This is not at all the book I expected it to be, and in a lot of ways I think it was actually much better. I went into it expecting a pretty distinctly academic, scholarly examination of the various atonement theologies that exist, a subsequent critique of them, and then the presentation of one that works. It sounds as though the co-authors also began this project with similar intentions, before realizing that in doing so they would be sucking the life out from what they hoped to create, and also fail to honor their lived experiences that catalyzed the project in the first place. What we have instead, then, is essentially two interwoven memoirs that are laced with gorgeously written theological musings throughout, which made for an unexpectedly moving and intimate read for someone going in anticipating purely scholastic theology!
The first section of the memoir, Rebecca's initial chapter, does somewhat provide the "presentation and takedown" I was expecting of other atonement theologies via her sermon series, which works well as an introduction to their discussion and a framing device for her chapter...but not necessarily as a fair introduction to those understandings of what occurred on the Cross. I was especially frustrated by the lack of nuance or articulation in the presentation of a liberation theology reading as well as Moltmann's "God on the Cross" understanding (which, as an aside, I still have trouble differentiating from her own take even after she explicitly denounces his later on). And from there I would say the book honestly does lose focus somewhat, focusing in on the unique and compelling lives of the co-authors rather than continuing to remain fixed on the stated intention.
While this could be seen as a fair criticism, it just worked really well. Because suffering is such a human experience and really only makes sense within that context, it wouldn't have worked to just read their musings on it as a theoretical concept - that already exists in abundance, primarily from straight white men. One could say this is the practice of feminist scholarship at its finest, prioritizing the lived experiences of women as the primary material and allowing insights and ideas and conclusions to be drawn directly from that. Although I will admit that I found Rebecca's story more immediately relevant to their theological exploration, I was still really interested in following Rita's narrative given my interests in theological academia.
As other reviewers have commented, it would have been nice to be left with a more satisfying, concrete conclusion - a formulaic theology of atonement to hold up against the ones they critiqued. The women themselves named at various points that they were tearing everything apart and feared there would be nothing new to build in its place, and to some degree that seems to be the case. From what I recall, they never walked us through an explicit interpretation of what occurred on the Cross and what its relevance is to Christians today and their understanding of salvation and suffering.
Definitively, they rebuked more conservative theologies (esp penal substation), exposing the God inherent to them to be a a cruel child abuser and rejecting the insidious ways they encourage suffering as a badge of honor or test of ones faith as counter-effective to the call to life all humans have. However, this only works for those experiencing avoidable suffering, and we are left wondering what those in a different context should consider? I felt frustration here, empathizing with the importance of avoiding an encouragement to suffer when it can be avoided but feeling as though the ways God identifies with and connects to those in suffering was being undermined. Rebecca herself, sandwiched in between her rejection of the idea that God uses suffering to encounter us, names that her encounter with God was at her moment of greatest earlier suffering. So I don't know what to make of that entirely.
From what I surmised, however, I think it's fair to suggest they came to a conclusion in line with a Process theology reading of Moltmann that insists God was immanently and intimately present on the Cross and NOT in control of or desiring that to happen. They certainly affirmed in much clearer terms the power of Presence in the face of suffering as the source of healing and growth, and also critically named the need for mourning and lamenting suffering rather than glorifying it as a sacrificial action of honor. And I can dig that.