Christian Anthropology & Synthetic Sex Identities

The Billionaire Family Pushing Synthetic Sex Identities (SSI)

The wealthy, powerful, and sometimes very weird Pritzker cousins have set their sights on a new God-like goal: using gender ideology to remake human biology

So says Jennifer Bilek in this important Tablet article. It’s worth your time.

Here are my thoughts.

Christian Anthropology, rooted in Biblical teachings, holds that humans are created in the image of God (Imago Dei) and that this divine image encompasses the whole person, including one’s biological sex and gender. The Christian view understands gender as a binary, corresponding to biological sex, given by God as part of the created order (Genesis 1:27). Biological sex is not only a physical reality but also has spiritual and psychological significance.

The Pritzker family’s support for SSI, which promotes the concept of gender fluidity and the medical transformation of gender, contradicts Christian Anthropology in several ways:

Contrast with Biblical Creation Story

The support for SSI, which asserts a spectrum of gender identities and the possibility of changing one’s biological sex, stands in contrast to the Biblical narrative that God created humans male and female. This narrative in Genesis is foundational for the Christian understanding of gender as a given and stable aspect of human identity. An identity affirmed by Jesus.1“Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female.'” [Matt 19:4]

The Concept of ‘Playing God’

The promotion of SSI and related medical practices should be seen as an attempt to ‘play God’ by altering the fundamental aspects of human nature. Christians believe those fundamentals were divinely ordained and reject this unethical attempt to fundamentally alter God’s Good creation, especially when it involves the core aspects of human identity.

The Role of Technology in Human Identity

The involvement of the techno-medical complex in creating new gender identities through medical interventions must be viewed from a Christian perspective as an over-reliance on technology to define and alter human identity. Christian Anthropology emphasizes the God-given nature of human identity, which is at odds with a technologically driven redefinition of this identity.

unethical Medical Practices

The promotion of surgeries and medical interventions, especially for children and adolescents, to affirm gender identities that do not correspond with their biological sex, is clearly unethical. From a Christian perspective, the physical and psychological well-being of individuals, particularly vulnerable children, is paramount, and the long-term impacts of such interventions are woefully missing in today’s discussions about gender.

Implications for Education and Social Policy

The influence of gender ideology on education and social policy, as indicated by the support for sex education programs that teach gender fluidity from a young age, is another pressing concern.

Christian Anthropology values the upbringing of children in ways that align with Biblical teachings, including the understanding of gender and sexuality. The introduction of concepts that contradict these teachings in educational settings conflict with the rights of parents and the church to guide children in accordance with their religious beliefs.


The promotion of SSI departs from Christian teachings on gender and human nature.

Many thanks to Jennifer Bilek for alerting us to the dark forces behind this movement.


Compromising Our Christian Identity

Roman Catholic Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades expressed significant concerns about the change in admission policy at Saint Mary’s College, a Catholic women’s college, which now considers for admission not only applicants whose sex is female but also those who consistently live and identify as women.

In a recent statement the Bishop emphasized that this shift departs from fundamental Catholic teaching on the nature of womanhood and compromises the college’s identity as a Catholic institution. He pointed out that the ideology affirming gender as a subjective experience separate from biological sex contradicts Catholic teaching, which sees the unity of body and soul and recognizes sexual identity as an innate aspect of one’s nature created by God.

Bishop Rhoades highlighted Pope Francis’ teachings, which emphasize the inseparability of biological sex and socio-cultural gender roles, cautioning against ideologies that try to separate these aspects of reality. He stressed that truth and love must go hand in hand, expressing concern that the new policy might prioritize an inclusive environment over adherence to Catholic doctrine. He called on Saint Mary’s College to uphold its Catholic identity and mission by rejecting gender ideologies that contradict the Church’s teachings on the human person, sex, and gender. This includes recognizing and respecting every individual’s dignity as created in the image of God, while not affirming views of sexual identity that diverge from Catholic understanding.

You can read his full statement below.

Our Christian Identity is grounded in both Truth and Love.

Pope Francis teaches about the intimate connection between truth and love in his first encyclical, Lumen Fidei (The Light of Faith). He writes:

“Love requires truth. Only to the extent that love is grounded in truth can it endure over time, can it transcend the passing moment and be sufficiently solid to sustain a shared journey. If love is not tied to truth, it falls prey to fickle emotions and cannot stand the test of time. True love, on the other hand, unifies all the elements of our person and becomes a new light pointing the way to a great and fulfilled life” (#27).


And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

John 1:14, ESV

Taking Care of the Planet & Our Bodies

I’ve sometimes wondered about Christians who were so keen on ‘saving the planet’ but who have little difficulty disregarding the importance of the human body.  They think, for example, that ‘gender fluidity’ is an acceptable way to be human.  They think you should identify as a different sex, for example, if that’s what it takes to actualize your ‘authentic self,’ and by that they mean ‘your inner, invisible self.’

I know some of these Christians.  I love them as brothers and sisters.  But here’s the problem.   They think the body is essentially irrelevant, and that we will one day ‘transcend the body’.  They think we will, at death, become ‘spiritual,’ and therefore more like God (they think).   I’ve studied their theology.  I’ve hung out with them.  I’ve loved them.  And still do. 

YET some of these same Christians think human-caused global warming crucially important.  So.  I must confess, I’m puzzled.  Why not hasten the day when we become ‘godlike’?  Why should we care about the material creation?  Why not salt the earth?  And hasten the coming day of godlikeness.  Material suicide is the ticket.  Isn’t it?

Of course each of them would recoil in horror at such a thought.  But I detect a glaring inconsistency in their thinking.


What if God created us to be and become what we were created to be and become?  What if God created us to become ‘spirit of God’ infilled human beings? (Theologians calls this Temple Theology.)  Doesn’t that change the end time calculus, cosmically and personally?  And allow us to consistently view the planet and our bodies sacramentalIy? I think it does.

I know there is altruism in the position of the Christian environmentalists I’m criticizing.  

“We should care for the planet because of our children and God’s other creatures” they say.   And they are right.

But if these Christians are convinced that our eternal destiny is a disembodied ‘spiritual’ existence, if we are so to speak ‘justa passin thru,’ and the ultimate goal is to become godlike, as in ‘spiritual’ like an angel, then why not the sooner the better?  True, it may be decidedly uncomfortable for our children and other worldly creatures.  But won’t it be eternally rewarding?

Also many of these Christians affirm God as the Creator.  So.  Can you square that circle?  I can’t. 

As a classic Christian I’m convinced that CREATED spirit (or soul) and CREATED matter (our bodies) are equally important to our Creator, and were meant to be integrated.  God values both.  God created both and called all of it “very good.”  Why would Christians think otherwise?  

They shouldn’t.

Oh, I know, some parts of the created order are broken.  Like my brother’s body was broken in the womb.  Still, assuming normal human development, our bodies are a great and good gift.  And Christians should not think otherwise?

Thinking like that is the great distortion of these very queer un-Christian times. 

God help us.  

There is more to say. Please see the post below.

Companion Post


Celebrate God’s Creation of Male & Female