The rest of this book is pretty much some appendix material which make some notes on the participants in the study and the authors. There is also a really good bibliography of sources and such that were referenced during the study. The two short biographies of the writers were fascinating in their own right. Linda was indeed a person who moved from faith to a kind of agnosticism but Daniel was clearly pretty much a skeptic out of the box so to speak. Looking back though I can see one particular weakness in this study and another flaw.
The weakness is that given the nature of this study there was only one direction that was researched. The only issue looked at was clergy who became disenchanted with faith and left their faith. The other direction could have been looked at which would have given the study a better perspective. It might have even reinforced their point about faith being something that is difficult to hold if they could have not found too many people who left being atheists or agnostics and became people of faith to the point of becoming clergy. If however there was just as much response to such an idea to what they did do, it would simply show that some people shift from faith to no faith and others move from no faith to faith. This leads to the other flaw of the book and the study.
The authors assume that the right thing to happen to a person is to move from faith to non-faith. They never even consider this is not the right direction to move. There is definitely a bias to the study that colors it and there is also another deadly assumption about the New Transparency and its effect. The authors both assume that the New Transparency only effects people of faith but in truth the overflow of information through the internet affects everyone, including the New Atheists. Everyone is going to be challenged by the New Transparency not just people of faith but also people who do not have faith. There is not just information on the problems of the bible and faith out there but there is also a counter to all of them out their as well on the internet. Sorry this is not a one way street but the internet is multiple avenues that address multiple questions. Everyone is going to have to adapt or die, not just theists.
That said this study accomplishes a lot of things that are indeed good. It demonstrates the thinking process of a clergy person that leaves their faith and some of the practical problems of the pulpit. It is not just that though, the book also shows how denominations are totally ill-equipped for dealing with this problem. Not one clergy person in their study stated they felt comfortable coming forward with doubts to their leadership and that is just plain sad. It also demonstrates that most denominations have little tolerance for this, something I personally experienced, for difference of opinion on theology or apologetics. The religious movements all try to indoctrinate instead of allow a person to work through things. there is no freedom for the seeker in most denominations.
I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in the particular problems of clergy who find themselves losing faith and the problems they face when this happens. It is also a good example of qualitative research but also is very much an example of the flaws of such research and its limitations. I enjoyed reading it but at the same time I feel it is biased one way but then again most Christian stuff I read is pretty biased as well.