In his conclusion, Chappell admits: "Approaching this story for the first time as an atheist, I was surprised and skeptical to hear so many of my subjects – whom I admired from afar – expressing what Bayard Rustin called “fundamentalist” views Chappell goes on to describe his reluctance to believe his subject's testimony of “miracles” were it not for their frequency and key to belief. of its subject's choices. In a catch-22 situation, perhaps only an atheist could have told this story with an objective mind, but perhaps a religious mind could have given more clarity to certain aspects. Clearly a well-researched book, A Stone of Hope is not, however, a book easily understood by someone unfamiliar with or even remotely interested in the civil rights movement of the twentieth century. Chappell obviously has an excellent grasp of the material, but seems to have difficulty conveying it to the reader in one way that is interesting and recognizable. It is more a book of general theories than facts, which is more difficult