Ed Stetzer: "Lost and Found" A Review
Posted by Dave Miller in Church & Missions
Stetzer, Ed, Stanley Richie, and Hayes, Jason. Lost and Found, The Younger Unchurched an the Churches that Reach Them. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Co. 2009, 232 Pages.
Have you noticed how hard it is to reach twenty-somethings today? Have you become alarmed at how many kids leave the church behind when they become adults. Our children’s programs and youth ministries are bursting at the seams, but when those kids hit college, they often hit the streets and are lost to the church. Ed Stetzer, with Richie Stanly and Jason Hayes, has written a book that will help those who read it, and digest its suggestions, to be more effective in reaching the younger unchurched in our communities.
Ed Stetzer is the director of Lifeway Research and an active blogger. Richie Stanley is team leader at NAMB’s Center for Missional Research and Jason Hayes is the Young Adult Ministry Specialist at Lifeway. They conducted extensive interviews with adults under the age of 30 who are not involved with a church, exploring their beliefs, their viewpoints, their opinions about the church, and what churches might do to reach them. This book presents their research.
I highly recommend this book to every pastor and church leader who wishes to have a more effective ministry to younger adults. It is very well-written, even entertaining – somewhat of a surprise for a book based on scientific research. The “how-to” section at the end is both practical and biblical.
Overview
Stetzer and his associates talked to over 1000 unchurched adults under the age of 30. I have no expertise on polling or statistics, but I would guess that more than qualifies as a scientific sample. Part 1 of the book presents this research. They found that not all young unchurched are created equal. They identified four major types: the “always unchurched” who have never been involved in a church, the people, the “de-churched” who grew up in church but no longer attend, the “friendly unchurched” who do not attend but are not hostile, and the “hostile unchurched” who are angry at the church or had a negative experience in church that left them bitter.
Stetzer weaves a fictional storyline throughout the book which illustrates these four types of people. A young Christian named Mitch is attempting to reach four unchurched friends: Ally (the always unchurched), Dean (the de-churched), Aaron (friendly unchurched) and Jason (hostile unchurched). Reading the storyline helps to make these categories more easily identifiable.
The second chapter presents the results of the research. What do they believe about God, about Jesus, about spirituality? What do they think of the church? Is there anything the church can do to motivate them to attend? One reading will not digest the information in this chapter.
The third chapter is a shocker. It compares the attitudes of this younger generation of the unchurched with older unchurched people. I expected to read that the younger unchurched were more hostile toward the church than their older counterparts. The opposite is true. There seems to be an openness to an authentic ministry from a church. Things are not hopeless.
Part 2 presents the results of another poll, an extensive survey of the attitudes of young adults. It identifies four key values of young people today: community, depth, responsibility and connection. A chapter is devoted to each of these.
The section on “depth” is worth the cost of the book. Young people today do not want neatly packaged theology with pat, easy answers to difficult questions – the kind this preacher’s kid used to give in Sunday School. Clichés will not reach these people. They want real answers from God’s Word about the very real problems they face.
There is a powerful section in this chapter comparing the simplistic values and themes of TV sitcoms and the way many churches function. Some humor, a good story or two, a minor conflict and a happy ending – the sitcom church. Wow!
Part 3 explores the “how-to’s” of reaching a younger, unchurched generation. Again, there is a chapter devoted to dealing with each of the four key values identified in Part 2.
Perspectives
Ed Stetzer is a genius – he is able to make statistics interesting! He speaks with both authority and humility. His research seems (to this amateur) to be solid and honest. But he is careful not to use research as the basis of truth. He recognizes that truth comes from God’s Word – something this book is careful to remember. He is not trying to derive truth from statistics, but to use his research to show the church how to communicate its eternal truth more clearly.
For example, the research made it clear that the younger unchurched are turned off by the condemnation of homosexual behavior and the refusal to ordain women as pastors. But there is no suggestion that we compromise scripture to increase our appeal.
Several findings of their research surprised me. Young adults have a very positive (though often theologically weak) view of Christ. It is not the Savior they have a problem with, but the perception of hypocrisy, legalism, shallowness and irrelevance of churches. Is that an accurate sentiment? Maybe yes, maybe no – but it is a common perception, one we must deal with if we want to reach these people.
I was also surprised to find that music was not one of the key issues in young people’s minds. They wanted authenticity, community, depth, truth and responsibility more than they wanted rock-and-roll.
This is not a book to be read once. It is a book to be slowly digested and considered over time. Buy it. Read it. Think about it. Pray about it. Implement its recommendations. The younger unchurched in your community will receive better ministry if we do.



So, Dave, what are to do about this statement…”For example, the research made it clear that the younger unchurched are turned off by the condemnation of homosexual behavior and the refusal to ordain women as pastors?” So, in effect, what this book is saying, without saying it bluntly, is to not preach on the sin of homosexuality, and dont teach the parts of the Bible that deal with not ordaining women as Pastors? After all, the young crowd wont like it. Well, what else do they not like? After all, if we want to reach young people, maybe there’s some more things that we need to not ever mention which the Bible clearly teaches.
I guess, Dave, that I would have to submit that if the “young crowd,” whoever that is that Ed Stetzer has interviewed, do not like the Bible’s teaching, that we stick with it. That we teach and preach it anyway. Maybe, just maybe, the Holy Spirit will change thier heart like He did mine. I used to think wrong about a lot of things before I got saved…back when I was a young man. There were many things in the Bible that I didnt like, as a young man. But, after I got saved, I willingly accepted these things as truth in order to please my Lord. I can remember hearing the preacher of a big Baptist Church in Memphis saying a lot of things that I didnt want to hear as a rebellious, sinful, young man. And then, after my family moved to a little town in W. TN, and they started going to a small Baptist Church, the preacher there said a lot of things that I didnt like to hear…things that I really didnt want to hear. But, I heard them, and they stuck with me…convicting me of the truth. I’m glad that the Pastors of the big and the small Churches that I attended as a young man stuck with sound preaching and teaching. I’m glad that they didnt let stats, or what the “young crowd” thought, dictate thier preaching.
Anyway, may we all be faithful to God…truly faithful to His Word. Let the stats be what they are…that’s up to a Sovereign God doing His work in this world. And, if old people dont want to hear it… preach it anyway. If young people dont want to hear it…preach it anyway. If middle age people with big bellies dont want to hear it…then preach it anyway. And, trust God for the results.
David
David, you might want to go back an read the review again.
My point was that I appreciated the book because even though research showed that the common SBC viewpoints on homosexuality and women’s ordination are unpopular, that he did not recommend changing to fit culture.
After mentioning this research, I said, “But there is no suggestion that we compromise scripture to increase our appeal.”
A Note to All,
I don’t know if the problem identified in Volfan’s comment above is with his reading or my writing. He took exactly the opposite point from what I intended.
Let me be unequivocal and clear – Ed Stetzer and the other authors stuck to their biblical guns, even when research indicated the young unchurched might not like it. That was my point, I appreciated that he didn’t re-interpret the Bible based on statistical analysis.
If I did not make that clear above, I apologize to Mr. Stetzer and the others and my my intent clear here.
Dave,
Nice job with the review. Can you share further as to what you gleaned from reading the book pertaining to suggested “how to’s”? I plan on picking up the book and am curious about those who read it and their application of or thoughts pertaining to application of.
I do really like your approach to the review!
Dave,
I think you were clear in the review. It looks like VolFan probably just missed your point; but, then again, we all do that every now and then, it seems to me. It looks like we all (including Ed Stetzer and his co-authors) are on the same page regarding the importance of not compromising on the Word of God.
I am intrigued by the part about “community, depth, responsibility and connection.” If those are truly the values of the younger generation (and I don’t have any reason to question that), it looks like they may in some way be prophetically calling the church back to some things it desperately needs, not only to better reach the younger generation but also to be more biblically authentic. I am excited about what God is doing through the younger generation, and will do in the years ahead, Lord willing, to breathe new life into His church.
And while I certainly agree that we must not compromise biblical teaching on issues such as homosexuality and church leadership roles for women, I think we can also learn something from the sensitivity of the younger generation regarding these issues. It is important that we learn to hold to truth in a redemptive manner that communicates grace and not judgment. No doubt, the proper balance is hard to maintain. But God is able to lead us to it as we continue to seek Him with all our hearts.
Thanks for the review. I look forward to reading the book whenever I can find the time.
Tim, there were so many suggestions on the “how-to” section, that I didn’t get into it in too much detail. I suspect it might be the kind of thing where you read the section and I read it, and two suggestions really strike you and two different ones strike me. The how-to part needs digesting.
I think a church staff (and others) reading this book together and going over it in depth would be a great exercise.
David, you are right – I found the research interesting, but the four values section was deeply intriguing. Again, as I said, the “depth” chapter was probably my favorite in the whole book.
I think that you hit at the key – if the church will be the church as it was meant to be, not just a reflection of Bible Belt culture, it might have a greater appeal.
I got me a gravatar!
Dave and David,
I guess I did take it wrong. At least, I hope I did. I guess what I said comes out of all those statements by people in conferences and in the blog world about how we need to not preach on this, or soften up on that, in order to reach the young crowd. Or, we need to not take such stands against liquor, or speak out on homosexuality, because the young crowd gets turned off.
I know of a large Church in a large city where the visiting Evangelist was told to not preach on sin, nor judgement, nor hell on Sunday morning, because it might turn some of the Sunday morning crowd off. And, they were trying to be more seeker sensitive.
I know of a blogger who mentions often that our stand on not ordaining women is “holding back the SBC.” That this stand is somehow causing the SBC to not go forward. That it will lead us to decline, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
Right now, I know of a study being done in the TN Baptist Convention, where they’re asking lost people to tell us what would be good ways to reach lost people, or what would be a turnoff, or something. I mean, we’re asking lost people! to tell us! And, while this may be interesting to know and to hear what they say, I can just see a new witnessing method being developed out of this. I can just see some people in SBC life saying, “See, we dont need to be talking that much about sin and hell…it’s turning people off.” Or, something else silly and compromising like that.
So, I guess when I saw this part of the study. I jumped the gun based on my previous experiences with stats and comments from people. And, I guess that I just have a synical attitude about all of these studies to try to show us how to do Church, anyway…even though my college degree is in sociology with a minor in psychology. It just kind of rubs me the wrong way to let stats and studies dictate to us how to do Church, rather than relying on the Bible and the Holy Spirit…to preach and worship and be led by God’s Spirit seems to me to be the better way.
David
Dave,
BTW, the gravatar is terrible!
I mean, Yankees. I’ve never heard of a good comment containing the word Yankees.
David
David,
Your words about the Yankees prove you are in fact liberal!!!!
Now my Yankee gravatar has disappeared – I am bereft.
Dave,
The difference is that you were logged into the site, which probably means your sbcimpact e-mail address is being seen by Gravatar on the posts that are missing one. If you set up that e-mail address at the gravatar site as well as the other, you’ll be back in action with your misguided avatar…
John,
Why did you have to tell him? I was glad that his Yankee gravatar left. Thanks a lot.
David
Testing…one…two…three
John is right again – if he’d only learn to love the Yankees
Brother Dave,
Thanks for the review,…. I may try to get this book in the near future. The statistics sound interesting and should be informative. Ed and the guys certainly push out a lot of stuff.
Blessings,
Chris
Dave,
I guess I’m seeing this all backwards and will have to check out the book for myself. It would seem to me that the people who aren’t going to church is the wrong crowd to be surveying. I mean, it’s like doing market research for Ford by asking Chrysler and GM drivers what they don’t like about Fords. The flaw in our thinking is that if we make Fords more like Chryslers and GMs that we will attract those buyers. From my understanding of how product development and marketing works, this is a fast-track to irrelevance and corporate suicide.
I agree that asking people why they don’t go to church will help us understand people who are not going to church. I appreciate the guys finding out the information you posted. However, it doesn’t follow that the authors can derive a “How to” section from the findings of people who aren’t using the product. We don’t ask bald men how to improve hair care products. We don’t survey cat owners for their ideas on how to improve dog food packaging. So why would a survey of people who don’t come to church tell us anything about why people DO come to church?
Here’s the unspoken assumption – if we fix what is wrong with the church as identified by these various groups of non-attenders, then they will start attending church. Why do we believe this? I don’t have a belief that cat owners are going to buy dog food even if I take their advice on how to improve the packaging. Why would I think that the advice of non-attenders is going to enhance attendance? Even if we fixed everything that is “wrong” with church for this set, we still have not put in what is “right.”
I presented your review to my Sunday School class of college kids, and then I asked them, “So why are you here?” The overwhelming sentiment is that there was somehow a sense of obligation that they needed to be there. One or two voiced an interest in learning about the Bible and the newest student who was recently saved in the past year said he likes the people at church. Admittedly, this is a non-scientific poll, but i think it’s interesting to note that not one thing that brought them to church is addressed in the critique Ed & Co. level against the church.
Suffice to say, identifying what folks don’t like and wish we would do different is insufficient to create a strong, compelling reason for them to come to church. I think we are laboring under a delusion if we think “fixing” what is “wrong” with church will appeal to 20-somethings. Our chruch’s 20-somethings all recognize the “broken” things at our church, but that hasn’t prevented them from coming. Maybe we should look at why people DO come to church and put more of THAT in the service than what people who don’t come wish was there.
The best auto designs come not from non-drivers of the products but from the product’s biggest fans. Maybe it’s about time we surveyed the fans of church and see what they like most and give them mo’ better of that.
Rick:
You are on to something!
It would be interesting to have a formal survey of “young adults” that currently DO attend church to see what they like and dislike.
Stetzer and Co. should survey the “young attender group” and compare/contrast the results with the survey from same age group that don’t attend.
I think there is validity to your analogy regarding car designs. People who like a certain car really make a significant “comittment” to driving that car. Why else would my wife and I pay $58K for a new Corvette and travel all the way to Bowling Green KY to watch them build them while taking factory delivery on our new car. We probably wouldn’t walk across the street to get a new T-Bird. [As you will recall Ford discontinued their "resurrected" T-Bird and I don't think there is much Ford could have done to woo many Vette drivers to their brand]
It was a “million years ago” when I took marketing while working on my MBA. As I recall, the way to keep your product going is to pay attention to your core constituency while adding “converts” at the margin. Don’t try to be “all things to all people” or you will kill your brand. You have to do a “cost/benefit” analysis when making changes.
One possibility is doing “niche branding” so you can attract new people without cannibalizing your existing customers. As far as I know this has only been marginally successful in the local church context.
Roger Simpson Oklahoma City OK
Brother Roger,
You may want to check with the Apostle Paul and see if he agrees or if this one is syncretistic thinking ;^)
If communicating the Gospel in a way that makes sense to those in our communities is important to us, then we’d better find out how they view us, the world, God and themselves. Then go to the Holy Scriptures to figure out how God addresses these things. This is no different than the preacher who has deep insight into his congregation and preaches using relevant texts from the Holy Scriptures and illustrations that make sense to his audience.
Peace to you brother,
From the Middle East
FTME
When you are starting something from scratch you look at your target audience (which may be a subset of the total population). In your case, you are probably targeting “people of Islamic background in the Near East” not Wall St. Bankers or USA inner-city residents.
When you already have some “customers” then you have a more complex task. I think we would both agree that it “cultural trappings” may be a variable that can be adjusted in order to reach a target group. When it is the case that you have two target groups — one that are your current members and another in the community that you are trying to reach — then you have to do a tradeoff. Or at least you may have to simultaneously support two “niche brands”. I’ve seen this myself –up close and personal — where churches change things to reach out to certain groups (by way for example of certain musical styles) with no apparent cost/benefit analysis as to the total result. I think all would agree that the goal is to reach new demographic groups WHILE STILL KEEPING your current demographic groups. I believe that a systems approach has to be used not just looking at the margin.
One of the things I like about this book is that it did not claim to be the final word on all things. They did research, reported the results and drew conclusions.
But they did not lay claim to final truth or anything. I found it to be interesting research and helpful conclusions.
But, I agree that a great follow-up would be research into young people the same age who are active and involved at church. That would make a wonderful companion piece.
Brother Roger,
Not to be contentious, but if the community does not understand the Gospel message we are proclaiming, there is a major problem. I’m not speaking so much with regard to music style or clothing, but to what questions we are answering when communicating the Gospel. It is my experience, albeit minimal, that most postmoderns are asking different questions, not less spiritual… just different, than what many evangelical churches are answering. We do need to listen!! But not for how to get them into church… rather, to find out how sin is affecting them and in what ways God is already speaking to them.
Peace to you brother,
From the Middle East
PS – My answer to your problem in #20 above: Quit trying to make a local congregation bigger and plant a new one.
FTME:
I agree. Setting up a new “congregation” as you suggest may sometimes be the best move in order to reach a new demographic. To use marketing lingo that would be the might be the “purest” response in terms of responding to a “niche” market segment.
In regard to “postmoderns”: I don’t know enough about them to comment. As I understand “postmodernism” it posits that rational thought is subordinate to subjectivity. [At least that's my take-away of what Karl Barth says] I really don’t know how that plays out in terms of any institutional — or non-institutional — church setting.
I think one aspect of postmodernism is that it is impossible in principle to know truth and/or there is no such thing as truth. In this case, it seems to me that Christianity (whose bedrock is a set of propositional truth-claims) would be a hard sell.
I have not read Stetzer’s book so I don’t know how many — if any — of the “20 somethings” he polled are postmoderns.
My previous comment (#23) incorrectly introduces the name of Karl Barth into the discussion of postmodernism. My error was that I wrongly associating Barth with postmodernism rather than with neo-orthodoxy.
[...] Review of Lost and Found by Ed Stezter at SBC Impact. Just read the [...]