At Cambridge University: When Truth is Abandoned, the Worst Blasphemies Are Possible

At Cambridge University: When Truth is Abandoned, the Worst Blasphemies Are Possible
Recently, Our Lord Jesus Christ was blasphemed in a sermon at Cambridge University.

“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.”

According to the British newspaper, The Daily Telegraph, that blasphemy was the conclusion of a sermon at the Trinity College chapel, a part of Cambridge University.

Order Today Return to OrderOrder Today: Return to Order: From a Frenzied Economy to an Organic Christian Society—Where We’ve Been, How We Got Here, and Where We Need to Go


Overreaching to Make a Point

During the sermon, Dr. Joshua Heath displayed three medieval depictions of Our Lord’s crucifixion. Somehow, out of them, he managed to construct a crude “do it yourself” form of blasphemy. In one of the images, he claimed, the spear wound inflicted by the Roman soldiers “takes on a decidedly vaginal appearance,” according to a report in the Washington Examiner.

Dr. Heath is a junior research fellow at Trinity College. His graduate work was supervised by Rowan Williams, who held the title of Archbishop of Canterbury from 2002 to 2012. Dr. Williams’s only superior in the Anglican Church was Queen Elizabeth II. That means that Dr. Heath was trained, in part, by the highest ecclesial official of the Church of England.

While some worshippers shouted “heresy” and left in tears, the man in charge of the chapel, Dr. Michael Banner, dean of Trinity College, found Dr. Heath’s blasphemy plausible.

“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.”

Help Remove Jesus Bath Mat on Amazon

It is hard to say which was worse, the blasphemer or the one validating the blasphemy.

Pseudo-Educated Nonsense and Malicious Distraction

That level of arrogance and stupidity could only come from the mouth of men in revolt against God.

The horrific incident shows to what lengths leftists will reach to justify the fallacy that a man can become a woman or vice versa—and that such a “transition” is not sinful. Indeed, they assert, it may be a part of God’s perfect will and attached to the Divine nature.

This blasphemy reflects a clear social agenda that willingly distorts the truth to achieve its ends. They want to substitute a counterfeit set of pseudo-ethics for God-given morality. Both men function within a decadent system that replaced political advantage for any form of academic integrity many years ago.

Indeed, such considerations can be found everywhere. Consider a comment by President Biden last March reflecting this position.

Satanic Christ Porn-blasphemy at Walmart — Sign Petition

“To everyone celebrating Transgender Day of Visibility, I want you to know that your president sees you—Jill, Kamala, Doug [Emhoff, the Vice President’s husband], our entire administration sees you—for who you are: made an image of God and deserving of dignity, respect and support.”

The Postmodernist Mind

In certain circles, such affirmations are prevalent. They typify the postmodern desire to create one’s own identity, narrative and destiny, regardless of one’s appearance and nature. This “individual autonomy” transcends reality and pushes people into the most bizarre fantasy. Individuals change reality to be whatever they decide. They might even decide how they want God to be, as in the case of Dr. Heath.

Indeed, if each possesses a unique truth, then each must ask: “Who am I to judge?”

Postmodern individuals find nothing wrong with such musings. They might ask: Aren’t we all free to chart our own course, to create our own destiny?”

God Does Not Make Mistakes

There are at least two answers to this question.

How Panera’s Socialist Bread Ruined Company

First, a person is limited by nature by not being God. Each person was born in a specific time and place, to a particular pair of parents, with certain specific biological traits—including those that determine sex. Individuals share a human nature that cannot be changed. Some are born male, and others are female. There is nothing in-between.

To argue otherwise is to say that God made mistakes when He made each person. No one who believes in an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God—as all Christians do—can assert that God errs when making all either male or female. He would not be so cruel as to place a male in a female body or vice versa.

Therefore, only by acting within those limitations can each person find happiness within God’s perfect will. The pretense of being something else ultimately destroys the soul. It leads the individuals to fantasies that eventually lead them to imagine God in their own image and likeness or as “transsexual,” as found in the blasphemies of Dr. Heaith.

Falsehood Cannot Lead to Truth

The second lesson concerns a fundamental problem within Protestantism.

What Does Saint Thomas Aquinas Say About Marriage?

Dr. Heath’s statement is not only blasphemous, but it is also grossly absurd. In his eagerness to deconstruct Our Lord’s human nature as a man, he cuts himself off from the truth. He has no anchor to attach himself to the truth. He is the product of a flawed philosophical system that raised and trained him.

When the Anglican Church revolted against the Catholic Church, it abandoned the magisterial body of knowledge and understanding consistently developed since Pentecost.

Free from the restrictions of a central teaching authority, Anglicanism’s theological underpinnings have deteriorated during its nearly five-hundred-year existence. It has now reached the point where Anglican professors like Dr. Heath are free to develop the most blasphemous opinions without fear of rebuke.

Inevitably, controversies arise within the Church of England. In an establishment where politics often trumps theology, the only way to resolve those differences is through a democratic process. Anglican doctrines were—and are—settled by majority rule at periodic Lambeth Conferences, which try to establish some kind of unified Anglican opinion. Since the Anglican Communion has no central, authoritative government, the bishops meet and treat each other as equals. The Archbishop of Canterbury presides as host and chairman. The tendency is to allow anything that seems popular, like women priests and bishops.

Is It Immodest to Wear Deliberately Ripped Clothes?

Therefore, Anglicanism falls into a trap that Our Lord described in Luke 6: 48-49. “He is like to a man building a house, who digged deep, and laid the foundation upon a rock. And when a flood came, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and it could not shake it; for it was founded on a rock. But he that heareth, and doth not, is like to a man building his house upon the earth without a foundation: against which the stream beat vehemently, and immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great.”

That ruin has manifested itself in many ways since Henry VIII claimed “supremacy” in 1534. Dr. Heath’s blasphemy is only the most recent. The shifting sands of politics, popularity and novelty cannot produce truth.

Photo Credit: © Pawel Pajor –