He made them Male and Female...

“He Made Them Male and Female” - Wrestling with Genesis 1:27

“He made them male and female.” Genesis 1:27

Those words from the opening chapter of the Book of Genesis are among the more familiar words of scripture. They seem, at first glance, beautifully simple - clear, ordered, and reassuring. Humanity, we are told, is created in two forms: male and female. A binary, distinct and complete.

And yet, as with so much in scripture, what appears simple on the surface begins to open into something far more complex when we look more closely at life, at science, the lived experience of human beings and indeed the Bible and theology as well.

I want to say at the outset that I approach this subject from a particular perspective, one that I don’t think is always heard in church. But it is not the only perspective. You do not need to agree with me. My hope is simply to open a space for deeper thought and reflection. 

My own perspective on matters of gender and sexuality was once very clear-cut. Right up to my late twenties, I held firm, definite and fairly conservative views. But then life did what life often does, it introduced me to real people… people of sincerity, integrity, and kindness… people whose lives bore the marks not of confusion or rebellion, but of a genuine and sincere desire to love and to live well, people whose desire and intent was to be of service to others often at cost to themselves. In other words they held many of the same values that I held as a Christian and follower of Christ. 

In meeting them, something in me softened. My certainty gave way to curiosity, y judgments gave way to listening and my strongly held opinions began to shift and change. 

Even before those real-life encounters, questions had already begun to arise for me - information and perspectives that didn’t fit neatly into my earlier understanding.

The first was a story I read in a South African Sunday paper. It told of a former Catholic priest.

This person had been born intersex. An intersexed person has a mixture of male and female biological markers not always immediately physically obvious. But in this instance, at birth, there was no clear physical indication that the child was either male or female, having a mixture of male and female reproductive characteristics. Faced with this uncertainty, the parents made a decision: they chose to raise the child as a boy.

For a time, that seemed to settle things. The child grew up, followed a vocation, and was eventually ordained as a Catholic priest, even teaching theology in a Catholic Seminary. The Church did not know that this person was intersex, neither clearly male nor clearly female.

But over time, something deeper began to emerge. Despite being raised as male, there was an inner awareness that this identity did not fully fit. More and more, the one everyone knew outwardly as “he” began to recognise inwardly that she experienced herself as “she,” (and perhaps this awareness was there all along.)

Nurture, family expectations, and religious expectations and formation could not override that inner sense of identity. And so at great personal cost, she eventually embraced her identity as a woman. Nothing physically had changed, but inwardly, everything had become clear.

The response from the Catholic Church was also clear: the priesthood was male-only, and so her ordination and licence were revoked.

That story planted questions for me. If a person can be born without clear biological markers of male or female, then perhaps the idea of a completely clear-cut binary is not as absolute as I had once assumed.

Science tells us that, at a purely biological level, around 1–2% of people are born with some form of intersex variation. Relatively speaking that is quite a high percentage. 1-2 out of every hundred people living in Dromore and Banbridge would fall into this category.  These are differences in chromosomes, hormones, or anatomy that do not fit typical definitions of male or female. Only a small proportion of these cases are obvious at birth; for many, the differences are less visible.

For example, a person may appear biologically female but have a male Y chromosome, or a person may appear male but have variations in chromosomes or hormone responses.

What this means, even for a small or medium size town like Dromore and Banbridge, is worth considering. In a school of around 1,000 pupils, statistically speaking, there could be around 15–20 children who, in some way, do not fit neatly into simple biological categories of male or female – and with those physical and biological markers one can easily imagine that such children, teenagers and adults might not feel they fit neatly into the socially acceptable binary categories of male and female.

A few years ago, the BBC aired a documentary asking: Do you have a male or female brain?

The premise, based on scientific research into average differences between male and female brains, is that there are some physical and functional differences. For example, some regions of the brain linked to spatial awareness and coordination on average tend to be more developed in males, while some regions linked to language, emotional processing, and social connection  tend to be more developed in female brains.

However, these are general patterns - not fixed rules.  What is increasingly recognised is that many people do not fit neatly into these categories. Some men show patterns more typical of female brains, and some women show patterns more typical of male brains.

This suggests that, biologically speaking, it is possible for a person to have a male body and, at the same time, patterns of brain development more typically associated with females—or vice versa.

This does not erase the categories of male and female, but it does suggest that they are not always as sharply defined as we might assume. (In other words things are sometimes fuzzier than we fist think)

These questions were deepened for me through reading Carl Jung one of the giants of early 20th century exploration into psychology and the inner workings of the unconscious. Through his work exploring the inner life, Jung came to the conclusion that within every person there exists both a masculine and a feminine aspect, just as all people have both male and female hormones.  He called these the animus and the anima.

For Jung, psychological growth involved learning to integrate these aspects in a greater balance:
For example, the average more typical man, with his more natural tendency towards assertiveness, learning tenderness and nurture, while the average more typical woman, with her more natural tendency towards receptivity, learning assertiveness and strength

In this way, Carl Jung came to see that masculinity and femininity are not strictly separate categories, but exist within each person—something more like a balance than a rigid divide.

I saw something of this in my own home growing up. My father carried a wonderful gentleness and a natural gift for care and nurture, while my mother had a strength and practical confidence—never afraid to pick up the tools and fix what needed fixing, whether it was the car or the washing machine.

And in their own ways, each of them reflected something rich and whole about what it means to be human.

Returning to the story of the former Catholic priest, what stands out is that upbringing and nurture alone were not able to override this person’s inner sense of identity.  She was raised as male, but it did not change her deeper inner sense of being female.

Many people who identify as gay, lesbian, or transgender describe something similar. From their earliest memories, they sensed that they were different - not as a choice, but as something they always felt deeply about themselves.

Their journeys are often difficult, involving confusion, struggle, being bullied and sometimes facing rejection by their closest family members. It raises a simple question: why would someone choose such a difficult path - unless, perhaps, it was never really a choice in the first place?

If we reflect on our own lives, most of us would say that our own sense of gender and attraction was not something we consciously chose, it was just a given.  What if we extended that same understanding to others? What if if for them it is also just a given? 

Another factor that challenged my earlier certainty is the understanding that development in the womb is a complex process. Biological development along male or female lines does not happen all at once. It unfolds over time and involves a series of processes influenced by genetic signals and the release of different hormones at different stages of pregnancy.

In most cases, these processes follow typical patterns. But they are not always identical in every pregnancy, and growing scientific evidence suggests that variations in these processes, including the release of certain hormones at certain times during pregnancy may play a role in shaping a person’s later sense of sexual orientation and gender identity.

I remember speaking with a mother in a church I served in Johannesburg.  She was struggling deeply with what she saw as her son’s “choice” to be gay. She blamed herself and felt pressure from others who suggested she must have done something wrong.

But when she began to understand that development during pregnancy is complex - and not simply a matter of upbringing - something shifted.  She reflected on her pregnancy with her son and remembered that it had not been straightforward. Her hormones had been all over the place, not following typical patterns.  For the first time, she began to consider that perhaps her son had not chosen this at all.  It became a turning point for her.

Where there had been shame and distance, there came acceptance and love. She no longer felt it was her role to try to change him, but to love him and support him in becoming the best version of who he already was.

So how do we interpret Genesis?

God is One. This is the affirmation of all monotheistic faiths. And yet Genesis tells us that both male and female are made in the image of God suggesting that masculinity and feminity are qualities that emerge from a single Divine source. 

And if that is so, that the masculine and the feminine emerge from a single Divine Source and male and female both reflect the Divine, then Carl Jung’s insight - that something of both exists within each of us - is not so far removed from a theological perspective. After all, even biologically speaking each of us have both male and female hormones in varying degrees. 

The question then becomes: How shall we respond? How do we live in a world where most people fit into clear categories, but some do not?  How do we respond to the statistical fact that quite possibly 10-20 children who attend a local primary school are biologically intersexed… at a physical level not fitting into the neat binary categories of male and female. 

Do we make those who do not fit feel like outsiders?
Do we force them to fit into our ideas of how we think they should be – even when key biological markers shows that they don’t?
Or do we make space for them to be themselves? Just as we have been given space to be ourselves?
And what if this is done not in a reckless way, but with deep care. 

Is there guidance in scripture you may ask? Hopefully by now we have begun to see that the Bible is more complex than some kind of an encyclopedic rule or law book… It is clearly not that. 

For Christians, the example of Jesus Christ is ultimately central and against whom the rest of scripture is evaluated. And when we look carefully at his life, a pattern begins to emerge - again and again, he moves towards those who are marginalised and excluded. Those who do not fit. Those who are pushed to the edges.

While others draw lines and build boundaries, Jesus crosses them.  While others exclude, Jesus includes. While others judge by outward appearance, Jesus looks deeper - seeing the person, the heart, and the humanity within.

And this pattern continues in the life of the early Church.  In the Acts of the Apostles, we find the story of the eunuch baptised by Philip. Under Jewish law, eunuchs were excluded - unable to participate fully in the religious community. But Philip, moved by the Spirit (of Jesus), does something remarkable: he does not hesitate, he does not question, he does not exclude. He baptises him, welcoming him fully into the people of God.  It is a powerful moment of inclusion.

And it becomes even more meaningful when we understand that in the ancient world, the word “eunuch” did not always refer only to men who had been physically castrated. While that was its most common meaning, it could also be used more broadly for those who did not fit typical masculine roles in society - those who, for various reasons, stood outside the usual expectations of marriage, sexuality, and family life. 

So here, in this encounter, we may be seeing not just the inclusion of one individual, but a sign that the grace of God reaches even those who do not fit neatly into society’s categories.

And perhaps that invites us to ask again:  If that is how the Spirit of Jesus was moving then… how might the Spirit of Jesus be calling us to respond today?

Those questions, while they should be central for us as Christians, don’t however simply remove all complexity.  In our modern world, there are real and difficult questions - questions around areas such as sport, privacy, and safety. These require careful thought and discernment. There are also cases where situations can be misused and abused.

But the existence of such cases should not lead us to reject or ostracise those whose experiences are genuine - many of whom are themselves vulnerable.

Finally I would like to get to what for me has become the heart of the matter

In 1 Samuel 16:7 we are told that God “does not look at the outward, external appearance, but at the heart”.

As I wrestled with these questions over the years, I came to see that the deeper issue is not about external categories, but about the condition of the heart. This was clearly Jesus position on parallel issues… what is the state of the heart?
 
Not, who is someone attracted but, what kind of life do they - and we - live?

Do they display what Paul in Galatians refers to as the fruit of the spirit:  showing love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control?  Because for Paul these were a kind of litmus test: he asserts in effect that wherever these are present, the life of God is present. And wherever the life of God is present, we are on holy ground.

A closing thought, getting back to the verse in Genesis that we started with:  “He made them male and female.”  Yes.  But perhaps those words are not meant to close down the conversation, but to open it. To invite us into wonder at the diversity of creation.

It is clear that God and the process of evolution favours diversity over a lack of diversity.   The process of evolution, guided I believe by the higher intelligence of the Divine Mind has not produced only one kind of tree or flower, but multiple kinds of trees, flowers, animals, birds and insects… and even human beings of diverse languages and colours. These are clearly not mistakes… this is the trajectory of evolution and therefore must in some way reflect the divine will and intention.  What if those who do not fit into our neat binary categories of male and female are not in fact aberrations but part of the diversity of the Divine will.  This would be a very boring world if we were all exactly the same.  There is something rich and beautiful in the diversity of creation… 

And perhaps what seems to be the Divine Love for diversity is call beyond fear into deeper understanding.  To remind us that human beings and human diversity are not problems to be solved but mysteries to be honoured.  And to lead us, above all, into a greater and a deeper love. Because according to Paul, if we miss love, we have missed everything. If I have no love says Paul I am nothing,  no better than a clanging cymbal. 

Whatever our views are on these things, (and ultimately we are talking now about ideas, but about people) how might we approach them with deep, sincere and Christ-like love? 

As always, just some food for thought… Amen.