic entry, I found instead that most of the information was all honeysuckle and roses. So then I started looking through the Archives, and found that there have been many issues with Fanpov and NPOV through the years. This, together with the weird "love" thing from my coworker, caused me enough of an alarm to look further into some of the allegations against Chuck's organization, and it seemed there is plenty -- including some works that akin Chuck Smith and Jim Jones. Let's face it, who would be most interested in building a Marketing Campaign page for Calvary Chapel? It would mostly be Fans. I am also a fan. I've known of Chuck's organization since the early 1990s. After urging from one of the editors (I think it was Walter, but I'll have to review the pages), I attended a Calvary Chapel, and I still meet with them. My attendance does not change the fact that there is significant negative press available to document on this organization. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 17:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, Walter & Blue do not want either "Fanpov" nor "NPOV" listed on their page. Is there a way to encourage other interested readers in joining the discussions on the Talk page instead of listing Fanpov or NPOV? I think it would be better overall anyway. Right now, we seem to have stagnated with a bunch of editors who seem to think differently. Once before (in the archives somewhere), it felt as though someone threatened to get a couple of their buddies from Chuck's to bully about -- this is not exactly what I hope will happen this time.
Also, Walter & Blue (& others), can you identify your COI in the COI section. Best, Sliceofmiami ( talk) 20:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I can see nothing really changed over the course of half a week. Blue is still hell bent on making his page hisPOV and completely Fanpov. From a recent edit, "BlueMoonlet (I have a hard time believing that anyone doubts the accuracy of any of these descriptors. This is basic stuff, and pretty neutral, too.)". Thanks for listening to yet another editor telling you to revert your Fanpov edit. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 13:39, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
How about this to attempt to get additional contributors to the talk page? I will add this unless one of the other fans has a better idea. There has to be something agreeable to everyone to get additional readers to review the Talk page. Specifically, "Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page."
{{
Multiple issues|date=September 2011}}
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
01:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the above arguments about "cult-status" and so on...I thought a quote from the Sonoma county register was used that sounded pretty balanced, reflecting multiple perspectives. What happened to that quote? I propose restoring it to the criticism section. DanVanNice ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC).
{{
multiple issues}}
Hmm... BlueMoonlet, as I read through the responses that other users have presented on this page, it appears that your Consensus to protect your page is ebbing again. I suggest the multiple issues tag be placed on the page, to encourage additional contributors to visit the Talk page. If you or other readers have a better idea, please suggest it. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 04:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi all. Regretfully, I have decided to post a notice to the Administrators' noticeboard regarding the disruptive behavior of User:Sliceofmiami. I am sure that other active editors on this page may want to contribute to the discussion. Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 19:53, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
The ANI thread has now been archived. What happened is that one administrator made some helpful comments, and then left a message on Sliceofmiami's talk page. I think this is a satisfactory outcome.
I want to emphasize that this episode should not be interpreted as any kind of persecution based on viewpoint. To the contrary, I hope that we can move forward now and constructively discuss how to improve the article, with both supportive and critical views towards the article subject represented. But the discussion does need to abide by WP policies of civility and consensus. Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 15:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed the content below from the referenced section. I listened to the referenced Chris Swanson sermon and did not hear the teaching that is quoted here in this section - his teaching mentioned John the Baptist's baptism of repentance as well as the holy spirit at Pentecost. To me, this calls the entire paragraph into question. At this point it is reasonable to ask that if the references are re-added, direct quotes including timestamps be included so that the material can be verified.
"However, there are some Calvary Chapels that do not hold with this doctrine in actual practice. Pastor Joe Focht at Calvary Chapel Philadelphia teaches that the Baptism of Holy Spirit happens at conversion.<ref>Straight from the Heart teaching from Genesis to Revelation. WED10224 Mp3, Calvary Chapel Philadelphia</ref> Other examples of similar teaching are Chris Swanson at Calvary Chapel Chester Springs, PA and and Tim Lloyd at Calvary Chapel of Newwark, DE.<ref>http://cc-chestersprings.com/teachingLists/teaching.asp, Matthew 3:11 , 5/29/2005.</ref><ref>http://www.ccnewarkde.org/matthew.html, Mathew 3:1-17 - John the Baptist Speaking today</ref>"
71.199.242.40 ( talk) 01:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The first sentence of the history section is straight up inappropriate: "While Chuck Smith was still a member of a denominational church, a prophecy came to him in which the Lord said to him that He was changing his name. His new name would mean "Shepherd" because the Lord was going to make him the shepherd of many flocks and the church would not be large enough to hold all of the people who would be flocking to hear the Word of God." You need to discuss this subject in terms that objectively correlate to verifiable reality. Don't say that Jesus came to some guy and told him to change his name (to what?) and then every other prophecy he ever made about how much money he'd rake in with a big box church chain came true. Say, "It is commonly stated in the denominations official literature [cite] that Jesus..." 24.91.244.221 ( talk) 01:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Probably the basic content and references are OK. But it has the tone of promotional literature, written from the perspective of someone involved in the movement. Just start rewriting it from an objective sounding, disinterested viewpoint--editors!
While Chuck Smith was still a member of a denominational church, a prophecy came to him in which the Lord said to him that He was changing his name. His new name would mean "Shepherd" because the Lord was going to make him the shepherd of many flocks and the church would not be large enough to hold all of the people who would be flocking to hear the Word of God. [11]
I WOULD DROP THE ABOVE.
In December 1965, Chuck Smith became the pastor of a 25-person congregation and in 1968 broke away from the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel in Santa Ana, California. Before Smith became their pastor, twelve of the 25 members attended a prayer meeting about whether or not to close their church: they reported that "the Holy Spirit spoke to them through prophecy" and told them that Chuck would become their pastor, that he would want to elevate the platform area, that God would bless the church, that it would go on the radio, that the church would become overcrowded, and that he would become known throughout the world.[12]
THE ABOVE SEEMS FINE
An almost identical prophecy was recorded in Chuck Smith's book "Harvest" where the prophecy was delivered to 16 discouraged people ready to quit and throw in the towel.[13]
I WOULD CONSOLIDATE ANY REFERENCES TO THIS REPORTED PROPHESY AND FRAME IT FROM ON OUTSIDER'S THIRD PERSON POINT OF VIEW. SOUNDS LIKE CC APOLOGETICS IN ITS CURRENT FORM. THAT IS FOR A CC WEB-SITE, NOT WIKIPEDIA
In 1969, Calvary Chapel became an epicenter with what later became known as the Jesus Movement when Smith's daughter introduced him to her boyfriend John, a former hippie who had become a Christian.
THE WORD "EPICENTER" HERE HAS AN VERY PROMOTIONAL RING TO IT.
John then introduced Chuck to Lonnie Frisbee, the "hippie evangelist" who became a key figure in the growth of both the Jesus Movement and in Calvary Chapel. Frisbee moved into Smith's home, and he would minister to the other hippies and counter-culture youth on the beaches. At night he would bring home new converts and soon Smith's house was full.[14] Frisbee was put in charge of a new rental home for the steadily growing crowd of Christian hippies and he named the commune House of Miracles, other House of Miracles would be set up throughout California and beyond. Through Frisbee's strong anointing of the Holy Spirit and 'power evangelism' and Smith's sense of running a church, Calvary grew exponentially.[citation needed] A tent was erected while a new building was under construction and Frisbee's Wednesday night Bible studies became wildly popular.[citation needed] Among Frisbee's converts were the musicians[citation needed] that had played on the beaches who now were writing music for praise and worship. This became the genesis for Jesus music and Christian rock concerts. The musicians started forming groups[citation needed] and Maranatha Music was eventually formed to publish and promote the music.[citation needed] The services usually resembled rock concerts more than any worship services of the time.[citation needed] Frisbee was featured in national television news reports and magazines with images of him baptizing hundreds in the Pacific Ocean at a time.[15] The network of House of Miracles communes/crash pad/coffee houses began doing outreach concerts with Smith or Frisbee preaching, Frisbee calling forth the Holy Spirit and the newly forming bands playing the music.[16]
THIS SECTION SOUNDS OK BUT LACKS CITATIONS.
KEEP PLUGGING AWAY. THE HISTORY SECTION HAS IMPROVED GRADUALLY OVER THE YEARS.
Theradicalrealist ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC).
Interesting material in support of "Calvary Chapel has been criticized because they themselves criticize others" which was a comment contained in Talk:Calvary Chapel/Archive 2 (I don't know how to link to that archive)
Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
This militant position about Calvary Chapel was in the wiki entry when I first reviewed it years ago, and the criticism was removed -- by you? I don't know who took it out. Why don't you re-add it, Walter? That would be a good point of this talk entry. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 23:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 17:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
BlueMoonlet (and others):
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 03:47, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. The following specific examples cover only some of the possible types of reliable sources and source reliability issues, and are not intended to be exhaustive. Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process.
— WP:RS
700 Club does not have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" it is therefore not a WP:RS (and there would appear to be no reason why "context; common sense and editorial judgment" would suggest otherwise -- see discussion of WP:QS below).
Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or which lack meaningful editorial oversight, or those with an apparent conflict of interest.[4] Such sources include, but are not limited to, websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional, or which rely heavily on rumor and personal opinion. Questionable sources should be used only as sources of material on themselves, especially in articles about themselves; see below. They are unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties.
— WP:QS
700 Club is clearly a questionable source, it is clearly being used, inappropriately, for material about a third party (Calvary Chapel).
That I did not explicitly rule out all inapplicable exceptions does not mean that I "still don't understand this basic concept".
That you think that Smith is an acceptable source in the context of:
...suggests to me questions about your own "common sense and editorial judgment" and understanding of the basic concepts. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 05:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Now I've gotten sick to my teeth of such vacuous argumentation and associated personal abuse. It is now blatantly obvious that there is a WP:CONSENSUS here to WP:IAR and treat the article as though it has the subtitle Hank Smith talks about how absolutely wonderful his denomination and religious beliefs are. Fine. I personally believe that such a strategy makes for an absolutely shitty and unencyclopaedic article on a number of levels -- but see no point in tilting at windmills. I therefore call WP:DEADHORSE on myself and withdraw. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 02:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm seeing far far too much repetition of the name " Smith, Chuck" in the references section -- to the extent that this article could more accurately be renamed to What Chuck Smith says about his church. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 03:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Add to this the fact that this material is largely self-published, and you also have a violation of WP:ABOUTSELF: "the article is not based primarily on such sources" (and quite possibly "the material is not unduly self-serving"). Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 04:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 06:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully. Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
— WP:PSTS
Does this make my point clearly enough? Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Walter, seems you are attacking Hrafn now for no real reason -- the writer does not appear to be imposing anything, instead you seem to be the "imposer". I agree with Hrafn in much of what was written. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 17:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Great, I'm glad you feel that way! Then you agree that this page is filled with NPOV, which means you should suggest that the tag be added, dear. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 18:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Is the use of primary sources, particularly the writings of Calvary Chapel's founder Chuck Smith (pastor), and Calvary Chapel's own publications, in this article excessive? Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No, I have too much respect for Wikipedia to joke when talk pages become longer than the articles they concern. As a subscriber to the Feedback Request Service, I was invited to contribute to this RFC as an outside observer. As such, I have as much as right to comment as anyone else; however, I don't expect my comments to carry the same weight as those of editors more vested in the article. Life is too short for edit wars. All the best, Miniapolis ( talk) 18:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
It seems this article is still plagued by Primary Sources, and Point of View issues. As a reader years ago first pointed out, the article still reads as a marketing article written on behalf of Smith's organization, yet the tags that would alert a Wikipedia reader that this is in dispute are not present on the main page. This has been an ongoing dispute for years (way before I ever showed up), and now new editors have joined and have to start over and battle a few Wikipedians that kind of guard this page. My suggestion: Put NPOV, Primary Source, Marketing Material, and other tags on the main page to alert new readers to visit the talk page.
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
15:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Stick to the point, dear Walter -- your comment sounds like a continued and unwelcome personal attack that I will once again ignore. The point of this section is that yet another reader has suggested adding "alert tags" to the page. At this point, most are aware of the WP:NPOV of Chuck's page. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 23:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Blue, how do you see this as "RFC has concluded" and thereby permission to remove the tag? Past criticisms of this article were that it is written as propaganda and marketing sheets, now a new contributor identified basically the same problem -- too much self sourced material. I don't see your justification for removing the tag, please explain?
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
17:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you also Blue, dear? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 18:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Added Bob Coy, recent fallen clergy. Should list other notable "high visibility" fallen clergy listed as well. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 12:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
"Fallen clergy" doesn't sound terribly encyclopedic or NPOV. "Former clergy" sounds much more appropriate. 108.34.252.222 ( talk) 21:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Moved "fallen clergy" to just "preacher" section. Lonnie Frisbee was a homosexual preacher, unclear whether he was "fallen" or just lived a lifestyle accepted by Calvary. On reflection, fallen is kind of a red herring word. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Looks like this continues to be an issue for editors this article. For example:
"The requirements do not include a seminary degree. In accordance with Calvary's interpretation and understanding of the Bible (see 1 Timothy 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:12), Calvary Chapel does not ordain women or homosexuals as pastors"
This should be changed to:
The requirements do not include a seminary degree. In accordance with Calvary's interpretation and understanding of the Bible (see 1 Timothy 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:12), Calvary Chapel does not ordain women or openly LGBT pastors.
The word "homosexual" is now used either among conservative evangelicals as their preferred nomenclature or as a clinical term in the sciences. I think it's clear that it's being used here in the former sense. Newspapers, magazines, public communications now use "LGBT" as the most common, accepted word choice. This should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donvduyse ( talk • contribs) 15:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm confused. The lede suggests that there was a schism within this association, but the article is written as if we're speaking of one single association of churches. Is this article going to be about both associations or just one? Ltwin ( talk) 16:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This Christianity Today article] indicates that the Calvary Chapel Association is the original body that Chuck Smith founded, and that the pastor of the Costa Mesa church left it to organize the Global Network. It seems to me that this article should properly be about the Calvary Chapel Association. The Global Network needs its own article. Ltwin ( talk) 16:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm adding this back in. BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 02:29, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
In an effort to increase the number of extrinsic, non-calvary chapel sources to this article, I offer the below references to fuel some careful rewrites for neutral pov All 3 of the below sources tell the story of Calvary Chapel. Orange County by Arellano has an opposed point of view. Whereas the current article continues to maintain a tone of at turns piety and credulity, Arellano is impious and incredulous. Neither the tone of Arellano, nor that of pieces of the current article, really maintain NPOV. Instead, look at the Handbook of Denominations and the Encyclopedia of Gospel Music. While both books represent of positive, assertive point of view on Christianity, they are neutral, adopting a third-person fact based point of view, rather than a first person, faith-based point of view that promotes claims of supernatural origins and spiritual visions. BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 12:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Encyclopedia of American gospel music, W.K. McNeil, ed., 2005 |
CALVARY CHAPEL, COSTA MESA In 1965, Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa had twenty-five members. By the end of the 1970s, more than twenty five thousand people attended services each week. By the end of the twentieth century, there were hundreds of individual Calvary Chapel congregations in the United States and the rest of the world. Its influence extended well beyond its own walls by establishing a new paradigm for churches, which ultimately influenced the direction of church growth in general. Other examples of new paradigm churches that emanated 58 CAMPBELL, LUCIE from Calvary Chapel’s influence are the Vineyard and Hope Chapel. The question that arises from this phenomenal growth is why and how did it happen? The answer to this can be found in the vision and work of one man: Chuck Smith (b. 1927). Smith graduated from LIFE Bible College and was ordained a Foursquare Gospel minister in the late 1940s. After successfully serving in Foursquare churches in California and Arizona, Smith became disillusioned with the then existing Protestant church paradigm, which was highly structured and stressed denominational loyalty. In the early 1960s, Smith established an independent church called Corona Christian Center, where he experimented with verse by-verse home Bible studies that were easily under stood and applicable to people’s needs in everyday life. In 1965, Smith accepted an invitation to become the pastor of Calvary Chapel. At the same time that Smith began his new past orate, the country was going through a cultural youth revolution. One of the revolution’s epicenters was in California. Nearby beaches with names like Huntington, Newport, and Venice were hangouts for the hippies and surfers that made up the Southern California counterculture. Drug use was rampant, and music was the primary tool for communicating new ideas. Smith had three teenage children who developed friendships with some of the hippie con verts of the early Jesus movement. They were called “Jesus freaks.’’ Pastor Smith and his wife Kay decided to open up their home to the new converts. One of them was a charismatic young man named Lonnie Frisbee. Frisbee would canvas the beaches during the day, wearing a robe and carrying a Bible. Later in the day he would bring the fruits of his labor to Pastor Chuck at Calvary Chapel. Some of these con verts were musicians, who began writing songs of worship and praise. As the number of young people attending Calvary Chapel increased exponentially, the original building, with a capacity of three hundred, proved inadequate. Eventually, a circus tent was erected to contain the expanding congregation while a new building was being built on eleven acres of land. Services were held nightly, and included worship using converted hippie musicians such as Chuck Girard, Oden Fong, and Tom Stipe. Soon the musicians formed groups, some of which were Children of the Day, Country Faith, Love Song, and Mustard Seed Faith. Next, a record label named Maranatha was formed to market the new Christian music and book the groups for concerts. Eventually, churches throughout Southern California began coffeehouse ministries and folk wor ship services, which featured many of the new Maranatha groups. Sometimes speakers such as Mike Macintosh or Lonnie Frisbee would accompany the groups to do a Bible study. A service at Calvary Chapel resembled a rock con cert more than it did the traditional liturgy of that period. The pastoral staff was often indistinguishable from the congregation because of their casual attire. The worship service was led by guitar-playing young musicians wearing T-shirts and bell-bottom trousers, rather than a robed choir accompanied by a pipe organ. The new songs had contemporary melodies that expressed a relevant message, reflective of the authors’ spiritual experiences and perimeter to the congregation. Oftentimes there would be a musical performance by one of the newly formed groups or solo artists on the Maranatha label. The message given by Pastor Chuck or another member of the pastoral staff would consist of a line-by-line exposition of Bible passages. The speaking technique used in the delivery was conversational in tone. Sermons in evangelical churches prior to the 1970s had been, for the most part, topical in nature, and had been pre sented in the formal elocutionary delivery style. Calvary Chapel’s theology is essentially conservative in nature, with a plenary verbal inspiration approach to Biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. It is charismatic (Pentecostal) in its approach to spiritual gifts, as they pertain to I Corinthians 12: 8-10. At the same time, the exercise of spiritual gifts is reserved for an afterglow service, rather than being incorporated into the main service as is common in mainline Pentecostal churches, such as Foursquare or Assembly of God. Bob Gersztyn See also Fong, Oden; Girard, Chuck; Love Song; Maranatha! Music; Rock Gospel Reference and Further Reading Balmer, Randall Herbert. Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory: A Journey into the Evangelical Subculture in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Calvary Chapel home page, http://www.calvarychapel.com (accessed April 5, 2003). “History of the Jesus Movement.” http://www.calvarymusic. org/ (accessed April 5, 2003). Miller, Donald E. Reinventing American Protestantism: Christianity in the New Millennium. Berkley: University of California Press, 1997. |
HANDBOOK OF DENOMINATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Twelfth Edition, 2005 |
CALVARY CHAPELS
Founded: 1965 Membership: statistics not available, s_ but at least 500,000 in 1,000 churches (2004) _r The Calvary Chapels is one of the most successful new denomina tions in U.S. history. It began as a single Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa, California, in 1965 and has grown to over seven hundred related congregations, most of them also named Calvary Chapel, across the nation. The founder and head of Calvary Chapels is Church Smith (b. 1927), who began his ministry career in 1946 in the Foursquare Gospel Church.* Frustrated with the restrictions of that and other denominations, Smith went independent in the early sixties with a focus on campus ministry. His focus was on addressing the everyday needs and concerns of his listeners. Two years after taking over the twenty-five-member Calvary Chapel, he had increased atten dance to over two thousand. Soon they built a much larger facility which regularly has over twenty-five thousand worshipers (18,000 members). It is the fountainhead for the Calvary Chapel network. One of the hallmarks of Smith’s ministry in the 1960s was reach ing out to the “hippies” and drug users of the California beach cul ture. He was a leader of the “Jesus Freak” movement that encouraged people to “turn off to drugs and on to Jesus.” Smith founded over a hundred “community houses” modeled on the origi nal “House of Miracles” for recent converts who needed a support ive environment. INTERNATIONAL CONCIL OF COMMUNITY CHURCHES Smith was a pioneer in the adaptation of secular rock and roll music for Christian worship. He established the Maranatha Music and Calvary Chapel recording companies, which have had a major impact on contemporary Protestant music. This “praise music” uses guitar and piano rather than traditional church instruments and has an upbeat tempo that has become very popular on Christian radio stations. This informal, lively music corresponds to the practice of wearing casual clothing and following very informal worship. Worship, fellowship, and study times may be very emotional since members are encouraged to express their love for Christ, love for one another, and offer their personal tes timonies of salvation. Calvary Chapels emphasize evangelism, conversion, and personal experience of the Holy Spirit, but they try to do so in an invitational rather than confrontational way. Slightly fewer than 15 percent of the members report that they had no previous church connection before joining a Calvary Chapel. |
ORANGE COUNTY, A Personal History, GUSTAVO ARELLANO, 2010 |
"Theological troglodytes worship at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa, where the original Jesus Freaks, transformed by their baptisms in pic turesque Corona Del Mar State Beach, began preaching the End Days. If you re compassionate and your bigotry is soft, drive down to Lake Forest and Saddleback Church, home for the mega-phenomenon called the Purpose-Driven Life®." p.11 "Saddleback represents the “new” Orange County—remember that Lake Forest is in South County—but its true heart roars half an hour away in a campus that looks like a former school, on the border between Costa Mesa and Santa Ana. Fire! Brimstone! Bad gays! The End Times are here! From this pulsing abscess springs forth the Calvary Chapel doctrine of accepting the world’s rejects, then transforming them into homo-hating zealots—if one of their thousand or so branches aren’t in your town soon, expect them next fall. Or, is this land’s soul inside the fake-antebellum mansion that serves as the headquarters for the Trinity Broadcasting Network, the world’s largest televangelism network? HAPPY birthday, JESUS!" p. 124 In 1962, Smith received an invitation from a Costa Mesa ministry named Calvary Chapel to save its floundering church. His wife opposed a move from Corona (just across the Orange County line, where they had just started a church) until receiving what Smith described in an official church history as a revelation: One night I came home from a Bible study and my wife met me at the door. She had been crying. She said, “Honey I’ve been in prayer and God has really spoken to my heart. The Lord has made it clear that I’m to submit to you. You’re the pastor, you’re my husband. Wherever you feel God wants you to minister, I must submit to you . . . though I think you’re crazy to even think about it. Surely, you’ve forgotten about it by now. But even if you decided to go, I would have to submit to you. ” Smith attempted to tell his wife that the Calvary Chapel board wanted a decision the following day before she interrupted him, Don t tell me! Don t talk to me about it. I’m not ready to move, I’m only to submit at this point.” Submission to Smith and his proxy Jesus would become the trademark of Calvary Chapel. Smartly, Smith knew that to draw adherents to his fundamentalist message in the liberal 1960s, he had to offer more than rigidity. At that time, Orange County was becoming a haven for the counterculture, much to the consterna tion of the county fathers. In Laguna Beach, acolytes of Timothy Leary’s created a nonprofit church called the Brotherhood of Eter nal Love, which quickly expanded from teaching Eastern religious principles into running one ofthe largest drug cartels in the United States. (I could continue, but this is where I’ll shamelessly plug my colleague Nick Schou, who wrote an amazing article about this a couple of years ago and is currently writing a book on the subject. E-mail him at nschou@ocweekly.com). The hippie movement also created the creepy cult known as the Children of God, but nowa days called the Family International, best known for introducing the concept of “flirty fishing” (enticing converts through sex) to Christendom—it began in Huntington Beach in 1969. “These long-haired, bearded, dirty kids going around the streets repulsed me,” Smith admitted in his Calvary Chapel history. “They stood for everything I stood against. We were miles apart in our thinking, philosophies, everything.” But Smith’s wife felt the call of God to reach out to these kids. And the boyfriend of Smith’s daughter—a hippie-turned-Christian identified in church narra tives only as John—regaled the couple with talk of his successful conversion efforts. Smith asked John to bring him a hippie. John drove down Fairview Road in Costa Mesa and picked up Lonnie Frisbee, a Costa Mesa native who had spent the previous years wandering through California on one long acid trip. When John asked Fris bee if he needed a ride, the hippie refused. “Hey, I’m not going anywhere, man,” Frisbee replied. “I’m a Christian and I’m just hitchhiking to witness to whoever picks me up.” Smith was pleased. “I wasn’t prepared for the love that came forth from this kid,” he wrote in Calvary Chapel’s 1981 history. “His love for Jesus Christ was infectious. The anointing of the Spirit was upon his life, so we invited Lonnie to stay with us for a few days.” With Frisbee’s flowing hair and beard, bonafide bells in his bell-bottoms, and flowers in his hair, it’s logical that The Encyclo pedia of Evangelicalism described him as “the quintessential Jesus freak.” Frisbee and Smith began baptizing en masse on the pic turesque beaches of Corona Del Mar State Beach. The Jesus Movement was born, fascinating the nation, receiving prominent play in Time and network news. The Calvary Chapel movement became one of the largest Christian ministries on earth and birthed other megamovements such as the Vineyard Movement and the Harvest Crusades. Smith also revolutionized Christian music through Maranatha! music, a record label that allowed non-traditional Christian singers—rock bands, folksingers, etc.—to record their songs and mass-distribute to churches. Equally influ ential was The Word for Today, a radio program Smith began in the 1970s that he also recorded on cassette tapes and distributed across the globe—podcasts before iPods. But Frisbee and Smith split just a couple of years into their hippie ministry over doctrinal reasons; it also didn’t help that Fris bee was a homosexual. Frisbee never returned to the Calvary Chapel fold, yet Smith gave the eulogy at Frisbee’s 1993 funeral, held at Crystal Cathedral. Before thousands, Smith compared Frisbee with a well-known, long-haired biblical figure, “Samson— a man who knew the powerful anointing of God’s light. What could have been ... a man who never experienced the ultimate of the potential. I often wondered what could have been.” As Calvary Chapel helped spark the rise of New Wave evangelicalism in the United States...." pp. 135-138 |
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL27695165M/Orange_County
/info/en/?search=Gustavo_Arellano BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 15:54, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
The purpose of this section is to collect the "critical reviews" of Calvary Chapel. Right now, references to the critical articles are presented throughout this page, as well as in the archives. The goal would be to have sections on the "calvary chapel" Wiki entry that describe many of the problems with the organization, as presented in the published works. If you come across additional critical references, please post them here, as well as on the "calvary chapel" Wiki entry.
Looking through the history and archives, the Calvary Chapel wiki article has a history that has caused some editors to believe it is being Fanpov protected by Calvary proponents as a marketing tool instead of allowing the article to grow as a neutral Encyclopedic entry. The current protection is being presented as "consensus says". This Talk page alone has three dozen references to "consensus". In addition, there are numerous entries on the Article history that identifies reverts based on "consensus".
One of the more recent Fanpovs presented an Opinion Poll. This practice was discouraged by multiple users, yet the warning was ignored by the Pollster.
Sliceofmiami ( talk) 05:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Mojo, I understand what you mean about Bluemoonlet, but someone needs to push to have this page NPOV. People come to "research" an organization, not to read about the propaganda or marketing material that is already available. Currently, this site is almost exclusively Calvary Chapel marketing material -- what use is that, other than for additional marketing?
What happens is there are Fans who go to this page (just like any Religious organization's Fans), and they will inherently change the page to what they have been told to believe, or have come to believe themselves -- basically, all original research. Any information that compromises Chuck's Church is quickly removed. I'm not saying the fanboi's are unique, they are only doing what they are grown to do, and I know other organizations enjoy the same kind of fanboi behavior.
Walter, you are right, not every editor here is a fan boi. But some are. And reading through the history logs, those that are Fans are more entrenched than the rest who finally give up. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 16:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay Blue, you win. I identified a number of sources on the Talk page, requesting that all of us take a look a the articles to make this Calvary Chapel entry a little more reliable. Your response? "Um, that would be your job, not mine. --BlueMoonlet (t/c)".
In making this page more NPOV (and less Fanpov), it is all of our jobs who have expressed an interest.
Your "complaint" or "references" about the Catholic church's page? You obviously didn't even read the article. You were just looking to justify your position about Chuck Smith. The Catholic_Church page has an entire Criticism_of_the_Catholic_Church referenced page. Do you really want to build a separate "Criticisms of Chuck's Church" page? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 03:58, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Well Blue, I think you said it best when you said, "it isn't my job to make this page NPOV" -- and then you go off and remove other people's edits to make sure only your Point of View is heard. You win the Incorrigible trophy. Your "I Love Chuck" zeal is more powerful than my current resolve. Drink that Koolaide, you'll be fine.
In regards to the Catholic Criticism page, why did you remove almost all of the criticisms of Chuck's organization? Many years of editors came before you, and in one unfailed swoop, you removed almost all of it? Even when more than one editor (including Moderator page editors) suggested additional criticisms need to be on this page, you still removed the information. And then, your retort of "Um, that would be your job, not mine. --BlueMoonlet (t/c)"? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
BlueMoonlet, you just removed a quoted article reference, and wrote something like, "you should put it somewhere else" -- stop taking referenced material out of the article! If you think it belongs in some other area of the article, CONSTRUCT the article instead of destructing it! Please stop reducing the effectiveness of other contributors, it appears to me that your actions are Fanpov. If my assumption is incorrect, by all means, help me and others understand why you would do this. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 20:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
You don't read, Blue. "If you think it belongs in some other area of the article, CONSTRUCT the article instead of destructing it!" Sliceofmiami ( talk) 13:59, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Hey guys and girls, I want you to know that I would be just as fervent about making any page NPOV and non Fanpov. It just so happens that this Religious page caught my attention about a year ago, because someone at work discussed Chuck's Church with what seemed to be unrealistic & unwarranted mystical "love" towards the leadership. As I looked over the page a year ago, it was like, "what is going on?" In what was supposed to be an encyclopedic entry, I found instead that most of the information was all honeysuckle and roses. So then I started looking through the Archives, and found that there have been many issues with Fanpov and NPOV through the years. This, together with the weird "love" thing from my coworker, caused me enough of an alarm to look further into some of the allegations against Chuck's organization, and it seemed there is plenty -- including some works that akin Chuck Smith and Jim Jones. Let's face it, who would be most interested in building a Marketing Campaign page for Calvary Chapel? It would mostly be Fans. I am also a fan. I've known of Chuck's organization since the early 1990s. After urging from one of the editors (I think it was Walter, but I'll have to review the pages), I attended a Calvary Chapel, and I still meet with them. My attendance does not change the fact that there is significant negative press available to document on this organization. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 17:03, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Okay, Walter & Blue do not want either "Fanpov" nor "NPOV" listed on their page. Is there a way to encourage other interested readers in joining the discussions on the Talk page instead of listing Fanpov or NPOV? I think it would be better overall anyway. Right now, we seem to have stagnated with a bunch of editors who seem to think differently. Once before (in the archives somewhere), it felt as though someone threatened to get a couple of their buddies from Chuck's to bully about -- this is not exactly what I hope will happen this time.
Also, Walter & Blue (& others), can you identify your COI in the COI section. Best, Sliceofmiami ( talk) 20:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
I can see nothing really changed over the course of half a week. Blue is still hell bent on making his page hisPOV and completely Fanpov. From a recent edit, "BlueMoonlet (I have a hard time believing that anyone doubts the accuracy of any of these descriptors. This is basic stuff, and pretty neutral, too.)". Thanks for listening to yet another editor telling you to revert your Fanpov edit. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 13:39, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
How about this to attempt to get additional contributors to the talk page? I will add this unless one of the other fans has a better idea. There has to be something agreeable to everyone to get additional readers to review the Talk page. Specifically, "Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page."
{{
Multiple issues|date=September 2011}}
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
01:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the above arguments about "cult-status" and so on...I thought a quote from the Sonoma county register was used that sounded pretty balanced, reflecting multiple perspectives. What happened to that quote? I propose restoring it to the criticism section. DanVanNice ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC).
{{
multiple issues}}
Hmm... BlueMoonlet, as I read through the responses that other users have presented on this page, it appears that your Consensus to protect your page is ebbing again. I suggest the multiple issues tag be placed on the page, to encourage additional contributors to visit the Talk page. If you or other readers have a better idea, please suggest it. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 04:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi all. Regretfully, I have decided to post a notice to the Administrators' noticeboard regarding the disruptive behavior of User:Sliceofmiami. I am sure that other active editors on this page may want to contribute to the discussion. Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 19:53, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
The ANI thread has now been archived. What happened is that one administrator made some helpful comments, and then left a message on Sliceofmiami's talk page. I think this is a satisfactory outcome.
I want to emphasize that this episode should not be interpreted as any kind of persecution based on viewpoint. To the contrary, I hope that we can move forward now and constructively discuss how to improve the article, with both supportive and critical views towards the article subject represented. But the discussion does need to abide by WP policies of civility and consensus. Thanks, -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 15:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed the content below from the referenced section. I listened to the referenced Chris Swanson sermon and did not hear the teaching that is quoted here in this section - his teaching mentioned John the Baptist's baptism of repentance as well as the holy spirit at Pentecost. To me, this calls the entire paragraph into question. At this point it is reasonable to ask that if the references are re-added, direct quotes including timestamps be included so that the material can be verified.
"However, there are some Calvary Chapels that do not hold with this doctrine in actual practice. Pastor Joe Focht at Calvary Chapel Philadelphia teaches that the Baptism of Holy Spirit happens at conversion.<ref>Straight from the Heart teaching from Genesis to Revelation. WED10224 Mp3, Calvary Chapel Philadelphia</ref> Other examples of similar teaching are Chris Swanson at Calvary Chapel Chester Springs, PA and and Tim Lloyd at Calvary Chapel of Newwark, DE.<ref>http://cc-chestersprings.com/teachingLists/teaching.asp, Matthew 3:11 , 5/29/2005.</ref><ref>http://www.ccnewarkde.org/matthew.html, Mathew 3:1-17 - John the Baptist Speaking today</ref>"
71.199.242.40 ( talk) 01:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
The first sentence of the history section is straight up inappropriate: "While Chuck Smith was still a member of a denominational church, a prophecy came to him in which the Lord said to him that He was changing his name. His new name would mean "Shepherd" because the Lord was going to make him the shepherd of many flocks and the church would not be large enough to hold all of the people who would be flocking to hear the Word of God." You need to discuss this subject in terms that objectively correlate to verifiable reality. Don't say that Jesus came to some guy and told him to change his name (to what?) and then every other prophecy he ever made about how much money he'd rake in with a big box church chain came true. Say, "It is commonly stated in the denominations official literature [cite] that Jesus..." 24.91.244.221 ( talk) 01:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Probably the basic content and references are OK. But it has the tone of promotional literature, written from the perspective of someone involved in the movement. Just start rewriting it from an objective sounding, disinterested viewpoint--editors!
While Chuck Smith was still a member of a denominational church, a prophecy came to him in which the Lord said to him that He was changing his name. His new name would mean "Shepherd" because the Lord was going to make him the shepherd of many flocks and the church would not be large enough to hold all of the people who would be flocking to hear the Word of God. [11]
I WOULD DROP THE ABOVE.
In December 1965, Chuck Smith became the pastor of a 25-person congregation and in 1968 broke away from the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel in Santa Ana, California. Before Smith became their pastor, twelve of the 25 members attended a prayer meeting about whether or not to close their church: they reported that "the Holy Spirit spoke to them through prophecy" and told them that Chuck would become their pastor, that he would want to elevate the platform area, that God would bless the church, that it would go on the radio, that the church would become overcrowded, and that he would become known throughout the world.[12]
THE ABOVE SEEMS FINE
An almost identical prophecy was recorded in Chuck Smith's book "Harvest" where the prophecy was delivered to 16 discouraged people ready to quit and throw in the towel.[13]
I WOULD CONSOLIDATE ANY REFERENCES TO THIS REPORTED PROPHESY AND FRAME IT FROM ON OUTSIDER'S THIRD PERSON POINT OF VIEW. SOUNDS LIKE CC APOLOGETICS IN ITS CURRENT FORM. THAT IS FOR A CC WEB-SITE, NOT WIKIPEDIA
In 1969, Calvary Chapel became an epicenter with what later became known as the Jesus Movement when Smith's daughter introduced him to her boyfriend John, a former hippie who had become a Christian.
THE WORD "EPICENTER" HERE HAS AN VERY PROMOTIONAL RING TO IT.
John then introduced Chuck to Lonnie Frisbee, the "hippie evangelist" who became a key figure in the growth of both the Jesus Movement and in Calvary Chapel. Frisbee moved into Smith's home, and he would minister to the other hippies and counter-culture youth on the beaches. At night he would bring home new converts and soon Smith's house was full.[14] Frisbee was put in charge of a new rental home for the steadily growing crowd of Christian hippies and he named the commune House of Miracles, other House of Miracles would be set up throughout California and beyond. Through Frisbee's strong anointing of the Holy Spirit and 'power evangelism' and Smith's sense of running a church, Calvary grew exponentially.[citation needed] A tent was erected while a new building was under construction and Frisbee's Wednesday night Bible studies became wildly popular.[citation needed] Among Frisbee's converts were the musicians[citation needed] that had played on the beaches who now were writing music for praise and worship. This became the genesis for Jesus music and Christian rock concerts. The musicians started forming groups[citation needed] and Maranatha Music was eventually formed to publish and promote the music.[citation needed] The services usually resembled rock concerts more than any worship services of the time.[citation needed] Frisbee was featured in national television news reports and magazines with images of him baptizing hundreds in the Pacific Ocean at a time.[15] The network of House of Miracles communes/crash pad/coffee houses began doing outreach concerts with Smith or Frisbee preaching, Frisbee calling forth the Holy Spirit and the newly forming bands playing the music.[16]
THIS SECTION SOUNDS OK BUT LACKS CITATIONS.
KEEP PLUGGING AWAY. THE HISTORY SECTION HAS IMPROVED GRADUALLY OVER THE YEARS.
Theradicalrealist ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC).
Interesting material in support of "Calvary Chapel has been criticized because they themselves criticize others" which was a comment contained in Talk:Calvary Chapel/Archive 2 (I don't know how to link to that archive)
Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:13, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
This militant position about Calvary Chapel was in the wiki entry when I first reviewed it years ago, and the criticism was removed -- by you? I don't know who took it out. Why don't you re-add it, Walter? That would be a good point of this talk entry. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 23:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 17:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
BlueMoonlet (and others):
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 03:47, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves. The following specific examples cover only some of the possible types of reliable sources and source reliability issues, and are not intended to be exhaustive. Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process.
— WP:RS
700 Club does not have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" it is therefore not a WP:RS (and there would appear to be no reason why "context; common sense and editorial judgment" would suggest otherwise -- see discussion of WP:QS below).
Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or which lack meaningful editorial oversight, or those with an apparent conflict of interest.[4] Such sources include, but are not limited to, websites and publications expressing views that are widely considered by other sources to be extremist or promotional, or which rely heavily on rumor and personal opinion. Questionable sources should be used only as sources of material on themselves, especially in articles about themselves; see below. They are unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties.
— WP:QS
700 Club is clearly a questionable source, it is clearly being used, inappropriately, for material about a third party (Calvary Chapel).
That I did not explicitly rule out all inapplicable exceptions does not mean that I "still don't understand this basic concept".
That you think that Smith is an acceptable source in the context of:
...suggests to me questions about your own "common sense and editorial judgment" and understanding of the basic concepts. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 05:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Now I've gotten sick to my teeth of such vacuous argumentation and associated personal abuse. It is now blatantly obvious that there is a WP:CONSENSUS here to WP:IAR and treat the article as though it has the subtitle Hank Smith talks about how absolutely wonderful his denomination and religious beliefs are. Fine. I personally believe that such a strategy makes for an absolutely shitty and unencyclopaedic article on a number of levels -- but see no point in tilting at windmills. I therefore call WP:DEADHORSE on myself and withdraw. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 02:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm seeing far far too much repetition of the name " Smith, Chuck" in the references section -- to the extent that this article could more accurately be renamed to What Chuck Smith says about his church. Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 03:59, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Add to this the fact that this material is largely self-published, and you also have a violation of WP:ABOUTSELF: "the article is not based primarily on such sources" (and quite possibly "the material is not unduly self-serving"). Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 04:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 06:29, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources. Secondary or tertiary sources are needed to establish the topic's notability and to avoid novel interpretations of primary sources, though primary sources are permitted if used carefully. Material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.
— WP:PSTS
Does this make my point clearly enough? Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:27, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Walter, seems you are attacking Hrafn now for no real reason -- the writer does not appear to be imposing anything, instead you seem to be the "imposer". I agree with Hrafn in much of what was written. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 17:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Great, I'm glad you feel that way! Then you agree that this page is filled with NPOV, which means you should suggest that the tag be added, dear. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 18:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Is the use of primary sources, particularly the writings of Calvary Chapel's founder Chuck Smith (pastor), and Calvary Chapel's own publications, in this article excessive? Hrafn Talk Stalk( P) 08:56, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No, I have too much respect for Wikipedia to joke when talk pages become longer than the articles they concern. As a subscriber to the Feedback Request Service, I was invited to contribute to this RFC as an outside observer. As such, I have as much as right to comment as anyone else; however, I don't expect my comments to carry the same weight as those of editors more vested in the article. Life is too short for edit wars. All the best, Miniapolis ( talk) 18:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
It seems this article is still plagued by Primary Sources, and Point of View issues. As a reader years ago first pointed out, the article still reads as a marketing article written on behalf of Smith's organization, yet the tags that would alert a Wikipedia reader that this is in dispute are not present on the main page. This has been an ongoing dispute for years (way before I ever showed up), and now new editors have joined and have to start over and battle a few Wikipedians that kind of guard this page. My suggestion: Put NPOV, Primary Source, Marketing Material, and other tags on the main page to alert new readers to visit the talk page.
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
15:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Stick to the point, dear Walter -- your comment sounds like a continued and unwelcome personal attack that I will once again ignore. The point of this section is that yet another reader has suggested adding "alert tags" to the page. At this point, most are aware of the WP:NPOV of Chuck's page. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 23:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Blue, how do you see this as "RFC has concluded" and thereby permission to remove the tag? Past criticisms of this article were that it is written as propaganda and marketing sheets, now a new contributor identified basically the same problem -- too much self sourced material. I don't see your justification for removing the tag, please explain?
Sliceofmiami (
talk)
17:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Are you also Blue, dear? Sliceofmiami ( talk) 18:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Added Bob Coy, recent fallen clergy. Should list other notable "high visibility" fallen clergy listed as well. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 12:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
"Fallen clergy" doesn't sound terribly encyclopedic or NPOV. "Former clergy" sounds much more appropriate. 108.34.252.222 ( talk) 21:59, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Moved "fallen clergy" to just "preacher" section. Lonnie Frisbee was a homosexual preacher, unclear whether he was "fallen" or just lived a lifestyle accepted by Calvary. On reflection, fallen is kind of a red herring word. Sliceofmiami ( talk) 15:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Looks like this continues to be an issue for editors this article. For example:
"The requirements do not include a seminary degree. In accordance with Calvary's interpretation and understanding of the Bible (see 1 Timothy 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:12), Calvary Chapel does not ordain women or homosexuals as pastors"
This should be changed to:
The requirements do not include a seminary degree. In accordance with Calvary's interpretation and understanding of the Bible (see 1 Timothy 3:2 and 1 Timothy 3:12), Calvary Chapel does not ordain women or openly LGBT pastors.
The word "homosexual" is now used either among conservative evangelicals as their preferred nomenclature or as a clinical term in the sciences. I think it's clear that it's being used here in the former sense. Newspapers, magazines, public communications now use "LGBT" as the most common, accepted word choice. This should be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donvduyse ( talk • contribs) 15:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{ Sourcecheck}}).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Calvary Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm confused. The lede suggests that there was a schism within this association, but the article is written as if we're speaking of one single association of churches. Is this article going to be about both associations or just one? Ltwin ( talk) 16:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
This Christianity Today article] indicates that the Calvary Chapel Association is the original body that Chuck Smith founded, and that the pastor of the Costa Mesa church left it to organize the Global Network. It seems to me that this article should properly be about the Calvary Chapel Association. The Global Network needs its own article. Ltwin ( talk) 16:24, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
I'm adding this back in. BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 02:29, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
In an effort to increase the number of extrinsic, non-calvary chapel sources to this article, I offer the below references to fuel some careful rewrites for neutral pov All 3 of the below sources tell the story of Calvary Chapel. Orange County by Arellano has an opposed point of view. Whereas the current article continues to maintain a tone of at turns piety and credulity, Arellano is impious and incredulous. Neither the tone of Arellano, nor that of pieces of the current article, really maintain NPOV. Instead, look at the Handbook of Denominations and the Encyclopedia of Gospel Music. While both books represent of positive, assertive point of view on Christianity, they are neutral, adopting a third-person fact based point of view, rather than a first person, faith-based point of view that promotes claims of supernatural origins and spiritual visions. BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 12:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Encyclopedia of American gospel music, W.K. McNeil, ed., 2005 |
CALVARY CHAPEL, COSTA MESA In 1965, Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa had twenty-five members. By the end of the 1970s, more than twenty five thousand people attended services each week. By the end of the twentieth century, there were hundreds of individual Calvary Chapel congregations in the United States and the rest of the world. Its influence extended well beyond its own walls by establishing a new paradigm for churches, which ultimately influenced the direction of church growth in general. Other examples of new paradigm churches that emanated 58 CAMPBELL, LUCIE from Calvary Chapel’s influence are the Vineyard and Hope Chapel. The question that arises from this phenomenal growth is why and how did it happen? The answer to this can be found in the vision and work of one man: Chuck Smith (b. 1927). Smith graduated from LIFE Bible College and was ordained a Foursquare Gospel minister in the late 1940s. After successfully serving in Foursquare churches in California and Arizona, Smith became disillusioned with the then existing Protestant church paradigm, which was highly structured and stressed denominational loyalty. In the early 1960s, Smith established an independent church called Corona Christian Center, where he experimented with verse by-verse home Bible studies that were easily under stood and applicable to people’s needs in everyday life. In 1965, Smith accepted an invitation to become the pastor of Calvary Chapel. At the same time that Smith began his new past orate, the country was going through a cultural youth revolution. One of the revolution’s epicenters was in California. Nearby beaches with names like Huntington, Newport, and Venice were hangouts for the hippies and surfers that made up the Southern California counterculture. Drug use was rampant, and music was the primary tool for communicating new ideas. Smith had three teenage children who developed friendships with some of the hippie con verts of the early Jesus movement. They were called “Jesus freaks.’’ Pastor Smith and his wife Kay decided to open up their home to the new converts. One of them was a charismatic young man named Lonnie Frisbee. Frisbee would canvas the beaches during the day, wearing a robe and carrying a Bible. Later in the day he would bring the fruits of his labor to Pastor Chuck at Calvary Chapel. Some of these con verts were musicians, who began writing songs of worship and praise. As the number of young people attending Calvary Chapel increased exponentially, the original building, with a capacity of three hundred, proved inadequate. Eventually, a circus tent was erected to contain the expanding congregation while a new building was being built on eleven acres of land. Services were held nightly, and included worship using converted hippie musicians such as Chuck Girard, Oden Fong, and Tom Stipe. Soon the musicians formed groups, some of which were Children of the Day, Country Faith, Love Song, and Mustard Seed Faith. Next, a record label named Maranatha was formed to market the new Christian music and book the groups for concerts. Eventually, churches throughout Southern California began coffeehouse ministries and folk wor ship services, which featured many of the new Maranatha groups. Sometimes speakers such as Mike Macintosh or Lonnie Frisbee would accompany the groups to do a Bible study. A service at Calvary Chapel resembled a rock con cert more than it did the traditional liturgy of that period. The pastoral staff was often indistinguishable from the congregation because of their casual attire. The worship service was led by guitar-playing young musicians wearing T-shirts and bell-bottom trousers, rather than a robed choir accompanied by a pipe organ. The new songs had contemporary melodies that expressed a relevant message, reflective of the authors’ spiritual experiences and perimeter to the congregation. Oftentimes there would be a musical performance by one of the newly formed groups or solo artists on the Maranatha label. The message given by Pastor Chuck or another member of the pastoral staff would consist of a line-by-line exposition of Bible passages. The speaking technique used in the delivery was conversational in tone. Sermons in evangelical churches prior to the 1970s had been, for the most part, topical in nature, and had been pre sented in the formal elocutionary delivery style. Calvary Chapel’s theology is essentially conservative in nature, with a plenary verbal inspiration approach to Biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. It is charismatic (Pentecostal) in its approach to spiritual gifts, as they pertain to I Corinthians 12: 8-10. At the same time, the exercise of spiritual gifts is reserved for an afterglow service, rather than being incorporated into the main service as is common in mainline Pentecostal churches, such as Foursquare or Assembly of God. Bob Gersztyn See also Fong, Oden; Girard, Chuck; Love Song; Maranatha! Music; Rock Gospel Reference and Further Reading Balmer, Randall Herbert. Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory: A Journey into the Evangelical Subculture in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Calvary Chapel home page, http://www.calvarychapel.com (accessed April 5, 2003). “History of the Jesus Movement.” http://www.calvarymusic. org/ (accessed April 5, 2003). Miller, Donald E. Reinventing American Protestantism: Christianity in the New Millennium. Berkley: University of California Press, 1997. |
HANDBOOK OF DENOMINATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES
Twelfth Edition, 2005 |
CALVARY CHAPELS
Founded: 1965 Membership: statistics not available, s_ but at least 500,000 in 1,000 churches (2004) _r The Calvary Chapels is one of the most successful new denomina tions in U.S. history. It began as a single Calvary Chapel in Costa Mesa, California, in 1965 and has grown to over seven hundred related congregations, most of them also named Calvary Chapel, across the nation. The founder and head of Calvary Chapels is Church Smith (b. 1927), who began his ministry career in 1946 in the Foursquare Gospel Church.* Frustrated with the restrictions of that and other denominations, Smith went independent in the early sixties with a focus on campus ministry. His focus was on addressing the everyday needs and concerns of his listeners. Two years after taking over the twenty-five-member Calvary Chapel, he had increased atten dance to over two thousand. Soon they built a much larger facility which regularly has over twenty-five thousand worshipers (18,000 members). It is the fountainhead for the Calvary Chapel network. One of the hallmarks of Smith’s ministry in the 1960s was reach ing out to the “hippies” and drug users of the California beach cul ture. He was a leader of the “Jesus Freak” movement that encouraged people to “turn off to drugs and on to Jesus.” Smith founded over a hundred “community houses” modeled on the origi nal “House of Miracles” for recent converts who needed a support ive environment. INTERNATIONAL CONCIL OF COMMUNITY CHURCHES Smith was a pioneer in the adaptation of secular rock and roll music for Christian worship. He established the Maranatha Music and Calvary Chapel recording companies, which have had a major impact on contemporary Protestant music. This “praise music” uses guitar and piano rather than traditional church instruments and has an upbeat tempo that has become very popular on Christian radio stations. This informal, lively music corresponds to the practice of wearing casual clothing and following very informal worship. Worship, fellowship, and study times may be very emotional since members are encouraged to express their love for Christ, love for one another, and offer their personal tes timonies of salvation. Calvary Chapels emphasize evangelism, conversion, and personal experience of the Holy Spirit, but they try to do so in an invitational rather than confrontational way. Slightly fewer than 15 percent of the members report that they had no previous church connection before joining a Calvary Chapel. |
ORANGE COUNTY, A Personal History, GUSTAVO ARELLANO, 2010 |
"Theological troglodytes worship at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa, where the original Jesus Freaks, transformed by their baptisms in pic turesque Corona Del Mar State Beach, began preaching the End Days. If you re compassionate and your bigotry is soft, drive down to Lake Forest and Saddleback Church, home for the mega-phenomenon called the Purpose-Driven Life®." p.11 "Saddleback represents the “new” Orange County—remember that Lake Forest is in South County—but its true heart roars half an hour away in a campus that looks like a former school, on the border between Costa Mesa and Santa Ana. Fire! Brimstone! Bad gays! The End Times are here! From this pulsing abscess springs forth the Calvary Chapel doctrine of accepting the world’s rejects, then transforming them into homo-hating zealots—if one of their thousand or so branches aren’t in your town soon, expect them next fall. Or, is this land’s soul inside the fake-antebellum mansion that serves as the headquarters for the Trinity Broadcasting Network, the world’s largest televangelism network? HAPPY birthday, JESUS!" p. 124 In 1962, Smith received an invitation from a Costa Mesa ministry named Calvary Chapel to save its floundering church. His wife opposed a move from Corona (just across the Orange County line, where they had just started a church) until receiving what Smith described in an official church history as a revelation: One night I came home from a Bible study and my wife met me at the door. She had been crying. She said, “Honey I’ve been in prayer and God has really spoken to my heart. The Lord has made it clear that I’m to submit to you. You’re the pastor, you’re my husband. Wherever you feel God wants you to minister, I must submit to you . . . though I think you’re crazy to even think about it. Surely, you’ve forgotten about it by now. But even if you decided to go, I would have to submit to you. ” Smith attempted to tell his wife that the Calvary Chapel board wanted a decision the following day before she interrupted him, Don t tell me! Don t talk to me about it. I’m not ready to move, I’m only to submit at this point.” Submission to Smith and his proxy Jesus would become the trademark of Calvary Chapel. Smartly, Smith knew that to draw adherents to his fundamentalist message in the liberal 1960s, he had to offer more than rigidity. At that time, Orange County was becoming a haven for the counterculture, much to the consterna tion of the county fathers. In Laguna Beach, acolytes of Timothy Leary’s created a nonprofit church called the Brotherhood of Eter nal Love, which quickly expanded from teaching Eastern religious principles into running one ofthe largest drug cartels in the United States. (I could continue, but this is where I’ll shamelessly plug my colleague Nick Schou, who wrote an amazing article about this a couple of years ago and is currently writing a book on the subject. E-mail him at nschou@ocweekly.com). The hippie movement also created the creepy cult known as the Children of God, but nowa days called the Family International, best known for introducing the concept of “flirty fishing” (enticing converts through sex) to Christendom—it began in Huntington Beach in 1969. “These long-haired, bearded, dirty kids going around the streets repulsed me,” Smith admitted in his Calvary Chapel history. “They stood for everything I stood against. We were miles apart in our thinking, philosophies, everything.” But Smith’s wife felt the call of God to reach out to these kids. And the boyfriend of Smith’s daughter—a hippie-turned-Christian identified in church narra tives only as John—regaled the couple with talk of his successful conversion efforts. Smith asked John to bring him a hippie. John drove down Fairview Road in Costa Mesa and picked up Lonnie Frisbee, a Costa Mesa native who had spent the previous years wandering through California on one long acid trip. When John asked Fris bee if he needed a ride, the hippie refused. “Hey, I’m not going anywhere, man,” Frisbee replied. “I’m a Christian and I’m just hitchhiking to witness to whoever picks me up.” Smith was pleased. “I wasn’t prepared for the love that came forth from this kid,” he wrote in Calvary Chapel’s 1981 history. “His love for Jesus Christ was infectious. The anointing of the Spirit was upon his life, so we invited Lonnie to stay with us for a few days.” With Frisbee’s flowing hair and beard, bonafide bells in his bell-bottoms, and flowers in his hair, it’s logical that The Encyclo pedia of Evangelicalism described him as “the quintessential Jesus freak.” Frisbee and Smith began baptizing en masse on the pic turesque beaches of Corona Del Mar State Beach. The Jesus Movement was born, fascinating the nation, receiving prominent play in Time and network news. The Calvary Chapel movement became one of the largest Christian ministries on earth and birthed other megamovements such as the Vineyard Movement and the Harvest Crusades. Smith also revolutionized Christian music through Maranatha! music, a record label that allowed non-traditional Christian singers—rock bands, folksingers, etc.—to record their songs and mass-distribute to churches. Equally influ ential was The Word for Today, a radio program Smith began in the 1970s that he also recorded on cassette tapes and distributed across the globe—podcasts before iPods. But Frisbee and Smith split just a couple of years into their hippie ministry over doctrinal reasons; it also didn’t help that Fris bee was a homosexual. Frisbee never returned to the Calvary Chapel fold, yet Smith gave the eulogy at Frisbee’s 1993 funeral, held at Crystal Cathedral. Before thousands, Smith compared Frisbee with a well-known, long-haired biblical figure, “Samson— a man who knew the powerful anointing of God’s light. What could have been ... a man who never experienced the ultimate of the potential. I often wondered what could have been.” As Calvary Chapel helped spark the rise of New Wave evangelicalism in the United States...." pp. 135-138 |
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL27695165M/Orange_County
/info/en/?search=Gustavo_Arellano BrainUnboxed2020 ( talk) 15:54, 21 March 2022 (UTC)