Cambridge sermon: Jesus may have been trans

[flyingbuttress43]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/26/jesus-could-have-transgender-claims-cambridge-dean/

Jushua Heath, a junior research fellow, guest preacher at evensong at Trinity College chapel displayed Renaissance and Medieval paintings of the crucifixion, which depicted a side wound he likened to a vagina, and said Christ had a trans body.

Dr Michael Banner, dean of Trinity College said such a view was "legitimate" in a response to one anonymous worshipper who said the audience and choir were "visibly uncomfortable" and upset at the sermon. Dr Banner said the sermon "suggested that we might think about these images of Christ's male/female body as providing us with ways of thinking about issues around transgender questions today".

He added: "For myself, I think that speculation was legitimate, whether or not you or I or anyone else disagrees with the interpretation, says something else about that artistic tradition, or resists its application to contemporary questions around transsexualism."

I'm not even religious, but I seriously wonder if there is anywhere the trans movement won't go in support of their ideology.

What a complete twat. I'm C of E but this was embarrassing.

The Church of England Twitter gang are probably loving it. Trans poetry is "on trend" at the moment amongst middle class vicars and curates alike.

I hate to quote the Mail, but the Telegraph is paywalled. The college's statement;

"Neither the Dean of Trinity College nor the researcher giving the sermon suggested Jesus was transgender. The sermon addressed the image of Christ depicted in art and various interpretations of those artistic portrayals."

As I've said, the wound/vagina imagery has been discussed in art-historical circles for at least 20 years, as as it relates to the sexualisation of Renaissance Christianity rather than Biblical commentary.

The Mail has a quote from the sermon,
'In Christ's simultaneously masculine and feminine body in these works, if the body of Christ as these works suggest [is] the body of all bodies, then his body is also the trans body."

To me, that means that if the aim of the artistic imagery is to present Jesus' physical body as containing male and female elements, and thus representing those part of humanity, then it also encompasses transsexual bodies. In the way that the Church is the Body of Christ.

I don't agree, but it doesn't seem to be what people are criticising here.

He was supposedly the son of god. You'd think if he wanted a vagina, dad could have rustled up something a bit more... authentic?

Yeah, there's really interesting art criticism/theory around representations of the body and crossing the body's boundaries. Whether you believe that any of this was intended by the artist ot not, it still provides interesting ways to think.

And Jesus is an interesting figure to be a male king/god in our culture...he's passsive, he turns the other cheek. You could definitely write some interesting analysis of Jesus as embodying culturally feminine qualities.

Of course none of this changes one iota about how the sex of our bodies impacts our lives. Exploring the cultural contexts around gender does not mean legitimising the absurdity that sex is subordinate to a secret inner gender.

'In Christ's simultaneously masculine and feminine body in these works, if the body of Christ as these works suggest the body of all bodies, then his body is also the trans body,' claimed the researcher.'

He has apparently said this but the article in the Mail doesn't make it clear whether it was in the sermon or in his PhD thesis.

Perhaps he also wants to be called Loretta.

Shouldn't laugh, but that even made my teenager snort!

I've managed to see the Telegraphy article; the Mail has essentially copied it verbatim but missed a few phrases. That passage was the conclusion of the sermon.

I've read quite a lot of art history and theology in various religions, as well as general psycho-social approaches to religion, and this sounds like the sort of thing I'd expect to find in pretty much any journal. An evensong sermon in an academic college is hardly the Easter message at Westminster Abbey!

I don't particularly agree with the conclusion but it seems to be coming from a place of inclusivity, and there's a long orthodox (small-o) tradition of seeing Jesus as a universal representation of humanity and therefore of all humans, a "Son of Man" if you like.

Leaving aside the deepy iffy theology, since when was a vagina under the ribs?

It was a botched faux-vag op.

Aside - there's a church near me offering a 'Live Nativity'. I wonder how far they're going with that?

OT but the best nativity I ever saw was in Tunisia (where we'd gone to escape Christmas 😆) They had a real camel and a real donkey. No idea about the baby.

Is there something in the water at Cambridge?

Although I don't think he went as far as saying TWATW wasn't a coe bod at a school reported, by the school, to Prevent for saying that it was okay to question gi orthodoxy, or along those lines. I think he's got an ET coming up.

Snorted at this. Thank you for putting it so succinctly.

Wrong quote! Sigh. Meant to quote the 'fashionably edgy' one. Wrong glasses.

If Jesus was trans then God himself is guilty of some pretty hefty misgendering.

Lord have mercy 🙄

The body of Christ only ever represents all humanity when it is convenient theology. If not it definitely represents only men.

If not we wouldn't have had to fight so hard to have female priests in any of the Christian denominations.

Amen. Theologians and whole denominations are incredibly good at being inconsistent and holding the whole system together with "mystery of faith!"

Julian of Norwich was writing about Jesus (and God the Father) as our Mother in the 14th century, but managed to keep it theological and spiritual rather than rabbiting on about gashes. It's the kind of nonsense that makes one wonder should men be priests.

@EmmaGrundyForPM “I’m fairly certain that no man in gheir right mind would identify as female in Palestine in AD33“.
SO true and darkly funny Emma.

says something else about that artistic tradition

Oh it says a whole lot of things.

'Batshit' is one of the politer ones.

Quite. Within this ideology he is the bungler busy stuffing souls in the wrong bodies.

Which makes you wonder what the ideology's view of the afterlife is.

I was thinking of going to a C of E church for some carols this Christmas. I think I'll pass.

Jesus declared himself the Son of God by direct testimony. Not trans daughter or any other such rubbish. the SON.
In His arraignment before Caiaphas, He was asked, "Art thou the Christ (Messiah), the Son of the Blessed?" He answered, "I am." (Mark 14:61, 62.)

Caveat that I haven't read the sermon and don't know how well it's been reported. But one reason this may be so offensive to feminist Christians is because one of the historic reasons for opposition to ordaining women was that a female body couldn't represent Christ at the Eucharist.

Women's vocations to the priesthood were denied for centuries because of this. It's so incredibly dismissive of our struggle, to say 'oh yeah! Christ was actually also simultaneously female all along because art! Cool!'

Excellent point Prince. I also believe this "sermon" demonstrates a key aspect of the well established tradition called "having your cake and eating it".