“Queering” Spiritual Direction: Towards a Trans*-Literary Praxis

Abstract

The praxis of spiritual direction has a number of well-established orthodoxies, most notably Ignatian, Franciscan and Benedictine, each typically characterized as paths that invite us to become our “true” selves in God. This article interrogates practices of spiritual direction from a queer perspective, examining the exclusions and inclusions for trans* people implicit in traditional notions of “spiritual direction”. Concentrating on a theo-literary reading of Psalm 139 using trans* understandings of the terms “passing” and “stealth” and grounded in my experience as a trans* woman, a spiritual director and poet, this article presents critical strategies to enable trans* Christians to locate themselves in the Christian spiritual discourse.

Keywords:

• Psalm 139
• queer
• selfhood
• spiritual direction
• subjectivity
• trans*

Notes

1 I use “trans*” as shorthand for a variety of trans subjectivities and positions, including transsexual, transgender, genderqueer and so on.

2 I am conscious that various terms for “spiritual direction” are used. I tend to use “director”/“directee” simply because those were the terms used in my first exposure to “direction”. I also use “spiritual companionship”, and some directors see themselves as “soul friends”. A discussion of the power dynamics and semantic values of differing terms falls outside the scope of this article.

3 While a number of scholars are writing about trans* issues, it is notable that many, including myself, use autobiography as a prism through which to explore philosophical and theological questions (see e.g. Mann 2012; Bornstein 1995).

4 “Cisgender”, as a gender theory term, has its origins in the Latin-derived prefix “cis”, meaning “to the near side”. In this context, “cis” refers to the alignment of gender identity with assigned gender.

5 I am conscious that this is not necessarily a trans* position, but one generated by occupying the position of woman, cis or trans*, in a patriarchal culture. That is, to be woman is, by definition, to be characterized as “lacking” or “lack”. See Lacan, Mitchell and Rose 1982; Kristeva, Waller et al. 1984.