Sanctified Sexual Relationships in Marriage: Reflections from Religious Wives and Husbands

Review of Religious Research (2021)Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Religion and sex are both prominent elements of most people’s lives. Most adults view both religion and sex as quite important in their lives. However, some research indicates that religion may negatively impact individuals’ perspectives on sex.

Purpose

We examined highly religious individuals’ spontaneous comments of the role of religion and sex in their lives and looked for themes in how sex and religion may be associated.

Methods

We conducted in-depth, qualitative interviews using a racially and ethnically diverse sample consisting of Muslim, Christian, and Jewish families comprised of 198 married heterosexual couples based on conjoint interviews with the husbands and wives. Couples were in long-term marriages (average 20 years) were interviewed together when most (93%) were in their 40s and 50s in 2001–2010. The topic of the nexus of religion and sexual relationships was not on the interview questionnaire but still surfaced in many of the interviews.

Results

We analyzed participants’ comments related to sex and found six themes that revealed these religious families’ perspectives on the purpose of sex, including: 1. The sanctity of sex; 2. The expression of sex is limited to marriage; 3. Sex strengthens the marriage; 4. Sex is for procreation; 5. Sex is just one component of a strong marriage; and 6. Religious beliefs can be damaging. Implications and applications are discussed.

Conclusions and Implications

This study also illustrates that how individuals, marriages, and families interpret and apply the teachings of their respective religion may have more to do with the influence of religion than their particular denomination or their religious attendance. Sexuality was viewed as a covenant, a higher purpose, a form of worship, or even a way to make God happy, but only within the bonds of marriage. Couples identified their sexual relationship with Godly characteristics and this provided a sense of power and sanctification. These findings may provide needed insight to religious couples about how and why sex and religion blend or create conflict.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Full list of search words and phrases available upon request.

  2. 2.

    This is the technical term for a coding category in NVivo.

  3. 3.

    All participant names in this article are pseudonyms for purposed of anonymity.

References

  1. Alghafli, Z., T. Hatch, and L. Marks. 2014. Religion and relationships in Muslim families: A qualitative examination of devout married Muslim couples. Religions 5: 814–833. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel5030814.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ali-Faisal, S. 2018. Crossing sexual barriers: Predictors of sexual guilt and sexual anxiety among young Canadian and American Muslim adults. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 27 (3): 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Babbie, E. 2004. The practice of social research, 10th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carter, M.J., and C. Fuller. 2016. Symbols, meaning, and action: The past, present, and future of symbolic interactionism. Current Sociology 64 (6): 931–961. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392116638396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Daly, K. 2007. Qualitative methods for family studies and human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Damon, W., and A. Colby. 2013. Why a true account of human development requires exemplar research. Exemplar methods and research 142: 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Davidson, J.K., C.A. Darling, and L. Norton. 1995. Religiosity and the sexuality of women: Sexual behavior and sexual satisfaction revisited. The Journal of Sex Research 32 (3): 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499509551794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Davidson, J.K., N.B. Moore, J.R. Earle, and R. Davis. 2008. Sexual attitudes and behavior at four universities: Do region, race, and/or religion matter? Adolescence 43 (170): 189–220.

    Google Scholar 

  9. del Mar Sánchez-Fuentes, M., P. Santos-Iglesias, and J.C. Sierra. 2014. A systematic review of sexual satisfaction. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology 14 (1): 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70038-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dollahite, D.C., and N.M. Lambert. 2007. Forsaking all others: How religious involvement promotes marital fidelity in Christian, Jewish, and Muslim couples. Review of Religious Research 48 (3): 290–307.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dudley, M.G., and F.A. Kosinkski. 1990. Religiosity and marital satisfaction: A research note. Review of Religious Research 32 (1): 78–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/3511329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Emmers-Sommer, T.M., M. Allen, K.V. Schoenbauer, and N. Burrell. 2018. Implications of sex guilt: A meta-analysis. Marriage & Family Review 54 (5): 417–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Francis, L.E., and R.E. Adams. 2019. Two faces of self and emotion in symbolic interactionism: From process to structure and culture—and back. Symbolic Interaction 42 (2): 250–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ghorpade, J., J.R. Lackritz, and G. Singh. 2006. Intrinsic religious orientation among minorities in the United States. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 16: 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327582ijpr1601_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hernandez, K.M., A. Mahoney, and K.I. Pargament. 2011. Sanctification of sexuality: Implications for newlyweds’ marital and sexual quality. Journal of Family Psychology 25 (5): 775. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hernandez-Kane, K.M., and A. Mahoney. 2018. Sex through a sacred lens: Longitudinal effects of sanctification of marital sexuality. Journal of Family Psychology 32 (4): 425. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Higgins, J.A., J. Trussell, N.B. Moore, and J.K. Davidson. 2010. Young adult sexual health: Current and prior sexual behaviours among non-Hispanic white US college students. Sexual Health 7 (1): 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1071/SH09028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Impett, E.A., A. Muise, and N.O. Rosen. 2015. Is it good to be giving in the bedroom? A prosocial perspective on sexual health and well-being in romantic relationships. Current Sexual Health Reports. 7 (3): 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-015-0055-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kainz, H. (2015). Sex and religion. The Catholic Thing. Retrieved from https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2015/07/18/sex-and-religion/

  20. Kleinplatz, P.J., A.D. Ménard, M. Paquet, N. Paradis, M.R. Campbell, D. Zuccarino, and L. Mehak. 2009. The components of optimal sexuality: A portrait of “great sex.” The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 18 (1–2): 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Laumann, E.O., A. Nicolosi, D.B. Glasser, A. Paik, C. Gingell, E. Moreira, and T. Wang. 2005. Sexual problems among women and men aged 40–80 y: Prevalence and correlates identified in the global study of sexual attitudes and behaviors. International Journal of Impotence Research 17 (1): 39. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3901250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lefkowitz, E.S., M.M. Gillen, C.L. Shearer, and T.L. Boone. 2004. Religiosity, sexual behaviors, and sexual attitudes during emerging adulthood. Journal of Sex Research 41 (2): 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490409552223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Leonhardt, N.D., D.M. Busby, and B.J. Willoughby. 2020. Sex guilt or sanctification? The indirect role of religiosity on sexual satisfaction. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 12 (2): 213–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mahoney, A. 2010. Religion in families, 1999–2009: A relational spirituality framework. Journal of Marriage and Family 72: 805–827. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00732.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Marks, L.D. 2015. A pragmatic, step-by-step guide for qualitative methods: Capturing the disaster and long-term recovery stories of katrina and rita. Current Psychology 34 (3): 494–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9342-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Marks, L.D., and D.C. Dollahite. 2011. Mining the meanings from psychology of religion’s correlation mountain. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality 3: 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Marks, L.D., and D.C. Dollahite. 2017. Religion and families. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Muise, A., and E.A. Impett. 2015. Good, giving, and game: The relationship benefits of communal sexual motivation. Social Psychological and Personality Science 6 (2): 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614553641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Perry, S.L. 2016. Perceived spousal religiosity and marital quality across racial and ethnic groups. Family Relations 65: 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pew (2014). Religious Landscape Study. Retrieved from: http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/importance-of-religion-in-ones-life/

  31. Prairie, B.A., M.F. Scheier, K.A. Matthews, C.C.H. Chang, and R. Hess. 2011. A higher sense of purpose in life is associated with sexual enjoyment in midlife women. Menopause 18 (8): 839–844. https://doi.org/10.1097/gme.0b013e31820befca.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Regnerus, M. 2007. Forbidden fruit: Sex and religion in the lives of American teenagers. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Seymour, J., G. Dix, and T. Eardley. 1995. Joint accounts: Methodology and practice in research interviews with couples. New York: Social Policy Research Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sierra, J.C., V. Ortega, and J.R. Gutierrez-Quinanilla. 2008. Encuesta de Opinión Sexual: fiabilidad, validez y datos normativos de una versión reducida en muestras salvadoreñas. Revista Mexicana de Psicología 25 (1): 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Silk, M., and A. Walsh. 2006. Religion by region. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: AltaMira.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Taylor, B., and H. De Vocht. 2011. Interviewing separately or as couples? Considerations of authenticity of method. Qualitative Health Research 21 (11): 1576–1587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Valentine, G. 1999. Doing household research: Interviewing couples together and apart. Area 31 (1): 67–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Waite, L.J., E.O. Laumann, A. Das, and L.P. Schumm. 2009. Sexuality: Measures of partnerships, practices, attitudes, and problems in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Study. Journals of Gerontology Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 64 (suppl_1): 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbp038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wallin, P. 1957. Religiosity, sexual gratification, and marital satisfaction. American Sociological Review 22 (3): 300–305. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Wallin, P., and A.L. Clark. 1964. Religiosity, sexual gratification, and marital satisfaction in the middle years of marriage. Social Forces 42 (3): 303–309. https://doi.org/10.2307/2575533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wilcox, W.B., and N. Wolfinger. 2016. Soul mates: Religion, sex, love, and marriage among African Americans and Latinos. England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Woo, J.S., N. Morshedian, L.A. Brotto, and B.B. Gorzalka. 2012. Sex guilt mediates the relationship between religiosity and sexual desire in East Asian and Euro-Canadian college-aged women. Archives of Sexual Behavior 41 (6): 1485–1495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9918-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by the Eliza R. Snow Fellowship.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. School of Family Life, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, 2054 JFSB84604, USA

    Chelom E. Leavitt, Rebecca W. Clarke, Loren D. Marks & David C. Dollahite

  2. Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    David B. Allsop

Authors
  1. Chelom E. Leavitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David B. Allsop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca W. Clarke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Loren D. Marks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. David C. Dollahite
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chelom E. Leavitt.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Leavitt, C.E., Allsop, D.B., Clarke, R.W. et al. Sanctified Sexual Relationships in Marriage: Reflections from Religious Wives and Husbands. Rev Relig Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13644-020-00440-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Religion
  • Sex
  • Sexual satisfaction
  • Relational satisfaction
  • Meaning of sex