Author’s Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the official position or views of Baylor University.
The Memorial to Enslaved Persons at Baylor University, a private Christian university in Waco, Texas, represents an effort to acknowledge and make amends for the university’s historical ties to the objectively evil act of chattel slavery. It seeks to do so by recognizing human beings whose forced labor contributed to the university’s 1845 founding and construction in Independence, Texas, before the Emancipation Proclamation, the Reconstruction Amendments, and the campus’s relocation to Waco in 1886. While the memorial understandably aims to repent for historical injustice, its name falls short of reckoning with the true nature of repentance (Mark 1:15), instead kicking the proverbial can of reconciliation down an infinitely regressive road and framing those it means to honor in a diminished and reductive way.
A more fitting title would be one that reflects the inherent and liberated state of human beings, aligning more coherently with good theological, philosophical, and practical principles. It would expansively elucidate God’s grace, focus on a clear and ideal objective, and accurately embody the universal dignity and respect owed to those who were once enslaved on a Baylor campus and should not now be “enslaved” on another. This position is grounded in the truth, as revealed in the Word of God: “Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin … So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed” (John 8:34-36, NRSVUE). The memorial’s name should thus proclaim the gospel and God’s promise of liberation, reflecting His objective design for all humanity rather than humanity’s subjective designs for each other.
Enslavement as a Universal Human Condition
While the term “enslaved persons,” as an alternative to “slaves,” has been used throughout history to describe human beings treated as property by others, at a deeper philosophical and Christian theological level, the term applies universally to all humans, past and present (Romans 6:16). Every human being has been and is enslaved—whether by unnatural chains and dependencies fabricated by men, or to God. As the Apostle Paul explains in his letter to the Romans, “But thanks be to God that you who were slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted and that you, having been set free from sin, have become enslaved to righteousness” (Romans 6:17-18). Therefore, at first glance, a memorial to enslaved persons—though Baylor does not intend it this way—might be interpreted as a tribute to all victims of sin or to those who willfully and rightly chose submission to Jesus Christ. However, this theological perspective of enslavement does not align with the memorial’s focus on a specific group of individuals who endured chattel slavery in Independence, Texas.
The paradoxical nature of enslavement within a Christian worldview should make one consider the depth and quality of thought that a Memorial to Enslaved Persons will evoke. It is one thing to present the condition of enslavement to elicit sympathy and ask visitors to “never forget” the past; it is another to present enslavement and hope it inspires visions of liberation for the future. Yet, alternatively, it is a far greater, more profound, and constructive endeavor to present the condition of liberation as the beginning and ultimate end of introspection, inviting and challenging visitors to contemplate the man-made chaos and horrors that always arise when liberty is forsaken and the sacrificial cost required to reclaim it. A title that emphasizes freedom would encourage and guide visitors through these deeper, more complex, and critically important thoughts (Philippians 4:8).
[RELATED: ‘A Slave to DEI’—Baylor Twists Scripture to Justify Slavery Memorial]
Dignified Labels and Names
In a secular and modern relativist context, the memorial may undermine its own intent by diminishing the groups and individuals it seeks to memorialize—assuming, of course, the secular relativist deems chattel slavery to be evil.
In that context, “enslaved” remains a label used by humans to subjugate other human beings. In reality, it is not a label that accurately or fairly describes who those humans were, nor who they are in relation to their fellow man. Postmodern relativists may struggle with this, but a community in Christ should know better, as Paul rebuked subjectivity to man and correctly wrote, “There is no longer Jew or Greek; there is no longer slave or free; there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:23-28). The individuals and groups that the memorial intends to honor are all children of God—created in His image (Genesis 1:26-28), endowed with freedom and dignity—and should be memorialized accordingly.
Just as God will bestow new names to signify higher callings (Genesis 32:28; Revelation 2:17), Baylor can reconsider the memorial’s name, transforming it and those it seeks to remember from symbols of subjective property into image bearers of divine liberation. Doing so could break chains forged by man’s sin and courageously declare a timeless and objective message of hope and salvation, a call to repentance, redemption, reconciliation, and true freedom for all.
Redemption over Wounds
It is also essential to consider that true identity is not found in mortal wounds, but in redemption.
As Paul writes, “So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; look, new things have come into being” (2 Corinthians 5:17). A memorial centered on the enslaved, who should be allowed to rest in peace, risks reviving old wounds and hindering new generations from experiencing healing, renewal, and reconciliation. Instead, such a focus will unintentionally foster a corrosive and infinitely regressive form of condemnation, forcing a community to remain trapped in the shadows of the past, unable to move toward the light of liberty and grace afforded by Christ’s finished work on the cross (Hebrews 12:14-15; Colossians 2:13-15).
An End to Suffering
Objections to recentering the memorial on liberation are understandable and must be addressed, as denying humanity’s free will, agency, and the undue suffering it causes should not be minimized or ignored. Therefore, for each concern, it is imperative to think deeply about what will convey the greatest amount of dignity and respect, and ultimately bring an end to past, present, and future suffering.
Some may argue that renaming the memorial would divert attention or undermine the suffering of those who endured the brutal system of chattel slavery. However, it must be known that an objectively evil act or practice, such as chattel slavery, cannot be undermined, as it already embodies the depths of human depravity. Such evil cannot be overcome with evil (Romans 12:17,21), or the memorialization thereof, but only with the grace of Jesus Christ, without which unresolved evil will only sustain condemnation (Romans 8:1).
Also, to the fullest extent that inscribed brick and metal can provide insight into historical experiences, the memorial itself will remain a powerful tribute to those who suffered under chattel slavery. An inverse title, though distinct, would highlight the memorial’s broader, non-physical significance, encompassing not only a painful past but also a hopeful present and future. This triune focus, offered via liberation and not enslavement, aligns practically as seen, for example, with the Emancipation and Freedom Monument in Richmond, Virginia, and the National Memorial for Peace and Justice, and Freedom Monument Sculpture Park at Equal Justice Initiative’s Legacy Sites in Montgomery, Alabama.
Others may express concern that if the title or theme is influenced by or dependent upon Christian theology, then it presumes that those who were enslaved were spiritually liberated through Christ, which might not align with their individual beliefs. Notably, the struggle to know God through Christ is not new and is one that intimately links humans throughout all of history. Different beliefs should not stop a community committed to Christ from boldly sharing that “The Lord is near to the brokenhearted and saves the crushed in spirit” (Psalm 34:18) and “is not far from each of us” (Acts 17:26–28). “And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us, and in cleansing their hearts by faith he has made no distinction between them and us” (Acts 15:8–9; Acts 2:17).
Like the Israelites in Egypt (Exodus 2:23–25), those who were enslaved by their fellow man in 19th-century Texas, even if they did not know the name of Christ, possessed an enduring dignity and resilience. Their unyielding spirit defied the evils forced upon them, laying the foundation for future generations to live free from overt human bondage. Today, their legacy is honored through solemn traditions and monuments, a testament to their perseverance and an eternal vision of liberation.
Further, some may object that, in a literal and secular sense, a memorial to liberated persons excludes those who simply “were not liberated.” If true, it is then even more critical for a Christian university, where the truth is exalted above worldly perspectives, to honor the natural freedom denied to those who were enslaved, and to remember them not in the same exact way as their finite oppressors, but as God sees them: inherently free. Such a divine perspective affirms a truth far greater and more enduring than any earthly circumstance, a truth rooted not in temporal suffering, but in the hope and eternal glory that awaits beyond it (Romans 8:18).
Finally, an objection to memorializing human beings as “liberated” could be that it removes the “healthy tension” that a Memorial to Enslaved Persons creates. That is a tension intended to challenge those who may be uncomfortable with or unwilling to acknowledge the pervasive reality of chattel slavery. Indeed, if tension or the acknowledgment of reality is an objective, then nothing in this fallen world is more challenging, causes more tension, or is in greater need of acknowledgment than the wickedness of man and the goodness of God (Matthew 10:34-36; John 3:19-20; Titus 3:3-5). So, in choosing between a heavenly good (e.g., liberation from human oppression) and a worldly evil (e.g., enslavement to humans) as the source of tension, one can and should choose good (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22; Galatians 5:1). Moreover, regarding the introspective challenges presented by a title, while a Memorial to Enslaved Persons offers a historical challenge, a memorial to “liberated” persons provides both a historical and eternal challenge, along with its solution—a solution so pure and simple, yet one that far too many, blinded by the world, refuse to accept (2 Corinthians 4:4).
There is no dispute that the men and women whose labor built Baylor’s original campus endured profound suffering while enslaved to man. But for God’s sacrifice, how long must they remain that way?
Darkness to Light
This is not a call to erase history or tuck human sinfulness neatly out of sight. Rather, it is a call to let light shine out of darkness (Genesis 1:2-3; 2 Corinthians 4:5-6).
The pain of those who suffered human oppression must be acknowledged, but it can and should be done in the context of truth and the gospel’s redemptive message. A memorial framed around liberation will still honor those oppressed by evil, but it will do so by framing it within an actionable solution, not reposing in the problem. It will invite and challenge visitors to reflect on iniquity, the liberation struggle, and what is required for good to triumph.
Furthermore, liberation aligns with Baylor’s greater Christian mission (Mark 16:15; Matthew 28:18-20). It would serve as a living testimony to the gospel of Jesus Christ, which does not leave people stranded in brokenness but calls them into new life. It would encourage all who visit to evaluate their own spiritual condition and consider how true freedom is attainable through Christ.
Conclusion
Motivated by a need to repent for the objectively evil act of slavery practiced 180 years ago, Baylor built a Memorial to Enslaved Persons to acknowledge the individuals and communities who were exploited for the university’s worldly gain. Unfortunately, this golden calf fails to achieve its purpose and overlooks God’s faithfulness and sacrifice. Baylor’s unjust treatment of human beings cannot be rectified by a memorial to their enslavement. A justified substitute is required: a memorial emphasizing liberation through Christ’s sacrificial gift is the only sufficient offering that can provide a way from enslavement to redemption, healing, and reconciliation for all.
Baylor’s dependence on enslaved persons must come to an end. Rededicating the memorial to reflect and celebrate their liberation will be costly in many ways, but it is necessary to redeem and free Baylor from the chains of its own making and to fully honor the freedom and dignity of those whose forced labor laid the foundation of a beloved Texas university.
Follow Douglas on X.
Image by author
