Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Politics and Religion
Tolkien, Resurrection of the Body, & Trangenderism

Tolkien, Resurrection of the Body, & Trangenderism

Last updated on: October 24, 2026 at 8:57 pm by Dennis Knapp

0 Comments

Tolkien, Resurrection of the Body, & Trangenderism 2026-10-24T20:57:59-06:00 Dennis Knapp

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Image created using AI.

I address this article to Catholics who believe that transgender identity reflects a reality God intended within His creation. Drawing on Scripture, the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, and the imagination of J.R.R. Tolkien, I will examine the relationship between body and soul in light of what Christians profess in the Nicene Creed: “I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.”

In J.R.R. Tolkien’s mythology, Glorfindel exemplifies Elven heroism and virtue. During the Fall of Gondolin, recounted in Tolkien’s writings, Glorfindel sacrifices his life fighting a Balrog, one of the ancient angelic spirits corrupted by Morgoth. Though Glorfindel defeats the Balrog, he falls to his death, and his fëa (spirit) travels to the Halls of Mandos.

In Tolkien’s mythology, Elves, unlike Men, remain bound to the world. Their fëar (spirits) cannot depart from it, and their hröar (bodies) possess a form of immortality, although violence or profound weariness can bring about their deaths. When an Elf dies, the fëa may answer the summons to Mandos, where it can remain disembodied or eventually receive a restored body.

This restoration differs from the Eastern concept of reincarnation. The Elven spirit does not enter an unrelated body or begin life as another individual. Instead, Tolkien envisioned a profound intimacy between fëa and hröa, such that the spirit’s enduring relationship with its original body allows for the restoration of that same bodily form.

Glorfindel does not return as a different person occupying an arbitrary body. He returns as Glorfindel.

Tolkien’s mythology raises a profound question about the Christian understanding of resurrection: Is our body merely something we possess, or is it integral to who we are?

Christianity Promises the Resurrection of the Body

As an incarnational faith, Christianity does not teach that salvation consists merely of the soul escaping the body. Scripture identifies Christ as the “firstfruits” of those who have fallen asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20). His resurrection anticipates our own, when God will reunite our souls with our glorified bodies.

The Catechism makes this plain in paragraphs 997–999. Death separates the soul from the body, but God will ultimately restore their union through the power of Christ’s resurrection. Paragraph 999 explains:

Christ is raised with his own body: ‘See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself’; but he did not return to an earthly life. So, in him, ‘all of them will rise again with their own bodies which they now bear,’ but Christ ‘will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body,’ into a ‘spiritual body.”

Just as Christ rose with His own body, we too will rise with ours. Though transformed and glorified, our bodies remain our own. Resurrection perfects our embodied existence rather than abolishing it. Unlike Tolkien’s account of Elvish re-embodiment, in which a body corresponding to the original is fashioned anew, Christian resurrection restores and glorifies the very body that belonged to us in earthly life.

Aquinas: The Soul Is the Form of the Body

St. Thomas Aquinas develops Aristotle’s understanding of the soul in the Summa Theologiae (I, Question 76, Article 1). For Aquinas, the soul is the substantial form of the body, meaning that it gives life and form to the human body. The soul does not constitute a complete human person temporarily inhabiting biological machinery or some interchangeable vessel. Rather, body and soul together constitute one human being. Death separates what naturally belongs together, while resurrection restores that unity.

Nor does Aquinas teach that souls exist as independently male or female substances that God assigns to bodies. Instead, his anthropology emphasizes the essential unity of body and soul. Our bodies are not merely possessions or instruments of an interior self. They belong to our very identity as human persons.

The implications are significant. If our bodies participate in our personal identity, we cannot simply dismiss biological sex as irrelevant to who we are. Scripture reinforces this understanding by identifying sexual differentiation as part of God’s original creation.

Male and Female: Part of Creation, Not the Fall

Returning to Scripture, Genesis 1:27 tells us that God created humanity male and female. Sexual differentiation existed before original sin. Unlike disease, aging, and bodily corruption, it is not a consequence of the Fall but part of God’s original design for humanity.

Echoing Scripture, the Catechism teaches that “sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul” (CCC 2332). It further states that “everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity” (CCC 2333).

More recently, Dignitas Infinita addresses this question directly. Paragraph 59 emphasizes that “biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated.” It further insists that sexual difference belongs to God’s creation, preceding our individual decisions and experiences.

This brings us to a crucial question: If sexual differentiation belongs to the goodness of creation, why would resurrection eliminate or reverse it?

The Resurrection Test: Male, Female, or Neither?

Consider a thought experiment. Suppose a biologically male person sincerely identifies as a woman. This person dies and, at the general resurrection, rises in a glorified body.

What sex will that resurrected body be?

Possibility A: Male. This preserves continuity with the person’s original biological sex and suggests that bodily sex reveals something objectively true about personal identity that subjective experience cannot overturn.

Possibility B: Female. This raises questions about bodily continuity and the goodness of creation. Why would glorification require changing the person’s original sex? Would this imply that the created body fundamentally misrepresented who that person was?

Possibility C: Neither. Some might appeal to Matthew 22:30, where Jesus teaches that there will be no marriage in the resurrection. However, the absence of marriage does not necessarily mean the abolition of sexual differentiation. In fact, St. Thomas Aquinas argues that both sexes will rise because sexual differentiation belongs to the perfection of human nature (Summa Theologiae, Supplement, Question 81, Article 3).

Possibility D: We Do Not Know. Christianity does not reveal every characteristic of our glorified bodies. Nevertheless, the Church’s teachings on bodily continuity, the goodness of creation, and the unity of body and soul remain relevant.

As Catholics, we understand that human beings exist as a unity of body and soul. Consequently, we must distinguish between a person’s sincere interior experience of gender identity and the objective reality of biological sex. The authenticity of an experience does not necessarily establish the truth of the conclusion someone draws from it.

Two Competing Anthropologies

At the heart of this discussion lie two competing understandings of the human person. From a Catholic theological perspective, the issue is not fundamentally about pronouns, bathrooms, or political controversies. Rather, it concerns the relationship between the body and personal identity.

A strong transgender anthropology holds that a person’s internal gender identity can determine who that person truly is, independently of biological sex. Conversely, classical Catholic anthropology maintains that body and soul together constitute the human person God created.

The latter challenges the former by affirming that biological sex is not merely an external characteristic, nor is it something subjective experience can redefine. While Catholic anthropology recognizes the reality of interior experiences, it questions whether those experiences possess the authority to override the meaning of the sexed body.

When we consider Aquinas’s teaching on the unity of body and soul alongside the doctrine of bodily resurrection, a fundamental question emerges: Does our interior understanding determine who we are, or must that understanding also account for the bodies God created us with?

Glorfindel and the Meaning of Restoration

Let us return to Tolkien’s fallen hero, Glorfindel. As a devout Catholic, Tolkien drew upon a Christian understanding of the human person in developing his mythology. Glorfindel’s restored embodiment reflects the enduring relationship between fëa and hröa, echoing Aquinas’s understanding of the unity of body and soul.

Although Tolkien’s fictional account differs from Christian resurrection, it illustrates an important principle: the body is not merely an accidental accessory to personal identity. Restoration does not mean replacing one’s embodied identity with an entirely different one.

Christianity makes an even stronger claim: God redeems the whole human person, body and soul.

Final Thoughts: God Raises Us, Not Just Our Consciousness

From Tolkien’s fëa and hröa to Aquinas’s understanding of body and soul, and ultimately to the resurrection, one consistent truth emerges: our bodies are integral to who we are. Just as Glorfindel’s restored body reflects his enduring identity, the Christian resurrection does not discard our embodied nature but restores and glorifies it. God does not merely save our souls; He redeems the whole human person.

This leaves us with a fundamental question: When God raises us from the dead, does He change our bodies to conform to our subjective understanding of ourselves, or does He restore and glorify the embodied persons He created?