Crossroads Podcast: Talarico’s Theology Draws Scrutiny During Senate Run
At some point, it appears that someone — maybe even a journalist — asked James Talarico if he believes that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead.
In a way, that’s a logical question. After all, he is a seminarian (his studies are currently on hold) at the Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary and he is preparing for ordination in the Presbyterian Church (USA). That’s a rapidly imploding denomination that has long been considered one of the “Seven Sisters” of the old mainline Protestantism.
However, Talarico is also the Democratic Party’s candidate for a Texas seat in the U.S. Senate. Under normal conditions, it would be strange to see an elite newspaper dedicate a major feature story to his views on theology.
But let’s note an exception to that rule and note some remarkable passages in the New York Times story that served as the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast.
The headline was appropriately blunt: “Are Texans Ready for Talarico’s Kind of Christianity?” Here’s the overture:
On a recent Sunday morning at St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin, Texas, Jim Rigby asked his congregation to share what came to mind when he mentioned the Apostle Paul, the major Christian figure to whom 13 books in the Bible are attributed. They cheerfully complied:
“Villain!”
“Homophobic!”
“He’s a jerk.”
This is Talarico’s home church and it’s leader is the Rev. Jim Rigby, an outspoken liberal who has been on the front lines in decades of PCUSA battles over theology, morality, culture and, often, politics. As Talarico told the Times: “He is my pastor in every sense of the word. … Not that we agree on everything.”
This leads to one of two crucial, and extremely precise, passages in the Times feature, which was written by a religion-beat professional based in Dallas and another reporter based in Houston. These are two rather “blue” cities in what has long been the bright “red” state of Texas, in terms of politics.
Meanwhile, Talarico and Rigby hail from a city that many Texans (tmatt raises his hand) have long called the “People’s Republic of Austin.” Read this carefully:
Mr. Rigby does not use male pronouns for God, for example, because it is a kind of “violence” to imply to a girl that her brother is more like God than she is, he said in an interview. ... He does not use the word “Lord,” because it conjures a wealthy, European, male God, he said. For that matter, he added, he does not much care for the word “God.” He uses it on occasion, he said, but he tries to use synonyms, because “it’s going to mean something different to everybody.”
And Rigby’s disciple?
Mr. Talarico uses the terms “Lord” and “God” and, he said, has no issue with using male pronouns to refer to God. He sees the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event, he said.
“I don’t believe in a progressive or conservative Christianity; I believe in a biblical Christianity,” Mr. Talarico said. “My faith is rooted in Scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ.” …
His campaign slogan, “It’s time to start flipping tables,” is a reference to a passage in the Bible where Jesus displays righteous anger.
A key theme in this week’s podcast is that, in this digital age, several years’ worth of Talarico sermons are available online or in other recordings. Thus, people interested in what he believes on a wide variety of hot-button issues — critics or even reporters — will find it easy to locate valid, verbatim, source material to quote on a wide variety of issues.
For example, note this second pivotal passage in the Times report:
In an interview with Mr. (Joe) Rogan last year … Mr. Talarico framed the New Testament account of an angel visiting Jesus’s mother before her pregnancy as a story that points to a biblical basis for abortion rights.
“The angel comes down and asks Mary if this is something she wants to do, and she says: If it is God’s will, let it be done,” Mr. Talarico said. “To me, that is an affirmation in one of our most central stories that creation has to be done with consent. You cannot force someone to create.”
Mr. Rigby recalled preaching on the passage in the past. He wasn’t bothered by the fact that in the text, the angel does not, in fact, “ask” Mary if she accepts the pregnancy, as Mr. Talarico framed it, but rather tells her it will happen.
“It’s mythological, not historical,” Mr. Rigby said.
Oh, and in a 2022 sermon at St. Andrews, Talarico stressed that “our trans community needs abortion care, too.”
The Times quoted the views of Jamie Wilder, a seventh-generation Texan who is a Talarico critic, on that theological and political statement: “That dog’s not going to hunt in Texas.”
During the podcast’s discussion of the resurrection question, I noted that — in the late 1980s, while covering candidates to become the Episcopal bishop of Colorado — I started asking three questions to probe doctrinal fault lines in modern, and postmodern, churches.
At GetReligion.org, these became known as the “tmatt trio.” Here is how the questions were worded in a 2014 post called, “Flashback to George Gallup, Jr., and very early roots of the tmatt trio.”
— Are biblical accounts of the resurrection of Jesus accurate? Did this happen?
— Is salvation found through Jesus, alone? Was Jesus being literal when he said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
— Is sex outside of marriage a sin?
Decades ago, journalists asked me if was appropriate to ask doctrinal questions of this kind during contests to select BISHOPS. Will pros working in Texas newsrooms dare ask them to U.S. Senate candidates?
That third question on marriage — or new questions about gender identity — will certainly be relevant in a Texas election in the era of bitter debates about medical care (think gender transitions for children) and education (Pride month readings and celebrations). Oh, and in a sports crazy state, it’s easy to anticipate locker-room and bathroom questions about the rights of trans Texans.
Also, right on cue, PCUSA leaders have ignited yet another firestorm (these began in the 1980s) about the status of biblical passages on monogamy.
Talarico may even be asked about headlines such as this one, atop a Religion News Service report: “As polyamory gains visibility, monogamy faces a vote in the Presbyterian Church (USA).” Here is some crucial material from that story:
A proposal that would require ordained clergy to be monogamous is on the docket at the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s General Assembly this summer.
The overture, CON-10, has generated strong reactions online but not yet earned broad support from PCUSA groups. A separate asks for theological studies on gender and sexuality, life-giving relationships and the Christian vocation of family that would support the denomination’s commitment to inclusion of different familial realities. Together, these overtures show that as polyamory gains visibility in broader culture, it may have policy implications, especially in theologically progressive Christian denominations.
“I think it is the next big conversation that most mainline denominations will have,” said the Rev. Claudia Aguilar Rubalcava, director of engagement for the LGBTQ-affirming nonprofit More Light Presbyterians. …
For More Light Presbyterians, the proposal on monogamy hits close to home. Aguilar Rubalcava told RNS that at speaking engagements, she routinely encounters polyamorous Presbyterians hungry for support. Kate Davoli, who serves as co-moderator on the board of More Light Presbyterians, told RNS they were dismissed from the denomination’s ordination process for being openly polyamorous.
A Fox News report on these debates included other blunt statements that, in the near future, Talarico may be asked to critique — once they appear in political ads funded by his critics.
Relevant? Once again, this candidate is preparing for ordination in this oldline denomination. The PCUSA assembly is sure to receive major news coverage from publications on the cultural left and right.
After all, this pro-monogamy rule has drawn:
… outrage from three official PC(USA) church advisory committees: the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy, Advocacy Committee for Women and Gender Justice and Advocacy Committee on LGBTQIA+ Equity.
In its official response, the Advocacy Committee for Women and Gender Justice claimed that requiring pastors to be monogamous attempts to “regulate the private lives and relational structures of individuals in ways that risk harm rather than healing.” The committee further argued that a monogamy mandate could “unintentionally reinforce systems of shame, silence, and spiritual coercion.”
The Advocacy Committee on LGBTQIA+ Equity also argued that the monogamy rule reinforced White privilege.
And also:
More Light Presbyterians … released a statement last month saying the proposal reinforces “narrow and culturally bound definitions of relationships that have historically been used to exclude, police, and harm queer bodies and lives.”
The group, which hosted a “Faithful Polyamory 101” training last month, said the rule would take the progressive denomination “backward” by centering on “a single model of relationship as the only faithful expression of Christian life.”
Yes, will this approach to public theology “preach” in Texas?