Research at the Intersections of Christianity and Transgender and Non Binary Identities: A Systematic Literature Review

Background and Purpose: While the impact of sexual orientation on the experience of Christian identifying people has been studied extensively, there is much less research on the intersection of transgender and non binary (TNB) identities and Christianity. In this systematic literature review, we proposed three research questions: 1) What is the overall scope and state of the research at the intersection of trans and non-binary identity and Christianity? (i.e., number of articles, conceptual vs research methods, sample size, etc.)? 2) What specific interventions or practice recommendations are named (micro and/or macro)? and 3) What is the next step in research at this intersection?

Methods: This systematic review was completed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist (Page et al., 2020). Working with a university librarian and Boland et al.’s (2017) guide to systematic reviews, we developed the research questions, search strategy, and parameters. The research team used Zotero reference management software to organize the articles and Google Sheets to track information relevant to the research questions. For rigor, two researchers completed the initial abstract reviews and rated independently whether an article fit the set parameters. Three authors reviewed the articles included in the final review meeting regular to audit the findings.

Results: From 2012-2022, we found N=47 articles that met our inclusion criteria. We identified n=28 research articles (59.57%) and n=19 conceptual articles (40.43%). The research articles included n=7 quantitative (25.0%), n= 16 qualitative (57.14%), and n=5 mixed methods (17.86%) studies. Only about half of the research articles (n=13, 46.43%) were focused on TNB participants. Another n=3 research articles included a mixed sample of TNB participants and sexual minoritized participants or a mix of TNB participants and cisgender peers. Additionally, one of the conceptual articles was by an author that self-disclosed trans identity. Consequently, out of all the articles relevant to TNB identity and Christianity, only about a third (36.17%) included the voices and perspectives of TNB people in the research. The n=12 research articles that did not include TNB participants were focused on Christian opinions of TNB rights. The conceptual articles were focused on ethical questions related to religious practitioners and healthcare services for TNB people or point of view pieces related to theological views of providers.

Conclusion: Looking at the collective research and practice implications, we pose the following: (1) Christian religious officials, congregants, and clinicians receive specific training on gender identity, gender expression, and the intersecting impact of religion. (2) Social workers and clinicians should carefully access TNB clients for religious identity past or present. When there is on-going interaction with a non-affirming religious community or family members, specialized screening and planning for individual safety is necessary. (3) Clinicians specializing in serving TNB clients should be aware of religious needs and strengths for TNB people and seek training about how to address religious harm or trauma in therapy (as indicated by client self-determination).