The publication of Sam Ashton’s Beyond Male and Female? A Theological Account of Intersex Embodiment marks a significant contribution to theological ethics. Ashton explores the theological significance of intersexuality, asking how Christians should understand bodies that fall outside of “the statistically predominant pattern of male and female” (p. 2). Socially and theologically, Ashton describes intersexuality as caught between the competing interpretive frameworks of sexual dimorphism (SD) and sexual polymorphism (SP). Christian “traditionalists” work within an SD framework, emphasizing male and female as complementary “creational givens,” viewing intersex conditions as a tragic departure from an otherwise stable norm (p. 5). In contrast, Christian “innovationists” adhere to an SP framework, with sex viewed as a spectrum of biological diversity rather than a fixed binary. According to innovationists, the traditional case for SD “not only falsely privileges (and misreads) the ‘order of creation’ but it undervalues the import of eschatologically redemptive newness in Christ” (p. 7). The result is the unjust exclusion and dehumanization of intersex individuals.

How might the gospel of Christ be proclaimed in a way that upholds the “very good” creation of male and female while still being heard as “good news” for intersex persons? This is the guiding question of Sam Ashton’s important study, which offers the first evangelical response to the best innovationist arguments for SP. The result is a careful dogmatic account that interprets intersexuality not as a metaphysical shift away from the order of creation but, in God’s providence, as an embodied witness to the truth that “all humans, however sexed, are ultimately ordered to life with God” (p. 227).

In Chapter 1, Ashton introduces intersexuality and the distinct interpretive challenges it raises socially, medically, and theologically. In response, he seeks to offer “a set of thick theological glasses through which to (self)interpret intersex embodiment” (p. 227). Whereas a thin theological method may affirm the truth of the Christian story yet pit its parts against each other—with creation subordinating eschatology, or redemption overruling creation—a thick theological method views the Christian story as a “divine drama” in which God’s acts from creation to consummation are taken together as “a divinely ordered and coherent whole” (pp. 10–11). All this methodological staging sets the reader up for a theological tour de force, which, by “tracking and tracing the theo-dramatic movement of the sexed body from creation to consummation,” aims “to elucidate what is essential and what is accidental for sexed embodiment” (p. 18).

Chapter 2 addresses the issue of the Bible’s cultural background, assessing whether Thomas Laquer’s thesis that the ancient view of the body was “monolithically one-sex” ought to inform how Christians interpret scriptural references to “male and female.” In chapter 3, Ashton begins his study of the biblical and theological material by starting with the theo-dramatic act of creation. He outlines the evidence for interpreting intersex in the beginning, either in the event of creation (via the “primal androgyny” argument) or its creational intent (via “the hybrid argument”). Megan DeFranza’s case for Adam and Eve as “parents of fecundity” rather than “prototypes of fixity” receives sustained and judicious attention from Ashton (pp. 68–78), who ultimately finds it lacking exegetical support and theological coherence in light of the whole theo-drama. Reading Adam and Eve canonically, Ashton builds a cumulative case for interpreting them as “prototypical parents,” whose sexuate correspondence and capacity for procreation participate in the divinely ordered shalom of creation (p. 73). The influence of DeFranza’s work among evangelical innovationists makes this section one of the study’s most valuable contributions.

Chapter 4 probes the impact of humanity’s fall into sin on the sexed body. Advocating an Augustinian view in which death is not a metaphysical substance but a parasitic evil, Ashton articulates a theologically rich and pastorally careful interpretation of intersex bodies—not as “more fallen,” but “differently fallen” (p. 127). Since the shalom of creation’s ordered diversity has been shattered by sin and death, all bodies are now impaired and experience traces of “disordered diversity in a diversely disordered world” (p. 128). Ashton draws on Aquinas to distinguish the ordered “structure” or essence of the sexed body in creation from its “direction” or accidental development in time. Though fallen, the sexed body is by no means in “free fall.” God is guiding it providentially toward its redemption in Christ and transformation at his parousia.

Chapters 5 and 6 focus upon the theo-dramatic acts of redemption in Christ and consummation in the new creation. Ashton explores the implications of Christ’s incarnation for the sexed body, considering whether Jesus was intersex (as some innovationists argue) and if “redemptive newness in Christ” might serve as a basis for replacing or expanding the structure of the sexed body in favor of SP (p. 145). Ultimately, Ashton argues that redemption in Christ now “refers to spiritual and social inclusion rather than sexed structural expansion or replacement” (p. 20). The conclusion of this section makes a powerful case that, in light of what Christ has accomplished in redemption, “it seems inappropriate to justify ‘corrective’ surgeries on intersex bodies.” Rather, Christians are called to “heal” intersex people by welcoming them into Christ’s Body, the Church, as full and equal participants (p. 169).

Chapter 6 extends the question of healing by exploring what eschatological consummation means for the sexed body generally and intersex bodies particularly. Giving a close and exegetically astute reading of 1 Corinthians 15, Ashton argues for a view of “consummation restoratively transforming creation” rather than replacing it (p. 194). Responding to Candida Moss’s provocative critique of heavenly healing as “heavenly eugenics,” Ashton draws on Augustine once more to offer a counter-interpretation of heavenly healing as “heavenly eulogization.” By this, he suggests that the legacy of intersexuality may well endure in the new creation, “not in terms of ambiguous embodiment” but as “marks of honor” that testify to God’s saving work in intersex persons (p. 216). The study concludes in chapter 7 with a review of the argument and an application of Ashton’s “thick” theological approach in the context of pastoral care. Moving from dogmatic theology to pastoral theology, he ends by considering the moral-pastoral challenge of intersex individuals and marriage.

It is impossible to do justice to a work of such depth and breadth in the limited space provided. The range of Ashton’s knowledge, theological perception, and command of primary sources is truly impressive. More impressive still is the irenic and pastorally sensitive approach that he brings to such a contentious and complex conversation. If I had to name one drawback of this remarkable book, it would be its limited accessibility. While Ashton aims to write “for academic, ecclesial, and worldly audiences” (p. 18), the book is much too technical for such a broad readership. Considering, however, that it originally served as his doctoral dissertation, I cannot imagine Ashton writing in any other way without it becoming another kind of book altogether. Perhaps we will just have to wait for a companion volume, written in a format that preserves his “thick” theological vision while expressing it in language that is more accessible.

Nonetheless, all of us owe Sam Ashton a debt of gratitude. I joyfully commend Beyond Male and Female? as a landmark work of evangelical scholarship and pastoral theology that deserves the widest possible reading, especially among pastor-theologians.