Central to Baker’s model of so-called “girlfriend theology” is providing girls opportunities to share their stories and reflect theologically on those stories with other adolescent girls and older female mentors. The idea is that this will provide safe space for these young women to be “heard to speech” and give them a way to begin constructing their own theologies that are informed by their lived experiences.

Baker makes the critique that early feminists, in their attempt to re-define women’s place in society, often left their young daughters behind. While she herself is deeply informed by feminism she also draws on other branches that have grown out of western feminist theology. These include mujerista theology which draws on the experience of Latin American women, Asian-feminism, and womanist theology from the experience of African-American women. Baker asserts that these other forms of women’s emancipatory theology all do a better job of recognizing the role of young women in the theological process than traditional western feminism.

Baker’s model for engaging in girlfriend theology is a four-step process of “story theology” intended to be undertaken with a small group of adolescents and a couple of adult mentors. The way Baker describes it seems to presuppose that these mentors are women well-versed in both theological and feminist thought, so that they can help the young women to flesh out the thoughts and ideas that may arise. The first step of the process is hearing the story at hand. For each session one woman in the group is asked to prepare a story from her life to share that they find meaningful, but one they have not already shared and reflected on in other settings. It should also be a story without many overtly religious elements (such as a story of conversion) because that may potentially limit the depth of the conversation to be had. Some examples of stories Baker gives are the death of a childhood friend, a cherished memory of a “perfect day”, an experience of relating in a new way with an adult friend or family member, or another time when God seemed particularly close.

After the story has been shared the group enters into a time of sharing their “near” experiences. These include feelings, memories, and associations brought up by the story and noting key themes, symbols, and images that may arise. The group then moves to sharing “distant” experiences and exploring the meaning of the story. During this time theological themes, connections to biblical stories and Christian practices, and even echoes of other religious traditions may be brought into the conversation. This is the time when the question: “where is God in this story” is considered.

The fourth and final step is preparing to go forth from this time of storytelling and reflecting. The group discusses how they have been changed by the story and in what ways they will look at life a little differently now. They consider how the practice of their faith will be changed by what they have learned. Importantly, there is also recognition that different meanings may exist and they should leave space for those differences.

While I greatly appreciate what Baker has done with this book in providing a lengthy support of why it is important to engage in this sort of theological and spiritual formation exercise with young women, I had some difficulty relating to the book and method much of the time. Being a man, I often felt like an outsider looking in, even though this has not always been my experience with feminist-oriented texts. Despite Baker’s assertion early on that this method can be “translated” for groups other than adolescent girls, I think that the many ways she connects this method with feminism and its importance for young women makes it more difficult to make that translation.

I think that for adolescents this process would definitely work best in single-gender groups because of the complicated social dynamics that are at play during that time in live. For slightly older, more mature young adults, let’s say post-college age, I think that mixed-gender groups would be more acceptable. I recently had the opportunity to participate in an example session of this sort of story theology with a mixed age and gender group of fellow seminarians. Since we were a group that had an established relationship it was probably easier for us to enter into this activity than it would be for a group that did not have a preexisting relationship.

I like Baker’s use of story theology and appreciate her way of claiming this form of group theological reflection as one way to reach out to young women during a time in their lives when they are in need of safe and supportive ways to more deeply explore their own faith and spirituality. And while Baker only addresses how important this is for young women, I think it is just as important for young men. I found that her powerful support for why this is so important for women made it more difficult for me to imagine how it could be translated for men. Story theology is undoubtedly a viable way of engaging in group theological reflection in settings other than adolescent girls, however Baker’s girlfriend theology application is so well-supported by her feminist/womanist approach that translating her ideas to other settings seems very awkward.

To Read or Not to Read: Anyone who anticipates engaging in the ongoing spiritual formation of young women (as a Sunday-school teacher, youth group leader, pastor, etc.) should probably put Doing Girlfriend Theology on their reading list. While it would be most helpful to women who are seeking to take up this task,  anyone would probably find it to be a valuable resource for envisioning and providing ways to help adolescent girls grow spiritually and theologically. Otherwise, while some of the ideas covered in this book could be used more widely, if you are interested in reading more about story theology in general there are likely other books that would be more worthwhile and more easily applied in a broader range of settings.