Fundraising and the Sheen of a New Product

From the beginning of his ministry, Schuller did not just plan for growth, but he also insisted on it. During his first pastorate at suburban Chicago's Ivanhoe RCA in the early 1950s, he demonstrated a panache for instigating church growth. In successfully developing his small church, Schuller sent the congregation a letter concerning “the crowded Sunday School,” the “overflow attendance at the morning worship service,” and the fact that “this growth [presented] problems”—a theme he would revisit throughout his ministry.Footnote ²² The minister prompted members to consider more generous tithing to allow the church to build to meet its capacity needs. Schuller delivered a sermon that same week, “Profitable Living,” that urged congregants to remember two things: “You will never get until you give . . . and you will get only in proportion to what you give.” Most importantly, for Ivanhoe's building expansion, this “law” also “held true in the church” as well: “The people who get a lot out of the church are the folks who put a lot of their time, talent, tithe, interest, attention, and concern into the church.”Footnote ²³ While members could contribute in various ways, financial giving was most deliberately communicated and certainly the most concrete. Schuller framed growth as the antidote to a future problem of running out of space for more members, pressing congregants to avoid that obstacle with more robust tithing. Schuller even hired a professional fundraiser (H. P. Demand and Associates) during this first pastorate, surely paying careful attention to the techniques employed.

After the move to plant a church in Southern California, development became an all-consuming task for Schuller's religious enterprise. By that point, Schuller understood growth as fundamental to his ministry, initiating successive projects to accommodate future growth. Founded at a drive-in theater, his church plant grew quickly, and the purchase of land and construction of a new building gave the congregation a high profile, which Schuller further promoted. The initial building, dubbed “The Chapel” with a capacity of 250, quickly proved too small, suppressing further growth. Already, GGCC had established itself with a reputation for growth and could not afford to slip. Stasis might be interpreted as decline. So, he raised funds for yet another new building mixing the aesthetics of the drive-in church with a traditional “walk-in” church, eventually calling it “The Arboretum.” Schuller also launched a television ministry (Hour of Power), which required considerable funding for everything from the best television cameras to elegant robes to modern-looking facilities. Recurrent calls from the pulpit for new giving to the latest challenge were accompanied by frequent direct mailings with Schuller's signature. In a 1964 mailer to the members of GGCC, Schuller described plans for yet another building (the fourth project of his career), called “the Tower of Hope,” a new centerpiece for the ministry that included a chapel, ministerial and psychology staff offices, and ten floors dedicated to classrooms for five hundred young people. He entreated investing in bonds for the building, saying, “Here truly your money works for God while it works for you.” Contributors would have the satisfaction of providing space for expanding pastoral needs, but, significantly, Schuller promised investors a return of five percent with quarterly disbursements. Investors would be helping to “build something that is absolutely tremendous for God and for The United States of America!”Footnote ²⁴ In his appeal to his suburban white members, Schuller fused the desire for accumulating wealth, affirming their patriotism, and fulfilling the concrete needs of pastoral work.

Building projects became more impressive and his giving campaign rhetoric more vivid. Promotional materials promised the “tallest and most functional Church Tower in Southern California.” Sketches, pictures, and models added visual detail: “When the lights go on in a little over a year, they will never go out in this little chapel in the sky. From Disneyland, Angel Stadium, to the County Hospital, to the freeway, this will be a silent reminder that there is ‘an eye that never closes, and ear that is never shut, and a heart that never grows cold.’” At the “Tenth Birthday Dinner Party” in November of 1965 (held down the road at the Disneyland Hotel), Schuller unveiled the renderings for the Tower of Hope, the building perched at the intersection of the Garden Grove Freeway and the Santa Ana Freeway, describing the location as “the highway hub of Southern California.” Dinner party brochures included a letter from Schuller framing the Tower as historically meaningful: “It's a tremendous thrill to know that we are picked by God to build this inspiring structure that should stand for more than 1000 years! The pyramids are 5000 years old! The Pisa Tower is 500 years old! The London Tower is 1000 years old! And these are towers of Pride, Vanity, and Greed! Now we build God's Tower! A Tower of Hope!”Footnote ²⁵

Amid sweeping visionary statements, Schuller persistently offered concrete details about the necessary financial commitment to build the Tower. The church would need $1 million. Yet brochures helpfully distilled the costs into 520 weekly payments for donors that ranged from $1 to $10 per week. Schuller imagined giving to be like a layaway plan with manageable payments: “a small pledge per week, will grow into a large gift!” Wealthy donors were touched for large lump sums, and regular members were taught to see that repeated smaller contributions over time added up to just as significant a sum. All pledges were memorialized; donors providing “pace-setting gifts of over $10 per week” would receive “Founder” wall plaques, and all contributors, regardless of level of support, would receive “Builders of the Tower” certificates suitable for framing.Footnote ²⁶ Once “investors” made their contributions, Schuller followed up with glowing letters to note holders assuring them that the church remained a growing entity about which everyone gushed with praise: “There was hardly a dry eye in the church. Over and over again one heard the expression, ‘Never in my life have I experienced such a thrilling religious emotion as I did Sunday morning.’”Footnote ²⁷

Schuller articulated his fundraising strategy for the benefit of all pastors in his denomination in a 1968 article in the RCA's Church Herald: “We must constantly offer new challenges in the form of programs or projects: a building program, an addition to the staff, an additional missionary project.” By example, Schuller noted that, on the day of the Tower of Hope's dedication in 1968, he thought that, perhaps, the church campus was complete. Before the service, the minister relaxed in his office in the new building. As he looked down twelve stories, though, he witnessed a lone automobile circling the parking lot. The car drove up and down the lanes, searching for an open spot. Finding none, the “car drove out the exit and sped up—and away.” Schuller wrote that he realized at that moment that construction “had only just begun.” He spied ten acres of adjacent walnut and orange trees that flanked the northern boundary of the church campus and “knew that [the ministry] had to buy it as well!”Footnote ²⁸ He pressed his pastoral readers to follow his example, continually crafting new projects to stimulate greater church income through limitless expansion.

The 1968 article demonstrates how Possibility Thinking (a ministry philosophy derived from Norman Vincent Peal's Positive Thinking—a strain of New Thought, a spiritual and psychological phenomenon that advocated the ability of the mind to change personal circumstances)Footnote ²⁹ provided both the confidence to take on large, capital-intensive projects on behalf of the ministry as well as the fundraising framework to meet those goals. Schuller initiated his advice with a key principle: congregations should be honest that they will always need more money than they have secured. Yet, churches should never offer the impression that they have a financial crisis—“nobody likes to invest in a shaky business.” Relatedly, “small pickings” like suppers and bake sales wasted time and energy, so Schuller advised pastors to tap into their members’ desires (“People love to spend their money. They can't wait to spend it on a new car, a new house, new clothes—anything that excites them or stimulates and inspires imagination.”) by offering an inspiring project that meets a “human need.” GGCC's own practices involved a festive dinner with a compelling presentation focused on a bold budget plan for the coming year projected on big screens: “The entire program of the church from janitor to missionary is emotionalized and dramatized through color graphics.”Footnote ³⁰

Schuller argued that his focus on growth promoted financial stability—a healthy balance sheet—by continually presenting new projects that generated even more capital. He had a proven track record because his church led “all churches in the Reformed Church in America in income from living donors.” More projects and more people resulted, however, in more costly infrastructure. Just the management of processing massive infusions of capital donations required significant effort. By the mid 1970s, a dedicated Department of Planned Giving solicited potential donors and offered classes “for people who sincerely sense the importance of a ‘Christ-centered’ will and estate plan.”Footnote ³¹ By the late 1970s, the ministry received an average of forty thousand letters per week, with three-quarters of the envelopes containing monetary gifts. On the church grounds, dedicated staff moved all letters received to a secure room where they removed the money, wrote a receipt, and then forwarded each letter to a bank of “readers.”Footnote ³² Every letter was then passed along to be answered by other staff, who utilized computer banks with prewritten messages crafted to respond to specific problems mentioned in correspondence, a marvelous mechanization of Schuller's charisma for monetary purposes. Described by a reporter, “The computer quickly assembles the appropriate paragraphs in readable form, and the letter is imprinted with Schuller's signature and mailed. Fast and efficient, a kind of ‘Action Line’ for the soul.”Footnote ³³ Thus, growth of funds from on-campus tithing as well as monetary gifts mailed on behalf of Schuller's Hour of Power television ministry was intended to expand facilities to address more people, who presumably would contribute even more. Yet, a higher flow of capital requires supporting more facilities and staffing just to manage the volume of giving.

Franchising a National Chain?

Schuller always demonstrated interest in promulgating his pattern of capital-intensive ministry strategically focused on new architecture, pushing other pastors to dream about their own respective buildings and urging their own fundraising. In late 1968, Schuller encouraged two RCA pastors in New York City to design East Coast versions of the Tower of Hope, which he named “Resurrection Tower” and “Bethany Tower” on their behalf. Schuller advised initiating the projects by passing resolutions with their councils to aggressively pursue these buildings, even proposing the wording: “I would suggest that you present this dream and its outline to your consistory and with a recommendation: ‘Resolve that the Consistory of Bethany Memorial Reformed Church adopt the Bethany Towers Project as a masterplan of development for this church, allowing God to unfold in our minds the way in which this miracle can occur.’” Schuller noted how this strategy had proven successful in Garden Grove: “This is the way we operate. It means that we can go on record saying, ‘Yes, it is a great idea—we will not stand in God's way, if He wants it, we will help Him.’”Footnote ³⁴ With even more detail, Schuller confidently articulated his vision for Resurrection Tower. For Schuller, any such project demanded an architectural rendering to prime the congregations’ imaginations:

He advised presenting Resurrection Tower as an RCA denominational mission project on a national scale: “[F]orget the money problem . . . it is my experience that it is easier to raise $1,000,000 or $2,000,000 for a big dream—than it is to raise $1,000 or $2,000 to patch up an old building. I had an awful job to raise $1,800 for a maintenance job on this property.” Schuller explained why: “Nobody gets enthused about old ideas. But a big pace-setting, exciting project could win the support of tens of thousands of people across the Country.”Footnote ³⁵ Of course, an East Coast version of Schuller's church would significantly validate his own charismatic legitimacy.

Schuller's desire to propagate his fundraising model (and further boost his own church) went beyond individual letters that advised pastors. In 1969, he arranged for GGCC to publish a pamphlet to distribute to all RCA congregations titled “Walk-In, Drive-In Church News.” The pamphlet asserted that “Walk-In–Drive-In” congregations reported “phenomenal growth,” a contrast to the net loss of members in the denomination overall. Crediting Schuller as the originator of the innovative concept, the pamphlet quoted his mentor and colleague Norman Vincent Peale, who extolled the virtues of hybrid churches: “This is one of the most exciting developments going on in the Protestant world today.” Where would funds be obtained to build these modern churches? Schuller drew on the embedded institutional logic of sympathy for missionary support, knowing that the vast majority of RCA members had only distant, if any, connections to far-off Sun Belt cities. The pamphlet appealed to “God's plan to use the Midwest Reformed church people to make this great mission succeed.” First, it noted to the RCA denomination's commitment to international missions: “One of the greatest forces for worldwide missions in the history of Christendom has been The Reformed Church in America. No Protestant denomination, however large and lofty, has done more for World Missions than our little Reformed Church in America.” Then, the pamphlet appealed to the RCA's Midwestern center of gravity:

Schuller audaciously entreated established church members to provide capital to fund newer West Coast churches as tactical mission outposts. As founder of GGCC, Schuller saw his own church as an exemplary beneficiary of such mission funding. He emphasized that, in the twenty-first century, the United States, not a foreign country, would stand as the most significant mission field—but only if churches acted before the “revolutionaries and atheists” started making gains and eventually closed “missionary doors” in this country. Structuring giving as an investment, the pamphlet detailed that readers could

Great churches should be built now, while it still remained possible:

Clearly, Schuller envisioned “a national chain” of Walk-In–Drive-In hybrid churches pioneered by his own congregation and generously funded as missional efforts by Midwestern contributors. He proposed a development effort to raise $800,000 from RCA members to solidify the undertaking. Faithful contributors would not just give to a godly cause but also invest in a sure bet: church bonds that offered better returns than average interest, a missions effort that resulted in spiritual benefits as well as monetary benefits through stable investment yields. Schuller understood that visionary ideas required capital and that donors required appropriate motivation to lay out significant sums. His confidence in this wild, blue-sky idea is further demonstrated in the pamphlet when Schuller promoted building hybrid churches in the colder climates of the RCA's traditional regions of the Midwest and Northeast. Due to varied weather conditions in these regions, he added the vision of building giant arenas to enclose the innovative buildings, saying, “If the world can build a dome over a baseball stadium in Houston, Texas to climate control an area, why can't we do the same thing for the Lord?” The pamphlet also offered details on three “expansion” projects in California: Sacramento, Long Beach, and, of course, GGCC. His own congregation “found it imperative to expand from their ten acres by purchasing an adjoining twelve acres” so that they could avoid the nagging problem of “unchurched people” driving in “on Sunday mornings only to have to drive out because there isn't a single parking space!” GGCC also included plans for hosting a West Coast branch of an RCA-affiliated college, expanding a counseling center, and establishing a Christian retirement home. All, of course, would necessitate a series of new construction projects.Footnote ³⁷

Unquestionably, GGCC was the template for Schuller's national promotion of church-growth strategies for fundraising, advancing his charismatic credentials. By late 1974, the minister claimed for his congregation the status of the “mother of new churches,” by which he meant that GGCC provided a rich source of new capital for the expansion of ministries. Schuller claimed that, since he began preaching at the Orange Drive-In, over fifty other drive-in churches had been founded “through the inspiration, and in many cases, financial support of this Mother Church!” Pressing his case, he insisted that, with even greater funding, his church could accomplish even more. In another letter to promissory note holders, Schuller hailed GGCC's efficiency in accomplishing the most ministry for the money:

Marshaling this evidence, Schuller dismissed a cohort of “unworthy challengers” for donation dollars, arguing for the unique impact made possible by contributing further to his own church's financial means.Footnote ³⁸

By this point, Schuller had spent years perfecting his formula for fundraising, specifically, campaigning for Possibility-driven projects that were ambitious, vision-rich, and compellingly concrete, all to be completed several years in the future. He enticed constituents to agree on the attractiveness of an idea, urged them to seek God's will on the project, and, thereby, sanctioned the call for more capital. Much of the giving to the church involved the purchase of church bonds, which were issued to donors and featured promissory notes guaranteeing the giver a steady rate of return. Accumulated pledges provided evidence of support required by banks to establish lines of credit, delivering the capital necessary to fund construction. Through a combination of offerings and loans, ground could be broken, providing a tangible start. In this way, large future projects stimulated giving that paid for past projects’ continual need for maintenance.

Buttressed by the confidence of his own successes, Schuller canvassed for a movement of ambitious capital projects to be completed by dozens of other pastors under his sage guidance. In spurring a nationwide effort for even more churches modeled on GGCC, Schuller expected to benefit from donors across the nation who would buy into the grander vision of “the mother church” and its experienced leader, who would use his expertise to direct an expansive urban missionary effort, further evangelizing the United States before the opportunity for revival was lost. Schuller's church would be both the exemplar of ministry and the repository of capital, targeting funding for further initiatives through the Garden Grove campus as well as worthy opportunities beyond.

“Inch by Inch, Anything's a Cinch”Footnote ³⁹

By the mid-1970s, Schuller grew concerned that the Arboretum, the Richard Neutra–designed space of the Walk-In–Drive-In structure and the original space for the Hour of Power program, was too small, lacking the capacity to house regular members and the increased number of weekly visitors. Perhaps more importantly, the structure presented an overly bland and conventional set for his television broadcast. In a 1975 publication for the church's twentieth anniversary celebration, Schuller described the dream of a Crystal Cathedral that would be “on the scale of the Great Cathedrals in Cologne, Germany, and the Notre Dame in Paris—even as our Tower of Hope rivals, in size, scale, and impact, the great Cathedral Towers of Europe!” Schuller sketched out a dramatic architectural wonder that would hold a larger audience and provide televised optics—a charismatic platform with a more stunning backdrop with which to match a grander scale of the broadcast production. Upon being built, architectural critics viewed the church as designed more as a stage for performance than as a traditional space for worship.Footnote ⁴⁰ Even Schuller admitted that, when completed, the Crystal Cathedral would function as the world's “first church auditorium designed to be a television studio as well as the sanctuary of a worshipping congregation.”Footnote ⁴¹

Mobilizing funding for the Cathedral gave Schuller an opportunity to be explicit regarding his “philosophy toward capital.” Although he described debt service as “an oppressive burden” and the “toughest and most thankless bill to pay,” Schuller viewed debt as necessary for church growth, again invoking a business mindset.Footnote ⁴² In a “Special Report” written in 1975, Schuller contended that, “since the beginning of this Church,” he had “known” that to “stimulate and maintain dynamic growth,” the congregation would have to be committed to being a “dynamic ‘business for God.’” Stating it bluntly: vigorous growth “would require cash” and “borrowing money.”Footnote ⁴³ Borrowed funds were required now to accommodate growth in membership that would produce income to pay off loans later. In this statement, Schuller professed an unequivocal formula: Increased debt produces added growth. His report expressed urgency to act quickly since the (then projected) $5 million cost would only increase. Construction must start now to avoid inflation. Schuller also reminded his readers that his strategy of rapid growth through financing was not new. His “responsible philosophy of capital debt” had, for twenty years, always included borrowing: “as much as we can—as fast as we can—to do as much good as we can”Footnote ⁴⁴ for “CAPITAL expenditures” because “expanded property or facilities” will “produce added growth i.e. additional income” (capitalization in the original). Schuller underlined that failure to build the Cathedral represented stagnation, decline, and wasted opportunity for growth: “To wait until surplus cash, if ever, was in the church coffers would wait too long.” Even more, Schuller graphically stated that “prospective customers” would “die before they would have a chance to ‘come into a building’ to hear The Word.” To not build risked opportunities for individual salvation—the stakes could not be higher.Footnote ⁴⁵

Of course, Schuller believed that an impressive building would attract funding from both his church members as well as the growing viewership of Hour of Power. At the same time, when he announced plans in the late 1970s for a four thousand–seat Crystal Cathedral, Schuller acknowledged that the cost was substantial and that the effort would raise the congregation's budget significantly. The Wittenburg Door, an evangelical satire magazine, published a scathing indictment regarding the initial cost in a feature titled, “How to Spend $15,000,000.” The article questioned the integrity of a Christian ministry that spent millions of dollars to build a “big glass church.” To demonstrate the scale of the Cathedral's cost, it calculated the expenditures of hundreds of different social and humanitarian programs targeting the poor around the world, demonstrating how much good work could be funded for that price. Suggestions ranged from $180,000 to support ten orphanages in Nairobi for five years, providing food and shelter for one thousand children, to $2,400,000 for establishing one hundred new schools in Haiti in an effort to provide an education for ten thousand children “in a country with only a 19% literacy rate.”Footnote ⁴⁶

Schuller was no stranger to critiques of his fundraising schemes. Yet, the size and scope of the Cathedral attracted unprecedented attention. In response to comments implying a self-aggrandizing focus, Schuller touted mission efforts funded through the church. Ministries and programs had been initiated and expanded, adding complexity that required staffing and resources. Noting the flow of funding that passed through numerous activities, Schuller argued for the broader economic benefits of the ministry. For example, after a tour of the church led by Schuller himself, a college professor noted the minister's focus on buildings while seemingly oblivious to the murder of six Jesuit priests in El Salvador just days before. Hearing about the professor's concerns, Schuller responded that, while he wished he had said something about the killings during the tour, he had helped people from El Salvador because “an awful lot of [workers] have money this week because of the job opportunities at this building project, some of them from El Salvador.”Footnote ⁴⁷ The Cathedral was infused with capital, and capital beneficially flowed through the sprawling operations of the Cathedral.

Persistent questions involving financial priorities raised the minister's ire and threatened his charismatic legitimacy. He repeatedly argued that the economic impact of the ministry should not be oversimplified. Tiring of critiques of his fundraising efforts, Schuller at one point asserted that he employed only “morally upright” strategies. Although the scale of operations made him an easy mark, Schuller also stated that his fame was the best evidence of his integrity. Viewing himself as a business outlet, he stated: “I'm judged in the marketplace every week by my viewers—just like any other merchant who's accepting money for a product or service. The public will judge you, that's No. 1. And on top of that, we have the judgement of TV stations who carry Hour of Power. And they say Robert Schuller is in a class by himself.”Footnote ⁴⁸ His success in securing a noteworthy slice of the media market shielded him from those who disparaged the ministry for financial excess.

Schuller worked to motivate regular loyal givers while simultaneously generating new donors. For example, he tended to discuss the ability to donate lavishly to his ministry as a God-given capacity. He argued that generous giving demonstrated the direct working of God's Spirit in a person. Abundant givers were spiritually enabled by God to give significantly so that even ordinary people could confirm the unique charism (New Testament Greek meaning gift) placed on a person's life through the act of giving. Giving affirmed a profound connection to God. Therefore, Schuller's call for greater giving allowed people not only to exercise their divine gifting but also a means to discover whether this, indeed, was their “spiritual gift.” When giving is viewed as a tangible means of assuring God's work in a person, it becomes a powerful incentive for continued offerings. For a time, Schuller called spiritually gifted givers “Pillars of Steel,” the supports that allowed the glass structure of the Cathedral to stand. In a development mailer, the minister writes:

The spiritual work of giving was made tangible in the structures built. As one woman said to Schuller before the start of the inauguration service for the Cathedral, “Dr. Schuller, my name is on a window in this cathedral. I now feel as if I'm somebody! I now know that I made a difference! I live on a small income, but my tithe paid off a window in two years!”Footnote ⁴⁹

To fund the construction of the Crystal Cathedral, Schuller also presented the concept of the “trusting expectation”—a statement of intent to give a specified weekly amount of money. The pamphlet noted that a trusting expectation had no legal obligations and should not be understood as a debt or “an act of resented necessity.” Instead, the trusting statement should be seen as an expression of worship, a sacrificial gift, and the “first expenditure” made from “the money God sends.” Tying religious commitment to giving as a spiritual investment, the design of the pamphlet included a facsimile of a stock certificate that quoted Malachi 3:10, “Bring the whole tithe into my house and test me now in this way, if I will not open the windows of the heavens, and pour out for you a blessing until there is no more need.” The same certificate included the promise of a “Guaranteed return upon investment.” Under the certificate was a final push that also sanctioned the goal of increasing the church family's financial stability: “Trying to get more income for family benefit is a pure motive . . . so even if your only motive would be more income . . . try it . . . prove Him.”Footnote ⁵⁰ In this way, Schuller blessed the desire for wealth by offering a scenario in which investors could reassure themselves that their generous and sacrificial giving was not only for their own individual return on investment but also for the long-term benefit of their family.

The ministry's demand for capital only grew over time, soon necessitating that members double their offerings. With signature calculation, Schuller communicated this directly, outlining a plan for those increases in giving, providing a step-by-step process for members to give up even more discretionary spending. First, he said, eliminate waste: “All of us waste time, money, energy, clothes and opportunities. It's incredible how much money is wasted on food! Most Americans are overweight. In addition, an incredible amount of money is wasted on alcohol, tobacco, and consumption that hurts more than it helps!” He then suggested that individuals consider leaving portions of their estates after death to the church. Third, members might simply consider increasing their income: “Dr. Schuller shared how a 78-year-old woman is planning a direct sales program to earn more money.” In a subtle rebuke, he calculated that if every family in the GGCC membership actually tithed ten percent, it would produce income of over $5 million. Most aggressively, Schuller noted that an estimate of the collective net worth of the congregation's 7,500 members likely rose to about $100 million and then suggested that some “pioneers” within the church would tithe not just income but also from their assets and invested wealth: “Many will dip into stocks and savings to double their giving in 1976!”Footnote ⁵¹ The minister enthusiastically approved of cashing out investments to enable a doubling of donations. In this way, the minister shrewdly suggested potential monetary sources, providing incentive for withdrawing funds, to achieve a steady and rising capital flow.

Cultivating Wealthy Benefactors

In a letter from December 1976, Schuller reported to Richard De Vos and Jay Van Andel, the founders of Amway Corporation outside of Grand Rapids, Michigan, that fundraising for the construction of the Crystal Cathedral had reached $8 million in pledges, making it clear that this amount would not cover the (then) projected $10 million cost. In doing so, Schuller reached out through familiar networks—people who shared his Dutch heritage and his religious background—to entreat Van Andel to meet with him: “I would prefer to talk with you personally and privately about this and will be happy to fly anywhere, any time so we can pray about it and finally determine what God wants you to do.” Of course, Schuller believed he knew what God wanted. Amway generated tremendous revenue by selling household products through interpersonal networks, but more status-conscious religious institutions might not touch Amway, a company mocked as a low-brow, multilevel pyramid scheme. The pastor smartly drew on an untapped resource.

Schuller had been dogged in his pursuit of Van Andel and De Vos. In May of 1976, he had already written a four-page letter outlining the desperate need for building the Cathedral. In it, he emphasized that the success of his Hour of Power television broadcast had “lured” such a robust tourist audience that his members had trouble finding seats in the sanctuary (prompting early arrival and waiting in long lines for seats as much as an hour before service). This situation also pressed capacity for their children's Sunday School. Striking a delicate balance, Schuller assured them of the successful growth of the ministry while detailing a dire need, motivating his reason for reaching out:

Schuller was always aware that the scope of his ambition for the ministry required a healthy flow of revenue. He did not want to express dependence on the continued infusion of special donations or imply that he would continually demand high-dollar contributions, but the need was urgent in the moment. So, he described the new facility as a “money-generating-factory.” In his letter, Schuller stressed that, once built, the Crystal Cathedral should be seen as housing “4,100 income producing seats” that would produce offerings “to meet the emotional, spiritual, and physical starvation which is destroying lives in America and abroad.” The ostensible success communicated by the confident construction would convey a charismatic vitality and attract giving: “People are not going to invest in an organization that's going bankrupt. Unchurched people will not be attracted into the institutional churches if they feel it has no future.”Footnote ⁵³

For Schuller, the church (now in the process of being renamed from Garden Grove Community Church to the Crystal Cathedral) no longer functioned as a local ministry but as one with a national audience that required nationally sourced funding from across the country to sustain inevitable growth. Besides the tourists and regular attenders who struggled for a seat, Schuller related a story about an “unchurched” young couple who attempted to attend a recent service. Unfortunately, “they couldn't find a seat. Even the aisles were filled with people standing. It was raining outdoors, so they left! Instead, they went out for Sunday breakfast!!” Schuller lamented being unable to host as many of the “unchurched people in Southern California” as possible. Always raising the salience, he went on to assert that successfully funding the Cathedral would pose a strong challenge to any who predicted the failure of the institutional church in America. Further expansion was the only solution. (Schuller quickly noted that any financial windfall from a generous donation would allow funds to support missions programs around the globe.)Footnote ⁵⁴

Claiming affinity with their successful business practices, Schuller took yet another step in his ask and presented the Crystal Cathedral and Amway as two firms with similar operations:

Elaborating on the resonance between their two “manufacturing” organizations, Schuller stated unequivocally: “I happen to know that our ministry stands for everything that you, Jay Van Andel, and Richard De Vos and Amway Corporation stand for.” Schuller went on to assert that his ministry resonated with the marketing and corporate policies that Van Andel and De Vos had instituted in their own company: “Without compromising my deepest convictions one iota, I know how totally we agree on issues and values.” Schuller's appeal based on presenting the church as a morally rooted business entity of similar design and intent worked. Van Andel and De Vos found Schuller persuasive and became benefactors. De Vos would eventually sit on the ministry board. Schuller's ministry was an “investment,” a spiritually inflected investment that fulfilled the value imperatives of conservative Christian philanthropists like Van Andel and De Vos while simultaneously fulfilling the practical revenue imperatives of Schuller's ambitiously expanding religious enterprise.Footnote ⁵⁵

With successful appeals to wealthy benefactors and donations from members, staff, and volunteers, the ministry financed the construction of the Cathedral through gifts that ranged from business philanthropist John Crean's $1 million (an Orange County multimillionaire industrialist so generous to the Crystal Cathedral that, today, his grave sits adjacent to the Schullers’) to $500 gifts for each of the 10,600 windows that sheathed the structure to faithful tithes to stray dollars from inspired givers. The total cost for the Cathedral, however, kept going up. Rising construction costs and the annual inflation rate (from just under 6 percent in 1976 to nearly 14 percent in 1980) left Schuller short of development goals. Needing a major infusion of capital, the minister booked the most significant event in the history of the church: a major celebrity concert in the not-quite-completed sanctuary. This is how ticketed events emerged as a new and unanticipated strategy for revenue.

Monetizing the Cathedral

Opera singer Beverly Sills appeared for what became the final solo performance of her career—a perfect public relations opportunity. The event was a godsend intended to overcome the controversy over the growing costs of the Cathedral. According to Michael Nason, executive assistant to Schuller, the Cathedral costs had attracted massive scorn: “$17 million today is nothing in a building, but then, $17 million—and we were in escalating inflation. Criticism was just huge.” It was a media relations disaster that demanded a deflection, something Nason described as “PR 101.” To pivot the narrative away from exorbitant costs, the ministry sought a featured event with ticketed seats to celebrate the opening of the Crystal Cathedral, “something bigger and splashier than anything that had ever been done.” It worked. Fortunately, the concert sold out. Unfortunately, the sound quality within the Cathedral proved problematic when an unanticipated issue with the acoustics emerged. Schuller and his leadership team cringed, fearing the media fallout from the poor-quality sound for such an expensive, high-profile event. Reserved seats had cost $1,500.Footnote ⁵⁶

Sills appeared on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson the evening after the concert. Carson quipped about needing copious amounts of Windex to keep the Cathedral translucent. Sills joked that her voice was likely “still there now, ricocheting from one glass wall to another, trying to find its way out.”Footnote ⁵⁷ The comment drew hardy laughs at the expense of the Cathedral. Schuller and Nason, however, reveled in the shift in conversation: Sills’ remark deflected attention from the costs “to concentrate on the building itself—the Crystal Cathedral was being discussed on national television!” Nason continued, “It became a media sensation for the next several weeks. That was a really big deal. The criticism on the cost of the church stayed within the church community, and the general public just shrugged their shoulders. From then on, the building itself became a great vehicle for [other revenue-generating events such as] the Glory of Christmas and the Glory of Easter.”Footnote ⁵⁸

The Sills event raised an astounding $4 million.Footnote ⁵⁹ Back in 1965, Schuller had noted with pride his fundraising was different from others who debased themselves to attract donations: “We have never had to stoop to beg for money from the pulpit, or cheapen our church by selling [raffle] tickets, selling suppers, or selling bingo games.”Footnote ⁶⁰ His was a classy effort—fundraising with dignity. Now, the selling of reserved seats for a high-status event allowed the Cathedral to be built debt-free. While the Sills event raised questions about the sustainability of fundraising that targeted wealthy elites instead of committed members of the church, the success of the concert established that ticketed events could become a significant new source of capital—one that associated the Cathedral with high-quality, high-status entertainment. The charismatic force embedded in the building and the charismatic presence of world-class entertainers would reinforce each other.

The Cathedral also served the broadcast ministry well. Part of the appeal of the Hour of Power rested in its setting: the spectacle of an all-glass building in perpetually sunny Southern California. Both the audience and revenue expanded. The triumph of building the spectacular Crystal Cathedral itself accentuated Schuller's charisma, not merely as an effective communicator but also as an inventive entrepreneur who knew how to sell his product. Schuller entered new church growth territory as he embraced economies of scale and honed a singular focus on customer desires. He openly described himself as a “religious retailer” and the church campus as a “22-acre shopping center for God.” Moreover, Schuller “knew that the first rule of marketing is to hold people's attention; so, he built his cathedral from glass, installed one of the best organs in the world, and invited a constant stream of celebrities, including presidents and film stars. And he understood cross-promotion: his bestselling books promoted his church services, and vice versa.”Footnote ⁶¹

Building on years of successfully broadcasting Hour of Power, and with the relative success of the Beverly Sills concert, the ministry turned to local theatrical production. In 1980, the Cathedral began producing The Glory of Christmas, then, in 1985, The Glory of Easter. Along with the architecture, these events made the church campus a destination. In 1982, Christianity Today highlighted the grand scale of the “Glory of Christmas” production: four hundred cast members, a 120-piece orchestra backing prerecorded in London, sixteen live animals, “electronics and lighting [that] would match any Hollywood set for sophistication,” $1 million in total production costs, forty performances, tickets that ranged in price from $6.50 to $12.50, and $10 cassettes for sale. A press release from the RCA in 1982 reported that 56,000 people had attended and that Bob Jani, of Walt Disney Productions, wrote and produced the performance. The release included a quote from Dan Rather on CBS Evening News: “It is stunning. A bit of Hollywood, a bit of Broadway, but it is the same beautiful Christmas story.” With the addition of The Glory of Easter, the ministry later reported two hundred thousand individuals attended the two performances annually.Footnote ⁶²

The Cathedral required a lot of capital, but, in the first years after completion, it appeared to fulfill the promise of attracting needed revenue. Although lamenting that the exterior of the building resembled a “jazzy corporate headquarters,” an architectural critic acknowledged the Cathedral as an enthralling venue: “The ability of this architecture to excite the average churchgoer is perhaps as interesting as the architecture itself.” Further, “If [the Crystal Cathedral] is not the deepest or the most profound religious building of our time, it is at least among the most entertaining—one that will do much more to interest a public that has grown accustomed to thinking of churches as banal works of architecture and not uplifting ones.” Journalists noted that the Cathedral served as a fitting setting for “spectacles” with a “striking, soaring, light-filled structure justly praised by architecture critics.” Some sensed the financial need that prompted its construction: “Like the much beloved, much pilloried Disneyland three miles to the northwest, the Crystal Cathedral is a monument to Americans’ inveterate ability to transform dominant cultural impulses—in this case, Christianity itself—into moneymaking enterprises that conquer the world.”Footnote ⁶³

A few years after the opening of the Crystal Cathedral, Schuller deadpanned to his congregation one Sunday morning: “Have you heard the latest? They're saying that when Oral Roberts, Billy Graham, and Bob Schuller get to heaven, Graham will convert everybody to Christianity, Roberts will heal them, and Schuller will be out raising money to air condition the place.” The joke confirmed that the Orange County minister embraced his reputation for fundraising savvy. The ostentatious scale and spectacle of the Cathedral's glass structure represented a divergence from the restrained tradition of his Dutch Reformed denomination: “Schuller's addition of the cathedral, beside what had been an airy and upbeat meeting house [the Arboretum], was, in itself, a break with Calvinist norms.”Footnote ⁶⁴ The more his celebrity grew and the more he built, the more he validated the cost of his religious project, authorizing Schuller to raise even more capital. Schuller had established a competitive niche for attracting donors.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, Schuller's multimodal ministry had arguably attained status as the highest profile church in the United States. For example, The Reader's Digest testified to the ministry's reputation as a church “powerhouse.” The magazine reported the “staggering” statistics: ten thousand congregational members, one thousand new members per year, nine thousand ministers (and wives and church leaders) having attended the Leadership Institute (established in 1969), an annual budget of $2.7 million, and a nationally televised program with a budget of $16 million annually.Footnote ⁶⁵ Schuller received moderate compensation in salary and housing allowance from the congregation ($123,500 reported for 1986), yet his lecture circuit fees ($10,000) alongside his royalties on books, tapes, cassette books, and sermon videos had earned him millions. Obviously, Schuller's distinct message, “a blend of salvation through Christ and a doctrine of self-esteem” had found a receptive audience.Footnote ⁶⁶ The Los Angeles Times presented Schuller as “America's leading evangelist,” despite his refusal to join the 950-member National Religious Broadcasters, one of the most important evangelical organizations of the time. When asked about his reluctance to join, Schuller shrugged and asserted his independence: “It's not the dues—what is it, $200 a year? And I don't want to seem snobbish or stand-offish. It's just that—who needs them?”Footnote ⁶⁷ Importantly, as a member of the RCA, Schuller viewed himself as having denominational accountability, a contrast from independent evangelicals who lacked validating connections and whose desire for respectability dictated their connection. The Orange County minister had carved out a seemingly unassailable position in the religious marketplace. His books and seminars on church growth represented Schuller's most valuable products, and his viewers and the expansive campus site of his ministry served as evidence of its efficacy. His expertise as a megachurch pastor was unquestioned.

Within a few years of opening the Cathedral, the moneymaking capacities of the church prompted official scrutiny of its tax-exempt status. Perceiving a threat to his charisma, Schuller defended ticketed events and insisted there had been precedent in that, “historically, churches have always been great centers of culture, of music, and drama.” Much as arenas and stadia today try to monetize outside of the local team's sport season with monster truck rallies and concerts, he framed the Cathedral as an Orange County cultural center that hosted events throughout the week: “Our church has never limited itself only to our congregation. We have always seen ourselves as a place to also serve the secular community, a place to enlighten, to inspire and entertain.” He argued that local residents would feel the loss most acutely: “We should be able to use our church to its maximum facilities, one that can be unselfishly shared with our entire community.” The public agency charged with tax administration and fee collection for the state disagreed. Discussing the Cathedral in 1983, William Grommet, a state Board of Equalization investigator for California, stated, “This church is commercialized to a much greater extent than I've ever encountered in the state.” He then listed specifics: “Our investigation shows that there were in excess of 15 concerts and musical performances, reserved seating $8.50–$15.50; reserved seating for the Glory of Christmas program was $40, $60, $68, and $150; there has been repeated use of the property for profit organizations and by nonprofit organizations that do not qualify for the exemption.”Footnote ⁶⁸

The Cathedral's tax controversy gained national attention. CBS Evening News reported: “The word of God is one thing, say California tax officials, but when you throw in everything from Weight Watchers to Lawrence Welk, including aerobic dancing, that's quite another matter.” The Cathedral had hosted concerts by Tony Bennett, Victor Borge, the Fifth Dimension, Robert Goulet, and Fred Waring. Sunday breakfast and brunch were sold starting at five dollars a plate, and event sales grew so strong that the church installed its own Ticketron office.Footnote ⁶⁹ Grommet registered his astonishment that the lobby included a Ticketron booth, saying he initially wondered when he first saw the unit: “You mean you have to buy a ticket to go to church?”Footnote ⁷⁰

Schuller and his team rallied against the threat to revenue. With an eye toward keeping their charismatic legitimacy intact, they cleverly framed the tax controversy as a test of religious freedom. Herman J. Ridder, carrying the title “President of the Crystal Cathedral Congregation,” released a statement that indicated why all religious organizations should be concerned:

Ridder explained that the Board of Equalization likely failed to understand the church's Calvinist theology that understood that “everything in life is religion.” Ridder further argued that any event that occurs at the church should “fall under the mantle of religion and should be tax-exempt.”Footnote ⁷² Ridder concluded on a defiant note, “We do not plan to be destroyed.”

Consistent with the tenets of a Christian-inflected libertarianism,Footnote ⁷³ Schuller dramatically vowed to litigate any attempts “to tax our pulpit, our choir loft, or our cross and church.”Footnote ⁷⁴ He cited support from a range of other faith communities and noted that, in their solidarity, “They recognize, correctly, that if the State of California can deny us our tax exemption, it can harass other religious and charitable groups as well.” Schuller added that the replacement costs of the social services provided by congregations should never be underestimated:

Schuller held a press conference and read a more detailed statement. He again noted the replacement value for services that the church offered the broader community and claimed that without these ministry programs, “millions of dollars would have had to be added to the social service agencies in [Orange County] and [the United States].” He went on, “Only God knows how much we have saved the local taxpayers in what would otherwise have been expanded police services, added welfare costs of unemployed persons, added social services because of marriages that would have been broken, added foster home care for children that would have been abandoned if not hooked on drugs.” Schuller again asserted, “there isn't a doubt in our mind that whatever tax advantages are extended to churches, synagogues, and temples in this country are far more than offset by untold savings in county, state, and social services.”Footnote ⁷⁵

For a man who had previously argued against clergy engagement in political matters, Schuller forcefully posed the issue as fighting against the potential encroachment of the state in the church's coffers on behalf of all clergy. Not all ministers, however, came to Schuller's defense on the tax-exemption issue. Fellow television minister Jerry Falwell argued that, if “a church competes with free enterprise, it ought to bear the same tax burden the business community bears.” A pastor more local to the Crystal Cathedral, Randy Ziegler of Costa Mesa's Calvary Chapel, dismissed the issue with a shrug, noting that the Crystal Cathedral “got what it deserved [from the Board of Equalization.] It is not a church; it is a profitable business.” In the midst of the tax controversy, Schuller wrote what may be his best known book, Tough Times Never Last, But Tough People Do! Perhaps with the California tax code on his mind, the minister advised his readers that they should not “violate the law, but don't reject an idea because it's illegal. You might be able to get the law changed.” Despite his optimism, Schuller failed to change the tax code. With a caveat that they deemed the state's position a form of “religious harassment,” the church in 1983 paid $473,000 in back taxes.Footnote ⁷⁶ Schuller continued pursuing more building projects to maintain solvency.

A Theistic Factory

As the infrastructure of the church expanded and grew in complexity, greater financial obligations included more staff and pastoral programs. A reporter from Minnesota who visited the Crystal Cathedral in the mid-1980s commented on the organizational scale: “The untold story here is not the television program or the building and grounds. Those are showcases for Schuller's exuberant style. The real success story is the ministry that goes on from week to week through the efforts of other members of the staff.” The reporter explained, “Schuller is the image that makes it all possible, but through more than 40 separate ministries, the church meets the needs of virtually every person who walks through the doors.” Another journalist described the campus as a “vast theistic factory” and marveled at the fact that the ministry employed “190 full-time staff, including 10 assistant ministers, on the campus and in the $1.3 million Hour of Power communications center across the street.”Footnote ⁷⁷ These ministries required massive capital along with an infrastructure to raise and process funds. Robert Schuller Ministries in 1985 spent $1.2 million on postage alone.Footnote ⁷⁸ In 1986, expenditures included another $2.8 million for direct mail fundraising and $3.2 million dollars for Hour of Power mail processing (including recording and depositing contributions).Footnote ⁷⁹

The “theistic factory” manufactured more programs and church ministries to serve pastoral needs, and, by the late 1980s and early 1990s, there seemed to be almost no limit to the services and opportunities that the church offered, which was accommodated with even more growth of staff, offices, and budgets. Schuller's infrastructure undergirded a ravenous, wide-ranging ministry that, in its best days, depended on over four hundred employees and more than two thousand volunteers.Footnote ⁸⁰ Schuller shied away from giving money to needy persons directly; instead, the entire ministry rested on a belief that the church built up “Possibility Thinkers” who would be able to economically sustain themselves. As Michael and Donna Nason once wrote, “Bob has his own way of combating poverty.” In their biography of Schuller, they explained: “It's not militant or political, it's not done through crusades or handouts or protest marches. He says, ‘The secret to solving the poverty problem is to develop possibilities within people to be creative so that they can become prosperous and develop self-respect in the process.’”Footnote ⁸¹ Schuller assumed that, by strengthening the financial capacity of his Possibility Thinking members, they would not only help themselves but also would, in turn, generously contribute back to the church that made their prosperity possible.

Schuller kept channeling his charisma, raising capital for yet another new building, the Family Life Center. The promotional material indicated the need for space for his Leadership Institute and headquarters for Hour of Power—but promised rooms dedicated to exercise, nurseries, classrooms, and the performing arts as well.Footnote ⁸² As part of a 1991 pledge drive, the ministry noted that the congregation had “mission and ministry groups for everyone.” Indeed, the list included:

These varied ministries were expected to fit into the increased bureaucratization of the church. For instance, the bylaws for Positive Christian Singles (a ministry for “single, widowed, and formerly married adults”) numbered eleven single-spaced pages and included notes about voting eligibility, censure and dismissal of members, election of officers, impeachment and replacement of officers, creation of subcommittees, and the expectation that all meetings follow parliamentary law.Footnote ⁸⁴

Bureaucratic procedure pervaded the multifaceted ministry in an attempt to routinize the charismatic energy of the church, requiring its own staffing and active management.Footnote ⁸⁵ In a “Building Standards” memo, Crystal Cathedral employees received explicit instructions on expectations for their work areas. Guidelines included prohibitions against anything being affixed to windows, outdoor clothing on doorknobs or flung over chairs, and wall displays that utilized glue, staples, or tape.Footnote ⁸⁶ The ministry did not limit formalized expectations only to paid staff members. The “theistic factory” rested heavily on the volunteer labor of thousands of committed members, and explicit expectations were also imposed on regular members. Labor was expected as part of church membership, which relieved some of the need to hire additional personnel, and all were expected to uphold strict standards of professionalism and quality.Footnote ⁸⁷ Attenders could not become members of the congregation without enrolling in a “comprehensive educational program.” The congregation initiated a Center for Advance Lay Leadership that all prospective members attended; it included evening courses for learning the requirements for participating in an area of service and focused on formalizing voluntary roles such as pastoral care, leading small groups, and telephone counseling.Footnote ⁸⁸ For some positions, members needed ninety-eight hours of instruction before they could be commissioned.Footnote ⁸⁹ Tour guides had to be familiar with the history and vision of the Crystal Cathedral. The visitor center guidelines at the Cathedral alone numbered fifty-nine single-spaced pages.Footnote ⁹⁰

Through every level of ministry, the detail on roles and processes for all involved in the congregation indicates the lengths to which the church went to ensure a strong, consistent, and positive charismatic presentation of the ministry. Regular tithing and the ongoing support of current capital campaign goals were inherent to their committed service. All were expected to participate in giving to the church. The organizational machinery was kept busy protecting the reputation of the church and its pastor—especially in monitoring threats to the flow of capital. For example, during the tax exemption controversy, members of the Crystal Cathedral staff found themselves tasked with tracking any media mentions of the story. The resulting chart included the media source, the headline for the story, the estimated circulation, and whether the source had a United Press International or Associated Press affiliation.Footnote ⁹¹

Clearly, Schuller understood the need to mobilize the charisma of the church into a financial vehicle, yet he especially concentrated it through personal meetings with corporate leaders and philanthropists. He did so continually throughout his ministry, and available examples are numerous. At a 1993 Amway distributors event, Schuller reported during a keynote address that his friendship with Rich De Vos and Jay Van Andel could be traced to the very beginnings of Amway. At one point, he described Amway as the world's largest organization of Positive Thinking people and that the Crystal Cathedral, “to a great degree,” could be considered “a ministry of Amway, unofficially, totally.”Footnote ⁹² The growth imperatives of Schuller's ministry depended greatly on the ability to convince wealthy Christians that his church, properly understood, was an extension of their business, a tangible manifestation of the noblest and deepest values they most cherished.

During the 1980s and 1990s, successes and accolades continued. An article in The Economist described Schuller as the “most successful of a new breed of televangelist who realized that technology was their friend” and the Crystal Cathedral as the “most striking of a new crop of megachurches that were springing up across America.”Footnote ⁹³ Thinking that he had started a second Reformation, Schuller assumed his formula for growth was universal, able to guide successful endeavors in a way that transcended both geography and generations. He further expanded efforts to standardize his charismatic leadership into coded principles to share with church leaders (and business and political leaders) across the world. The Institute, the architecture, and the Hour of Power all stood as demonstrations of the successful enactment of the minister's principles. Schuller's ministry, however, would prove less resilient than most observers would have assumed.

A Masked Fragility

The success of Schuller's Hour of Power proved to be a double-edged sword. The broadcast's popularity translated into a growing number of seats in the Cathedral occupied by one-time tourists, mostly viewers on vacation who managed to schedule a Sunday morning visit. Still, less than a decade after its construction, overall attendance at the Cathedral began to slip, and it was Hour of Power revenues that maintained the church building and kept other programs going. For many years, the broadcast produced as much as 70 percent of the total ministry's revenue.Footnote ⁹⁴ Because two separate boards—Robert Schuller Ministries and the Crystal Cathedral Congregation of the Reformed Church in America—merged into one board in 1988 to form Crystal Cathedral Ministries, financial access between various pots of funding was made easier. Schuller himself summarized: “By merging the two boards, efficiency and consolidation, with attendant economic and management advantages, will be fully realized. Both organizations will now jointly own all property and real estate, which will expedite the wise, prudent, and asset-management moves enabling the board to achieve its long range financial goals of the Crystal Cathedral Ministries.”Footnote ⁹⁵ Spending was justified as serving broadcast constituents—including the live ones visiting the sanctuary.

Attendance declined and revenue sagged, yet Schuller kept on building, using new projects to stimulate more capital while still drawing on Hour of Power revenue. In 1988, Schuller reported opening a church conference and retreat center in San Juan Capistrano, but only with some creative funding: “A ten-million-dollar investment fell only narrowly short of being fully underwritten in cash. The balance was financed with a gift and a low interest loan through the private pension funds of Dr. and Mrs. Schuller which represents a substantial savings to the ministry.” (The site also became the location of a Crystal Cathedral church plant led by the Schullers’ only son, Robert A. Schuller.) That same year, the ministry expanded its campus by nearly five acres after buying out homes and relocating eighty-two families.Footnote ⁹⁶ Note that financial strain is already evident by the late 1980s.

In anticipation of the 1989 opening of the $25 million Family Life Center, Schuller had requested from the pulpit—and in color brochures—that members and viewers increase their giving to the ministry by an additional 25 percent to cover the predicted costs of increasing maintenance liabilities on the campus. The architectural plans betrayed concern over funding. When critics noted that the 150,000-square-foot Family Life Center looked blandly corporate, Schuller insisted that the design was intentional. The ministry could lease space to local businesses “in the future if the church ever needs money.”Footnote ⁹⁷ With such considerations built into the aesthetics, the increasingly tenuous makeup of the ministry's finances shadowed the pastor's thoughts. Schuller was preparing a means to address the financial pressures of the mega-ministry as they began to escalate.

Because of (not despite) budding financial concerns, the ministry continued building, raising capital, and then building again, following Schuller's well-worn formula for stimulating revenue. In 1990, the ministry unveiled the 236-foot, $5.5 million Prayer Spire wrapped in polished stainless steel that included a fifty-two-bell carillon (an assembly weighing fifty thousand pounds) and a tiny chapel.Footnote ⁹⁸ Functionally, the spire offered little to the campus, but Schuller reported his feeling that “it had to be built” as the “finishing touch” of the Cathedral—an official message that, indeed, the corporate-looking Cathedral was a church, visible to thousands of cars driving down the neighboring highway.

After the Prayer Spire, the ministry initiated yet another capital-intensive project, deciding that it needed more space to host tourists who visited the church grounds. The land-locked church campus required another ten acres for the new facility and its attendant parking, so the ministry bought out the owners of thirty-one nearby houses. Schuller was convinced that Richard Meier, the renowned designer of the billion-dollar Getty Museum in Los Angeles, should be the architect.Footnote ⁹⁹ This project resulted in the $40 million, stainless steel-clad Welcoming Center, which opened in 2003.Footnote ¹⁰⁰ (The futuristic architectural style was featured as the twenty-third century Starfleet headquarters for the film Star Trek: Into Darkness.)Footnote ¹⁰¹ The second and third floors housed the “DreaMuseum,” a series of small exhibits on the “extraordinary history of the Crystal Cathedral Ministry,”Footnote ¹⁰² including architectural models of past building projects and life-sized bronze statues of Billy Graham, Norman Vincent Peale, Fulton Sheen, and Robert H. Schuller himself, physically associating his own charismatic leadership with these other commendable Possibility Thinkers. To finance construction, the ministry sold twenty thousand optical glass bricks for $500 each to form a translucent wall on the second floor.Footnote ¹⁰³ Fundraising efforts again fell short. By the mid-2000s, the ministry had taken on a debt between $30 and $40 million.Footnote ¹⁰⁴

At this point, the ministry ran an annual operating budget of $80 million—only about $10 million less per year than the entire city government of Garden Grove—and that was still too low to meet mounting obligations.Footnote ¹⁰⁵ Schuller had famously quipped, “Nobody has a money problem, only an idea problem.”Footnote ¹⁰⁶ Seeking another infusion of capital, the ministry looked to itself and noted the successes of “The Glory of Christmas” and “The Glory of Easter,” deciding in 2005 that, perhaps, a production themed around “Creation” might be successful. The new event required between $13 and $15 million to produce. Local newspapers described the production as “extravagant” with “giant digital screens and elaborate sets.” Staged only once, the production lost an estimated $5 million.Footnote ¹⁰⁷

Had the fundraising template of “new vision for future projects to raise funds for current needs” been more durable, the Welcoming Center and the Glory of Creation might have functioned as two more signals of successful, innovative growth of the ministry. Instead, both projects further contributed to financial overextension, which means that the finances of the church had been in distress since before the recession of 2007 and before the significant tensions of family leadership succession. The financial difficulties also accelerated. In 2006, the ministry lost $6.4 million. In 2007, the losses grew to $7 million and then to $11.5 million in 2008.Footnote ¹⁰⁸ In addition, end-of-the-year financial reports demonstrated that revenues for Hour of Power fell by over 20 percent from 2007 to 2008.Footnote ¹⁰⁹ Overall, donations to the ministry in 2009 fell by 24 percent.Footnote ¹¹⁰

For over half of a century, Schuller's syncopation of constituents, charisma, and capital had worked because the contextual factors of the migration and economic boom of the region and sympathy of wealthy Christian businessmen had tilted in his favor. As the strain of harmonizing these elements continued to increase, the strategy of forward-projecting charisma could no longer be trusted to financially mobilize current constituents to provide ever more capital in anticipation of future constituents, and the generosity of wealthy benefactors withered. A campus filled with multiple buildings and a broad infrastructure of programs and staff demanded high levels of maintenance. Their charismatic credibility depended on tangible signs of continued growth, and any tarnishing of Schuller's religious products could be read as contrary evidence of their efficacy.Footnote ¹¹¹ Loans and other financial obligations mounted. The aggressive and ongoing call to fund future growth became catastrophic, leading to the declaration of bankruptcy in 2010. In the following year, Schuller launched a $50 million “Miracle-Faith Campaign” in a last-ditch attempt to pay off the ministry's debts in just four months. The effort raised only $172,755.50. The fund drive ended early when it became clear that the campaign had no chance of success.Footnote ¹¹² The ability of Schuller's charisma to attract capital had fizzled.