Introduction

Sexual satisfaction in intimate dyadic relationships has long been acknowledged as a crucial factor that can predict couples’ relationship satisfaction and commitment over time (Impett et al., 2014). For instance, an extensive research endeavor utilizing machine learning techniques, which aimed to pinpoint the most robust indicators of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal studies of couples revealed that sexual satisfaction ranked among the top five predictors of both actors’ (self-reports) and partners’ (partner-reports) future relational satisfaction and commitment (Joel et al., 2020). Furthermore, higher levels of sexual satisfaction have been linked to reduced marital instability as time progresses (Yeh et al., 2006) and to increased personal well-being among individuals from various cultural backgrounds (Laumann et al., 2006).

Thus, it is unsurprising that substantial theoretical and empirical attention has explored sexual satisfaction as a dependent variable (del Mar Sánchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). However, specific religious/spiritual factors associated with heightened or lowered sexual satisfaction in the context of marriages or committed romantic relationships have received relatively little attention (Mahoney 2013; Mahoney et al., 2023). Instead, scientific investigations on religious/spiritual functioning and sexuality have focused on determining whether increased religious participation (e.g., attending religious services) hinders premarital or extramarital sexual conduct and fosters heightened guilt regarding sexual activities, particularly those occurring outside of marriage (Hernandez et al., 2013). Nonetheless, recent studies have commenced exploring the convergence of religious/spiritual factors and sexual satisfaction within marital and committed relationships (e.g., Hernandez et al., 2018; Leonhardt et al., 2021; Leonhardt et al., 2023; Moore et al., 2024). This study adds to these efforts by examining whether religious/spiritual struggles with one’s sexual life/activity within an intimate union is a specific religious/spiritual factor that may undermine sexual satisfaction whereas the sanctification of relational sexuality is a specific religious/spiritual factor that may buffer such an association in marital or committed relationships.

Empirical research on global religious/spiritual factors and sexual functioning

Throughout history, the predominant religious doctrines across the globe have advocated for sexual conduct to be confined to heterosexual marriage. Consequently, scholars have predominantly concentrated on demonstrating that greater religiousness is associated with a postponed initiation of premarital sexual relations, reduced or non-existent engagement in premarital and non-heterosexual sexual activities, diminished instances of extramarital affairs, and greater sexual guilt and inhibition outside of marriage (Hernandez et al., 2018). However, major world religions exalt marriage as a sacred and sanctioned relational domain where partners are encouraged to engage in sexual activities for procreation, sexual gratification, and/or the enhancement of marital harmony (Hernandez et al., 2013; Leavitt et al., 2021; Onedera, 2008). Thus, empirical attention is needed to identify specific ways that religiousness/spirituality may be tied, for better and worse, to sexual satisfaction within marriages as well as long-term unions that often function like marital relationships for the partners.

To set the stage for this study, we first review empirical findings on links between sexual satisfaction within marriage and global religious/spiritual variables. For the purposes of this manuscript, global religious/variables refer to single-item questions about the frequency of religious attendance or frequency of prayer and self-ratings of overall religiousness or spirituality as well as multi-item scales that combine various global religious/spiritual items. Also, for the purposes of this manuscript, we use the phrase “relational sexuality” to refer broadly to the participants’ sexual functioning within the context of a marriage or committed intimate union as opposed to sexual attitudes or activities expressed in other contexts.

Associations of global religious/spiritual factors with sexual satisfaction

Initial efforts to investigate the interplay of global religious/spiritual variables with relational sexuality focused on individuals who are now in late middle adulthood or older and yielded mixed findings. For instance, a nationally representative survey conducted in the United States in 1992 found that more frequent religious attendance was correlated with greater sexual gratification among married men, but not women, who in 2025 would fall in the age range of 51–92 years old (Waite & Joyner, 2001). In two other large-scale studies conducted in the late 1990s that involved this older age cohort of Americans, null results were also found of sexual satisfaction with religious attendance (Davidson et al., 1995) as well as with multi-item scales of religiousness and perceptions of God’s approval of sexual activity in marriage (Young et al., 1998).

Over the past two to three decades, minimal scientific consideration appears to have been given to religious/spiritual factors tied to the sexual satisfaction of partners within marital or committed relationships. Recent studies suggest that some, but not other, single-item indices of religiousness and spirituality are tied to greater sexual frequency or satisfaction for married individuals. In a 2017 national U.S. survey (average age 56) single item questions about overall religiousness, spirituality, attendance, and prayer were correlated with greater sexual satisfaction for married couples (Cranney et al., 2020). By contrast, in 2010–2012 national survey of Britian, some but not other, single-item indices of religiousness and spirituality were tied to sexual satisfaction for married individuals (Peri-Rotem & Skirbekk, 2023). Overall, global religious/spiritual variables have yielded small, mixed, or null associations with sexual satisfaction (Dew et al., 2020; Mahoney et al., 2023).

Disentangle helpful and harmful religious/spiritual factors tied to sexual satisfaction

Calls have been proposed to advance research on relational sexuality by moving beyond global religious/spiritual variables to better elucidate specific religious/spiritual beliefs centered on sexuality that may inhibit or facilitate sexual satisfaction (Leonhardt et al., 2021; Mahoney et al., 2023). Such efforts could help clarify the reasons behind any links between organized religious practices, such as, regular worship attendance or the recitation of prescribed prayers, and sexual satisfaction. Increased involvement in a supportive religious community could plausibly signify a deeper internalization of favorable religious/spiritual beliefs regarding relational sexuality, such as sanctification, that can enhance sexual satisfaction. Conversely, greater internalization of some religious teachings about sexuality could contribute to religious/spiritual struggles about sexuality that undermine sexual satisfaction. Utilizing global religious/spiritual measures (e.g., frequency of prayer or reading of religious texts) fails to disentangle specific religious/spiritual factors that could either bolster or compromise personal or relational functioning.

The confounding of potentially beneficial and detrimental specific religious/spiritual factors within global religious/spiritual indices in studies creates three major problems in understanding why generally being “more religious” or involved in organized religious groups may matter for individual or interpersonal functioning, such as sexual satisfaction (Mahoney et al., 2023). First, skeptics can easily argue that any apparent associations between greater overall religiousness/spirituality and sexual satisfaction is merely due to the partners’ psychosocial strengths, such as having strong moral values or social networks, which partners can develop and access within or outside of organized religious participation. From this conceptual vantage point, greater religious attendance or rituals are interchangeable with involvement in other cultural activities; such religious/spiritual behavior is not necessarily beneficial because of unique, substantive religious/spiritual beliefs or practices that may facilitate sexual satisfaction, such as sanctification. Second, and conversely, critics can easily attribute associations between global religious/spiritual indices and sexual problems to specific religious/spiritual teachings or beliefs that promote sexual guilt or inhibit sexual pleasure. Third, global religious/spiritual indices can obscure the adverse implications of religious/spiritual problems, such as religious\spiritual struggles, that are relatively rare compared to more commonplace religious/spiritual resources, such as sanctification. This study examines the association between sexual satisfaction and two distinctive, specific religious/spiritual constructs that have well-established theoretical and empirical foundations: religious/spiritual struggles and sanctification.

Religious/spiritual struggles with sexual functioning and relational sexuality

Religious/spiritual struggles arise when certain aspects of belief, practice, or experience become focal points or sources of an individuals’ sense of internal tension or conflict (Abu-Raiya et al., 2015; Exline et al., 2014; Pargament & Exline, 2021). Originally referred to as “negative religious coping” (Pargament, 2002), recent scholarship has updated theory and assessment of religious/spiritual struggles, with six sub-types identified (e.g., Exline, 2013; Exline et al., 2014). Divine struggles entail tensions or conflicts related to beliefs about God or perceived connections with a divine entity, while demonic struggles involve concerns that malevolent forces like the devil or evil spirits are targeting an individual or causing adverse occurrences. Interpersonal struggles encompass negative encounters with religious individuals or institutions, as well as conflicts with others over religious matters. Three intrapersonal sub-types of religious/spiritual struggles include moral struggles, involving the internal conflict of adhering to moral principles or experiencing excessive guilt over perceived transgressions; doubt-related struggles, characterized by distress or uncertainty regarding one’s beliefs; and ultimate meaning-related struggles, marked by a sense of existential emptiness or a lack of deeper significance in life.

Research demonstrates that these six religious/spiritual struggles coalesce into one higher-order factor that reflects intense mental strain and undermines general wellness (Pargament & Exline, 2021). Put more plainly, religious/spiritual struggles have the power to greatly unsettle individuals and challenge their fundamental sense of self (Abu-Raiya et al., 2015). Indeed, a considerable number of cross-sectional studies have linked religious/spiritual struggles to greater emotional distress and poorer individual well-being (for reviews, see Ano & Vasconcelles, 2005; Exline, 2013; Pargament, 2011). Longitudinal inquiries have compellingly indicated that religious/spiritual struggles predict future individual psychological distress and personal maladjustment (for a recent relevant meta-analysis of longitudinal studies, see Bockrath et al., 2022).

Conceptual work has extended theory and research on religious/spiritual struggles from individual to relationship adjustment (Mahoney, 2013), and some initial empirical efforts exist on the negative implications of religious/spiritual struggles to married couples. For example, married Canadian women, but not men, who reported more religious/spiritual struggles in general also reported lower marital satisfaction (Tremblay et al., 2002), whereas for both Iranian men and women, more religious/struggles predicted lower marital satisfaction after controlling for marital sanctification and positive religious coping (Fallahchai et al., 2021). In two intriguing studies of Iranian women seeking counseling after infidelity by their husbands, higher religious/spiritual struggles were robustly tied to stronger desires to divorce (Hassannezhad, 2022; Khazaei & Babaie, 2022).

In this study, we expanded these initial relationship studies for the first time to Israeli Jewish individuals in marital or committed unions and assessed religious/spiritual struggles about their sexual activity/life. Given that religious/spiritual struggles have been robustly tied to indices of distress and poorer individual well-being worldwide (Bockrath et al., 2022) and among Israeli samples (e.g., Abu-Raiya et al., 2016a), and initial studies connecting these religious/spiritual struggles in general to relational/marital maladjustment (Hassannezhad et al., 2022; Tremblay et al., 2002), we hypothesized that higher religious/spiritual struggles sexual centered on sexual activities/life for individuals who are married or in committed unions would be tied to lower sexual satisfaction.

Sanctification of relational sexuality and sexual satisfaction

Sanctification refers to the degree to which an aspect of life is perceived (a) as a manifestation of God or Higher Powers (i.e., theistic sanctification) and/or (b) as imbued with sacred qualities (i.e., nontheistic sanctification; Pargament & Mahoney, 2005). Theistic sanctification captures the extent to which people view God/Higher Powers as playing a central role within a particular aspect of life. For example, one’s sexual relationship with a spouse/partner can be seen as a reflection of God’s will, a way to connect with or experience God’s presence, influenced by God, or embodying God’s essence. Non-theistic sanctification refers to ascribing qualities that are associated with divinity, such as transcendence, ultimate value, and purpose, to a domain of life. For example, relational sexuality can be seen as being a deep spiritual experience, part of a larger spiritual plan, miraculous, sacred, and holy; connecting the couple to a creative power beyond themselves; as revealing the deepest truths and mysteries of life; and as embodying moments when time stands still and one is part of something eternal. People who do (theists) and do not (non-theists) believe in God can endorse non-theistic beliefs (for details on theory and findings related to sanctification, see Mahoney et al., 2013; Pargament & Mahoney, 2005; Pargament et al., 2017).

Viewing relational sexuality as sanctified is consistent with Christian teachings that sexual intimacy within marriage symbolizes the divine love and presence of God (Onedera, 2008) and unites the couple with the divine (Gardner, 2002; Lauer, 1985). Eastern religions like Taoism, Hinduism, and Buddhism also emphasize the harmonious connection between marital sexuality and spiritual transcendence (Turner et al., 2007). Particularly relevant to this study, in Judaism, sexuality is perceived as “God-given impulse that is normal, healthy, good, intended, and commanded within a heterosexual marriage” (Turner et al., 2007, p. 296). Research on sanctification offers one possible avenue to assess the extent to which people translate and incorporate potentially helpful religious teachings about sex into their experience of lived sexual relationships.

Empirical evidence demonstrates that many aspects of life can undergo a sanctification process, such as family relationships, work, one’s body, and the environment. Further, the more individuals sanctify a given aspect of life, the more they appear motivated to invest time and energy into that sacred realm (for reviews, see Mahoney et al., 2013; Pargament and Mahoney, 2005; Pomerleau et al., 2016). Concurrently, greater sanctification is associated with more satisfaction and better functioning in the domain. For example, in a meta-analysis of correlational findings through mid-2019, Mahoney et al. (2022) found that greater sanctification of various types of close relationships (marital, sexual, parent-child, friendships) was associated with more positive relational adjustment and lower rates of relational problems.

Especially relevant to this investigation, a few studies have examined individuals’ perceived sanctity of their sexual relationship with their spouse or partner. Specifically, greater sanctification of sexuality (combined theistic and non-theistic scales) predicted greater sexual satisfaction cross-sectionally and longitudinally among newlyweds, married and unmarried partners in committed unions (Hernandez et al., 2011; Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018). Also, non-theistic sanctification of relational sexuality was correlated with sexual satisfaction for those individuals in long-term committed relationships (at least 2 years) including married and unmarried people who spanned a range of sexual orientation (68% identified as completely heterosexual to 9% completely homosexual Leonhardt et al., 2021) and predicted greater sexual satisfaction to the same degree across no to high global religiousness/spirituality (Leonhardt et al., 2023). In addition, non-theistic sanctification was tied to lower sex guilt among opposite-sex, same-sex, and cohabiting partners in established intimate unions (Leonhardt et al., 2020; Phillips et al., 2017) and to lower odds of physical and emotional cheating, even after controlling for plausible alternate explanations (general religiousness/spirituality, problematic alcohol use, trait self-control; McAllister et al., 2020). In this study, we expected to replicate that greater theistic and non-theistic sanctification of relational sexuality would be tied to greater sexual satisfaction.

Interplay of religious/spiritual struggles and sanctification for sexual satisfaction

As the most novel element of this study, we examined whether greater sanctification of relational sexuality would moderate the association between higher religious/spiritual struggles about sexual functioning and lower sexual satisfaction. Although, to our knowledge, no empirical study has investigated this question, we theoretically expected greater sanctity of relational sexuality to operate as a psychosocial resource that could provide individuals with reassurance and comfort when faced with religious/spiritual struggles about sexuality that might otherwise interfere with their intimate relationship. Taking refuge in viewing sexual intimacy with a spouse or partner as sacred may offer an individual religious/spiritual counter-evidence that allays the negative impact on sexual satisfaction due to distress in one’s relationship with God, conflicts with others over religious matters, internal confusion with morality, and/or doubts about larger religious worldviews involving sexuality. Experiencing a sense of divinity, transcendence, and ultimate meaning within a visceral union with a loved one may help neutralize more abstract existential r/s struggles tied to religious/spiritual teachings about sexuality.

Reciprocally, greater sexual satisfaction may deepen the perceived sanctity of relational sexuality and reinforce one’s confidence of the decision to forge and maintain a sexual bond with a spouse or partner. Such processes within a union may also help people compartmentalize or ignore nagging religious/spiritual struggles over sexuality rooted in religious/spiritual teachings that foster sexual guilt or inhibitions about sexual activity, even with a spouse. Conversely, experiencing both greater religious/spiritual struggles and lower sanctification of relational sexuality may generate a “double whammy” effect. Here, higher religious/spiritual struggles with God, other people, or internally over sexuality and a failure to experience one’s sexual bond with a spouse or partner as embodying divine qualities (e.g., transcendence) or love as taught in many religious groups (Leavitt et al., 2021) could undermine sexual satisfaction due to violating higher religious/spiritual expectations of oneself, one’s partner, and the couples’ sexual relationship. Consistent with our speculation of interactive effects between sanctification of sexuality and religious/spiritual struggles for sexual satisfaction, Abu-Raiya et al. (2016a) utilized a representative sample of the American population, and identified a few religious/spiritual factors (e.g., religious commitment, life sanctification, religious support, religious hope) as protective factors against the negative impact of religious/spiritual struggles on overall well-being and psychological distress. The authors concluded that their findings underscore the multifaceted character of religion and spirituality: paradoxically, some religious/spiritual processes may offer solutions to religious/spiritual problems that may be an inherent part of religious/spiritual life.

The current study

Although marriage is the most socially sanctioned context for sexual activity among world religions and diverse religious traditions uphold marital sexuality as sanctified (Jones & Hostler, 2005; Rosenau & Sytsma, 2004), surprisingly little empirical research has examined any religious/spiritual factors that could help or harm sexual satisfaction in the context of marriage and committed unions (Leonhardt et al., 2021; Leonhardt et al., 2023). Hence, the study’s aim is to fill this important gap in literature, by examining the link between two constructs that have well-established theoretical and empirical foundations (i.e., religious/spiritual struggles, sanctification) and sexual satisfaction among people in marriages or committed unions. Consistent with previous work, we hypothesized that: 1) lower religious/spiritual struggles and greater sanctification of relational sexuality would be associated with greater sexual satisfaction; 2) sanctification of sexuality would moderate the association between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction, such as, when levels of sexual sanctification increase, the negative link between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction becomes weaker (i.e., a buffering effect).

Finally, prior research shows that the sanctification of relational sexuality tends to be endorsed at lower levels than the sanctification of marriage itself. This finding highlights that people tend to demonstrate more variability and ambivalence about sexuality as sacred, even in the context of marriage or committed unions. Perhaps cognitions of God being manifested in the bedroom are relatively difficult to embrace due to internalized conflict and conventional religious messages about taking pleasure in sexuality. By contrast, non-theistic sanctification offers a less anthropomorphic view of sexuality that taps more easily and directly into sacred attributes that could elevate peoples’ sense of awe, wonder, and connection via sexuality. Thus, theistic and non-theistic sanctification of relational sexuality could potentially operate differently, with the latter more easily accessed as a resource to bolster their sexual satisfaction. Thus, non-theistic sanctification could be more likely than theistic sanctification to function as a protective resource against religious/spiritual struggles more generally. Hence, we differentiated between the two types of sanctification to generate nuanced findings.

Methods

Procedure

To be eligible for participation, individuals had to meet the following inclusion criteria: 1) being Israeli Jewish; 2) perceiving oneself as religious or spiritual to some degree; and 3) being legally married or in a committed relationship (one that has lasted for two years at least). Convenience and snowball sampling techniques were implemented to recruit participants. To this end, the second author reached out to various Facebook groups, especially those interested in religious/spiritual matters, focusing on issues related to sexuality, or the intersection of both matters (e.g., “Mikvi”, “healthy sexuality”) and acquaintances (e.g., family, friends, colleagues). In her outreach efforts, she provided an explanation of the study’s objectives and outlined the inclusion criteria. Included in this communication was a Qualtrics-generated hyperlink leading to the study’s survey, allowing individuals who met the criteria to access the survey, express their willingness to participate, and complete the survey. Throughout the data collection process, no ethical dilemmas or challenges were encountered. Given the convenience nature of the sampling method and the approach taken to promote the study, it proved unfeasible to estimate the participation rate accurately.

A total of 463 surveys were completed during data collection. However, 154 participants failed to complete more than 70% of the survey items, and thus they were excluded from the subsequent analyses. Consequently, the final sample consisted of 309 participants, upon whom the final analyses were performed.

See the end of the manuscript for an ethics approval statement and an informed consent statement which provide details about both topics.

Sample

The average age of participants was 34.51 (SD = 9.06, Range = 19–67). Seventy-four percent of participants were female and the rest male. Regarding marital status, 91.2% reported being married and 8.8% being in a committed relationship. As for education, 6.1% reported completing high school, 31.8% reported having some degree of higher education and the rest (62.1%) reported completing an undergraduate degree or obtaining a master’s degree. The average level of self-perceived religiousness indicated by participants was 3.46 (SD = 0.71, R = 1–5) and their average level of self-perceived spirituality was 3.21 (SD = 1.02, Range = 1–5). Self-perceived religiousness and spirituality were operationalized via the questions: 1) To what degree do you consider yourself a religious person? 2) To what degree do you consider yourself a spiritual person? To both these questions, participants were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all religious, not at all spiritual) to 5 (very religious, very spiritual). It is imperative to acknowledge that the inquiries presented herein diverge from the question employed to evaluate the inclusion criterion (“do you consider yourself to possess some degree of religious or spiritual identity?” which elicits a binary yes/no response).

Measures

Demographics

This section was composed by the authors for the purpose of this study. Participants were asked to indicate their age, gender, marital status, education, self-perceived religiousness, and self-perceived spirituality.

Sexual satisfaction

Sexual satisfaction was assessed by the Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction (GMSEX) questionnaire developed by Lawrence and Byers (1998), translated into Hebrew and validated among a Jewish sample by Spivak-Lavi and Gewirtz-Meydan (2022). Participants rated their sexual relationship with their partner on five 7-point bipolar scales: bad-good, unpleasant-pleasant, negative-positive, unsatisfying-satisfying, worthless-valuable. Responses were summed with higher scores indicating greater sexual satisfaction. In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha was excellent (α = 0.95) and similar (α =0.94) to that found by Spivak-Lavi and Gewirtz-Meydan (2022).

Religious and spiritual struggles with sexual life/activity

Religious/spiritual struggles were assessed by the Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale (RSSS) developed by Exline et al. (2014) and translated into Hebrew and validated among the Jewish population in Israel by Abu-Raiya et al. (2016b). It consists of 26 items divided into six subscales that examine six types of religious/spiritual struggles: Divine (e.g., “I felt anger towards God”); Demonic (e.g., “I felt tormented by Satan or evil spirits); Interpersonal (e.g., “I had conflicts with other people over religious matters”); Moral struggles (e.g., “I was worried that my actions were morally wrong”); Ultimate Meaning (e.g., “I felt that my life had no deep meaning”); and Doubt (e.g., “I wondered if my religious/spiritual beliefs were true”). Participants read the prompt “At certain times in life, many people experience struggles, worries, or doubts about religious or spiritual matters. Please indicate to what extent you have experienced each of the experiences listed below with respect to your sexual life/activity during the past month” and were asked to rate each of the scale’s items on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (to a very large extent). Item scores were averaged, with higher scores on each subscale indicated higher struggle of the type assessed by the subscale. In the current study, five of the six subscales exhibited high internal consistencies (α = 0.80–0.91). The internal consistency obtained for the Demonic struggles subscale was low (α = 0.41) and all of its items lowered the internal consistency of the whole scale. Hence this subscale’s items were dropped from further analysis. The internal consistency for the whole scale after excluding the Demonic struggles items was 0.92, similar (0.93) to what was found by Abu-Raiya et al. (2016). For further examination, we have made the decision to concentrate on the aggregate of religious/spiritual struggles rather than conducting separate analyses for each individual type of religious spiritual struggles. This decision was influenced by several factors: 1) the correlations between scores on each subscale and the global score were moderately high (0.67–0.82); 2) the correlations between the various types of religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction were of a similar magnitude (r = 0.14–0.19), and lesser than the correlation between the global score of religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction (r = −0.21); 3) the overall internal consistency of the religious/spiritual struggles with sexual life scale was high (α = 0.92), surpassing that of each individual type of religious/spiritual struggles. This approach ensured that the analyses remain both concise and meaningful.

Sanctification of relational sexuality

Sanctification of relational sexuality was assessed by the Sanctification of Marital Sexuality Scale developed by Hernandez-Kane and Mahoney (2018). This scale was adapted from a scale designed to measure the sanctification of marriage developed by Mahoney et al. (1999). The scale was translated into Hebrew by the 2nd author and back translated into to English by the 1st author. This scale consists of two 10-item subscales. The first subscale is called Sacred Qualities assessed non-theistic sanctification and includes the following items: Being sexually intimate with my partner feels like a deeply spiritual experience; Our sexual relationship seems like a miracle to me; Our sexual connection is part of a larger spiritual plan; Our sexual relationship is holy; The sexual bond I have with my partner is sacred to me; Our sexual relationship connects us to something greater than ourselves; My sexual relationship with my partner reveals the deepest truths of life to me; There are moments when we are sexually intimate that time stands still and I feel like I am part of something eternal; Our sexual relationship puts me in touch with the deepest mysteries of life, and; At moments, being sexually intimate with my partner makes me very aware of a creative power beyond us). The second subscale, which is called the Manifestation of God, assessed theistic sanctification and includes the following items: I experience God through my sexual connection with my partner; God played a role in my decision to have a sexual relationship with my partner; Our sexual relationship speaks to the presence of God; I experience God through the sexual bond I have with my partner; God’s essence is expressed in our sexual relationship; Being in a sexual relationship with each other is a reflection of God’s will ;God has been a guiding force in our sexual relationship; In mysterious ways, God deepens the sexual intimacy I have with my partner ;I feel God at work when we express ourselves sexually with each other; There are moments when I feel a strong connection with God when I am sexually intimate with my partner, and; I see God’s influence in our sexual relationship. Participants were asked to rate each item on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Items are summed, with higher scores on each subscale indicate higher sanctification of sexuality within the intimate union. The two sub-scales were correlated at r = 0.62, justifying conducting primary analyses using the separate sub-scores instead of combining the scales into one index. Both subscales displayed high internal consistencies (α = 0.92, and 0.94 for Manifestation of God and Sacred Qualities, respectively).

Data analyses

Little’s Missing Completely at Random (MCAR) test (Collins et al., 2001) revealed that the data were missing completely at random, X2 (1986) = 2182.04, p = 0.01. Missing data were handled with maximum likelihood (ML; Enders, 2010) via the SPSS 28. To ascertain the data imputation procedure (Rubin, 1987), all analyses were recalculated with the original dataset to check whether the effects that were found in the imputed dataset differed from the effects found in the original dataset. The analyses with the original dataset yielded similar results, thus supporting the lack of bias due to data imputation.

The results section reports descriptive statistics for the study’s main variables (i.e., sexual satisfaction, religious/spiritual struggles with sexuality, theistic and non-theistic sanctification of sexuality), and findings of correlational analyses between these variables. This section also reports the findings of regression analyses, which examined whether the association between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction is robust, and moderation analyses using the PROCESS add-on to SPSS (Hayes, 2017) to determine whether the link between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction depends on either type of sanctification of sexuality.

Results

As seen in Table 1, participants reported on average high levels of sexual satisfaction and low levels of religious/spiritual struggles. They also reported relatively moderate non-theistic sanctification and relatively low theistic sanctification, with the former being significantly higher than the latter (t = 5.61, p < 0.01). Greater sexual satisfaction was associated with lower religious/spiritual struggles with sexuality and greater non-theistic sanctification. No correlation was found between non-theistic sanctification and sexual satisfaction. No correlation was found between religious/spiritual struggles and both types of sanctification. Table 1 also presents demographic variables that were potential control variables in subsequent analyses. Specifically, gender correlated positively with sexual satisfaction such that women (M = 27.73, SD = 8.34) scored significantly higher than men (M = 23.37, SD = 9.38). Relationship status, as well as age and education, were uncorrelated with the study’s main variables and hence were not included in Table 1.

Table 1 Descriptive statistics and a correlations matrix.
Full size table

To determine whether religious/spiritual struggles remain predictive of sexual satisfaction above and beyond the effect of demographics and potential moderators, a linear regression analysis was performed. In this Model, three variables were entered simultaneously: gender, which was correlated with sexual satisfaction (and coded in a binary format: 0 = men; 1 = women), non-theistic sanctification and religious/spiritual struggles (both of which correlated with sexual satisfaction). All three variables were significantly related to sexual satisfaction at the significance level of 0.01 (β = 0.15, 0.16, and −0.24 for gender, non-theistic sanctification, and religious/spiritual struggles, respectively). Collectively, these variables accounted for 11% of the variance in predicting sexual satisfaction, with r/s struggles accounting for 6% of this variance.

To test whether the two types of sanctification of sexual relationships moderated the link between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction, we ran moderation analyses using the moderated bootstrap approach suggested by Hayes (2017). These analyses were performed using the SPSS’s adds-on PROCESS, developed by Hayes. Using Model 1, we ran two regression models. In both these models, sexual satisfaction was entered as the dependent variable, religious/spiritual struggles as the independent variable, and gender as a control variable. In the first model, we entered non-theistic sanctification as the moderating variable, and in the second theistic sanctification. Analyses showed that non-theistic sanctification moderated the link between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction (b = 0.10, t = 2.23, p < 0.05), while theistic sanctification did not. Figure 1 shows the relationship between sexual satisfaction and religious/spiritual struggles visually for three levels of non-theistic sanctification (-1 SD below the mean, mean, and +1 SD above the mean). As can be seen in the fig., as the level of non-theistic sanctification increases, the negative relationship between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction decreases.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Simple slopes of sexual satisfaction on r/s struggles at values of non-theistic sanctification.

Full size image

Discussion

Three main findings emerged from the current investigation. First, as expected, greater religious/spiritual struggles about one’s sexual life and activity for people who are married or in committed unions were associated with lower sexual satisfaction. Due to a lack of existing research examining this correlation in the literature, this finding could not be compared with findings of studies, especially given that we specifically asked participants about religious/spiritual struggle about sexuality, not religious/spiritual struggles in general. Nonetheless, this finding aligns with previous findings that consistently associate religious/spiritual struggles with greater individual psychological distress and lower overall well-being among various populations (for reviews, see Ano & Vasconcelles, 2005; Bockrath et al., 2022; Exline, 2013; Pargament & Exline, 2021), and Israelis in particular (e.g., Abu-Raiya et al., 2016). It also adds to a growing empirical literature connecting religious/spiritual struggles in general to marital/relational difficulties and challenges (Fallahchai et al., 2021; Hassan Nezhad et al., 2022; Khazaei & Babaie, 2022; Tremblay et al., 2002).

The underlying reasons behind religious/spiritual struggles being a risk factor for lower sexual satisfaction could be partly due to regulations, instructions, and ethical standards concerning sexual conduct and contentment that are often embedded in religious or spiritual frameworks (Hernandez et al., 2011). In Judaism, for instance, religious/spiritual struggles revolving around sexuality could signify a disruption in one’s fundamental beliefs and practices, posing a threat to core values, commitments, and overall worldview (Abu-Raiya et al., 2016a). As such challenges related to sexuality increase, people may experience uncertainty, perplexity, remorse, a feeling of detachment from either God or others, which could disrupt sexual desire or functioning within a marital or partnership context and result in a decrease in sexual satisfaction. This explanation echoes the numerous apprehensions that critics of religion (e.g., Freud, De Beauvoir) have long proposed concerning ways that religious doctrines about sexuality could impede sexual satisfaction. We posit that religious/spiritual struggles regarding sexual conduct/life highlight these concerns in a rather tangible, precise manner.

The second and third main findings from the present investigation were the contrasting results yielded by the two types of sanctification of sexuality in relation to sexual satisfaction. Greater non-theistic sanctification, but not theistic sanctification, was tied to lower sexual satisfaction in the context of committed intimate unions. In addition, the former but not the latter, functioned as a buffer of the negative link between sexual satisfaction and religious/spiritual struggles.

The link found between greater non-theistic sanctification and greater sexual satisfaction is in line with previous empirical evidence, which suggests that assigning transcendence, ultimate value, and purpose to a specific aspect of life is generally advantageous from a psychological perspective (e.g., Carroll et al., 2014; Mahoney et al., 1999). This attribution has shown benefits in relational adjustment (Mahoney et al., 2022) and is advantageous in the context of sexuality and sexual satisfaction (e.g., Hernandez et al., 2011; Hernandez & Mahoney, 2018; Leonhardt et al., 2021; Leonhardt et al., 2023; Murray-Swank et al., 2005). This finding is also coherent with the conceptual framework proposed by Hernandez-Kane and Mahoney (2018), who suggested that sanctifying a sexual connection could elevate couples’ most intimate and vulnerable moments of sexual interaction to a sacred realm. This sanctification process could potentially embody what is perceived as a mundane process (e.g., sexual attraction or functioning) to something imbued with everlasting significance. Moreover, in line with Pargament and Mahoney’s theory of sanctification (2005), if couples view their sexual bond as exemplifying qualities of transcendence and eternal love, they might be more inclined to invest in their sexual relationship and make efforts to protect and persevere in it. In other words, they may prioritize maintaining recurring sexual connections and steer clear of negative relational dynamics that could undermine sexual desire. Additionally, the process of sanctification might foster greater tolerance towards difficulties and challenges related to sexuality and sexual life, which are bound to arise as the relationship evolves.

The finding that non-theistic sanctification functioned as a buffer of the negative link between sexual satisfaction and religious/spiritual struggles further stresses the paradoxical, multi-faceted role that religion/spirituality can have in the lives of religious/spiritual people. As Abu-Raiya et al. (2016a) has found, religion/spirituality may be a source of solutions to religious/spiritual problems that may be an inherent part of religious/spiritual life. Yet, this finding broadens the scope for this effect from individualistic indicators of well-being and psychological distress (e.g., depression, happiness) to the relational realm, sexual satisfaction in particular. Coupled with previous findings, non-theistic sanctification could offer people a significant psychological resource. The unique addition of this investigation in this regard is that non-theistic sanctification is not only tied to individual and relational benefits but also buffers adverse religious/spiritual influences.

A plausible rationale for the insignificance of theistic sanctification concerning sexual satisfaction could be the possibility that embracing theistic sanctification beliefs might indicate a deeper internalization of certain orthodox and conventional ideologies that dissuade individuals from embracing sexuality as a means of pleasure and contentment. Instead, greater theistic sanctification may signify a heightened sense of duty to partake in sexual acts for the sole purpose of reproduction or fulfilling obligations to a spouse or marriage, even if one lacks sexual interest or attraction towards their partner. These perspectives on sexuality are notably prevalent among followers of monotheistic faiths, with Judaism standing out in this regard.

In a related vein, escalating levels of religious/spiritual struggles related to sexual activities/life might indicate that an individual is experiencing internal impulses, fantasies, or wishes to partake in sexual conduct beyond the confines of marital or committed union and/or engaging in actions such as, pornography consumption or infidelity, which trigger the religious/spiritual struggles concerning one’s sexual impulses. Such religious/spiritual struggles could reflect divine doctrines that establish stringent limits on permissible and impermissible sexual behaviors. Thus, theistic sanctifying sexuality could imply sanctifying a distinct form or essence of sexuality, namely the one that initially led to the struggles. Conversely, non-theistic spirituality, by placing less emphasis on defined “normal” or “virtuous” sexual behaviors, may potentially mitigate these encounters and/or assist individuals in suppressing such thoughts.

Another plausible explanation for the absence of a connection between theistic sanctification and sexual satisfaction is the act of imbuing sexuality with Divine presence. For some, sexuality is an aspect of human nature that encompasses base desires and animalistic tendencies. The mere association between God, who should be regarded with utmost reverence, and such inclinations could have caused psychological discomfort among certain individuals. This discomfort may have prompted them to disregard the notion of sexuality as a manifestation of God and thereby diminish any potential advantages derived from sanctifying sexual experiences. Notably, theistic sanctification was endorsed much less than non-theistic sanctification.

Implications for theory and practice

The findings from this investigation have important implications for research, theory, and practice. From a research perspective, this study is a novel exploration of sanctification, both in a general sense and specifically regarding sexuality, within the Israeli Jewish community. Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, it represents the inaugural investigation testing the phenomenon of religious/spiritual struggles with one’s sexual activity/life in the context of marriage and committed union as a predictor of sexual satisfaction. Hopefully, these initial findings will be replicated and extended to people in intimate unions who belong to other or no religious communities.

Theoretically, these findings illuminate an essential perspective on the presumably intricate connection between religion/spirituality and sexual satisfaction. Specifically, they emphasize the necessity of employing robust conceptual frameworks to comprehend the nature of the connection between religion/spirituality and sexual satisfaction, and to avoid the arbitrary selection of religious/spiritual variables in studies within this field of investigation. More precisely, these findings indicate that both religious/spiritual struggles with sexuality and the sanctification of sexuality are significant constructs to consider in our endeavor to acquire a more comprehensive understanding of the multi-faceted phenomenon of sexual satisfaction. They also emphasize the dual nature of religious/spiritual factors concerning sexual satisfaction; while certain factors may potentially decrease satisfaction (i.e., religious/spiritual struggles), others (non-theistic sanctification) may augment it and counterbalance the negative impact of factors that could otherwise diminish it.

Another theoretical observation arising from the study’s findings suggests the potential varying impact of the two types of sanctification on the link between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction. For certain individuals, non-theistic sanctification characterized, which places less emphasis on the God entity, could serve as a more beneficial resource compared to theistic sanctification in reducing the adverse effects of religious/spiritual struggles on sexual satisfaction. Conversely, for others, the opposite scenario might hold true. It is likewise feasible that associating the divine with specific human occurrences, particularly those distinguished by desire, physical necessities, and animalistic attributes, could potentially unsettle certain individuals, and thus deprive them from the potential psychological advantages resulting from sanctifying these occurrences.

The results of this investigation also carry practical implications. Considering the connection between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction, it would be inappropriate to disregard these challenges in psychological interventions tailored for Israeli Jewish communities dealing with sexual issues, especially those related to diminished sexual satisfaction. The findings emphasize the importance of assessing religious/spiritual struggles with sexual activity/life once signs of their presence become apparent. Efforts should be directed towards helping individuals anticipate, understand, and navigate through these difficulties. This recommendation aligns with prior research indicating that individuals who fail to resolve such struggles over time are more likely to experience poorer mental and physical health outcomes, whereas those experiencing temporary struggles do not face the same risks (Exline, 2013; Pargament et al., 2002).

The findings also indicate a potential approach to mitigate the adverse effects of religious/spiritual struggles on sexual satisfaction. This approach revolves around the notion that individuals with a religious/spiritual orientation may seek solace in religious/spiritual coping mechanisms when facing such challenges (Abu-Raiya et al. 2016a). Clinicians and pastoral counselors could assist their religious or spiritual clients by encouraging them to explore or cultivate a perspective on sexuality through a sacred lens, which may already exist but may not be readily apparent or accessible to them (Hernandez et al., 2011).

Limitations and future directions for research

The current study’s results show promise, yet it’s essential to acknowledge several limitations. Firstly, the findings of the study are cross-sectional, and as such, they do not allow us to infer causality. For example, higher levels of religious/spiritual struggles as well as non-theistic sanctification might be the end result as well as the cause of greater sexual satisfaction. The inability to draw causal conclusions from the findings underscores the need for longitudinal studies assessing all variables at multiple time points. Secondly, since the study’s sample was not randomly selected, caution is warranted when generalizing the findings to the broader Israeli Jewish population. Therefore, future research should aim for a representative sample of this population to enhance the replicability and generalizability of results. Thirdly, relying solely on self-reported data introduces potential bias, though considering the subjective nature of all variables included in the study, alternative assessment methods may not be feasible. Lastly, the study did not explore potential intervening/mediating variables, such as relationship satisfaction, spiritual or emotional intimacy, communication skills, personality traits, mental health indicators, overall subjective well-being, or sexual education/attitudes/beliefs/conservatism, which could influence the relationship between religious/spiritual struggles and sexual satisfaction. Future investigations should include mediation analyses to better understand the complex interplay between these factors.