Reciprocal Church 2 of 4 Who Pays First?
•Descargar como KEY, PDF•
2 recomendaciones•185 vistas
WHAT IF the real church thought the real world mattered to God? Pt. 2 of 4 Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy February 14, 2012 Kevin Yoho, DMin Transformation With a Passion http://kevinyoho.blogspot.com. General Presbyter, Newark Presbytery Synod of the Northeast Presbyterian Church (USA)
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Similar a Reciprocal Church 2 of 4 Who Pays First?
Similar a Reciprocal Church 2 of 4 Who Pays First? (20)
Último
Último (20)
Reciprocal Church 2 of 4 Who Pays First?
- 1. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy February 14, 2012 Kevin Yoho, DMin Transformation With a Passion http://kevinyoho.blogspot.com. General Presbyter, Newark Presbytery Synod of the Northeast Presbyterian Church (USA) For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 2. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy February 14, 2012 Kevin Yoho, DMin Transformation With a Passion http://kevinyoho.blogspot.com. General Presbyter, Newark Presbytery Synod of the Northeast Presbyterian Church (USA) For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 3. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy February 14, 2012 Kevin Yoho, DMin General Presbyter, Newark Presbytery Synod of the Northeast Presbyterian Church (USA) For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 4. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy February 14, 2012 Kevin Yoho, DMin General Presbyter, Newark Presbytery Synod of the Northeast Presbyterian Church (USA) For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 5. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 6. The Reciprocal Church Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy To Grow the Church Deep and Wide For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 7. Where Did The Social Capital Go? For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 8. Where Did The Social Capital Go? The research of Dr. Robert Putnam, Harvard University, helps us quantify forty years of social capital in North America in his two best sellers, Bowling Alone (2001) and Better Together (2004). For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 9. Where Did The Social Capital Go? The research of Dr. Robert Putnam, Harvard University, helps us quantify forty years of social capital in North America in his two best sellers, Bowling Alone (2001) and Better Together (2004). One indicator of volunteerism’s effectiveness is to measure group membership. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 10. Where Did The Social Capital Go? The research of Dr. Robert Putnam, Harvard University, helps us quantify forty years of social capital in North America in his two best sellers, Bowling Alone (2001) and Better Together (2004). One indicator of volunteerism’s effectiveness is to measure group membership. Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, mosques, recreation clubs, political parties, bowling leagues, etc., and the church with all its tribes and varieties. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 11. The Data For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 12. The Data Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style, we learn about Americans' changing behavior over the past thirty years. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 13. The Data Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style, we learn about Americans' changing behavior over the past thirty years. We have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 14. The Data Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style, we learn about Americans' changing behavior over the past thirty years. We have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 15. The Data Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style, we learn about Americans' changing behavior over the past thirty years. We have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 16. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 17. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) 1968 2004 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 18. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) 1968 2004 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 19. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) 1968 2004 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 20. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) 1968 2004 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 21. Group Numbers Total Number of Groups Total Membership in Groups Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. (Illustrates comparative data) 1968 2004 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 22. North Americans Do Not Perceive Value of Participating in Groups For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 23. North Americans Do Not Perceive Value of Participating in Groups Stressors exist for all volunteer associations, including churches: More Groups Fewer Members For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 24. North Americans Do Not Perceive Value of Participating in Groups Stressors exist for all volunteer associations, including churches: More Groups Fewer Members For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 25. Group Trends Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership (millions) All Other Groups Membership (millions) 4 3 2 1 US Population 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 26. Group Trends Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership (millions) All Other Groups Membership (millions) 5 4 3 2 1 US Population 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 27. Group Trends Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership (millions) All Other Groups Membership (millions) 5 4 3 2 1 Presbyterian Church Membership US Population 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 28. Group Trends Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership (millions) All Other Groups Membership (millions) 100 Years Group Membership 5 5 4 4 3 3 Aggregate Group Membership 2 1 Presbyterian Church Membership US Population 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 29. Group Trends Presbyterian Church (USA) Membership (millions) All Other Groups Membership (millions) 100 Years Group Membership 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 1 US Population 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 30. The Reciprocal Church Part 2: Who Pays First? Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 31. The Reciprocal Church Part 2: Who Pays First? Reversing the Decline of the Presbyterian Church: Addressing the Cause, Practicing the Remedy To Grow the Church Deep and Wide For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 32. Consider this conversation… For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 33. Consider this conversation… A Government support? No. Of course not. A Property Taxes? No. Not at all. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 34. Fact: In Newark Presbytery Alone For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 35. Fact: In Newark Presbytery Alone The equivalent exemption in property taxes for the presbytery’s thirty-eight congregational sites exceeds… $2,000,000 Per Year ! For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 36. Missional Reciprocity Opportunity For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 37. Missional Reciprocity Opportunity Decades ago, it was clear that any church in the community added value to the community that could be measured as social capital. Tax exemption can only be understood in light of the principle of reciprocity. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 38. Missional Reciprocity Opportunity It is a fair question to ask our congregations, “In what ways does the community receive a reciprocal value in services equal to the “gift” of property tax relief from the municipalities?” This is the opportunity! For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
- 39. Missional Reciprocity Opportunity Most congregations return something to the community. The missional challenge is to invite every congregation to be accountable in their ministry and mission to give, in a reciprocal way, to their own community. For more information about the Reciprocal Church, please contact the author, Dr. Kevin Yoho kevin@newarkpresbytery.org .
Notas del editor
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. \nSlide Point:\nThe point is that there are more groups, but dramatically fewer members. The Moveable Feast offers resources to help reverse these discoveries.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\nSource Data:\nhttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nKevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n\n\n
- Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. \nSlide Point:\nThe point is that there are more groups, but dramatically fewer members. The Moveable Feast offers resources to help reverse these discoveries.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\nSource Data:\nhttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nKevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n\n\n
- Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. \nSlide Point:\nThe point is that there are more groups, but dramatically fewer members. The Moveable Feast offers resources to help reverse these discoveries.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\nSource Data:\nhttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nKevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n\n\n
- Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. \nSlide Point:\nThe point is that there are more groups, but dramatically fewer members. The Moveable Feast offers resources to help reverse these discoveries.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\nSource Data:\nhttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nKevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n\n\n
- Groups include all voluntary associations such as the PTA, AMA, synagogues, churches, recreation clubs, political parties, and bowling leagues, etc. \nSlide Point:\nThe point is that there are more groups, but dramatically fewer members. The Moveable Feast offers resources to help reverse these discoveries.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\nSource Data:\nhttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nKevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n\n\n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Slide Point:\nThe point is that Presbyterian Church membership decline is NOT a Presbyterian problem, but a sociological one.\nIt is critical in the transformation process to put “our” decline in its social context so that congregational responses to this decline can be relevant, effective, and contextually relevant. The negativity and defensiveness that often describes the PC(USA) membership and leadership can be mitigated and even turned around to positive and creative responses when we realize that only through contextual and collaborative transformation efforts can these trends be reversed.\n\nBased on statistical research published of Dr. Robert D. Putnam (Harvard University) in his Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (2001) and Better Together: Restoring the American Community (2004). Drawing on vast data from the Roper Social and Political Trends and the DDB Needham Life Style -- surveys that report in detail on Americans' changing behavior over the past twenty-five years -- Putnam shows how we have become increasingly disconnected from family, friends, neighbors, and social structures, whether the PTA, church, recreation clubs, political parties, or bowling leagues. Our shrinking access to the "social capital" that is the reward of communal activity and community sharing is a serious threat to our civic and personal health. Congregations are part of this trend of decline shared with all other groups. \n\n\nSource Data:\nPresbyterian Church data is in millions of members, composited to include various streams of PC(USA). data sets found at: datahttp://www.thearda.com/Denoms/Families/Trees/familytree_presbyterian.asp\nAll Other Group Data: data is 10x million of members, Robert Putnam, data sets found at: http://www.bowlingalone.com/data.php3\n\nFor more information and the missional implications for the PC(USA), please contact the author:\nDr. Kevin Yoho, General Presbyter\nNewark Presbytery\n973.429.2500 office\n201.207.1544 mobile\nkevin@newarkpresbytery.org\n\n
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- Social networks have value\nSocial capital refers to the collective value of all people in social networks and the benefits from these networks to do things for each other (norms of reciprocity).\n\n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- \n