find ourselves in the United States in 2016–17. In this context, what does it mean to consider God without the framework of sovereignty?

The entire discussion was opened with a keynote statement by J. Kameron Carter, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology and Black Church Studies at the Duke Divinity School. Carter works in the field of African American Diaspora studies, with considerable attention to issues facing the black church in the United States, and brings to the table historical, literary, and poetic concepts from a broad range of cultures. Let it be said—it took a while for many in the room to “catch on” to what Carter was saying, thus the initial “stunned silence” reaction.

But Jay (as he likes to be called) has a winsome manner, and we werebased on this hierarchical concept, including the justification for slavery, which is deeply encased in the whole concept of ownership. When the slave is considered to be the owner’s property, the slave’s humanity disappears, and when the slave decides to become a fugitive, the slave is actually stealing the rightful property of the owner. The slave becomes a thief by affirming his own selfhood. As Jay points out, for Anselm it was the work of the devil that inspired the fugitive, and redemption is only realized when the rightful property of the master is recovered and restored to its owner.

Anselm’s concepts of the fugitive and ownership became the structure within which his whole creedal theology was fashioned: just put your previously unexamined assumptions aside and think about (go