Hispanic-American Theology: The Finale- Grace and Humanness

This will be the final essay on the series of Hispanic-American theology.  As we have seen, there is a close similarity between Latin American Liberation Theology, and Hispanic-American theology.  The former focuses on class issues in Latin America and the Caribbean, while the latter centers on ethnic/racial issues in the continental U.S.A. They both focus on people who are oppressed by political and social injustice.  They both also focus on a group of people whose primary language of parlance is Spanish.  They both deal with a people who have either experienced colonization and neo-colonization, or are the offspring of those who have.

This last essay focuses on the writings of Dr. Orlando Espin who has been a professor of theology at the University of San Diego.  In the book by Fernando Segovia, We are A People: Initiatives in Hispanic American Theology,  Espin writes an article entitled Grace and Humanness: A Hispanic Perspective.  Espin points out that Christianity is not understandable without what we call "grace." (Espin in Segovia, p. 133).

It should be noted that though Espin writes from a Roman Catholic perspective, that his emphasis on grace is something that is shared by all Christian traditions, including Eastern Orthodoxy and historic Protestantism.  One of the most positive things that have been contributed by Liberation Theology and Hispanic-American theology has been a forum in which Christians of different traditions can come together to engage in effective, faithful, and serious theological engagement.  Both of these theologies open the door for ecumenical and even interfaith dialogue among Hispanic-Americans. Some of the topics covered by Espin's article are the following:

The God of Grace

Espin states, "The God of Christians is a trinitarian God, the one who forever remaining one, is also an eternal community of love.  In other words, the internal and eternal reality of God is expressive of the love that God is.  That which binds and is the oneness of the Trinity is the love that the Three  share and are among themselves. (Espin in Segovia, p. 137)."

It is interesting to note that in this article, Espin does not get "bogged down" in the controversy about whether the Trinity is a trinity of modes or a trinity of three distinct persons who share the same nature. It appears that for Espin, what really matters is not the nature or type of trinity, but rather how this triune God relates to humanity and participates in human history.

Espin goes on to say, "The God who is love, freely choosing to be authentically and fully that which God is, called another into existence, not as a sign of capriciousness, and not as expressive of raw might, but as a freely chosen consequence of that love which God is.  Creation exists as the first sacrament of God's love and life, and as the first other that God loves.  It is in the ongoing act of creation that we first detect that which can be called grace----God's loving self-given to us and for us as an expression of that which God is.  God-for us-is grace (Espin in Segovia, p. 137)."

Two things are of noteworthy interest here.  One is that Espin does not limit the notion of grace to the historic Protestant definition of "unmerited favor" which begins or is centered on the Cross, but rather, puts it in a broader context of creation.  In other words, for Espin, the very act of creation is an act of grace.  The other interesting thing is that Espin is not locked into the traditional masculine descriptions of God.  This is noteworthy in that Liberation Theology and Hispanic-American theology both emerge from a culture which is characterized by male chauvinism.

Humanity as "Graced" Image of God

Espin points out that to be the image of God is a gift from God. We did not merit it and could do absolutely nothing to achieve it.  We are gifts.  God's pouring of God's loving life created us, without our having deserved it, and for the sole purpose of loving us.  Our very being is graced. Because of this, all human beings can look at themselves, by the mere fact that they are the images of God, as graced.  No human being, has ever been without this foundational grace.  Otherwise, we would have to claim that some human beings are not images of God, that some do not find their ultimate definition and reality in the God of love who created them. (Espin in Segovia, p. 139).

In some respects, it is safe to say that Espin is challenging the notion that only those who believe in Jesus are "covered," if you will, by God's grace.  For Espin, as pointed out before, grace is rooted in the creative acts of God and not in human decisions to believe or not.

Humanity as Historical and Sinful

Espin reminds us of the obvious fact (though not so obvious to some people) that humans are historical beings.  He says, "It is a constitutive dimension of ourselves that we grow, that we learn, that we become.  Although from the beginning we are human, we also become human as we live our lives in history, both individually and communally.  The historical processes whereby we become more fully human we can call humanization.. Given all that has been said above, it can be affirmed that the most profound and ultimate goal of authentic humanization is our becoming  more fully that which we are-images of the trinitarian God of love.  (Espin in Segovia, p.139)."

Espin's comments remind us of the need for us to stay within the context of history when engaging in theological discourse and reflection.  Far too many people, (especially Christians) want to approach theology as if it were something thrown from the sky and thrown in our laps.  Even the most sacred text in the Christian faith, i.e. the Bible, has to be considered in a historical context. 

Furthermore, Espin's comments remind us of our limitations not only due to history but also to sin. The historic Christian doctrine of the noetic (darkening) effects of sin include a rupture in divine-human relationship and also in human-to human relationships.  Sin has affected our ability to see things clearly and objectively.  Even our theological engagement is rooted in our sinful condition.
That is most demonstrated when we attempt to make our theological outlook and perspective the dominant one.  When we think we know it all, or when we think that we have the totality of God's truth "in our pockets," we are guilty of the sins of arrogance and presumptuousness. 

Grace and Hispanic Culture

For Espin, it is reasonable to state that the experience of grace possible to U.S. Hispanics, in order to be authentically an experience of the God-for-us, must be culturally Hispanic.  Espin emphasizes that, "Deculturization, in the name of Christianity, would be dehumanizing and (as a consequence) sinful. To trample on Hispanic culture while pretending to evangelize is to impede the very experience of the God that saves, because as we have seen, the experience of grace can only be had in and through one's culture.  To dehumanize, as we discussed earlier, is to actively oppose the God of love and salvation, and to decultarize or to trample on our culture is dehumanizing (Espin in Segovia, p. 147)."

For Espin, to emphasize, a non-cultural or in this case, a non-Hispanic experience of grace, runs contrary to the message of the Gospel itself.   To deny one's culture, is in essence to deny part of God's creation. 

Espin is quick to add, "The other side of this argument is the implied belief that non-Hispanic culture (in our American context, Anglo culture) is either part of the gospel message or the superior vehicle for its expression.  That belief is not only utter nonsense, but pure evil (Espin in Segovia, p. 147)."

Espin is fighting the notion that one culture is superior to the others for experiencing the grace of God. For him, all cultures have elements of sin, and subsequently, all cultures are in need of experiencing God's grace within their own context.

Espin raises a very important question for us.  It is the following: How does a Hispanic individual or community encounter the God-for-us (in other words, experience grace) in a culturally authentic way?  He says that perhaps it is easier to say how it should not be done.  But, he adds, we must attempt to address this question and search for answers,  even if no totally satisfactory ones are to be found (Espin in Segovia, p. 148).

In closing, I invite you (the reader) to do either one of the following:

1.  Comment on any of the previous essays that I have written on Hispanic-American theology.  Feel free to say what you think are both the strengths and weaknesses of each essay, or at the very least, of the ones that you may have taken the time to read.

2.  Comment on Espin's perspective on experiencing God's grace in a Hispanic-American cultural context.  In your opinion, how is experiencing the grace of God in a Hispanic-American cultural context the same or different from having that same experience in a totally different cultural context?

3. Express in very brief and summary form, your view of Hispanic-American theology and whether or not there can be mutual dialogue between Hispanic-American theology and other theological systems that you may be familiar with.

I humbly and respectfully submit this series of essays for your reflection and evaluation.

In the Name of the Creator, and of the Word, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Rev. Dr. Juan A. Ayala-Carmona