Talk:Washington National Cathedral

Architecture High‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: District of Columbia Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Washington, D.C. portal This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Mid-importance).

Christianity: Anglicanism Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Mid-importance).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Wikify

There are several nouns not yet linked. Is this an oversight? --Wetman 02:30, 15 February 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership?

Who does it belong to? Which organizations fund it? David.Monniaux 13:32, 4 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Episcopal Diocese of Washington owns and funds the Cathedral Church of Saints Peter and Paul from its own fundraising pools, like any other Roman Catholic and Episcopal cathedral in the United States. --Gerald Farinas 13:50, 4 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I thought (I know very well that the US government is not supposed to fund religions). Then, I think this should be noted in the article, because people unfamiliar with the US may get the false impression that this "National" cathedral is somewhat publicly funded. I added a sentence to that effect. David.Monniaux 15:01, 4 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the record... Washington National Cathedral is operated by an organization called the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation, not the Episcopal Diocese of Washington D.C. It is funded entirely by private donations, gifts, bequests, memberships in the National Cathedral Association and proceeds from the Cathedral gift shops. 69.140.206.138 02:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC) a Washington National Cathedral Docent, 8 December 2006[reply]

WNC is supported by the National Cathedral Association, a non-profit organization to raise money for the Episcopal Churich in America. The government, however, did provide support for the early stages of building it. 71.231.91.187 14:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I know very well that the US government is not supposed to fund religions." That is incorrect, and in fact, it frequently does (It is not supposed to 'establish' a religion). The National Cathedral also got over 700,000 dollars worth of aid from the Federal Government to aid in its construction. 75.128.86.230 (talk) 04:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Televised Worldwide

Please stop saying that the 9/11 memorial was not televised worldwide, because of the Canadian service. I live in Canada and watched the Washington service on TV. (Besides which "televised worldwide" does not mean "televised in every country in the world.") - Cafemusique 02:02, 26 June 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I go strictly by the fact that both services took place simultaneously. People in Canada saw "the largest single vigil ever seen" in the nation's capital on September 14, 2001. This is because both Washington and Ottawa are in the same time zones. SNIyer12 00:15, 6 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canadians have access to US media outlets and thus had access to watch (if they, like I, so chose) the Washington service. Despite that, if you persist in believing that a lack of coverage in one country means that an event was not "televised worldwide," then I would find it hard to believe that any event was televised worldwide, under that definition. - Cafemusique 7 July 2005 14:52 (UTC)

For Canadians, only the American media outlets broadcast the service at the National Cathedral. Canadian media outlets were tuned to one Parliament Hill--the largest single vigil there in the nation's capital, as Prime Minister Paul Martin put it when President George W. Bush made his visit to Canada in 2004. - SNIyer12 7 July 2005 20:26 (UTC)

Name of the site

Is it "Mount Saint Albans" or "Mount Saint Alban"? It is referred to both ways in the text. Al 13:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have "Mount Saint Alban" in one source. I'd be surprised if the Cathedral's official site does not mention it, and there should be plenty of other placename sources available. (SEWilco 17:47, 29 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Appears to be Mount Saint Alban. All of the "Saint Albans" I found on the site appear to be misspellings of "Saint Alban's". I'll fix. Al 18:04, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Albans is not a misspelling, it's an affectation that the Close institutions took to make the place seem more English and antiquated. It is an older form meant to distinguish between an entity dedicated to someone and something that belongs to someone. It is Mount Saint Alban, though.

Mt. Saint Alban is the location; St. Alban's School for Boys is one of the schools on the ground. Mangoe 02:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure of the official location name but it certainly is St. Albans School not St. Alban's —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.143.178.230 (talk) 15:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Amusing

Does anyone else find it amusing that this article about a single cathedral is almost as long as the article about the entire Church of England? Contrafool 03:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could say the same thing about Canterbury Cathedral. But at any rate, it's wikipedia, so if you think an article is too short, get going and add to it! Cheers, brother. 24.91.244.221 (talk) 00:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it is a NATIONAL church

the corner stone was laid by Teddy Roosevelt who was NOT Episcopalian but Dutch Reformed

it was chartered by Congress

the constitution doesn't say that the government can't fund religion but says that cant respect a specific one---WNC welcomes are faiths to worhsip

and btw the to the person below St. Alban's is not the same as WNC St. Alban's is a school on the grounds of WNC and there is a cathedral called St. Alban's in England — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.198.179 (talk) 02:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the corner stone was laid by Teddy Roosevelt

For the record, President Theodore Roosevelt was present and spoke at Washington National Cathedral's Foundation Stone service, September 29, 1907. He did not lay the Cathedral's Foundation stone. 69.140.206.138 02:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC) a Washington National Cathedral Docent, 8 December 2006[reply]

it was chartered by Congress

For the record, this misleading truth preys on a general lack of understanding that, at the time the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation was chartered, the U.S. Government, Congress and Executive, were functioning as the local government for Washington D.C. All non-profit or not-for-profit organizations founded during such a period required chartering through the U.S. Congress and a Presidential signature. 69.140.206.138 02:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC) a Washington National Cathedral Docent, 8 December 2006[reply]

Nonetheless, that still doesn't make the cathedral any more constitutional, technically - Congress was making laws respective of religions at the time, because they were among the organizations queuing up to charter. — Rickyrab | Talk 17:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, the Constitution may be to blame for this unconstitutionality: an amendment is supposed to cancel out or alter earlier parts of the Constitution. The core of the Constitution (that is, the Articles and Sections) mandated the foundation and running of Washington, DC. The First Amendment came later. — Rickyrab | Talk 17:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admittedly. But charters, etc., are arguably respectings of specific religions. — Rickyrab | Talk 17:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

has it occured to anyone that the idea of a national cathedral in a country that prides itself on its seperation of state and religion is accepted and encouraged in its role as a quasi government operation? is there such a thing as a national mosque or temple? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weeddude (talk • contribs) 18:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added to the article a link (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/arts-post/2011/02/americas_treasures_receive_fed.html) to an article in the Washington Post reporting in February, 2011, that the cathedral received $700,000 from the Federal government for building repairs. This flatly contradicts the assertion that the cathedral receives no funding from the US government. Someone removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.53.195.38 (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having a federally funded church in Washington isn't establishing a state religion in the United States, and to say so is just ludicrous. And to answer 'why isn't there a national mosque'--because most Americans are Christians. The Congress has helped fund religious projects since its inception. You guys are just being overly critical. The separation of church is not meant to be a barrier from all aid to any religious project, it is specifically, word for word, to stop the 'establishment' of religion by the Congress. 75.128.86.230 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:03, 26 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

caption makes no sense

"In addition, a memorial service for Harry Truman took place at National Cathedral, which foreign dignitaries attended because of the advanced age of his wife, Bess." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.122.141.9 (talk) 20:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Darth Vadar

Some pictures & info. if needs be. [1]. I already know it is in the article. Thanks, CarpD 4/24/07 — Preceding undated comment added 21:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

83 years construction time

I've twice reverted an observation that the cathedral's 83 years construction time is similar to the human lifespan simply because it's not at all relevant to the topic of the article. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpmullins (talk • contribs) 14:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

I found some great historical photos of the Cathedral (thanks to the LOC), thinking it would be a nice addition to the article's history section. Unfortunately, there's doesn't appear to be one at the moment. That's surprising, considering the building's significance. I'm a history nerd, but also a nerd that has 1.3 million items on my WikiToDoList. I just thought it should be mentioned in case someone wants to take on the task. (hope this doesn't make me look lazy) APK is not a Womanizer 15:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recently visited the Cathedral. During the tour, the guide mentioned that there had been other designs proposed with the gothic winning out. She indicated some of the competing designs were rather far out, but I can find no details about these. It would be interesting to see what other perposals looked like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dnatch (talk • contribs) 19:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doubtful they ever actually worked up any drawings of alternate designs; the choice of Gothic was not done on the basis of a competition. As far as I know, they decided on Gothic before they approached Bodley. Mangoe (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

severely distorted image

This image appears at the top of the Architecture section. Surely the two massive stone columns (or whatever the correct term is) are in reality straight, not severely bowed as they appear in this photograph. The distortion is unfortunate, because the photograph is good otherwise.

I have left a request on the image's talk page that someone who knows how to use Photoshop remove the distortion. If that is not done, I think this image should be removed from this article. The distortion is so severe that it detracts and distracts from the article rather than enhancing it.--Jim10701 (talk) 03:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Distorted"? That's just a wide-angle shot. Ventifax (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

info on carillon

The cathedral has a magnificent carillon, which is controlled somewhat like an organ, a keyboard that is connected to wires that ring the bells. A write-up on this would be a nice addition to the Music section. There was a recent (Nov 2011) article on this in the Wash. Post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.43.86.70 (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On attendance and membership

Until a relatively short time ago, the only members of the cathedral parish were the bishop and his family, and the dean and his family. This was ended in 2006, and the cathedral started reporting membership figures the following year. However as one can see by looking up the cathedral on this page (note that you cannot permalink the charts generated) there is a certain ramp-up in the membership numbers; one cannot really tell how much of the week-to-week attendance represents people who treat this as their main parish, but comparison with other parishes suggests that it's probably well in excess of attendance (usually membership is two to three times ASA). I have reported the 2009 ASA number as notable and reliable (ASA is an actual head count of people in the church) rather than the probably misleading membership number. Mangoe (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

National Cathedral

How and when did it gain the nickname (if it is that) of the 'National Cathedral? Is it because it's in DC? Seems odd since there are other cathedrals in DC as well. 138.162.128.52 (talk) 14:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bells

How many bells are there in towers? - Prücsök (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See under "Music". There are 10 bells in the ring and 53 in the carillon. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to remove the mean statement about Matthew Shepard being a drug addict from the Bells section? It's irrelevant and inflammatory 😢 2607:FB91:1814:1E73:1C04:7CFF:4CE4:8456 (talk) 10:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done An editor fixed it the next day. Ken Gallager (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting apparent mischief

I have just deleted a paragraph commemorating the large contributions by Frank Q. Nation, of the extraction empire. An Internet search showed no mention of him except this article. I take the impudent suggestion that it is on his account that the church is called National! and that he spent many happy summer vacations in the crypt of Notre Dame de Paris as a thumb on the nose. Please don't let this information back in without firm documentation, which I doubt we will see.

I also deleted the challenge to the mention of intentional flaws because back in my student days (when the Internet was the Arpanet) a professor explained to us in class that the Parthenon doesn't have a straight line in it anywhere. J S Ayer (talk) 01:16, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the vandalism. But your removal of the "original research" tag was inappropriate. There is no citation to a reliable source, making it original research. Sundayclose (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Lawrence Saint Moses Closeup.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Spiritual home for the nation"?

I'm confused about the purpose of the section "Spiritual home for the nation". It seems like the title of the section is making a claim and then trying to support that claim in the details. However, I think designating it as a "spiritual home for the nation" is arbitrary and implies the cathedral is important to people of all religions, which doesn't seem to be the case. I would change the title of that section, but I don't understand what point that particular section is trying to make as it stands. Pythagimedes (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you mean, User:Pythagimedes. I'm not sure if this is any better, but I've changed the section to "National role" since the section seems to be about the fact that the Cathedral sees itself or is seen by others as having a significant albeit unofficial role in national life.Ltwin (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Space window picture

I'm working on an article for the designer of the space window and I noticed the picture on file here is pretty poor quality. Our archives uploaded a slightly better one, but I didn't want to be presumptuous and change it. Sharris2000 (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

The Cathedral should use the Infobox church and put the Infobox NRHP below it. A bunch of the other articles of historic churches and cathedrals are formatted like this (Example: Basilica of the National Shrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary), so it'd make things more consistent and allow for more information to be readily accessible via the infobox. TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]