SACRED OR PROFANE? EMERGING ADULTS' SANCTIFICATION AND DESECRATION OF THEIR NON-MARITAL RELATIONAL SEXUALITY AND LINKS TO RELATIONAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND SPIRITUAL ADJUSTMENT

Julie M. Pomerleau

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

August 2020

Committee:

Annette Mahoney, Advisor

Katherine Brodeaur Graduate Faculty Representative

Joshua Grubbs

Dara Musher-Eizenman © 2020

Julie Pomerleau

All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT

Annette Mahoney, Advisor

This study assessed emerging adults’ beliefs that their sexual behavior with a committed partner was sacred/reflective of divine qualities (sanctification) and as a violation of something sacred (desecration) in a sample of 205 undergraduate students at a public university (66% female; 76% Caucasian) who were in a non-marital committed romantic relationship and sexually active within the past month. Results indicated that sanctification of sexuality (Sacred

Qualities) was prevalent for college students in the context of non-marital committed relationships. Stronger beliefs that sexuality has sacred qualities were linked with greater relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and more frequent sexual behavior with one’s partner. These results were significant both for emerging adults’ personal beliefs and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs about sanctification of sexuality. These findings confirm the results of initial studies of non-marital sanctification and extend the findings of marital sanctification studies, underscoring the relevance of studying sanctification beliefs about sexuality in non-marital relationships.

Regarding negative r/s beliefs about sexuality, prevalence rates of desecration were somewhat low, yet desecration showed significant links to adjustment variables. Stronger personal desecration beliefs were linked to less relationship and sexual satisfaction as well as greater r/s struggles. Stronger perceptions of one’s r/s community’s desecration beliefs were linked with less frequent sexual behavior, greater sex guilt, and greater r/s struggles. These results situate desecration beliefs with similar constructs like moral incongruence about sexual iv behavior, supporting further research in this area. Together, sanctification and desecration findings show the intersection of helpful and harmful r/s beliefs and relational adjustment.

Keywords: Romantic relationships, sexuality, religion/spirituality, sanctification, desecration v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am incredibly grateful for the many people who were a part of this project and with me on my journey to receiving my doctorate. Firstly, I would like to thank my advisor and dissertation chair, Dr. Annette Mahoney, for seeing the potential in me and always pushing me to develop my ideas and abilities. Your high standards for excellence have motivated me to achieve more than I had thought possible. I would also like to thank Dr. Ken Pargament for the support he has offered and wisdom he has shared. Thank you for the opportunities you have both given me to grow as a writer, researcher, and scholar and for instilling more confidence in me than I often had in myself. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Dara Musher-

Eizenman, Dr. Joshua Grubbs, and Dr. Katherine Brodeur for your guidance, support, and wisdom throughout this project.

To my graduate school clinical cohort- Lynnel Goodman, Jessica Hartl Majcher,

Lindsey Roberts, Sonia Singh, and Serena Wong- I cannot imagine walking this path with a more remarkable group of women. Through both the stressful and joyous times, your friendship has been a priceless gift that I will cherish and carry with me always. To my friends and family, especially Sarah Hunter and Paul and Teri Pomerleau, thank you for your steadfast love and belief in my dream and for always offering a place of rest and renewal along this journey. And to my fiancé, Brandon Gordon, for being with me with abundant love and support every step of the way. I could not have imagined a more perfect ending to this journey. vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

CHAPTER I. BACKGROUND ...... 1

Growing Importance of Studying Non-Marital Relational Sexuality ...... 1

Greater Acceptance of Non-Marital Romantic and Sexual Relationships ...... 3

Sanctification ...... 5

Development of Sanctification as a Psychospiritual Construct ...... 6

Sanctification of Marital Sexuality ...... 7

Sanctification of Non-marital Sexuality ...... 9

Negative R/s Beliefs about Sexuality ...... 12

Sex Guilt ...... 13

Moral Incongruence ...... 14

Gap in Literature: Specific Negative R/s Beliefs about Non-Marital

Relational Sexuality ...... 16

Desecration ...... 16

Desecration and Divorce ...... 18

Desecration and Romantic Breakups ...... 19

Desecration and Sexuality...... 20

Emerging Adults’ Perceptions of their R/s Communities’ Beliefs ...... 22

Relational Spirituality Framework ...... 22

CHAPTER II. GOALS AND HYPOTHESES ...... 25

Sanctification… ...... 25

Desecration ...…...... 27 vii

The Role of R/s Communities in Sanctification and Desecration Beliefs ...... 28

CHAPTER III. METHOD ...... 32

Participants…….…...... 32

Procedures…...... 33

Measures...... 33

Independent Variables ...... 33

Sanctification of Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (Self)... 33

Sanctification of Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (R/s

Community) ...... 34

Desecration Beliefs about Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship

(Self) ...... 35

Desecration Beliefs about Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship

(R/s Community) ...... 35

Dependent Variables ...... 36

Religious/spiritual Struggles ...... 36

Relationship Satisfaction ...... 36

Frequency of Sexual Intercourse ...... 36

Sexual Satisfaction ...... 36

Depression...... 37

Self-esteem ...... 37

Sex Guilt ...... 37

Descriptive Variables ...... 38

Romantic Relationship Descriptive Behavior ...... 38 viii

Demographic Information ...... 38

Global Religiousness ...... 38

Biblical Conservatism ...... 39

CHAPTER IV. RESULTS ...... 40

Descriptive Statistics ...... 40

General Religiousness ...... 40

Biblical Conservatism ...... 40

Sexuality and Romantic Relationships ...... 40

Links between Global Religiousness and Sexuality Variables ...... 41

Links between Global Religiousness and Sanctification and Desecration ...... 41

Links between Demographic Covariates and Dependent Variables ...... 41

Goal 1: Prevalence of Sanctification (Self) of Non-Marital Sexuality ...... 42

Hypothesis 1…...... 42

Descriptive Statistics: Relational Dependent Variables ...... 42

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and Relational Outcomes ...... 43

Hypothesis 2...... 44

Descriptive Statistics of Individual Psychosocial Dependent Variables ...... 44

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and Individual Adjustment...... 44

Hypothesis 3...... 44

Descriptive Statistics: R/s Struggles ...... 44

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and R/s Struggles ...... 44

Hypothesis 4...... 45

Descriptive Statistics: Desecration ...... 45 ix

Links between Desecration (Self) and Psychological and Relational

Adjustment ...... 45

Hypothesis 5...... 46

Hypothesis 6...... 46

Descriptive Statistics: Sanctification (R/s Community) ...... 46

Links between Sanctification of Sex (R/s Community and Adjustment

Variables ...... 46

Hypothesis 7...... 47

Descriptive Statistics: Desecration (R/s community) ...... 47

Links between Desecration (R/s Community), Relational, and Adjustment

Variables ...... 47

Hypothesis 8...... 48

Hypothesis 9...... 48

CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION ...... 49

The Sample...... 49

Sanctification (Self) ...... 50

Sanctification (Self) Prevalence ...... 50

Manifestation of God v. Sacred Qualities ...... 51

Sanctification (Self) and Relational Adjustment ...... 53

Sanctification (Self) and Individual Adjustment ...... 55

Desecration (Self) ...... 56

Desecration (Self): Prevalence ...... 56

Desecration (Self) and Relational Adjustment ...... 58 x

Desecration (Self) and Individual Adjustment ...... 59

The Role of Religious/Spiritual Communities ...... 61

Sanctification (R/s Community) ...... 62

Sanctification (R/s Community): Prevalence...... 62

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Sanctification (Self) ...... 63

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Relational Adjustment ...... 63

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Individual Adjustment ...... 64

Desecration (R/s Community) ...... 65

Prevalence ...... 65

Desecration (R/s Community) and Adjustment ...... 66

Sanctification and R/s Adjustment...... 67

Desecration and R/s Adjustment ...... 68

Sanctification and Desecration ...... 68

Self and Religious/Spiritual Communities’ Beliefs ...... 69

Limitations...... 70

Future Directions ...... 71

CHAPTER VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 73

REFERENCES...... 76

APPENDIX A. TABLES ...... 88

APPENDIX B. SANCTIFICATION MEASURES ...... 99

APPENDIX C. DESECRATION MEASURES ...... 102

APPENDIX D. DEPENDENT VARIABLE MEASURES ...... 104

APPENDIX E. DESCRIPTIVE MEASURES ...... 113 Running head: EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 1

CHAPTER I. BACKGROUND

This cross-sectional study aimed to examine emerging adults’ potentially enhancing and detrimental religious/spiritual beliefs about their sexual relationship with a partner in the context of a non-marital committed romantic relationship (i.e., non-marital relational sexuality). In terms of positive religious/spiritual beliefs, this study considered college students’ reports of the sanctification of their non-marital sexual behavior within a committed romantic relationship as well as their perceptions of their religious or spiritual community’s belief in the sanctity of non- marital relational sexuality. Sanctification in this context refers to perceiving relational sexuality as having sacred qualities and/or as a manifestation of the divine. In terms of negative religious/spiritual beliefs about relational spirituality, this study considered emerging adults’ own beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality as being a desecration as well as their perceptions of their r/s community’s beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality being a desecration. In this context, desecration refers to an event that violates the sacred/divine. Thus, this study aimed to provide a balanced account of specific helpful and harmful r/s beliefs about non-marital sexuality in the context of an ongoing romantic relationship on the part of emerging adults themselves and their perceptions of their religious community’s views. This study also considered whether either set of beliefs are tied to emerging adults’ relational, individual, and spiritual outcomes.

Growing Importance of Studying Non-Marital Relational Sexuality

Research on specific religious and spiritual beliefs about one’s romantic and sexual relationships is fairly new. Most of the research on both the constructs of sanctification and desecration has focused on married or divorced couples, with only a few studies considering the experiences of unmarried adults. Psychospiritual research has primarily focused on married EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 2 couples because most religious traditions teach that sexual expression is only morally acceptable within marital unions. Thus, researchers do not expect religious individuals to have positive religious and spiritual beliefs about non-marital sexuality. However, an initial study of college students’ sanctification of non-marital sexual relationships had surprising results (Murray-

Swank, Pargament, & Mahoney, 2005). Participants endorsed viewing non-marital sexual behavior with their committed romantic partner as sacred. However, few additional studies have further explored unmarried emerging adults’ r/s beliefs about consensual sexual behavior with a romantic partner.

Instead, most research on adolescent and emerging adults’ sexuality and religious practices has focused on the prohibitive nature of religious engagement on sexual attitudes and behavior. Studies of college students have found significant links between higher levels of religious engagement (i.e., attendance, prayer, commitment) and less frequent sexual behavior

(Beckwith & Morrow, 2005; Brelsford, Luquis, & Murray-Swank, 2011; Hook et al., 2015;

Lefkowitz et al., 2004; Luquis, Brelsford, & Rojas-Guyler, 2012; Murray, Ciarrocchi, & Murray-

Swank, 2007; Simons, Burt, & Peterson, 2009). For example, using a nationally representative sample of over 3000 15-21-year-olds, Haglund and Fehring (2010) found that youth who more frequently attended religious services and endorsed that religion is very important to them were

27 to 54% less likely to have engaged in sexual intercourse and to have had less partners than like-aged peers. Participants who reported viewing religion as very important had a mean of 1.9 lifetime sexual partners (SD = 2.9) compared to a mean of 2.9 (SD = 4.3) partners for whom religion was less important. 20% of participants who endorsed religion being very important were virgins at the age of 21 compared to 15% of adolescents who viewed religion as not very important. Thus, it is important to recognize that though a link clearly exists between religiosity EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 3 and sexual behavior outside the context of marriage, the majority of unmarried religiously engaged emerging adults are also sexually active.

Greater Acceptance of Non-Marital Romantic and Sexual Relationships

Despite past findings on the prevalence of religious engagement inhibiting sexual behavior, it is clear that non-marital sexual relationships are becoming a more acceptable and normative part of development for emerging adults. With the rising age of marrying and starting a family, the average emerging adult has a longer period of romantic and sexual engagement prior to marriage than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations (Arnett, Zukauskiene, &

Sugimura, 2014). This increased time between adolescence and marriage has impacted today’s emerging adults’ attitudes and behaviors regarding sex, relationships, and premarital cohabitation.

Longitudinal sociological surveys have shown that the current generation of emerging adults have more permissive attitudes about sexual behavior, particularly non-marital sex and cohabitation, than former generations of 18-29-year-olds (Petersen & Hyde, 2011; Wells &

Twenge, 2005). A meta-analysis of 543 studies between 1943 and 1999 found that in the 1950s only 30% of young women and 40% of young men reported premarital sex as acceptable behavior, whereas this acceptance rate increased to 91% of women and 84% of men by the late

1980s (Wells & Twenge, 2005). Emerging adults are also engaging in sexual behavior earlier and more frequently prior to marriage. Between the 1950s and 2000, the average age of first sex decreased substantially from 19 to 15 years of age (Wells & Twenge, 2005). Research using

Wave 3 of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (ADD Health) found that 99% of individuals aged 18-26 who were in a non-marital relationship lasting more than 3 months had had vaginal sex (Kaestle & Halpern, 2007). According to data from the National Survey of EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 4

Family Growth (2006-2008), 87-89% of emerging adults ages 20-24 have had sex with at least one partner, and 97% have had sexual intercourse by ages 25-29 (Chandra, Copen, & Mosher,

2013; Halpern & Kaestle, 2014). Based on these findings, it is clear that much of emerging adults’ sexual activity with committed partners happens outside of a marital relationship.

Notably, these findings are not only true of secular individuals, but research has shown similar trends among young adults who are actively religiously engaged. Having analyzed national surveys and gathered ethnographic data in New York City in 2012, Wilcox and

Wolfinger (2016) found that the majority of unmarried adults who attended services several times per month were engaging in sexual practices (e.g., nonmarital sex, use of contraception) that went against their religious/spiritual communities’ teachings. Thus, evidence supports that emerging adults who have romantic partners are engaging in sexual behaviors, whether or not this is consistent with their r/s communities’ teachings.

In addition to more permissive sexual attitudes and behavior, current cohabitation rates among unmarried emerging adults have risen substantially from 3-4% in 1990 to 9-20% in 2017

(Halpern & Kaestle, 2014; Pew, 2017). There has also been a significant increase in lifetime prevalence of cohabitation. Research using the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFR) has found an increase for women (ages 19-44) having ever cohabitated from 30% in 1987 to 65% in

2013 (Manning & Stykes, 2015). Cohabitation is increasingly becoming the first way in which emerging adults share a residence rather than marriage (Manning, Smock, & Fettro, 2019).

Hemez and Manning (2017) examined the NSFR data and found a 75% increase in cohabitation with one’s marital partner prior to marriage between 1980 and 2010. Results showed that 2 out of 5 women who married between 1980 and 1984 cohabitated with their partner prior to marriage whereas 7 out of 10 women who married between 2010 and 2014 lived with their partner before EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 5 marriage. Also, cohabitating relationships increased in duration from 12 months in the 1980s to

18 months in 2010s (Lamidi, Manning, & Brown, 2019). Cohabiting couples’ relationships tend to be similar to marriage in that they are often committed and monogamous, and it has become increasingly common for emerging adults in serious romantic relationships to live together for several years prior to marriage. Though there are still some cultural taboos surrounding cohabitation, particularly for individuals within more conservative religious groups, cohabitation has become more accepted among emerging adults (Willoughby and Carroll, 2010).

Thus, research suggests that becoming sexually active with at least one partner outside the context of a marital relationship has become increasingly normative for emerging adults.

However, unmarried emerging adults in committed relationships are not being studied in ways similar to their married counterparts. Much research on the sexual behavior of emerging adults focuses on sexuality in uncommitted contexts such as hook-up experiences or in general ways that do not consider whether or not the sexual behavior occurred within a committed relationship

(i.e., relational sexuality). A gap exists in the literature concerning emerging adults’ non-marital relational sexuality, particularly considering the ways that specific religious and spiritual beliefs may function within committed non-marital relationships involving sexuality. Therefore, this study aims to fill this gap by examining unmarried emerging adults’ specific religious and spiritual beliefs about sexuality in the context of their committed romantic relationships.

Sanctification

As non-marital cohabitation with committed romantic partners becomes increasingly normative, non-marital relational sexuality may also be seen as more normative than it had in prior generations. Therefore, specific religious or spiritual beliefs about sexuality that have been shown to enhance relational, sexual, and personal well-being in the context of a marital EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 6 relationships may also apply to non-marital committed unions. One such r/s belief that appears to have some benefit to married couples is the sanctification of sexuality. Findings show that the sanctification of marital sexuality is linked to healthier relational and sexual outcomes.

However, limited research has examined sanctification of non-marital relational sexuality. This project will be the first to examine the current generation of emerging adults’ beliefs about their non-marital sexuality is sacred.

Development of Sanctification as a Psychospiritual Construct

Sanctification refers to the process of regarding elements of life as the manifestation of

God/a higher power or as imbued with sacred qualities like transcendence, boundlessness, and ultimate value and purpose (Pargament & Mahoney, 2005). The first psychospiritual sanctification measure was developed by Mahoney, Pargament, and colleagues (1999) to study the prevalence and effects of couples’ viewing their marital relationship as sacred. This original sanctification scale consisted of two subscales that capture both theistic and non-theistic aspects of individuals’ r/s beliefs about their relationships. The theistic subscale, Manifestation of God

(MG), consists of items related to individuals’ beliefs about direct experiences with God/the divine in their marriage. For example, one item reads, “I experience God through my marriage.”

The non-theistic subscale, Sacred Qualities (SQ), inquires about individuals’ experiences of their marriage as having qualities of the sacred, such as transcendence, ultimacy, and boundlessness.

For example, one item states, “My marriage connects my spouse and me to something greater than ourselves.” Participants rate these items on a 5-point scale ranging from Strongly Agree to

Strongly Disagree.

Original and modified versions of the sanctification measures that have been developed to empirically study specific aspects of life including strivings (Mahoney et al., 2005), work EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 7

(Walker, Jones, Wuensch, Aziz, & Cope, 2008), pregnancy (Mahoney, Pargament, & DeMaris,

2009), heterosexual marriage (Mahoney et al., 1999; Mahoney, Pargament, & DeMaris, 2009), same-sex unions (Phillips et al. 2017), parenting (Murray-Swank, Mahoney, & Pargament,

2006), relational sexuality (Hernandez & Mahoney, 2009; Hernandez et al., 2011; Hernandez-

Kane & Mahoney, 2018; Murray-Swank, Pargament, & Mahoney, 2005), the body (Mahoney et al., 2005), and dreams (Phillips & Pargament, 2002). Research in this domain increases each year, with new domains being explored through the lens of sacred beliefs. Research on sanctification across domains has shown that when individuals sanctify an aspect of life they tend to show more commitment to and investment in the sanctified domain and demonstrate a higher likelihood of protecting and preserving the sanctified object/relationship. They also tend to have stronger spiritual emotions, including awe, compassion, and gratitude and derive greater satisfaction from sanctified aspects of life (Pargament & Mahoney, 2005; Pomerleau, Wong, &

Mahoney, 2015).

Sanctification of Marital Sexuality

Expanding beyond couples’ sanctification of their marital relationship, Hernandez and colleagues (Hernandez & Mahoney, 2009; Hernandez, Mahoney & Pargament, 2011) explored couples’ the sanctification of sexuality within their marital relationships. This was a logical extension from studying the sanctification of marriage because sexual satisfaction and intimacy are considered important components of a healthy marital relationship. The initial study (2009) examined a sample of newly married couples’ sanctification of sex within their marital relationship and associations between sanctified sex and relational outcomes. Because they were studying newlyweds, the sample consisted of primarily young adults (M age = 31). Sanctification of sexuality measures were adapted from the Revised Sanctification Scale. The theistic EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 8

sanctification, Manifestation of God subscale, included items such as, “I experience God/the divine through the sexual bond I have with my spouse.” The non-theistic sanctification, Sacred

Qualities subscale consisted of items such as, “The sexual bond I have with my romantic partner is sacred to me.”

Despite a small sample size (N = 83), cross-sectional results showed that the majority of newly married couples imbued sex with sacred qualities such as ultimacy, boundlessness, transcendence, and spiritual purpose. 40-50% of participants endorsed feeling that God willed their sexual relationship with their partner. 75% reported to some degree that they viewed their sexual relationship with their spouse as sacred. Greater sanctification of sex among married couples was linked to greater sexual and marital satisfaction and more frequent sexual intercourse (Hernandez & Mahoney, 2009; Hernandez et al. 2011).

A longitudinal study was conducted with the same participants one year following the initial sanctification of marital sexuality study (Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018). Greater sanctification at Time 1 longitudinally predicted greater marital satisfaction, greater sexual satisfaction, and greater sexual frequency one year later after controlling for initial marital satisfaction. Also, individuals with higher Time 1 sanctification of marital sexuality experienced little if any declines in sexual satisfaction across one year, compared to sharp declines of those with lower sanctification (Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018). Thus, results indicate that sanctification of marital sexuality uniquely predicts marital satisfaction and relational health over and above general relationship satisfaction. This suggests that believing one’s sexuality with a committed partner has sacred qualities or is an expression of God/the divine is a unique experience that may enhance committed romantic relationships.

EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 9

Sanctification of Non-Marital Sexuality

Only a few studies have thoroughly examined emerging adults’ sanctification beliefs about sexuality within the context of a committed romantic relationship. Murray-Swank et al.

(2005) conducted this initial study of unmarried emerging adults’ sanctification of sex and the ways this impacts their relational satisfaction. The original hypothesis was that holding beliefs that sexuality is sacred would inhibit unmarried college students from having non-marital sex with their romantic partners, and thus sanctification would be linked to less frequent sexual behavior. However, the results were contrary to this hypothesis. Specifically, students who endorsed greater sacred qualities of sexuality endorsed greater likelihood of ever engaging in sexual intercourse, greater frequency of sexual intercourse, and more lifetime sexual partners.

Results showed that the majority of emerging adults who endorsed having sexual intercourse with a partner in a loving committed relationship reported seeing sacred qualities of sexual intercourse in their relationships. Higher sanctification of relational sexuality was linked to greater frequency of sexual behavior and greater sexual satisfaction in college students (Murray-

Swank et al., 2005).

Phillips and colleagues (2017) conducted a study to determine whether those in same-sex unions would endorse sanctification beliefs about their romantic relationship and sex within that relationship. In a sample of 256 individuals in same-sex relationships (M age = 34, M relationship duration = 5 years), 34% endorsed viewing their romantic relationship as sacred to some degree and 28% reported viewing their sexual behavior with their partner as sacred to some degree. The study used only the Sacred Qualities subscale of sanctification because this subscale tends to be less highly correlated with religious engagement and biblical conservatism, unlike the

Manifestation of God subscale. The researchers chose the subscale less tied to religiosity because EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 10

many LGBTQ individuals are not religiously affiliated due to experiencing judgment and discrimination from their religious groups. Participants who reported greater sanctification of their relationship also reported greater relationship investment, emotional intimacy, and relationship satisfaction. Greater sanctification of sexual behavior with their romantic partner was tied to greater positive affect toward sex and greater frequency of sex. These results support the theory that religious and spiritual beliefs about sex can operate in non-marital relationships, even for individuals who are not highly engaged with organized religious communities.

As part of a larger examination of religion’s influence on relationship quality in cohabiting and dating couples, Henderson, Ellison, & Glenn (2018) included one question to determine whether unmarried couples sanctify their sexual relationship with their partner. The single question used was, “God is at the center of my relationship,” to which participants rated their level of agreement. Results indicated for unmarried dating and cohabiting couples that greater sanctification of their relationship was tied to greater relationship satisfaction. These results further point to the relevance of studying sanctification beliefs outside of a marital context and the ways that specific r/s beliefs may operate similarly for married and unmarried couples. It should be noted, however, that the item included did not measure the sanctification of sex, but rather was focused on the sanctification of the romantic relationship.

In a recent study, Leonhardt, Busby, and Willoughby (2020) examined the direct and indirect roles of general religiosity, sanctification of sexuality, and sex guilt on sexual satisfaction. Their sample consisted of 1614 adults recruited from Mechanical Turk (M age 34,

65% women, 78% Caucasian) who, at the time of the study, reported being sexually active with a partner with whom they had had a committed romantic relationship lasting at least two years.

This study placed no restrictions on whether the participants were married, and results showed EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 11

that 55% of participants were married and 27% cohabiting. They hypothesized that positive

(sanctification of sexuality) and negative (sex guilt) religious/spiritual meaning making variables would mediate the relationship between general religiosity (freq. of attendance, prayer, and level of religious importance) and sexual satisfaction.

Leonhardt and colleagues (2020) adapted the Sacred Qualities subscale from Hernandez et al. (2011) to measure sanctification of sexuality. Overall, participants endorsed sanctification of sexuality to a moderate degree (M = 4.01, SD = 1.67, Range = 1-7). Results differed by gender, so analyses were conducted separately for men and women. For both men and women, greater sanctification of sexuality within their committed romantic relationship was correlated with greater sexual satisfaction (r = .37, men; r = .45, women) and less sex guilt (r = -.11, men; r = -.20, women). Using a structural equation model to test the mediational hypotheses, results showed support that sexual sanctification fully mediated the relationship between general religiosity and sexual satisfaction for men. For women, the results were more complex.

Independently, greater general religiosity was tied to greater sexual satisfaction. However, when sanctification of sexuality was included in the model, greater religiosity was directly tied to less sexual satisfaction for women. Sex guilt showed no significant mediational effects between general religiosity and sexual satisfaction for men or women. Based on their findings they theorize that sanctification of sexuality, specifically Sacred Qualities, may characterize elements of religion/spiritualty that facilitate sexual satisfaction whereas for women, general religiosity may characterize more elements of religion/spirituality that hinder sexual satisfaction (Leonhardt et al., 2020).

These studies provide evidence that sanctification can operate in committed non-marital romantic and sexual relationships in ways that are comparable to marital sanctification of EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 12

sexuality. Specifically, we see links between greater sanctification of sexuality in committed relationships and greater relationship and sexual satisfaction (Murray-Swank et al., 2005;

Phillips et al., 2017; Leonhardt et al., 2020). However, additional research is needed to determine the extent to which the current generation of emerging adults views their relational sexuality through a sacred lens. Today’s emerging adults are a group that has been identified as less religiously engaged than former generations at this age (Pew, 2010). However, despite our understanding of emerging adults’ religious and sexual behavior, we know much less about their specific r/s beliefs about sexuality that inform their behavior. This study bridged this gap to provide a more nuanced understanding of sanctification of sexuality within unmarried emerging adults’ committed romantic relationships.

Negative R/s Beliefs about Sexuality

Though there is evidence that certain r/s beliefs such as sanctification may enhance sexuality, it is also possible that emerging adults hold r/s beliefs about sexuality that are potentially problematic and distressing. Despite the increase in the acceptance of non-marital sexual behavior among emerging adults, older generations and certain religious groups within

US culture hold differing views. Greater cultural acceptance of non-marital sexuality directly conflicts with many religions’ teachings that sexual behavior is only morally acceptable within a marital relationship. Though more progressive religious institutions may not take issue with this shift in sexual expression, several conservative to moderate religious groups stand in direct opposition to the growing normativity of non-marital cohabitation and sexual activity (Browning,

Green, & Witte, 2006; Regnerus, 2007).

Given these conflicting messages, it is likely that emerging adults who are both sexually active and more religiously engaged may be experiencing distress or confusion regarding the EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 13 dissonance between secular and religious beliefs about what constitutes acceptable sexual behavior. Several studies have determined that one of the main pathways through which greater religiosity prohibits sexual behavior is through higher levels of sexually conservative attitudes

(Beckwith & Morrow, 2005; Brelsford et al., 2011; Hook et al., 2015; Lefkowitz et al., 2004;

Luquis et al., 2012; Simons et al., 2009). Sexually conservative attitudes also tend to be linked to experiences of sexual guilt, shame, and religious and spiritual struggles, which in turn are tied to poorer adjustment.

Sex Guilt

Hackathorn, Ashdown, and Rife (2016) found that emerging adults with higher levels of religiosity reported lower levels of sexual satisfaction. Sex guilt mediated this link between religiosity and sexual satisfaction for unmarried individuals but did not mediate for married individuals, suggesting the influence of religious teachings and norms on sexual attitudes.

Murray, Ciarrocchi, and Murray-Swank (2007) also found that college students who were more religious and/or spiritual held less permissive sexual attitudes and were less likely to have had multiple sexual partners within the past three months. Also, they found that felt alienation from

God was responsible for 47% of the increase in shame and 28% of the increase in guilt experienced by students who had multiple partners in the past three months. Woo et al. (2012) found similar results in a study of Euro-Canadian and East Asian female college students.

Women with higher levels of religious fundamentalism and/or intrinsic spirituality reported higher levels of sex guilt. Their results also showed that sex guilt mediated the relationship between high levels of religious fundamentalism and spirituality variables and low sexual desire in the Euro-Canadian women (2012). EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 14

A recent meta-analysis of eight studies examining sex guilt (Emmers-Sommer, Allen,

Schoenbauer, and Burrell, 2017) found that sex guilt remains a prevalent experience among U.S. adults and has implications for their sexual behavior and attitudes. The aggregated study results showed that sex guilt was correlated with religious affiliation and behavior at a moderate level

(r = .44) such that individuals who were more religiously engaged tended to have higher levels of sex guilt. Greater sex guilt was significantly linked with less positive attitudes about sexual behavior, less frequent sexual behavior, less frequent use of and more negative views of contraceptives, and less accurate information about sexuality.

Moral Incongruence

Moral incongruence is an emerging construct that provides support for the importance of religious and spiritual beliefs and perceptions in shaping individuals understanding of their sexual behavior. Moral incongruence can be understood as experiencing a disconnect between one's behaviors and one's values/beliefs about those behaviors, resulting in dissonance (Grubbs

& Perry, 2019). Several studies show evidence that for both sexual behavior with a partner and individual pornography use, moral incongruence is linked with greater psychosocial and spiritual distress (Hook et al., 2015; Grubbs, Exline, Pargament, Volk, & Lindberg, 2017; Grubbs &

Perry, 2019).

Hook and colleagues (2015) conducted two studies of 491 (Study 1) and 191 (Study 2) undergraduate students to examine the relationships between religiosity, moral incongruence, sexual behavior, and r/s struggles. Results showed evidence of greater religious and spiritual struggles (i.e., shame, guilt, and a strained relationship with God) in participants who had high levels of moral incongruence following a time when they engaged in sexual behavior that was inconsistent with their values. Emerging adults who felt that their sexual behavior was EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 15

inconsistent with their sexual values also tended to show difficulty forgiving themselves and rated their sexual behavior as problematic. These results were significant after controlling for objective sexual behavior, showing the power that negative r/s beliefs about one’s sexual behavior can have in shaping sexual behavior and beliefs.

Griffin and colleagues (2016) found similar results in their study of 295 college students at a large public university when they examined links between hypersexual behavior, moral incongruence about sexuality, and r/s struggles. They defined hypersexual behavior as

“experiences of being controlled by their sexual thoughts, feelings, and behavior, using sex to cope with unpleasant emotions, and suffering undesirable consequences as a result of their sexual behavior” (p. 282). Results showed links between more sexual incongruence and greater r/s struggles. Also, for individuals with high levels of moral incongruence about their sexual behavior, greater hypersexual behavior was linked with greater r/s struggles.

Additional research in the area of internet pornography use further underscores the impact that religious/spiritual beliefs such as moral incongruence have on individuals’ understanding of their sexual behaviors. Similar to the context of non-marital sexuality, individuals who are more religious tend to show higher ratings of disapproval of pornography use. However, many who disapprove due to religious/moral beliefs continue to engage in pornography use, resulting in dissonance (Grubbs & Perry, 2019). Several studies have shown that greater moral incongruence about pornography use has been linked to greater perceptions of one’s pornography use as an addiction or highly problematic (Grubbs et al., 2015.; Grubbs et al.,

2017). These studies controlled for pornography use behavior, showing evidence that one’s moral beliefs about sexual behavior tend to have a unique impact on one’s interpretation of sexual behaviors. Studies have also shown links between higher ratings of moral incongruence EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 16

about pornography use and greater psychological distress (Perry, 2017) and poorer marital quality (Perry, 2018) over time. Finally, in a sample of both college students and adults, Grubbs and colleagues (2017) found links between greater experiences of moral incongruence about pornography use and greater overall religious and spiritual struggles.

Gap in Literature: Specific Negative R/s Beliefs about Non-Marital Relational Sexuality

Though research has examined negative sexual attitudes such as guilt and shame that are related to both religiosity and sexuality, little work has been done to explore the specific negative r/s beliefs about sexuality that occur for emerging adults engaging in non-marital sexuality.

Much of the research that has been conducted has focused on individuals’ r/s beliefs about sexual behavior in non-relational contexts (e.g., internet pornography use, hook-up sex) and little has focused on individuals perceptions of their sexuality in committed romantic relationships.

Because religious organizations have specific teachings about morally acceptable sexual behavior in marital v. non-marital relationships, it is important to move beyond general guilt and shame and moral incongruence to gain an understanding of the specific r/s beliefs about non- marital sexuality and how they influence relational, psychological, and spiritual adjustment among emerging adults.

Desecration

Previous literature has found links between non-marital sexuality and similar concepts to desecration (e.g., shame, guilt, negative emotions). However, this research usually has not differentiated between sexual behavior that occurred with a committed partner or that happened casually such as in a hook-up encounter. This project will consider specifically whether desecration beliefs about sexual activity with a partner are prevalent for individuals in committed EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 17

romantic relationships and the correlates of such desecration beliefs on their relational, individual, and spiritual outcomes.

The psychospiritual construct of desecration refers to the belief that that something that was once sacred has been broken or violated (Pargament, Magyar, Benore, & Mahoney, 2005).

Relationally, desecration beliefs have been studied in individuals going through divorce and romantic breakups and have been linked to maladaptive psychological and spiritual outcomes

(Krumrei, Mahoney, & Pargament, 2009; 2011; Warner, Mahoney, & Krumrei, 2009; Hawley &

Mahoney, 2013). Desecration beliefs have not yet been studied in the domain of sexuality.

However, the language of violation fits with the language of most religious traditions’ sexual moral teachings such as an emphasis on maintaining sexual purity and remaining “stainless” from sexual immorality. In most religious traditions, non-marital sexuality is depicted as a violation of this concept of purity and may be linked to feelings of shame, guilt, or sinfulness.

Emerging adults who have internalized these types of r/s beliefs about non-marital sexuality and are also sexually active would be expected to experience dissonance between their beliefs and behavior. Though these beliefs may be rare for individuals engaging in non-marital sexual relationships, for individuals who come from more religiously conservative backgrounds these desecration beliefs may have potent impact on their relational, spiritual, and psychological well- being.

The field of desecration research is a fairly new, with four known studies having examined desecration within relational contexts. Pargament and Mahoney developed a scale to study desecration as a psychospiritual construct in 2005, and it is comprised of two subscales, one of which studies desecration and the other sacred loss. Whereas desecration refers to viewing something that was held sacred as being violated or broken, sacred loss refers to viewing EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 18

something that was regarded as sacred as having been irreplaceably lost (Pargament et al., 2005).

Though designed as two separate subscales, in certain contexts such as divorce, sacred loss and desecration have been highly correlated and treated as one construct. Thus, in the context of the loss of a relationship, individuals have reported very similar levels of both sacred loss and desecration whereas these two constructs have been found to be unrelated in the initial study on desecration that encompassed a broad array of negative life events (Mahoney et al., 2005).

Desecration and Divorce. Krumrei, Mahoney, and Pargament (2009) conducted the initial study of divorce as a desecration/sacred loss. The sample consisted of 100 adults (M age = 40) from the community who had been divorced within the past 6 months. About 1/3 of participants reported that they had initiated the divorce, 1/3 had decided mutually with their spouse, and 1/3 said that their spouse had initiated the divorce. Results showed high prevalence rates of viewing the divorce as a sacred loss/desecration. 74% of participants endorsed some level of experiencing their divorce as a sacred loss/desecration, with 47% of the sample endorsing these beliefs to a moderate or high degree (Krumrei et al., 2009). Greater beliefs that the divorce was a sacred loss/desecration were cross-sectionally linked to greater depression symptoms (r = .32).

An additional study of divorce as a desecration/sacred loss was longitudinal, studying 89 community members (M age = 40) at the time of their divorce and one year later (Krumrei,

Mahoney, & Pargament, 2011). The majority of the sample identified their religious background as Christian. However, the overall sample reported lower general religiosity than typical US norms. About 30% of individuals endorsed viewing their divorce as a sacred loss/desecration to a moderate to high degree. Greater sacred loss/desecration beliefs at the time of the divorce predicted greater depression symptoms and more dysfunctional conflict with one’s former spouse one year later controlling for relevant demographics, general religiousness, and baseline EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 19

levels of adjustment (Krumrei et al., 2011). This study also examined the degree to which participants used negative religious/spiritual coping strategies in the year following their divorce, finding that greater negative r/s coping was linked to greater depression symptoms at Time 2.

Results also showed a significant interaction between negative r/s coping and sacred loss/desecration beliefs. Negative r/s coping had a stronger link to depression symptoms one year later for individuals who initially endorsed high levels of sacred loss/desecration than for those who endorsed low levels of sacred loss/desecration. Thus, it seems that negative r/s beliefs and negative r/s coping can have compound effects on psychological adjustment.

Warner, Mahoney, & Krumrei (2009) shifted their focus to individuals’ desecration/sacred loss beliefs about their parents’ divorces. The study was conducted with a sample of 275 college students (M age = 19), who had experienced parental divorce an average of 4 years prior to the study. Sixty-nine percent of the sample endorsed viewing their parents’ divorce as a desecration or sacred loss at the time it occurred to some degree, with 10% endorsing items to a moderate or high degree. Greater sacred loss/desecration beliefs were related to college students blaming their parents and themselves for the divorce. Sacred loss/desecration was also positively linked with depression symptoms, intrusive thoughts, and greater feelings of loss or abandonment (Warner et al., 2009).

Desecration and Romantic Breakups. Hawley and Mahoney (2013) extended

Krumrei’s work on divorce by studying college students’ views of their romantic breakups as a sacred loss/desecration. The sample consisted of 243 mostly female, majority Christian, college students who had experienced a romantic breakup an average of 15 months prior to the study (M relationship duration = 12 months). Most of the sample (56%) endorsed some level of experiencing their breakup as a sacred loss/desecration, with 5% reporting moderate to high EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 20 levels. Results found that greater beliefs that the romantic breakup was a sacred loss/desecration were linked to poorer psychological adjustment including greater depression symptoms (r = .21), anger (r = .22), and subjective distress (r = .37) (Hawley et al., 2013).

Hawley, Mahoney, Pargament, & Gordon (2015) further extended the desecration/sacred loss research by performing a longitudinal study of college students’ desecration/sacred loss beliefs about their romantic breakups. The sample consisted of 445 mostly female, Christian undergraduates who had experienced the dissolution of a romantic relationship (M relationship duration = 12 months) an average of 15 months prior to the study. Half of participants endorsed experiencing the romantic breakup as a sacred loss/desecration to some degree, with 5% reporting moderate to high levels. Greater sacred loss/desecration beliefs were related to greater subjective distress and anger over the breakup. The study also examined the role of sexual activity within the romantic relationship and its links to desecration/sacred loss beliefs and psychological adjustment. Results showed that greater pre-breakup sexual activity was also correlated with greater post-breakup desecration/sacred loss beliefs and greater anger and subjective distress. A mediation analysis showed that sacred loss/desecration beliefs fully mediated the links between greater pre-breakup sexual activity and poorer psychological adjustment. Also, results showed that this model was moderated by general religiousness and conservatism. The mediation model was significant for participants who endorsed moderate to high religious involvement and biblical conservatism but was not significant for individuals who endorsed low religious involvement and low biblical conservatism (Hawley et al., 2015).

Desecration and Sexuality. These initial studies of desecration occurring in the context of the dissolution of committed romantic relationships provide evidence that certain emerging adults view their romantic relationships as sacred and holding great spiritual value. When these EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 21

sacred relationships are broken, violated, or ended, individuals have a sense of spiritual loss that heightens their emotional distress related to these losses. Hawley’s longitudinal findings that sacred loss/desecration beliefs mediated the relationship between greater pre-breakup sexual activity in the relationship and poorer psychological adjustment is particularly relevant. These results indicate that sexuality is a unique component of romantic relationships that individuals hold sacred. The additional moderator effect showing that this mediation was only true for individuals moderately or highly religiously engaged and biblically conservative underscores the impact of religious teachings about sexuality on emerging adults’ beliefs about their non-marital sexual behavior. These results suggest that some young adults may engage in non-marital sexuality with the hopes that the sexual relationship will be sanctioned by their religious institution when they marry their partner in the future. When a breakup occurs, individuals may become confused with how to reconcile a sexual relationship that at one time may have seemed sacred but was later lost, violated, and broken.

Given these findings and the similarity between the language of desecration and that of sexual immorality, it is relevant to extend the research on desecration beyond divorce and romantic breakups into the realm of sexuality. This study hoped to accomplish this goal by examining whether unmarried emerging adults view their sexual behavior as a violation of their sexual morality/purity. I did not expect that the language of desecration would resonate with the many of today’s emerging adults due to the broader acceptance of non-marital sexual behavior and cohabitation and the decreasing rates of religious engagement. However, similar to Hawley’s

(2015) findings, I expected that for more religiously engaged and conservative individuals, desecration may have potent effects on emerging adults’ relational, psychological, and spiritual well-being. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 22

Emerging Adults’ Perceptions of their R/s Communities’ Beliefs

Most research on religious and spiritual beliefs and attitudes has assessed these attitudes solely from the perspective of the individual. Individuals rate their levels of religious commitment, engagement, belief in God, trust in religious authority, ways they use religion to cope, ways they struggle with religion and spirituality, and countless other r/s beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Though this research has provided valuable information about the psychological role of religion and spirituality, it relies heavily on the individual, intrapsychic level while neglecting other relational layers of the religious/spiritual system. These other layers consist of individuals’ religious/spiritual organization/community, other family members’ and friends’ religious/spiritual beliefs and practices, and individuals’ views of God/the divine’s expectations and understanding of their r/s beliefs.

Relational Spirituality Framework

Mahoney (2010) presents a systems theory of how religion and spirituality impact an individual through their relationships with God/the divine (Tier 1), close relationships with other people such as family members, friends, and romantic partners (Tier 2), and relationships with religious organizations or communities such as their church, parish, synagogue, mosque, temple, etc. (Tier 3). These three tiers are embedded within the individual’s larger sociocultural context

(the largest circle), which includes race/ethnicity, culture, socioeconomic status, personality, and other such factors.

For any given individual, processes that fall within one or more of the tiers may be absent. For example, individuals who do not affiliate with a religious organization may only hold a felt relationship with God/the divine and with other people (Tiers 1 and 2). Others may participate in Tier 3 religious organizations but not have any sense of a personal relationship EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 23

with God/the divine (Tiers 2 and 3 only). However, for most individuals raised in the United

States, all three tiers will have some influence on the individual’s understanding of their own religious/spiritual beliefs, even if only due to their experiences in their developmental history.

For instance, individuals who have left their religious tradition of origin may still be impacted by the teachings their former religion holds unless they have transformed these beliefs (Smith,

2005). Also, research shows that our understanding of God/the divine (Tier 1) is influenced largely by our parents (Tier 2) and the religious organizations in which we developed our beliefs

(Tier 3) (Kirkpatrick, 2005; Pew, 2015; Spilka, Hood, Hunsberger, & Gorsuch, 2003).

In the context of emerging adults’ sanctification and desecration of non-marital sexuality, it would be valuable not only to include individuals’ personal r/s beliefs about sexuality, but also to study their perceptions of their r/s communities beliefs. Individuals’ r/s beliefs are generally formed through the internalization of r/s beliefs taught by r/s communities and parents (King &

Boyatzis, 2015). R/s teachings about sexual morality tend to be restrictive for unmarried young adults. Thus, we would expect that more religiously engaged emerging adults would have less positive and more negative r/s beliefs about nonmarital sex. However, individuals’ personal r/s beliefs may differ from those of their r/s community due to the influence of secular culture and friends/family with different beliefs. Therefore, it is possible that many of today’s emerging adults have individual r/s beliefs that may not be based in the beliefs of their r/s community, or they may not currently be attending a r/s community.

Thus, differentiating between emerging adults’ own r/s beliefs about sexuality and their perceptions of their current or recent r/s community’s beliefs about sexuality could give us a better idea of the similarities and differences between one’s personal beliefs and perceptions of one’s r/s community’s beliefs about sex. This study aimed to extend research beyond the realm EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 24 of the individual to gain insight into the ways that emerging adults’ perceptions of their r/s communities may differ from their own r/s beliefs about sexuality and thus influence their relational, psychological, and spiritual well-being. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 25

CHAPTER II. GOALS AND HYPOTHESES

Sanctification

The first goal of the study was to conduct a similar study to the original study of emerging adults’ sanctification of sexuality (Murray-Swank et al., 2005) and to extend studies of marital sanctification of sexuality (Hernandez et al., 2018, 2011) to a non-marital sample.

Examining sanctification of non-marital sexuality is important because so few published studies

(Leonhardt et al., 2020; Murray-Swank et al., 2005; Phillips et al., 2017) have thoroughly examined sanctification of sexuality in a non-marital context. Without additional studies in a current sample of college students, we cannot fully understand the experiences of current emerging adults. I provided detailed base rates of participants’ sanctification beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality, which is important because the research about emerging adults’ religious and spiritual beliefs about sexuality is limited.

Murray-Swank et al. (2005) found that greater non-theistic sanctification of participants’ own relational sexuality was linked to greater sexual satisfaction, more frequent sexual intercourse, and more positive affective reactions to sexuality (e.g., more pleasure, love, satisfaction and less guilt, fear, sadness, and embarrassment). A more recent study (Leonhardt et al., 2020) found that for both men and women, greater sanctification of sexuality within their committed romantic relationship was correlated with greater sexual satisfaction. Past research on the sanctification of marital sexuality has found that married couples who sanctify their sexuality also report greater sexual satisfaction and frequency of sexual intercourse both cross-sectionally and longitudinally (Hernandez et al., 2011; Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018).

• Hypothesis 1: Consistent with past findings, I hypothesized that participants’ greater

sanctification of their non-marital relational sexuality would be linked with greater EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 26

relationship satisfaction, greater sexual satisfaction, and more frequent sexual

intercourse.

In order to provide a more nuanced understanding of the experiences of emerging adults and their sanctification beliefs, this project also considered participants’ individual psychological adjustment as a dependent variable. A meta-analysis of sanctification studies shows that greater sanctification across multiple domains tends to be linked to better individual adjustment

(Pomerleau, Wong, & Mahoney, 2015). Also, A recent study found that greater sanctification of sexuality within a committed romantic relationship was linked with less sex guilt (Leonhardt et al., 2020). Marital sanctification studies have tended not to include individual adjustment as a dependent variable because their focus tends to remain on the health of the couple rather than of the individual. However, research shows that relational adjustment is strongly linked to individual psychological adjustment (Heyman et al., 2009.)

• Hypothesis 2: Thus, I predicted that greater sanctification of non-marital relational

sexuality would be linked to better psychological adjustment (less depression, greater

self-esteem, and less sex-guilt) and relational adjustment (i.e., relationship satisfaction,

sexual satisfaction, frequency of sexual intercourse).

Also, sanctification research has shown that greater sanctification of marital relationships and marital sexuality is linked with better religious/spiritual adjustment (Hernandez et al., 2009;

Mahoney, Pargament & DeMaris, 2009).

• Hypothesis 3: Therefore, I predicted that participants’ greater sanctification of their

non-marital sexuality would be linked with better r/s adjustment (less religious and

spiritual struggles). EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 27

Desecration

Having addressed the helpful dimensions of r/s beliefs about sexuality, it is important to consider that emerging adults may also experience harmful r/s beliefs about sexuality.

Desecration, the belief that something that was once held sacred has been broken or violated, has not yet been studied in regard to sexuality. However, from a r/s lens, sexual morality is often described in terms of “purity” and being “stainless,” particularly for individuals in Judeo-

Christian and Islamic traditions. In most religious traditions, nonmarital sexuality is depicted as a violation of this purity and may be linked to feelings of shame, sinfulness, and being unclean.

Thus, this construct could tap into emerging adults’ negative r/s beliefs about sexuality, particularly for those who come from more religiously conservative backgrounds.

As the first study to examine desecration beliefs in the context of sexuality, this project provided detailed prevalence rates of emerging adults’ desecration beliefs. Given that the study sample consists of individuals who have been engaging in non-marital sexual behavior with a committed partner, I did not expect high prevalence rates of desecration beliefs. A significant portion of emerging adults who have strongly held beliefs that non-marital sexuality is immoral would likely avoid a conflict between their values and behavior by abstaining from sexual activity. However, because cultural norms are shifting to make non-marital sex more normative and acceptable for emerging adults, it is possible that some participants will continue to experience internalized negative r/s beliefs about non-marital sexuality and concurrently be engaging in sexual behavior with a partner. It is important to examine the characteristics of the sample that endorses their non-marital relational sexuality a desecration to better understand this process. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 28

This project then investigated how emerging adults’ desecration beliefs about their relational sexuality may be linked to relational and psychological adjustment variables. Previous literature has found links between similar concepts to desecration such as shame, guilt, negative emotions, and religious/spiritual struggles in the context of non-marital sexuality. Past research indicates that negative r/s beliefs about one’s sexual behavior, both secular and spiritual, are linked to poorer psychological adjustment and r/s struggles (Hook et al., 2015; Pomerleau,

2017). Also, past studies of desecration have shown links between greater desecration beliefs about divorce or romantic breakups and poorer psychological, relational, and spiritual adjustment, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally (Krumrei et al., 2009, 2011; Hawley &

Mahoney, 2013; Hawley et al., 2015). Therefore, I expected that desecration beliefs about non- marital sexuality will operate in a similar fashion and would be tied to psychological, relational, and spiritual correlates.

• Hypothesis 4: Greater desecration beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality

would be linked to poorer psychological adjustment (greater depression, lower self-

esteem, and greater sex-guilt) and poorer relational adjustment (i.e., relationship

satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, frequency of sexual intercourse).

• Hypothesis 5: Greater desecration beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality

would be linked to poorer religious and spiritual adjustment (i.e., greater R/s struggles).

The Role of R/s Communities in Sanctification and Desecration Beliefs

Current emerging adults have complex relationships with religion and spirituality.

Research shows that though emerging adults are less engaged in organized religious communities than any other former generation (Twenge et al., 2016). However, a considerable portion continue to endorse belief in God/the divine and pray daily or weekly. Though US EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 29 cultural norms have become more accepting of non-marital sexuality, the majority of r/s institutions’ teachings remain in moral opposition to this culture. However, we have limited knowledge about emerging adults’ perceptions of their r/s communities’ teachings about non- marital sexuality. Whether currently attending religious services with a particular community or whether they attended services with their parents as youth, emerging adults have likely been exposed to r/s teachings about non-marital sexuality and internalized them to some degree. As they developed, emerging adults may have formed their own individual beliefs about sexuality that differ from those of their r/s community. However, it is likely that for more religiously engaged emerging adults, their internalized perceptions of their r/s community beliefs remain within their awareness and influence the way they think about sexuality. Therefore, the third goal was to extend current research on emerging adults’ sanctification and desecration beyond their own personal beliefs (Tier 2) to explore their perceptions of their religious/spiritual communities’ beliefs about sexuality as sanctified or as a desecration (Tier 3).

This study measured participants’ perceptions of r/s communities’ sanctification and desecration of non-marital sex with the aim of taking a balanced approach and capturing a broad spectrum of participants’ perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs. Because a growing portion of emerging adults are not affiliated with religious/spiritual communities and do not attend religious services, I expected that a significant number would endorse that these items do not apply to them. Despite the possibility of low base rates, I expected that there would be some degree of variability among participants’ perceptions of their religious/spiritual communities’ religious/spiritual beliefs about their non-marital relational sexuality.

No previous studies to my knowledge have examined sanctification and/or desecration through the lens of the r/s community. However, previous research on r/s coping has found that EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 30 individuals’ interactions with their r/s communities during stressful times can be both helpful and harmful (Pargament, 1997, 2007). Some individuals report helpful coping strategies of seeking support from their religious leaders or asking other individuals in their communities for prayer.

However, others endorse feeling judged or excluded by members of their religious/spiritual community, which contributes to worse psychological and spiritual outcomes (Pargament, 1997,

2007). Thus, it seems that individuals who find support for their beliefs and practices regarding choices about forming and maintaining romantic unions, including engaging in non-marital sexuality, within their r/s community would have better adjustment outcomes (Mahoney, 2010,

2013). However, individuals who perceive that their r/s communities disagree with their sexual practices and view them as a desecration may struggle to reconcile their behavior with these r/s community beliefs and their relational and psychological adjustment may suffer.

• Hypothesis 6: Therefore, I expected that greater participant perceptions of their r/s

communities as viewing participants’ non-marital relational sexuality as sanctified would

be linked to better individual adjustment (i.e., less depression, greater self-esteem, less

sex-guilt) and relational adjustment (i.e., relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction,

frequency of sexual intercourse).

• Hypothesis 7: Similarly, greater perceptions of r/s communities viewing participants’

non-marital relational sexuality as a desecration would be linked to poorer and

individual adjustment (i.e., greater depression, lower self-esteem, greater sex-guilt and

relational adjustment (i.e., relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, frequency of

sexual intercourse).

Not only do individuals rely on their religious and spiritual communities for support in their psychological and relational lives, but also to gain guidance about religious and spiritual EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 31 matters. Individuals who receive support from their religious/ spiritual communities regarding matters of relationship issues, such as relational sexuality, would also likely have greater access to resources and support for religious/spiritual questions, concerns, and practices (Mahoney,

2013). Conversely, should participants perceive judgment or apprehension from their r/s communities in matters related to their sexuality, they likely would also be more disconnected from their community’s resources related to matters or religious/spiritual growth and questioning

(Hernandez, Mahoney, & Pargament, 2014).

• Hypothesis 8: Therefore, I predicted that greater participant perceptions of their r/s

communities as sanctifying their non-marital relational sexuality would be linked to

better r/s adjustment (i.e., less r/s struggles).

• Hypothesis 9: Greater participant perceptions of their r/s communities as viewing their

non-marital relational sexuality as a desecration would be linked to poorer r/s

adjustment (i.e., greater r/s struggle). EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 32

CHAPTER III. METHOD

Participants

510 undergraduate students at Bowling Green State University who were enrolled in

Psychology courses completed the online survey between April 2019 and May 2019. From this broader sample, a subsample of 205 individuals was selected who met study criteria: 1) Were currently engaged in a committed nonmarital romantic relationship and 2) Had been sexually active within this romantic relationship within the past month. 253 (52%) participants were excluded because they reported that they were not “currently in committed romantic relationship.” 9 participants (<1%) were excluded because they reported that they were currently married. 9 participants (<1%) were excluded because they noted that they had not been sexually active with their romantic partner within the past month. 34 participants (7%) were excluded due to missing data for either of the inclusionary criteria variables. Thus, 205 participants (40%) met inclusionary criteria for this study.

Demographic information for study participants is displayed in Table 1. Participants were primarily female (65%), Caucasian (76%), and Christian (69%). Most participants reported their parents’ average yearly income as $30,000 to $70,000. Race, income, and religious denomination of the sample were consistent with national norms for emerging adults (US Census

Bureau, 2019; Pew Research Center, 2014). Though the sample was slightly more female than national norms, this is likely because 75% of U.S. undergraduate psychology majors are women

(Clay, 2017). Most were college sophomores (28%) with a mean age of 21 years and mean GPA was 3.21. Consistent with national norms for young adults, most participants reported belief in

God(s)/higher power, reported attending church weekly to a few times per year and endorsed EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 33 praying daily to weekly. Participants reported moderate mean levels of religious importance and biblical conservatism, consistent with national norms for young adults (Pew, 2014).

Procedures

After gaining IRB approval, participants were recruited from Psychology courses to complete an online questionnaire for course credit. The questionnaire took about 30-45 minutes to complete and asked about participants’ demographic characteristics, sexual and romantic history, relational adjustment, recent psychological adjustment, and religious/spiritual adjustment and experiences. The survey was anonymous as participants’ responses could not be linked with their name or identifying information. Students either signed up to participate through the university’s research credit system or used a separate link at the end of the survey to enter their email address to receive course credit.

Measures

Independent Variables

Sanctification of Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (Self). Two 10-item subscales of the revised sanctification of sex within marital unions (Hernandez, Mahoney, &

Pargament, 2011) were adapted to assess the perceived sanctity of sex within unmarried committed relationships. On a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), participants rated the extent to which they view sex with their committed romantic partner as having sacred qualities (Sacred Qualities subscale) and as an expression or as a manifestation of God/the divine (Manifestation of God subscale).

Descriptive statistics of Sanctification (Total) and the two subscales, Manifestation of

God and Sacred qualities, are displayed in Table 2. Appendix A lists all sanctification items.

Bivariate correlations of key constructs are shown in Table 4. Initial review of the means of total EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 34

Sanctification (self) and the two subscales showed clear differences in mean levels of Sacred

Qualities (self) v. Manifestation of God (self). The two scales were significantly correlated at r

= .67 (p < .001). Given their mean level differences and the magnitude of the correlation between the two scales, the two scales treated as separate variables and entered individually within hierarchical regressions. Notably, the amount of variance captured in the step where the two sub-scales are entered also provides an indication of their combined contribution. Also examining the associations of the two subscales separately is consistent with past literature suggesting these subscales may tend to operate differently with regard to sexuality (Murray-

Swank et al, 2005). Both scales showed strong reliability (MG:  = .97, SQ:  = .93). Appendix

A lists all sanctification items.

Sanctification of Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (R/s Community).

Two 10-item subscales of the revised sanctification of sex within marital unions (Hernandez,

Mahoney, & Pargament, 2011) were adapted to assess the perceived sanctity of sex within unmarried committed relationships. On a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7

(strongly agree), participants rated the extent to which they perceive that their religious/spiritual community views their sex with their committed romantic partner as having sacred qualities

(Sacred Qualities subscale) and as a manifestation of God/the divine (Manifestation of God subscale). Appendix B lists all sanctification items.

Descriptive statistics of sanctification (r/s community) are displayed in Table 2.

Bivariate correlations of key constructs are shown in Table 4. Similar to sanctification (self),

Initial review of the two subscales, showed a correlation of r = .71 between Manifestation of God

(MG) and Sacred Qualities (SQ). Given their mean level differences and the magnitude of the correlation between the two scales, the two scales were treated as separate variables and entered EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 35 individually within hierarchical regressions. Notably, the amount of variance captured in the step where the two sub-scales are entered also provides an indication of their combined contribution.

Also examining the associations of the two subscales separately is consistent with past literature suggesting these subscales may tend to operate differently with regard to sexuality (Murray-

Swank et al, 2005). Both scales showed strong reliability (MG:  = .98, SQ:  = .94).

Desecration Beliefs about Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (Self).

Negative spiritual appraisals of individuals’ nonmarital sexual behavior within a committed romantic relationship were assessed using the desecration subscale of the Sacred Loss and Desecration Scale (Pargament, Magyar, Benore, and Mahone, 2005). On this 14-item subscale, participants reported the degree to which they currently view their nonmarital sexual behavior within their current committed romantic relationship as a desecration (e.g., A sacred part of my life was violated; Something sacred that came from God was dishonored). The ratings were made on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). An average score was then computed for the desecration subscale. See Appendix C. The scale showed strong reliability ( = .95).

Desecration Beliefs about Sex in Non-Marital Committed Relationship (R/s

Community). Perceptions that their r/s community negatively appraised participants’ nonmarital sexual behavior within a committed romantic relationship was assessed using the desecration subscale of the Sacred Loss and Desecration Scale (Pargament et al., 2005). On this 14-item scale, participants reported the extent to which they perceived their religious/spiritual community as viewing sex with their current committed romantic partner as a desecration (e.g., A sacred part of your life was violated; Something sacred that came from God was dishonored). The ratings were made on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). An EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 36 average score for the desecration subscale was then computed. See Appendix D. The scale showed strong reliability ( = .99).

Dependent Variables

Religious/spiritual Struggles. The 26-item Religious and Spiritual Struggles Scale

(RSS) was used to assess the degree to which participants have experienced religious/spiritual struggles within the past month. This measure, shown in Appendix E, is comprised of six domains of struggles: divine, demonic, interpersonal, moral, doubt, and ultimate meaning, all of which have shown high convergent, predictive, and discriminant validity and load together into a single “struggles” factor (Exline et al., 2014). In this sample, the Cronbach’s alpha of .92 indicates that the items may be considered together as one “struggle” factor and thus a mean score was computed.

Relationship Satisfaction. The Dyadic Satisfaction subscale from the Dyadic

Adjustment Scale (Spanier, 1976) was used to measure participants’ relationship satisfaction with their current committed romantic partner. The scale consists of 10 items that measure the extent to which the participant feels satisfied with their partner. A meta-analysis of 91 studies using the DAS confirmed its validity and reliability for both the overall scale and subscales

(Graham, Liu, and Jeziorski, 2006). See Appendix F. The scale showed acceptable reliability (

= .76).

Frequency of Sexual Intercourse. Participants estimated the average monthly frequency of sexual intercourse with their romantic partner, specifically choosing among 7-point options ranging from 0 never to 7 more than once per day. See Appendix G.

Sexual Satisfaction. Sexual satisfaction was measured using eleven items adapted from a scale used by Young et al. (1998). These items were also used by Hernandez (2011, 2018) in EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 37 studies of sanctification of sex in married couples, reporting strong internal reliability ( = .95).

Participants reported on their degree of agreement with statements, such as “I am satisfied with the sexual relationship I have with my partner,” using a Likert scale ranging from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. These items were summed to compute a total score. See Appendix

H. The scale showed strong reliability ( = .86).

Depression. Participants’ depressive symptoms were assessed with the 20-item Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977). Research on the CES-D has consistently established various elements of validity and reliability in the general population

( = .85). Items were rated on a 4-point scale from “rarely or none of the time” to “most or all of the time,” and summed to create a total depression score. See Appendix I. The scale showed strong reliability ( = .90).

Self-esteem. The 10-item Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) was used to measure global self-esteem by measuring positive and negative feelings about the self. Items were rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 4 (strongly disagree). Negative items were reverse coded and then all items were added to compute a total score with higher scores indicating higher self-esteem. See Appendix J. The scale showed strong reliability ( = .89).

Sex Guilt. The short version of the revised Mosher Sex-Guilt Scale (Janda & Bazemore,

2011) was used to measure sex guilt. The Mosher Guilt Scale (Mosher, 1966) is a well- established scale that is comprised of three subscales, one of which measures sex guilt. This subscale was revised (Mosher, 1998) and recently validated in a short, 10-item version that correlated highly with the full revised version (r = .95). Items asked participants to rate their level of agreement with items such as “When I have sexual desires I enjoy them like all healthy human beings” (reverse scored) and “’Dirty’ jokes in mixed company are in bad taste.” Items EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 38 were rated on a Likert scaling ranging from 1 not at all true of me to 7 extremely true of me.

Scores were summed to compute a total score. Janda and Bazemore (2011) showed that the short scale had good internal consistency ( = .85). See Appendix K. The scale showed acceptable reliability ( = .76).

Descriptive Variables

Romantic Relationship Descriptive Behavior. This questionnaire assessed several components of the participants’ romantic relationship. These items included questions about whether or not the participant was currently engaged in a romantic relationship with a partner, the duration of this relationship, whether or not they were sexually active in this relationship, how long they had been sexually active. See Appendix L.

Demographic Information. Participants answered items concerning their age, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, major, sexual orientation, and GPA for the previous semester.

This information was used both to provide a description of sample characteristics and to identify potential control variables. See Appendix M.

Global Religiousness. Participants responded to one item assessing the degree to which they believe that God exists on a ten-point scale from 0 (not at all) to 9 (totally). A second question addressed their religious affiliation. Also, two commonly used items in religion research, frequency of church attendance and frequency of prayer, were used to attain descriptive information of the religious characteristics of the sample (Mahoney et al., 1999). Greater scores across these two items indicated greater religiousness/ spirituality. Additionally, one question asked whether the participants identify as “religious,” “spiritual,” both, or neither. This is becoming a widely used question in religion research and helps us to compare our sample to the larger population norms. See Appendix N. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 39

Biblical Conservatism. Biblical conservatism was assessed using a two-item index.

Participants indicated their agreement with the following statements on a 5-point scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”: (a) “The Bible is God’s word and everything will happen exactly as it says” and (b) “The Bible is the answer to all important human problems.”

The sum of these two items, shown in Appendix N, was used to create a total score for biblical conservatism. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 40

CHAPTER IV. RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics

General Religiousness

Descriptive statistics for general religiousness are displayed in Table 1. Overall, participants endorsed that religion was moderately important to them. There was variation in religious attendance, with 28% attending weekly or nearly weekly, 27% attending a few times per year, and 46% attending rarely or never. Frequency of prayer was also varied, with about

37% saying they pray daily or several times per week and 38% saying they pray rarely or never.

Consistent with national norms for emerging adults, most endorsed a Christian

(Protestant/Catholic) affiliation (69%), with the next prevalent being “no religious affiliation”

(21.6%). Notably, when examining differences between current religious affiliation and the affiliation with which they were raised (Table 1), only 7% of students reported having been raised with no specific religious tradition. This means that about 15% of participants disaffiliated from their parents’ religious tradition between childhood and emerging adulthood.

Biblical Conservatism

Participants reported a range of beliefs about Biblical Conservatism, with the mean falling in the low-moderate range. About 25% of the sample endorsed no beliefs consistent with

Biblical Conservatism, 55% endorsed a low level of belief, and about 20% endorsed moderate to strong beliefs.

Sexuality and Romantic Relationships

Participants endorsed having had on average about 2 sexual partners in their lifetime.

About 50% endorsed having had 1-2 sexual partners, 20% 3-5 partners, and 30% six or more partners. The mean age of first sexual intercourse was 16 years, with 75% of participants EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 41 reporting first sexual intercourse between 15 and 18 years of age. Participants reported the mean length of their current romantic relationship as 24 months. However, several outliers of longer relationships suggested that the median (16 months) may be a better estimate of the typical length of participants’ current romantic relationship.

Links between Global Religiousness and Sexuality Variables

Table 3 shows results of bivariate correlations between global religiousness variables

(general religiosity and biblical conservatism), specific religious/spiritual variables

(sanctification and desecration), and sexuality variables (sexual frequency, sexual satisfaction, sex guilt). Results show no significant links between general religiosity or biblical conservatism and sexual frequency or sexual satisfaction. However, greater sex guilt was linked with both greater religiosity (r = .34) and biblical conservatism (r = .39).

Links between Global Religiousness and Sanctification and Desecration

Results (displayed in Table 3) show that greater general religiosity and greater biblical conservatism are linked with greater endorsement of Manifestation of God, Sacred Qualities, and Desecration. These links are significant both for participants’ own beliefs (self) and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs (r/s comm).

Links between Demographic Covariates and Dependent Variables

Bivariate correlations between demographic variables and dependent variables were conducted to determine which demographic variables (i.e., age, SES, gender, race, sexual orientation, year in college) to include in the model as relevant covariates. Results showed a significant link between relationship satisfaction and race (dummy coded) (r = -.14, p = .05) and sexual orientation (dummy coded) (r =.15, p < .05). Sexual satisfaction was not significantly related to any demographic covariates. Sexual frequency was significantly linked to race (r = .14, EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 42

p = .05). Depression was significantly tied to sexual orientation (r = -.17, p = .01), gender

(dummy coded) (r = -.20, p < .01), and socioeconomic status (r = -.19, p < .01). Self-esteem showed significant links to sexual orientation (r = -.22, p < .01), race (r = .22, p < .01), and gender (r = .22, p < .01). Sex guilt was significantly related to sexual orientation (r = -.14, p

= .05). Religious/spiritual struggles showed no significant links to demographic variables.

Goal 1: Prevalence of Sanctification (Self) of Non-Marital Sexuality

Descriptive statistics of sanctification beliefs are displayed in Table 2. Bivariate correlations of key constructs are shown in Table 4.

Differences emerged between prevalence rates and mean levels of the two subscales. On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), the mean level of Manifestation of God in sex was 2.31 (SD = 1.46) and 13% of participants endorsed beliefs above the midpoint of 4. In contrast, Sacred Qualities of sex had a mean of 3.56 (SD = 1.47) and a base rate of 38% endorsement above the midpoint. T-test results showed that the mean of Sacred Qualities was significantly greater than that of Manifestation of God (t (202) = -14.94, p < .001). Thus, we see low levels of Manifestation of God perceptions and moderate levels of Sacred Qualities of sex perceptions.

Hypotheses 1

Descriptive Statistics: Relational Dependent Variables

Mean scores for relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and sexual frequency are displayed in Table 2. Overall, the participants were satisfied with their romantic relationships, with 50% of participants reporting being highly satisfied with their romantic relationships.

Participants also tended to report high sexual satisfaction with 83% endorsing somewhat to strong sexual satisfaction. Regarding past month frequency of sexual activity, the majority EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 43

reported engaging in sex about 3 times per week. There were no significant gender differences in level of sexual satisfaction or sexual frequency.

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and Relational Outcomes

Bivariate correlations and regression analyses were used to examine the hypothesis that greater sanctification of non-marital sex would be linked to better relational outcomes. Results of bivariate correlations (displayed in Table 4) showed that the Manifestation of God subscale was not significantly correlated with any of the relational outcomes. However, greater Sacred

Qualities was significantly correlated with greater relationship satisfaction (r = .24), sexual satisfaction (r = .25), and sexual frequency (r = .21).

Regression analyses that included the two subscales, Manifestation of God and Sacred

Qualities, as separate variables showed that the two contributed unique variance in different ways with relational dependent variables. Greater Sacred Qualities of Sex (SQ) remained associated with greater relationship satisfaction (β = .32), sexual satisfaction (β = .39), and sexual frequency (β = .34),after controlling for MG and other demographic control variables.

The Manifestation of God (MG) subscale was not uniquely linked with relationship satisfaction or sexual frequency after taking into account SQ, general religiousness, and demographic control variables but was uniquely linked with less sexual satisfaction (β = -.23), after taking into account SQ, general religiousness, and control variables. Thus, Hypothesis 1 is partially supported, with bivariate and regression results indicating the Sacred Qualities subscale is associated with better relational functioning. Contrary to expectations, the Manifestation of God subscale was not directly associated with relationship adjustment and was associated with less sexual satisfaction after Sacred Qualities was taken into account, along with general religiousness and demographic control variables. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 44

Hypothesis 2

Descriptive Statistics of Individual Psychosocial Dependent Variables

Mean scores for depression, self-esteem, and sex guilt are displayed in Table 2. Overall, participants reported low depressive symptoms, with 55% falling below the midpoint.

Participants on average showed moderate to high levels of self-esteem, with 75% rating self- esteem above the midpoint of the scale. Overall, participants reported low levels of sex guilt.

About 13% endorsed moderate to high levels of sex guilt.

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and Individual Adjustment

Bivariate correlations (displayed in Table 4) showed that participants’ sanctification of sex (self) did not relate to level of depression, self-esteem or sex guilt. Neither subscale (MG nor

SQ) was related to these individual adjustment outcomes. Therefore, Hypothesis 2 is not supported. One’s own sanctification of sex does not relate to one’s individual adjustment.

Hypothesis 3

Descriptive Statistics: R/s Struggles

Mean scores for religious and spiritual struggles (r/s struggles) are displayed in Table 2.

Overall, participants reported low levels of r/s struggles, with 25% endorsing any degree of r/s struggles and 13% endorsing r/s struggles to a moderate to high degree.

Links between Sanctification of Sex (Self) and R/s Struggles

Bivariate correlations displayed in Table 3 showed that participants’ sanctification of sex

(self) did not relate to level of r/s struggles. Neither subscale (MG nor SQ) was related to these r/s struggles. Thus, Hypothesis 3 is not supported. One’s own sanctification of sex does not relate to one’s level of religious/spiritual struggles.

EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 45

Hypothesis 4

Descriptive Statistics: Desecration

Mean scores for desecration beliefs are displayed in Table 2. Overall, participants reported low to moderate levels of desecration, with 47% endorsing desecration to some degree and 9% endorsing desecration to a moderate to high level.

Links between Desecration (Self) and Psychological and Relational Adjustment

Bivariate correlations are displayed in Table 4. Results showed that participants’ own desecration beliefs did not significantly relate to depression or self-esteem. Bivariate correlations showed that greater desecration (self) was significantly linked to greater sex guilt (r = .25). A hierarchical stepwise regression, displayed in Table 5, confirmed that desecration (self) significantly predicted sex guilt (β = .15), over and above control variables including general religiousness.

Bivariate correlations showed that greater desecration (self) was significantly related to less relationship satisfaction (r = -.28) and less sexual satisfaction (r = -.14). No significant correlations were found with desecration (self) and sexual frequency. In a hierarchical stepwise regression displayed in Table 5, greater desecration was significantly linked with less relationship satisfaction (β = -.21) and less sexual satisfaction (β = -.19) over and above control variables and general religiousness. Thus, Hypothesis 4 is partially supported. Greater perception of one’s own non-marital sexuality as a desecration was linked to greater sex guilt and less relationship and sexual satisfaction but was not related to depression, self-esteem, or sexual frequency.

EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 46

Hypothesis 5

Results of bivariate correlations (Table 4) showed that participants’ desecration (self) was significantly related to r/s struggles (r = .20). The hierarchical regression (displayed in Table 7) showed that desecration was significantly linked to r/s struggles over and above general religiousness (β = .22). Thus, Hypothesis 5 is supported.

Hypothesis 6

Descriptive Statistics: Sanctification (R/s Community)

Descriptive statistics of sanctification (r/s community) are displayed in Table 2.

Bivariate correlations of key constructs are shown in Table 4. Differences emerged between prevalence rates and mean levels. On a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), the mean of the Manifestation of God (MG) in sex scale was 2.49 (SD = 1.63) and 19% of participants endorsed beliefs above the midpoint. Sacred Qualities of sex had a mean of 3.06 (SD

= 1.57) and a base rate of endorsement of 29% above the midpoint of 4. Results of a T-test showed that the mean of Sacred Qualities (r/s comm) was significantly greater than the mean of

Manifestation of God (r/s comm) (t (199) = 6.72, p <.001). Thus, similar to Sanctification (self), emerging adults tended to endorse Sacred Qualities of sex more frequently and to a greater degree than they did Manifestation of God in sex.

Links between Sanctification of Sex (R/s Community) and Adjustment Variables

Results of bivariate correlations showed a significant link between greater Manifestation of God (r/s comm) and greater sex guilt (r = .18) and a significant link between greater Sacred

Qualities (r/s comm) and greater relationship satisfaction (r = .23) and greater sexual satisfaction

(r = .18). EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 47

Results of regression models for relational variables can be found in Table 8. Results showed that the scales operated in different ways with regard to relational variables. Higher

Sacred Qualities scores were related to greater relationship (β = .35) and sexual satisfaction (β

= .30). However, higher Manifestation of God (MG) scores were not significant but approached significance in a link to less relationship (β = -.18, p =.10 ) and sexual satisfaction (β = -.19, p

= .08). These results remained the same when including relevant control variables and general religiousness. Table 8 shows the results of a regression model for Manifestation of God and

Sacred Qualities with sex guilt. Results showed that greater Manifestation of God (r/s comm) was not significantly linked to greater sex guilt, but it approached significance. Greater Sacred

Qualities (r/s comm) was linked with less sex guilt. Therefore, Hypothesis 6 is partially supported.

Hypothesis 7 Descriptive Statistics: Desecration (R/s Community)

Descriptive statistics of desecration (r/s community) beliefs are displayed in Table 2. The mean level of r/s community desecration beliefs was 1.73 (SD = 1.20) on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Thus, results show that on average, emerging adult participants reported low to neutral beliefs that their r/s community’s view non-marital sexuality as a desecration. When considering base rates, results showed that 49% of participants endorsed any community desecration beliefs of some kind, with 21% above the midpoint of 4.

Links between Desecration (R/s Community), Relational, and Adjustment Variables

Results of bivariate correlations showed that greater desecration (r/s community) was significantly linked to greater sex guilt (r = .20) and less frequent sexual behavior (r = -.21).

Desecration (r/s community) was not significantly related to depression, self-esteem, relationship satisfaction, or sexual satisfaction. Results of regression models can be found in Table 9. In a EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 48

hierarchical stepwise regression, results showed that desecration (r/s comm) was uniquely related to sex guilt (β = .14) and sexual frequency (β = -.19) after including general religiousness and control variable. Therefore, Hypothesis 7 is partially supported.

Hypothesis 8

Results of bivariate correlations (Table 3) showed that neither the Manifestation of God

(MG) nor Sacred Qualities (SQ) subscales were significantly related to r/s struggles. Thus,

Hypothesis 8 is not supported.

Hypothesis 9

Results of bivariate correlations (Table 4) showed that greater overall desecration (r/s community) was significantly linked to greater r/s struggles (r = .21). Results of regression models can be found in Table 10. In a hierarchical stepwise regression, results showed that desecration (r/s community) was significantly related to r/s struggles over and above relevant control variables and general religiousness (β = .23). Thus, Hypothesis 9 is supported. Greater perception of one’s r/s community viewing non-marital sex as a desecration is linked with poorer r/s adjustment.

EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 49

CHAPTER V. DISCUSSION

The main goal of this project was to explore both the light and dark sides of religion/spirituality’s intersection with sexuality within emerging adults’ non-marital romantic relationships. Rather than simply examining global religious variables (frequency of prayer or service attendance) and overall sexual behaviors and attitudes, this study focused on specific religious and spiritual beliefs about sexuality and the ways that these might be relate to personal, relational, and spiritual well-being. Rooted in the broader theories of sanctification and desecration, this study’s hypotheses stemmed from the emerging collection of studies that have examined sanctification of sexuality within marital and non-marital romantic relationships as well as studies exploring the role of negative r/s beliefs about non-marital sexuality (e.g., desecration, r/s struggles, and moral incongruence). The aim was to determine how the specific religious/spiritual constructs of sanctification and desecration align with emerging adults’ beliefs and perceptions of their sexual relationships with committed non-marital partners and the relationship between these r/s beliefs and relational, individual, and spiritual adjustment.

The Sample

Overall, the sample’s characteristics were consistent with national norms for emerging adults both demographically and religiously despite participants being college students, perhaps because the university they attend tends to attract relatively diverse individuals in terms of socioeconomic status and racial/ethnic background compared to many other institutions of higher education. Typically, more frequent sexual behavior and more permissive sexual attitudes are linked with lower levels of general religiousness (attendance, prayer, religious importance)

(Ahrold et al., 2011; Hernandez et al., 2014). Because the inclusionary criteria for this study involved participants being sexually active within the past month, we expected this sample to be EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 50 somewhat less religious than the general population of emerging adults. However, the sample was generally consistent with emerging adult norms for religiosity and sexual behaviors, again perhaps because the sample reflects a more socioeconomically diverse range of college students than tends to be recruited from undergraduate universities. Regarding romantic relationships, we see that this is a sample of emerging adult college students who on average have been with their committed partner for over a year and most are emotionally and sexually satisfied with their relationships. The majority are engaging in sexual behavior several times per week, which is normative for emerging adults.

About one-fifth of the sample identified as having no current religious affiliation, but nearly all participants reported being raised within a specific religious tradition. This means that most participants had a religious/spiritual community (Tier 3) that may have been involved in shaping their personal beliefs about sexuality. It also suggests that most participants had a specific r/s community on which to reflect when answering questions about their perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs about sexuality.

Sanctification (Self)

Sanctification (Self) Prevalence

An important preliminary step to further exploring the role of sanctification beliefs about sexuality was to examine prevalence rates in the current sample of emerging adults. With such little research in this area, observing how many individuals currently identify with these beliefs helps us to better understand the current generation of emerging adults’ religious/moral beliefs about sexuality. Over a third of this study’s participants endorsed moderate to high levels of

Sacred Qualities beliefs about their non-marital sexuality, with considerably less endorsing

Manifestation of God beliefs about sexuality. These prevalence rates are similar to those found in EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 51 the original study of non-marital college student sanctification of sexuality (Murray-Swank et al.,

2005) as well as prevalence rates of Sacred Qualities in more recent studies (Leonhardt et al.,

2020; Phillips et al., 2017). Thus, research is beginning to find stable prevalence rates of sanctification of non-marital sexuality both across generations of emerging adults and among various samples of adults (Leonhardt et al., 2020; Phillips et al., 2017). These prevalence rates show that sanctification sexuality in non-marital relationships remains a relevant construct to examine within emerging adults and merits additional research attention.

It should be noted that though this study’s prevalence rates are similar to past non- married samples, they fall well below the reported base rates of marital sanctification. For example, Hernandez et al. (2011) found that 75% of married participants reported that they viewed their sexual relationship with their spouse as sacred to some degree. Theoretically, these higher rates of marital sanctification could be due to many mainstream religious teachings/norms that the marital relationship is one of the only morally appropriate contexts for sexual behavior.

However, given that there are so few studies in this field, it is unclear whether religious norms fully explain these differences.

Manifestation of God v. Sacred Qualities

When examining prevalence rates of sanctification of sexuality, it is interesting to note the differences between the Manifestation of God and Sacred Qualities subscales. Results showed that Sacred Qualities’ means and prevalence rates were significantly greater than those of Manifestation of God, despite 91% of the sample reporting a belief in God/higher power.

Whereas in many sanctification studies these items tend to overlap so highly that it makes little sense to separate them, in this study, though strongly related, there were clear differences between the two subscales. It is important to recall that these subscales were developed to EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 52 capture the experiences of both theistic and non-theistic elements of sanctification. Furthermore, within the framework of sexuality, the theistic and non-theistic subscales might be particularly different because of specific religious teachings about the contexts in which sexuality is religiously sanctioned.

Past research has shown that the Sacred Qualities subscale tends to be more highly endorsed than Manifestation of God when applied to non-marital sexuality (Murray-Swank et al.,

2005). It not entirely clear why such differences have emerged given that nearly all participants in both studies reported endorsing a theistic worldview – i.e., saying they believed in God.

However, in the context of sexuality, Manifestation of God may likely tap into views about sexuality that reflect theologically and socially conservative views given that very few r/s groups openly condone or encourage non-marital sexual activity and many moderate to conservative r/s groups continue to strongly teach adolescents to postpone sexual intercourse until marriage

(Regnerus, 2007). In contrast, the Sacred Qualities scale may capture experiences of both emerging adults who are actively engaged with religious communities and those who are not.

Note the considerable differences in wording of these two subscales and the unique aspects of sanctification that each intends to capture. The Manifestation of God subscale implies that God(s)/the divine is actively present in one’s sexual experience. This scale includes statements such as “God has been a guiding force in our sexual relationship” and “I feel God/the divine at work when we express ourselves sexually with each other.” This type of language tends to coincide with religious dogma and theological teachings regarding the role of the divine in a marital (not non-marital) sexual relationship. In contrast, the Sacred Qualities subscale captures broader spiritual aspects of sexuality: “Being sexually intimate with my romantic partner feels like a deeply spiritual experience.” EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 53

It should also be noted, however, that Sacred Qualities is more prevalent than

Manifestation of God even in studies of sanctification of sexuality within the context of a marital relationship. For example, Hernandez and Mahoney (2009) found that only about 40-50% of married individuals endorsed Manifestation of God in sexuality items whereas 70-80% endorsed

Sacred Qualities of sexuality items. Therefore, we see that both within and outside the context of marriage, there is a tendency to compartmentalize God/the divine figure from sexual behavior.

Thus, it may be that the Manifestation of God scale is worded in a way that resonates less with people’s experiences of viewing their sexual relationships as sacred.

Sanctification (Self) and Relational Adjustment

The next goal was to examine the links between sanctification beliefs about sexuality and relational adjustment. We expected to find similar links as those found in marital sanctification of sex studies, with greater sanctification of sexuality tied to better relational adjustment. In several ways, the findings supported our hypothesis and were consistent with past research. Greater Sacred Qualities of sex was linked with more relationship satisfaction, more sexual satisfaction, and more frequent sexual behavior with one’s partner. These findings are consistent with Murray-Swank et al.’s original study (2005) of non-marital sanctification of sex by college students, which also found significant links between greater Sacred Qualities and greater sexual frequency and sexual satisfaction but no significant links between Manifestation of God and sexual/relational adjustment. Both recent studies of sanctification (Leonhardt et al.,

2020; Phillips et al., 2017) also found significant links between greater Sacred Qualities of sexuality and greater relational adjustment.

We also see alignment between these results and those of marital sanctification of sex studies regarding relational adjustment, which found that greater overall sanctification of marital EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 54 sex was linked with greater relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and sexual frequency

(Hernandez & Mahoney, 2009; Hernandez et al. 2011; Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018).

Therefore, we see considerable support that both for married and unmarried emerging/young adults, viewing one’s sexual behavior within a committed romantic relationship as sacred is associated with healthier adjustment within this romantic relationship.

An interesting finding that differed from our hypothesis was the difference in how the

Sacred Qualities and Manifestation of God scales uniquely operated with regard to relational adjustment when controlling for their overlap. Though greater Manifestation of God was not significantly linked to relational outcomes in the bivariate correlations, when controlling for general religiousness and Sacred Qualities, greater Manifestation of God was significantly related to less sexual satisfaction. Most prior studies of non-marital sanctification have used only the Sacred Qualities scale to measure sanctification beliefs (Leonhardt et al., 2020; Phillips,

2017), so there are few findings to provide context to interpret this finding. Murray-Swank et al.,

(2005) was the only study to include both Sacred Qualities and Manifestation of God in regression models examining sanctification and sexual satisfaction.

When entered in the same model, results showed that Manifestation of God was not significantly linked to either sexual satisfaction or sexual frequency whereas Sacred Qualities showed a significant positive link. Thus, our findings are consistent in some ways in that previous studies have shown links between Sacred Qualities and sexual satisfaction. However, our findings that greater Manifestation of God was linked to less sexual satisfaction after controlling for Sacred Qualities are the first of their kind. One possible explanation is that when controlling for more spiritual/non-theistic beliefs about sex (sacred qualities), the Manifestation EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 55 of God scale may represent more conservative r/s beliefs about sexuality and thus relate to less sexual satisfaction.

Overall, these findings support the theory that in some ways sanctification of sex functions similarly in committed non-marital relationships as it does in marital relationships. We see that emerging adults who view their sexual relationship with a committed partner as “sacred” or as “a deeply spiritual experience,” tend to be more satisfied with their emotional and sexual relationships with their partner. Though these are cross-sectional findings and cannot support a causal link, they support the results of the marital sanctification of sexuality studies (Hernandez

& Mahoney, 2009; Hernandez et al. 2011; Hernandez-Kane & Mahoney, 2018) and extend them to non-marital relationships.

Sanctification (Self) and Individual Adjustment

Whereas sanctification of sex (self) was related to relational adjustment, results indicated no link to participants’ individual adjustment (depression, self-esteem, sex-guilt). Thus, my hypothesis that greater sanctification of non-marital sex would be linked to better psychological adjustment was not supported. However, since this was the first study to examine the tie between sanctification of sexuality and individual adjustment outcomes, it is unclear whether this finding is incidental or indicative of sanctification of non-marital sexuality’s links with psychological adjustment overall. No studies of sanctification of relational domains (e.g. marriage, sexuality, parenting) have examined ties with individual psychosocial adjustment, opting to focus on relational dependent variables. However, marital relationship literature has long established a link between one’s relationship satisfaction and one’s individual adjustment and well-being

(Heyman et al., 2009). Thus, given the link between sanctification and relational adjustment, sanctification may be better examined as having indirect influence on individual adjustment EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 56 through relational adjustment/satisfaction. Future research may consider using mediation and/or longitudinal models to explore the links between these variables further. Also, it is important to recognize that this sample reported low overall levels of psychological distress. Thus, this research question may be primarily relevant to psychologically distressed or clinical samples in which the participants are experiencing higher levels of individual psychological distress (e.g., higher depression, anxiety, and lower self-esteem) relative to what is typically reported.

Desecration (Self)

Having established the ways that religious/spiritual perceptions of sex might enhance sexuality, this study also aimed to extend the literature to explore the ways that negative religious/spiritual beliefs about sexuality may impact those in non-marital committed relationships. Though many emerging adults are less traditionally religious than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations (Pew, 2014), research suggests that the influence of religious norms on sexuality are deeply rooted within American culture and thus continue to have an impact (Grubbs & Perry, 2019; Smith, 2005). The specific construct of desecration has never been examined in the context of non-marital sexuality. However, similar constructs including shame, guilt, moral incongruence, and religious/spiritual struggles about sexuality have been examined in the context of non-marital sexuality and offered substantial support for the relevance of negative r/s beliefs in emerging adults’ understanding of their sexuality. This study served as a preliminary exploration of the prevalence and the intersection of desecration with psychological and relational adjustment variables.

Desecration (Self): Prevalence

Results indicated that the mean level of desecration (self) was low, with most participants endorsing minimal desecration beliefs. Approximately half of the participants endorsed some EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 57 beliefs that their sexual behavior is a desecration, with a small portion (9%) endorsing these beliefs to a moderate to high degree. These prevalence rates differ from those seen in studies of divorce, which typically show 30-50% of participants endorsing moderate to strong desecration beliefs about divorce (Krumrei et al., 2009, 2011) but were similar to those for college students with romantic breakups, in which about 5% had moderate to strong desecration beliefs (Hawley

& Mahoney, 2013; Hawley et al., 2015).

Given the inclusionary criteria for this study that individuals were sexually active with a romantic partner, these somewhat low base rates of desecration are not surprising. Generally, desecration beliefs are linked with higher levels of religiosity and this was seen in this study’s sample as well. However, greater religiosity is also linked with less frequent sexual behavior and more conservative sexual attitudes (Ahrold et al., 2011; Hernandez et al., 2014). Thus, a portion of the college student population who hold strong desecration beliefs regarding sexuality may not have qualified to participate in this study because they did not meet the inclusionary criteria of being sexually active within the past month.

An exploration of the means and prevalence rates of desecration items showed that the most highly endorsed personal desecration beliefs conveyed a few key themes. One theme was that the sexual behavior was sinful or immoral, with the connotation of violating one’s own values. The second theme was the sense of offending God/the divine through one’s behavior.

Finally, responses conveyed a sense that something meaningful in one’s life had been violated.

Thus, we see some overlap with constructs such as moral incongruence while also noting additional aspects of religious/spiritual beliefs such as feeling one’s sexual behavior has impacted one’s relationship with God/the divine and impacted the meaning one placed on sexuality. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 58

Desecration (Self) and Relational Adjustment

Despite somewhat low prevalence rates of desecration beliefs, findings supported the hypothesis that greater desecration would be linked with poorer relational adjustment. Results indicated that stronger desecration beliefs about non-marital sexuality were linked with less relationship satisfaction and less sexual satisfaction. This means that emerging adults who held stronger beliefs that their sexual behavior was immoral, sinful, or in some way violated their r/s beliefs also experienced less satisfaction within their romantic relationships.

These findings are important for several reasons. First, they provide support that viewing non-marital sexuality as a desecration fits within the desecration literature and follows patterns similar to desecration findings in similar contexts. These findings fit with previous studies in which greater desecration of divorce was related to greater subjective distress and more conflict with one’s former spouse (Krumrei et al., 2009, 2011) and also extend the initial work that

Hawley et al. (2013, 2015) started in examining the intersecting roles of sexuality, romantic relationships, and desecration. Hawley and colleagues focused on romantic break-ups, finding that engaging in non-marital sexual behavior played a significant role in viewing one’s break-up as a desecration and ultimately resulted in greater individual distress. This study’s results provide evidence that desecration beliefs about sexual behavior in romantic relationships not only play a role after the relationship has ended but also while it is occurring.

Also, this link between desecration and relational adjustment suggests that desecration of non-marital sexuality aligns with research on other negative r/s beliefs about sexuality such as moral incongruence and r/s struggles. Like other negative r/s beliefs, we see that despite low prevalence rates, negative r/s beliefs can be potent and powerful, particularly in regard to sexual morality. Moral incongruence beliefs about one’s pornography use behavior have been linked to EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 59 poorer marital quality (Perry, 2019) and greater beliefs that one’s pornography use is highly problematic in one’s relationships (Grubbs et al., 2015; 2017). Thus, desecration beliefs about sexuality fit within this emerging area of research exploring specific negative r/s beliefs about sexuality in the context of committed relationships.

Desecration (Self) and Individual Adjustment

In examining the results of desecration’s links with individual adjustment variables, we see a significant link between desecration and sex guilt but no association with depression or self-esteem. Thus, the hypothesis was partially supported that greater desecration (self) would be linked to poorer individual adjustment. The link between desecration and sex guilt remained significant even when controlling for general religiosity, which tends to have a moderate correlation with sex guilt (Emmers-Sommer et al., 2017; Woo et al., 2012). In this study’s model, greater general religiosity was significantly linked to greater sex guilt. Adding desecration in the next step, we saw a significant increase in the overall model and a unique and significant link between stronger desecration beliefs and more sex guilt. Thus, both general religiosity and more specific desecration beliefs about sexuality are related to emerging adults’ experience of sex guilt.

These findings are consistent with previous literature about sex guilt and specific r/s beliefs about sexuality. Murray et al. (2007) found that felt alienation from God was a key factor in explaining experiences of sexual guilt and shame in college students. Also, across multiple studies of sex guilt, negative attitudes about sexual behavior were significantly related to greater sex guilt (Emmers-Sommer, 2017). Hook and colleagues (2015) also found that participants who viewed their sexual behavior as incongruent with their values tended to experience greater religious and spiritual struggles such as guilt and shame. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 60

Desecration aligns with these constructs and may take them one step farther. Desecration involves believing that one’s sexual behavior is morally incongruent with one’s values, but also consistent with the relational spirituality framework directly involves feeling that one has offended God/the divine and violated a meaningful aspect of life through one’s sexual behavior.

These types of beliefs imply that sexuality and/or sexual teachings are regarded as sacred and that breaking these teachings is not only incongruent with personal morality but may also be seen as actively harming one’s relationship with God/the divine. It follows then that desecration is associated with stronger feelings of guilt related to one’s sexual behavior.

Similar to sanctification (self), desecration (self) beliefs were not significantly linked to other measures of individual psychosocial adjustment (depression and self-esteem). This is inconsistent with previous studies of desecration beliefs about divorce and romantic break-ups, which showed significant links between greater desecration beliefs and greater depressive symptoms (Krumrei et al., 2009; 2011; Hawley and Mahoney, 2013) and greater subjective distress and anger one year later (Hawley et al., 2015). However, this study differed from those significantly because it did not occur in the context of the dissolution of a romantic relationship, an event that is strongly associated with higher psychological distress. Thus, it seems that desecration in the context of non-marital sexual behavior for individuals who are quite satisfied with their union and reporting very little personal distress differs from the experience of desecration involving the loss of a close relationship. As this was the first study of desecration of non-marital sexuality, additional research is needed to better understand desecration’s links to individual adjustment. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 61

The Role of Religious/Spiritual Communities

The second segment of this study involved shifting the consideration of sanctification and desecration beyond the confines of individual beliefs to examine the role of other religious and spiritual systems on emerging adults’ beliefs about their sexuality. The majority of psychological research on religion and spirituality has limited its focus to individuals’ personal, intrapsychic thoughts, beliefs, and behaviors. However, we know that religious and spiritual beliefs do not exist in a vacuum. Just like other attitudes and beliefs, they are largely informed and influenced by one’s family, friends, communities, and by one’s broader culture/society. Mahoney’s relational spirituality framework (2010) captures these other areas of influence succinctly by dividing these three layers into “tiers.” Tier 1 refers to one’s personal intrapsychic experience of the sacred/God/the divine. Tier 2 consists of one’s experience of God/the divine/the sacred through personal relationships with other people. Tier 3 represents one’s experience of the sacred/God/the divine through one’s religious and/or spiritual community.

The focus of research often remains in Tiers 1 and 2 because the other tiers are difficult to access directly. However, research on the ways that our religious/spiritual beliefs develop show that the three tiers play distinctive roles. Typically, individuals’ views of God/the divine

(Tier 1) are influenced largely by their parents (Tier 2) and the religious/spiritual organizations in which they were raised (Tier 3) (Kirkpatrick, 2005; Pew, 2015; Spilka et al., 2003). Examining the influence of emerging adults’ religious and spiritual communities may be particularly important when considering religious/spiritual beliefs about non-marital sexuality. As the broader US culture has become more permissive about sexual behavior outside of marriage, many religious and spiritual groups have held to their teachings that sexuality is only permitted within marital relationships. However, researchers have also found that many young adults who EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 62 are religiously engaged are engaging in sexual practices that go against their r/s communities’ teachings and tradition (Wilcox & Wolfinger, 2016). Thus, research is needed to explore how emerging adults are taking in and attempting to integrate multiple sources of information about the morality of non-marital sexuality.

This study sought to address this important question about adults’ beliefs about their sexuality. By asking participants about their perceptions of what their r/s communities believe and teach about non-marital sexuality, we hoped to compare and contrast personal beliefs and what they thought their r/s communities believed. Though their perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs likely informed some of their personal beliefs about sexuality, there could be there are considerable differences due to the influence of popular culture, friends/family, or other influences on their personal beliefs about sexuality. This study sought to examine the similarities and differences between emerging adults’ own personal r/s beliefs about non-marital committed sexuality and the beliefs they perceive their r/s communities hold.

Sanctification (R/s Community)

Sanctification (R/s Community): Prevalence

Overall, most participants reported experiencing sanctification (r/s community) to a low to moderate degree, with nearly a third of participants endorsing sanctification (r/s comm) to a moderate to high degree. When examining prevalence rates of participants’ perceptions of their r/s communities’ sanctification beliefs, we see similarities and differences with sanctification

(self). Like sanctification (self) we see that participants more frequently endorsed Sacred

Qualities (r/s comm) than Manifestation of God (r/s comm). Thus, both when considering their own beliefs and those of their r/s community, Sacred Qualities items resonated more with emerging adults’ experiences of sexuality than did Manifestation of God. This is likely due to EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 63

Sacred Qualities being a broader scale that could capture more of the participants’ experiences than would Manifestation of God, which is theistic and reflective of specific religious norms.

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Sanctification (Self)

Participants’ personal views of sanctification and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ views were strongly related (i.e., r = .69-.75). This similarity is reasonable given the similarity in measures and the way in which one’s r/s community and personal religious beliefs inform one another. One notable difference emerged when examining self v. r/s community beliefs for sanctification. Participants rated their personal Sacred Qualities beliefs significantly higher than those of their r/s communities. However, there was no significant difference between one’s personal beliefs and one’s r/s community’s beliefs for Manifestation of

God. One possible reason for this is that Manifestation of God beliefs might align more closely with traditional religious teachings about sexuality and participants’ unorthodox or non- traditional views of the role of God in their lives. In contrast, the Sacred Qualities items are non- theistic and may be developed as personal beliefs that are not as closely informed by formal religious/spiritual teachings.

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Relational Adjustment

In line with our hypothesis, the links between participants’ perceptions of their r/s community’s sanctification beliefs and relational adjustment were significant and paralleled the links seen with their own sanctification beliefs. Just as with sanctification (self), Sacred

Qualities (r/s comm) was linked to greater relationship and sexual satisfaction whereas manifestation of God (r/s comm) was linked to less sexual satisfaction. These results point to several important implications. First, though Sacred Qualities (r/s community) beliefs were less prevalent than participants’ personal views, they continued to function in a similar way. Though EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 64 less prevalent than personal beliefs that sex is sacred, our findings suggest that emerging adults are encountering religious and spiritual communities that convey the message that sexuality is sacred, whether or not it is within a marital union.

An interesting next step would be to learn more about the types of messages that emerging adults perceive their r/s communities are sending and explore the details of their experiences in understanding their role within r/s communities as unmarried couples. A second point to recognize is the similar way in which sanctification (r/s community) and sanctification

(self) function. The parallels between these two suggest that both one’s personal views (Tier 1) and the perceived views of one’s r/s community (Tier 3) play a role in the health and well-being of emerging adults’ relationships. These findings also support the push to move beyond examining only personal beliefs to further explore the role of one’s religious and spiritual community in shaping one’s relational and psychological well-being.

Sanctification (R/s Community) and Individual Adjustment

We hypothesized that similar to sanctification (self), sanctification (r/s comm) would be linked with better individual adjustment. In partial support of this hypothesis and unlike sanctification (self), greater Sacred Qualities (r/s comm) was linked with less sex guilt. Greater

Manifestation of God (r/s comm) was not significantly linked with greater sex guilt but approached significance. This link between sanctification and sex guilt being present only for r/s community beliefs fits with the way one experiences guilt- as a concern that one has violated a rule or offended an external party. Thus, when emerging adults believe that their r/s community approves of non-marital sexuality and views it as sacred, they also tend to experience lower levels of guilt sexual guilt. However, it is also possible that greater emphasis on God/the divine EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 65 being present in the sexual relationship relates to greater guilt because many more traditional religious teachings emphasize God/the divine’s disapproval of non-marital sexual behavior.

Similar to sanctification (self) findings, no other individual adjustment dependent variables showed significant associations with either sanctification scale. As discussed previously when considering sanctification (self) and individual outcomes, the lack of ties between sanctification

(r/s community) and depression and self-esteem is not particularly surprising. These insignificant findings are likely due to low base rates of psychological distress in the current sample, the way that individual adjustment was measured, and the possibility that non-relational dependent variables were too distal to show significant links with r/s beliefs about sexuality.

Desecration (R/s Community)

Prevalence

Compared to their personal beliefs about desecration, participants perceived that their r/s communities held stronger desecration beliefs. About a fifth of the sample endorsed moderate to high levels of perceived r/s community desecration beliefs. Also notable, desecration (self) and desecration (r/s community) were moderately linked, but not to as high a degree as would be expected given that they are the same measure and tap into the same construct. These results offer evidence that emerging adults may concurrently recognize r/s beliefs as the teachings of their r/s community, but they may not integrate these beliefs as strongly into their personal belief system. Given the contrast between US culture’s general permissiveness of non-marital sexuality and many religious/spiritual institutions disapproval, emerging adults’ personal beliefs about sexuality are likely influenced by aspects of both sources. This difference between desecration (self) and desecration (r/s comm) suggests that emerging adults know what their r/s communities teach and yet recognize that they hold differing personal beliefs about sexual EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 66 morality. The results indicate that those who are engaging in non-marital sexual behavior do not simply let go of these beliefs entirely but are still aware that these are the teachings of their r/s communities. Also, for some, these views are integrated into their own belief system.

Desecration (R/s Community) and Adjustment

Though more prevalent than desecration (self), desecration (r/s community) did not show the same pattern of findings with relational adjustment variables. Whereas desecration (self) was linked to less relational and sexual satisfaction, greater perceived desecration (r/s comm) was not significantly linked to relationship nor sexual satisfaction but was linked with less frequent sexual behavior. This pattern of results seems to provide evidence for how these two variables differ. One possible explanation is that desecration (self) beliefs may be more of an internalized belief system and are thus more closely related to one’s attitudes about one’s romantic and sexual relationship. In contrast, desecration (r/s community) may be characterized as a knowledge or recognition of religious/spiritual teachings about sexuality that are not fully internalized/integrated and thus are not as closely related to one’s attitudes about one’s romantic/sexual relationship.

The link between desecration (r/s community) and less frequent sexual behavior may be related to religious/spiritual sanctions on sexual behavior. The more strongly one thought that one’s r/s community disapproved of non-marital sexuality (desecration), the less frequently one engaged in sexual behaviors. This again fits with the moral incongruence model such that dissonance is likely to arise between one’s perceptions of moral disapproval by one’s r/s community and one’s sexual behavior. Emerging adults may attempt to resolve this dissonance by engaging in sexual behavior less frequently. However, it is notable that this same result was EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 67 not observed for one’s own beliefs about desecration (self). Further research is needed to clarify these results and gain a more definitive understanding of these processes.

Similar to desecration (self) variables, desecration (r/s comm) was not associated with depression or self-esteem. Desecration (r/s comm) showed a small link with greater sex guilt similar to desecration (self). These parallels are logical yet also noteworthy given the differences between desecration (self) and (r/s community). Though a small effect size, these findings highlight the importance of considering the role of the r/s community in informing and shaping individuals’ beliefs about sexuality and the ways that these beliefs may impact their personal views of their sexual behavior.

Sanctification and R/s Adjustment

Neither sanctification (self) nor sanctification (r/s community) showed a significant relationship with religious and spiritual adjustment. However, it is important to recognize that r/s adjustment was only measured by one scale, religious and spiritual struggles. Though a comprehensive scale in asking about several ways that one might struggle with morality, doubts about religion/spirituality, and one’s relationship with God/the divine, the R/s Struggles Scale does not ask about positive aspects of religion/spiritualty. Thus, it may not be a particularly sensitive measure for detecting moderate to high levels of r/s well-being. In this study, the r/s struggles scale was also positively skewed with only 25% of participants endorsing any level of r/s struggles. This would make it impossible to differentiate between the religious/spiritual adjustment of the 75% who reported no r/s struggles. Thus, it is important to recognize that sanctification did not relate to r/s struggles, but the results do not show sufficient evidence to make conclusions about sanctification’s link to broader r/s adjustment. Future studies might consider using additional measures that are more sensitive to neutral to positive r/s adjustment. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 68

Desecration and R/s Adjustment

Results supported our hypotheses that greater desecration (self and r/s community) would be linked to poorer r/s adjustment. Both participants’ own desecration beliefs and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ desecration beliefs were tied to poorer r/s adjustment

(greater r/s struggles). When interpreting the meaning of these relationships, it is important to remember that the r/s struggles measure asked about participants’ broader experience of r/s struggles, not their struggles specifically with sexual morality. Therefore, this link suggests that for emerging adults who see their sexual behavior as a desecration or think that their r/s community sees it this way, they are also experiencing broader religious and spiritual concerns.

These concerns may have to do with their morality, relationship with God/the divine, relationship with their r/s community, existential questions, and/or doubts about their r/s beliefs.

This is consistent with literature about the impact of negative r/s beliefs about sexuality.

This is consistent with previous literature that shows links between perceptions of immoral or problematic sexual behaviors and r/s struggles (Grubbs et al., 2017; Hook et al.,

2015). For example, college students who reported low levels of moral congruence following a time when they engaged in sexual behavior that was incongruent with their values endorsed more religious/spiritual struggles (Hook et al., 2015). Also, college students who rated their pornography use as more problematic (“an addiction”) also reported more r/s struggles (Grubbs et al., 2017). Thus, the link between greater desecration beliefs about one’s non-marital sexuality and greater r/s struggles fits with results with those found in other areas of sexual morality.

Sanctification and Desecration

Considering the sanctification and desecration findings together, we see that these constructs are complimentary and lend support to the overarching theory that r/s beliefs about EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 69 non-marital sexuality have important implications. Stronger positive religious/spiritual beliefs that one’s non-marital sexuality is sacred are linked with greater relationship and sexual satisfaction whereas stronger negative r/s views that one’s non-marital sexuality has violated something sacred are linked with poorer relational/sexual outcomes. These findings also support the broader concept that going beyond global r/s demographic variables to examine specific r/s beliefs about sexuality is critical to increasing our understanding of how religion/spirituality and sexuality intersect. The constructs of sanctification and desecration taken together add to the more nuanced understanding of how emerging adults understand their sexual and spiritual selves.

Self and Religious/Spiritual Communities’ Beliefs

Considering this study's expansion beyond personal r/s beliefs to include perceptions of one’s r/s community’s beliefs, a few key findings emerged. First, we see that sanctification and desecration variables differed somewhat between emerging adults’ considerations of their personal beliefs and those of their r/s communities. Due to the measures being identical for self and r/s community, it was possible that the results could have shown such high overlap between these constructs as to make them redundant and not worth considering separately. Rather, the differences observed between the means and prevalence rates as well as the function (in the case of desecration) of emerging adults’ own views and those of their r/s communities offered valuable information that allow us to better understand the influence of religion/spirituality on sexual beliefs and behaviors. These differences suggest that though interrelated, asking about perceived r/s community beliefs is an effective way to tap into a different aspects of r/s beliefs about sexuality.

Another interesting discovery was how different sanctification and desecration were in regard to personal beliefs compared to those of the r/s community. Whereas sanctification self EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 70 and r/s community were strongly correlated, desecration self and r/s community showed a small- moderate correlation. These differences suggest that there are subtle distinctions between emerging adults’ experience of sanctification beliefs between one’s own experience and that of one’s r/s community, but there is a clear distinction between their personal experience of desecration and the perceived beliefs of one’s r/s community.

Limitations

Given that this is one of the first studies to examine sanctification and desecration in the context of non-marital sexual relationships, there are several limitations. First, the cross-sectional nature of the study limits our understanding of the potential direction of the relationships between key constructs. We cannot make assumptions about the degree to which sanctification and desecration predict adjustment or whether having greater relational adjustment impacts one’s sanctification and desecration beliefs. Another limitation stemming from the cross-sectional nature of this study is that we are unable to see the effects of sanctification or desecration over time. It is often difficult to determine whether these attitudes have significant ongoing effects on individual and relational adjustment without longitudinal data. Thus, it will be particularly important for future studies to examine the effects of sanctification and desecration beliefs and perceptions across time.

Another limitation is the somewhat limited sample and small sample size. Due to restrictions on funding and time, this study was conducted using a convenience sample of college students who were enrolled in psychology courses. Due to inclusionary criteria, the sample size was limited to about 200 participants. This sample size provided enough power for the proposed analyses, but not enough for more in-depth modeling. Also, though the subsample was generally representative of national demographics, it should be recognized that these were EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 71 college students at a public university. Therefore, their experiences may not be representative of college students’ experiences at religiously affiliated colleges/universities or to the experiences of emerging adults who are not college students. Thus, it may be helpful for future research to examine these hypotheses using a larger, more diverse sample.

One final limitation is the way that several of the constructs were measured. For the individual adjustment construct, self-esteem may have reflected a stable, personality variable rather than an accurate measure of individual adjustment that varies significantly across time.

Sex guilt may also be more of a stable belief system rather than a measure of adjustment.

Therefore, future studies may want to include measures of psychological well-being/flourishing that may be broader and more situationally/mood specific. Also, religious/spiritual adjustment was measured using only one variable (r/s struggles). This may have limited our findings regarding r/s adjustment and makes it less clear why desecration and not sanctification were linked to r/s adjustment. Future studies should consider adding additional measures of overall religious/spiritual health and well-being.

Future Directions

Examining specific religious and spiritual beliefs such as sanctification and desecration, particularly in the context of non-marital sexuality, is a new field. Therefore, additional studies need to be conducted to provide enough research findings to better understand the prevalence and implications of views of sexuality within committed relationships as sacred/sanctified or a desecration. Only through a growing number of studies in different samples will we come to a more nuanced understanding of how sanctification and desecration beliefs function. Longitudinal studies would provide further clarity first in confirming the direction of these links to further solidify the theory. Also, a longitudinal design like that of Hernandez et al. (2018) would provide EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 72 a better understanding of how sanctification and desecration of non-marital sexuality impact relationships across time.

It would be helpful if future studies included similar measures of sanctification and desecration so that results can be compared across samples. However, it would also be advisable to use more open-ended or qualitative approaches. Particularly since this is a new field, we don’t fully understand what is driving response patterns. By including open-ended questions or using qualitative methods such as interviews, researchers could come to a better understanding of what participants are experiencing in more detail which could then guide our study in this domain.

Finally, it seems particularly relevant for future research to in the area of sexuality and relationships to consider both the positive and negative aspects of religious and spiritual beliefs.

Often the tendency is to theorize about whether religion/spirituality is helpful or harmful in a particular context (e.g. non-marital sexual behavior, pornography use, hook-up sex) and then focus hypotheses and measures solely on either positive or negative religious beliefs. However, research has shown that religion and spirituality have a complex relationship with sexuality, with both positive and negative beliefs about sexuality informing individuals’ understanding of their sexual morality and decision-making. Thus, future research would benefit from taking a more balanced approach, exploring both helpful and harmful aspects of religious/spiritual beliefs about sexuality. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 73

CHAPTER VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This cross-sectional study examined emerging adults’ potentially helpful and harmful religious/spiritual beliefs about their sexual behavior within non-marital committed relationships.

In terms of positive religious/spiritual beliefs, this study considered college students’ reports of the sanctification, perceiving sexuality as having sacred qualities and/or as a manifestation of the divine. This study sought to confirm previous findings about sanctification beliefs about marital sexuality and expand them to sexual behavior within non-marital relationships. In terms of negative religious/spiritual beliefs about relational spirituality, this study examined emerging adults’ beliefs that their non-marital sexuality is a desecration, an event that violates the sacred/divine. An additional aim of this study was to examine similarities and differences between emerging adults’ personal beliefs about sanctification and desecration and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ beliefs in these domains. In addition to assessing for means and prevalence rates of sanctification and desecration, this study also examined links between sanctification and desecration and relational, individual, and spiritual adjustment. The hypotheses predicted that stronger sanctification beliefs and weaker desecration beliefs would be linked to better relational, individual, and spiritual adjustment whereas weaker sanctification beliefs and stronger desecration beliefs would be linked to poorer adjustment outcomes.

In a sample of 205 undergraduate students at a public university, findings indicated that sanctification of sexuality was prevalent in the context of non-marital committed relationships.

Results showed that the Sacred Qualities subscale, a non-theistic scale stating that sexuality is imbued with sacred qualities, was more strongly endorsed than the Manifestation of God subscale, a theistic scale assessing for how much one views God/the divine as present in one’s sexual relationship. In support of our hypothesis, greater Sacred Qualities of non-marital EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 74 committed sexuality was linked with greater relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction.

However, greater Manifestation of God was linked with less relationship and sexual satisfaction.

These results were parallel for emerging adults’ personal sanctification beliefs and their perceptions of their r/s communities’ sanctification beliefs. Contrary to my hypothesis, no links were found between sanctification and most individual (depression or self-esteem) or spiritual adjustment variables. Greater Manifestation of God was linked to greater sex guilt whereas greater Sacred Qualities of sexuality was linked to less sex guilt.

Regarding negative r/s beliefs about sexuality, prevalence rates of desecration were somewhat low, yet desecration showed significant links to adjustment variables. Emerging adults perceived that r/s communities held stronger beliefs than their own beliefs that non-marital sexual behavior is a desecration. In support of our hypothesis, stronger desecration (self) beliefs were linked to less relationship and sexual satisfaction as well as greater r/s struggles.

Desecration (r/s community) was linked with less frequent sexual behavior, greater sex guilt, and greater r/s struggles. Contrary to our hypotheses, findings did not show support for links between desecration (self or r/s community) and other measures of individual adjustment (i.e., depression, self-esteem).

These findings are significant for several reasons. They confirm the results of initial studies of non-marital sanctification and extend the findings of marital sanctification studies, underscoring the relevance of studying sanctification beliefs about sexuality in non-marital relationships. Differences between the Sacred Qualities and Manifestation of God scales provides support for continuing to explore these as separate aspects of sanctification in future research. Also, future research is needed to clarify the results that Manifestation of God was linked with less relational adjustment. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 75

This study also provides initial evidence for the ways that sexuality may be viewed through the lens of desecration, situating this construct with similar constructs like moral incongruence about sexual behavior. Together, sanctification and desecration findings show the intersection of helpful and harmful r/s beliefs and relational adjustment. Though this is a cross- sectional study that cannot determine casual links, it provides a foundation for future research to continue examining the ways that specific religious/spiritual beliefs impact romantic and sexual relationships. Little support sanctification and desecration’s links to individual adjustment indicates that this may be less directly influenced by r/s beliefs about sexuality. However, due to relational adjustment’s impact on individuals’ psychosocial adjustment, sanctification and/or desecration may be indirectly related and thus should be examined further in future research.

Differences between emerging adults’ personal sanctification and desecration beliefs and those they perceive of their r/s communities suggests the importance of assessing the role of r/s communities in shaping emerging adults’ sexual beliefs.

This study had several limitations including a small sample that only included college students, cross-sectional design, and limited measures of individual and r/s adjustment. Future studies should use larger samples including a broader range of emerging adults, longitudinal designs, and additional measures that may better tap into the constructs of individual and r/s adjustment. Overall, this study provided evidence for the relevance of better understanding religious and spiritual beliefs about non-marital sexuality and the way these beliefs intersect with emerging adults’ relational, psychosocial, and spiritual well-being. I hope that these findings provide the foundation for continued research in this area to encourage researchers to delve more deeply into the various nuanced ways that religion and spirituality influence beliefs about sexuality in relationships. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 76

REFERENCES

Ahrold, T. K., Farmer, M., Trapnell, P. D., & Meston, C. M. (2011). "The relationship among

sexual attitudes, sexual fantasy, and religiosity": Erratum. Archives of Sexual Behavior,

40(4), 851.

Arnett, J. J., Žukauskienė, R., & Sugimura, K. (2014). The new life stage of emerging adulthood

at ages 18–29 years: Implications for mental health. The Lancet Psychiatry, 1(7), 569-

576. doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00080-7

Beckwith, H. D., & Morrow, J. A. (2005). Sexual attitudes of college students: The impact of

religiosity and spirituality. College Student Journal, 39(2), 357–366.

Brelsford, G. M., Luquis, R., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2011). College students’ permissive

sexual attitudes: Links to religiousness and spirituality. International Journal for the

Psychology of Religion, 21(2), 127–136. doi: 10.1080/10508619.2011.557005

Browning, D.S., Green M.C., & Witte Jr., J. (2006). Sex, marriage, and family in world

religions. New York: Columbia University Press.

Chandra, A., Copen, C. E., & Mosher, W. D. (2013). Sexual behavior, sexual attraction, and

sexual identity in the United States: Data from the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family

Growth. In A. K. Baumle & A. K. Baumle (Eds.), International handbook on the

demography of sexuality. Vol. 5, pp. 45–66. New York, NY, US: Springer Science and

Business Media. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-5512-3_4

Clay, R. A. (2017, July). Women outnumber men in psychology, but not in the field's top

echelons. Monitor on Psychology, 48(7). http://www.apa.org/monitor/2017/07-

08/women-psychology EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 77

Emmers-Sommer, T. M., Allen, M., Schoenbauer, K. V., & Burrell, N. (2017). Implications of

sex guilt: A meta-analysis. Marriage and Family Review, 0(0), 1–21.

doi: 10.1080/01494929.2017.1359815

Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Grubbs, J. B., & Yali, A. M. (2014). The Religious and Spiritual

Struggles Scale: Development and initial validation. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality,

6, 208-222. doi: 10.1037/a0036465

Graham, J. M., Liu, Y. J., & Jeziorski, J. L. (2006). The Dyadic Adjustment Scale: A reliability

generalization meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68, 701- 717. Doi:

10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00284.x

Griffin, B. J., Worthington, E. L., Leach, J. D., Hook, J. N., Grubbs, J., Exline, J. J., & Davis, D.

E. (2016). Sexual congruence moderates the associations of hypersexual behavior with

spiritual struggle and sexual self-concept. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 23(2/3),

279–295. doi: 10.1080/10720162.2016.1150924

Grubbs, J. B., Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Hook, J. N., & Carlisle, R. D. (2015). Transgression

as addiction: Religiosity and moral disapproval as predictors of perceived addiction to

pornography. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 125–136. doi: 10.1007/s10508-

013-0257-z

Grubbs, J. B., Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Volk, F., & Lindberg, M. J. (2017). Internet

pornography use, perceived addiction, and religious/spiritual struggles. Archives of

Sexual Behavior, 46(6), 1733-1745. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0772-9

Grubbs, J. B., & Perry, S. L. (2019). Moral incongruence and pornography use: A critical review

and integration. Journal of Sex Research, 56(1), 29–37. doi:

10.1080/00224499.2018.1427204 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 78

Hackathorn, J. M., Ashdown, B. K., & Rife, S. C. (2016). The sacred bed: Sex guilt mediates

religiosity and satisfaction for unmarried people. Sexuality & Culture, 20(1), 153-172.

doi: 10.1007/s12119-015-9315-0

Haglund, K. A., & Fehring, R. J. (2010). The association of religiosity, sexual education, and

parental factors with risky sexual behaviors among adolescents and young adults. Journal

of Religion and Health, 49(4), 460-472. doi:10.1007/s10943-009-9267-5

Halpern, C. T., & Kaestle, C. E. (2014). Sexuality in emerging adulthood. In D. L. Tolman, L.

M. Diamond, J. A. Bauermeister, W. H. George, J. G. Pfaus, L. M. Ward, … L. M. Ward

(Ed) (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology, Vol. 1: Person-based

approaches. (pp. 487–522). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

doi: 10.1037/14193-016

Hawley, A.R., & Mahoney, A. (2013). Romantic breakup as a sacred loss and desecration among

Christians at a state university. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 32 (3) 245-

260. http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/92531510/romantic-breakup-as-sacred-

loss-desecration-among-christians-state-university

Hawley, A. R., Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., & Gordon, A. K. (2015). Sexuality and

spirituality as predictors of distress over a romantic breakup: Mediated and moderated

pathways. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 2(2), 145. doi: 10.1037/scp0000034

Hemez, P. & Manning, W. D. (2017). Thirty years of change in women's premarital cohabitation

experience. Family Profiles, FP-17-05. Bowling Green, OH: National Center for Family

& Marriage Research. http://www.bgsu.edu/ncfmr/resources/data/familyprofiles/hemez-

manning-30-yrs-change-women-premarital-cohab-fp-17-05.html EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 79

Henderson, A. K., Ellison, C. G., & Glenn, N. D. (2018). Religion and relationship quality

among cohabiting and dating couples. Journal of Family Issues, 39(7), 1904-1932. doi:

10.1177/0192513X17728982

Hendrick, S.S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and

the Family, 50, 93–98. doi: 10.2307/352430

Hernandez, K.M. & Mahoney, A. (2009). Sex through a sacred lens: The longitudinal effects of

sanctifying marital sexuality. Working paper located at National Marriage & Family

Research center website. Retrieved from http://ncmr.bgsu.edu/data/workingpapers.html

Hernandez, K. M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K. I. (2011). Sanctification of sexuality:

Implications for newlyweds’ marital and sexual quality. Journal of Family Psychology,

25(5), 775–780. doi: 10.1037/a0025103

Hernandez, K.M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K.I. (2014). Sexuality and religion. D.L. Tolman

and L.M. Diamond (Eds), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology: Vol. II (pp. 425-

447). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14194-013

Hernandez-Kane, K. M., & Mahoney, A. (2018). Sex through a sacred lens: Longitudinal effects

of sanctification of marital sexuality. Journal of Family Psychology, 32(4), 425-434.

doi: 10.1037/fam0000392

Heyman, R.E., Smith Slep, A. M., Beach, S. R. H., Wamboldt, M. Z., Kaslow, N. J., & Reiss, D.

(2009). Relationship problems and the DSM: Needed improvements and suggested

solutions. World Psychiatry, 8(1), 7–14. doi: 10.1002/j.2051-5545.2009.tb00198.x

Hook, J. N., Farrell, J. E., Ramos, M. J., Davis, D. E., Karaga, S., Van Tongeren, D. R., &

Grubbs, J. (2015). Religiousness and congruence between sexual values and behavior.

Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 34(2), 179-189. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 80

Janda, L. H., & Bazemore, S. D. (2011). The revised Mosher Sex-Guilt Scale: Its psychometric

properties and a proposed ten-item version. Journal of Sex Research, 48(4), 392-396.

doi:10.1080/00224499.2010.482216

Kaestle, C. E., & Halpern, C. T. (2007). What’s love got to do with it? Sexual behaviors of

opposite‐sex couples through emerging adulthood. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive

Health, 39(3), 134-140. doi: 10.1363/3913407

King, P. E., & Boyatzis, C. J. (2015). Religious and spiritual development. In M. E. Lamb & R.

M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science:

Socioemotional processes (pp. 975-1021). Hoboken, NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Kirkpatrick L.A. (2005). Attachment, evolution, and the psychology of religion. New York:

Guilford.

Krumrei, E.J., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K.I. (2009). Divorce and the divine: The role of

spirituality in adjustment to divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 373-383.

Krumrei, E.J., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K.I. (2011). Spiritual stress and coping model of

divorce: A longitudinal study of a community sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 25,

973-985. doi: 10.1037/a0025879.

Lamidi, E. O., Manning, W. D., & Brown, S. L. (2019). Change in the stability of first premarital

cohabitation among women in the United States, 1983-2013. Demography, 56(2), 427–

450.

Lefkowitz, E. S., Gillen, M. M., Shearer, C. L., & Boone, T. L. (2004). Religiosity, sexual

behaviors, and sexual attitudes during emerging adulthood. Journal of Sex Research,

41(2), 150–159. doi: 10.1177/0743558404271236 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 81

Leonhardt, N. D., Busby, D. M., & Willoughby, B. J. (2020). Sex guilt or sanctification? The

indirect role of religiosity on sexual satisfaction. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality,

12(2), 213–222. doi: 10.1037/rel0000245

Luquis, R., Brelsford, G., & Rojas-Guyler, L. (2012). Religiosity, spirituality, sexual attitudes,

and sexual behaviors among college students. Journal of Religion & Health, 51(3), 601–

614. doi:10.1007/s10943-011-9527-z

Mahoney, A. (2010). Religion in families 1999-2009: A relational spirituality framework.

Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 805 – 827.

Mahoney, A. (2013). The spirituality of us: Relational spirituality in the context of family

relationships. K. I., Pargament, J. J. Exline, & J. W. Jones, (Eds.), APA handbook of

psychology, religion, and spirituality: Vol. I. (pp. 365-389). Washington DC: American

Psychological Association.

Mahoney, A., Carels, R. A., Pargament, K. I., Wachholtz, A., Leeper, L. E., Kaplar, M., &

Frutchey, R. (2005). The sanctification of the body and behavioral health patterns of

college students. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 15(3), 221–238.

doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr1503_3

Mahoney, A., Krumrei, E.J., & Pargament, K.I. (2008). Broken vows: Divorce as a spiritual

trauma and its implications for growth and decline. In S. Joseph & P. Alex Linley (Eds.),

Trauma, recovery, and growth: Positive psychological perspectives on posttraumatic

stress (pp. 105-124). New Jersey: Wiley & Sons.

Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., & DeMaris, A. (2009). Couples viewing marriage and pregnancy

through the lens of the sacred: A descriptive study. Research in the Social Scientific

Study of Religion, 20, 1–45. doi: 10.1163/ej.9789004175624.i-334.7 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 82

Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., & Hernandez, K. M. (2013). Heaven on earth: Beneficial effects

of sanctification for individual and interpersonal well-being. J. Henry (Ed.), The Oxford

handbook of happiness (pp. 397-410). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Mahoney, A., Pargament, K. I., Jewell, T., Swank, A. B., Scott, E., Emery, E., & Rye, M. (1999).

Marriage and the spiritual realm: The role of proximal and distal religious constructs in

marital functioning. Journal of Family Psychology, 13(3), 321–338. doi:10.1037/0893-

3200.13.3.321

Manning, W. D., Smock, P. J., & Fettro, M. N. (2019). Cohabitation and marital expectations

among single millennials in the U.S. Population Research & Policy Review, 38(3),

327–346. doi: 10.1007/s11113-018-09509-8

Manning, W. D., & Stykes, B. (2015). Twenty-five years of change in cohabitation in the U.S.,

1987–2013 (NCFMR Family Profiles, No. FP-15-01). Bowling Green, OH: National

Center for Family and Marriage Research. Retrieved from

https://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-

andsciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-15-01-twenty-five-yrs-cohab-us.pdf

Mosher, D. L. (1966). The development and multitrait–multimethod matrix analysis of three

measures of three aspects of guilt. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 30(1), 25–29. doi:

10.1037/h0022905

Mosher, D. L. (1998). Revised Mosher Guilt Inventory. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R.

Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures

(pp. 290–293). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 83

Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame

and guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal of Psychology and

Theology, 35(3), 222–234. doi: 10.1177/009164710703500305

Murray-Swank, N.A., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K.I. (2006). Sanctification of parenting: Links

to corporal punishment and parental warmth among biblically conservative and liberal

mothers. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 16(4), 271–287. doi:

/10.1207/s15327582ijpr1604_3

Murray-Swank, N. A., Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2005). At the crossroads of sexuality

and spirituality: The sanctification of sex by college students. International Journal for

the Psychology of Religion, 15(3), 199–219. doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr1503_2

Pargament, K. I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. New

York: Guilford Press.

Pargament, K. I. (2007). Spiritually integrated psychotherapy: Understanding and addressing

the sacred. New York: Guilford Press.

Pargament, K. I., Magyar, G. M., Benore, E., & Mahoney, A. (2005). Sacrilege: A study of

sacred loss and desecration and their implications for health and well‐being in a

community sample. Journal for the scientific study of religion, 44(1), 59-78.

Pargament, K. I. & Mahoney, A. (2005). Sacred matters: Sanctification as vital topic for the

psychology of religion. The International Journal of the Psychology of Religion, 15,

179-198. doi: 10.1207/s15327582ijpr1503_1

Perry, S. L. (2018). Pornography use and marital quality: Testing the moral incongruence

hypothesis. Personal Relationships, 25(2), 233–248. https://doi-

org.ezproxy.bgsu.edu/10.1111/pere.12234 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 84

Perry, S. L. (2017). Pornography use and depressive symptoms: Examining the role of moral

incongruence. Society and Mental Health, 2156869317728373. doi:

10.1177/2156869317728373

Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2011). Gender differences in sexual attitudes and behaviors: A

review of meta-analytic results and large datasets. Journal of Sex Research, 48(2–3),

149–165. doi:10.1080/00224499.2011.551851

Pew Research Center. (2017, April 7). Number of U.S. adults cohabiting with a partner

continues to rise, especially among those 50 and older. Retrieved September 10 2018,

from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/number-of-u-s-adults-

cohabiting-with-a-partner-continues-to-rise-especially-among-those-50-and-older/

Pew Research Center. (2015, November 3). U.S. public becoming less religious. Retrieved

October 14 2017, from http://www.pewforum.org/2015/11/03/u-s-public-becoming-less-

religious/

Pew Research Center (2014). Religious Landscape Study. Retrieved May 27, 2017.

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/

Pew Research Center (2010, February 17). Religion among the millennials. Retrieved May 26,

2017, from http://www.pewforum.org/2010/02/17/religion-among-the-millennials/

Phillips, R. E., Kalp, D., Lucci, M., Maccarelli, A., Avant, S., Cenkner, D., & Herndon, R.

(2017). Initial validation of measures of sanctification in same‐sex romantic relationships

and sexual behavior. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 56(4), 836-851.

Phillips, R. E., & Pargament, K. I. (2002). The sanctification of dreams: Prevalence and

implications. Dreaming, 12(3), 141–153. doi:10.1023/A:1020166208750

Pomerleau, J.M. (2017). "It's Complicated..." Psychosocial and Religious/Spiritual Coping with EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 85

Hook-Up Experiences. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation). Retrieved from

https://etd.ohiolink.edu/

Pomerleau, J.M., Wong, S., & Mahoney, A. (2015). Sanctification: A meta-analytic review.

Poster accepted to the annual meeting of APA Division 36, Provo, UT and BGSU

Shanklin Research Colloquium.

Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale a self-report depression scale for research in the general

population. Applied psychological measurement, 1(3), 385-401.

doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306

Regnerus, M.D. (2007). Forbidden fruit: Sex and religion in the lives of American teenagers.

Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Simons, L. G., Burt, C. H., & Peterson, F. R. (2009). The effect of religion on risky sexual

behavior among college students. Deviant Behavior, 30(5), 467–485.

doi: 10.1080/01639620802296279

Smith, C. (with M. L. Denton). (2005). Soul searching: The religious and spiritual lives of

American teenagers. New York: Oxford University Press.

Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of

marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15–28.

doi: 10.2307/350547

Spilka, B., Hood Jr., R. W., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (2003). The psychology of religion:

An empirical approach (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 86

Twenge, J. M., Sherman, R. A., Exline, J. J., & Grubbs, J. B. (2016). Declines in American

adults’ religious participation and beliefs, 1972-2014. SAGE Open, 6(1).

doi: 10.1177/2158244016638133

Walker, A. G., Jones, M. N., Wuensch, K. L., Aziz, S., & Cope, J. G. (2008). Sanctifying work:

Effects on satisfaction, commitment, and intent to leave. International Journal for the

Psychology of Religion, 18(2), 132–145. doi:10.1080/10508610701879480

Warner, H. L., Mahoney, A. & Krumrei, E. J. (2009). When parents break sacred vows: The role

of spiritual appraisals, coping and struggles for young adults' adjustment to parental

divorce. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1(4), 233-248.

doi: 10.1037/a0016787

Wells, B. E., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Changes in young people’s sexual behavior and attitudes,

1943-1999: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 9(3), 249–

261. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.9.3.249

Wilcox, W. B., & Wolfinger, N. (2016). Soul mates: Religion, sex, love, and marriage among

African Americans and Latinos. Oxford University Press.

Willoughby, B. J., & Carroll, J. S. (2010). Sexual experience and couple formation attitudes

among emerging adults. Journal of Adult Development, 17(1), 1–11.

doi: 10.1007/s10804-009-9073-z

Woo, J. S. T., Morshedian, N., Brotto, L. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (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.

doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-9918- EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 87

Young, M., Denny, G., Luquis, R., & Young, T. (1998). Correlates of sexual satisfaction in

marriage. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 7, 115-128. EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 88

APPENDIX A. TABLES

Table 1

Descriptive Characteristics of Sample Characteristic M SD % Age 20.80 2.92 Gender Female 65.5 Male 33.0 Transgender Male 0.5 Prefer not to say 1.0 Sexual Orientation Bisexual 11.3 Gay/Lesbian 1.0 Other 3.4 Heterosexual 84.3 Ethnicity Caucasian/Euro-American 76.0 African American/Black 11.8 Multi-racial/ethnic 6.4 Hispanic/Latino 3.4 Middle Eastern 1.0 Asian American 1.5 Year in college First 26.5 Second 28.4 Third 20.6 Fourth 16.7 Fifth+ 7.9 GPA (4.0 scale) 3.24 0.62

Annual Household Income 4.22 1.5 (Range 1-6) Under $30,000 15.7 $30,000-69,999 34.8 $70,000-89,999 22.5 $90,000 & above 27.0 Belief in God Yes 91.2 No 8.8 Religious Affiliation (raised) Raised Current Protestant (Christian) 49.5 47.5 Catholic (Christian) 40.2 21.1 Jewish 0.5 1.0 Muslim 0.5 0 Hindu 0.5 0.5 Buddhist 0.5 0 Other Religion 1.0 8.3 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 89

No Affiliation 7.4 21.6

Religious Service Attendance 2.96 1.73 (range 1-7) Once a week or more 5.9 Once a month to nearly every week 21.5 A few times a year 27.0 Once a year or less 22.5 Never 23.0 Frequency of Prayer (range 1-8) 5.13 2.28 Once a day or more 16.2 Once a week to nearly every day 21.1 Once a month 8.8 Less than once a month 19.1 Never 19.1 Biblical Conservatism (1-5) 2.46 1.18 Religious Importance Daily Life (1-5) 2.40 1.20 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 90

Table 2

Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables

Variable M SD % Range Skewness  above neutral Sanctification of sex self 2.94 1.34 25% 1-7 .46 .96 Manifestation of God (MG) 2.31 1.46 13% 1-7 .82 .97 Sacred Qualities (SQ) 3.56 1.47 38% 1-7 -.01 .93 Sanctif. of sex r/s comm. 2.78 1.49 19% 1-7 .56 .97 Manifestation of God (MG) 2.49 1.63 20% 1-7 .77 .98 Sacred Qualities (SQ) 3.06 1.57 29% 1-7 .29 .94 Desecration self 1.33 .63 9% 1-5 2.34 .95 Desecration r/s comm. 1.73 1.20 21% 1-5 1.63 .99 Relationship satisfaction 4.96 .56 -- 1-6 -1.09 .76 Sexual satisfaction 4.49 .54 -- 1-5 -1.63 .86 Sexual freq. (past month) 3.71 1.42 -- 1-7 --- n/a Depression 2.05 .54 -- 1-4 .45 .90 Self-esteem 2.95 .52 -- 1-4 -.06 .89 Sex guilt 2.94 .94 -- 1-7 .71 .76 R/s struggles 1.68 .60 -- 1-5 1.04 .92 N = 204 EMERGING ADULTS’ SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 91

Table 3

Bivariate Correlations between Religious/spiritual and Sexual Variables

1 2 1. Gen. Religiousness -- 2. Rel. Conservatism .57*** -- 3. MG self .48*** .38*** 4. SQ self .34*** .34*** 5. MG r/s comm .47*** .31*** 6. SQ r/s comm .35*** .26*** 7. Des self .36*** .36*** 8. Des r/s comm .23*** .10 9. R/s struggles -.01 -.16* (demonic) 10. Sex freq. -.09 .01 11. Sex sat. .06 .03 12. Sex guilt .34*** .39*** *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 197 NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 92

Table 4

Bivariate Correlations of Key Constructs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1. Sanct. 1 self 2. MG .91*** 1 self 3. SQ .91*** .67** 1 self * 4. Sanct .74*** .71** .65*** 1 rcom * 5. MG .63*** .69** .46*** .93** 1 rcom * * 6. SQ .75*** .63** .75*** .93** .72*** 1 rcom * * 7. Desec .24*** .28** .17* .25** .29*** .16* 1 self * * 8.Desec .06 .07 .03 .15* .21** .06 .35*** 1 rcom 9. Mor .19** .18* .16* .16* .18* .11 .71*** .34*** 1 Tns self 10.Mor .13 .15* .09 .20** .25*** .11 .39*** .84*** .49*** 1 Trn rcom 11. Rel .18** .09 .24*** .17* .08 .23** -.28** .02 -.15* .03 1 sat. 12. Sex .17* .05 .25*** .12 .05 .18* -.14* -.09 -.12 -.03 .46*** 1 sat. 13. Sex .13 .02 .21** -.03 -.08 .04 -.04 -.21** -.06 -.20** -.01 .28** 1 freq. * 14. .01 -.01 .01 -.02 -.01 -.02 .05 .01 -.08 .02 -.16* -.13 .001 1 Depress 15. Slf .06 .06 .05 .05 .07 .02 .002 .05 .08 .05 .10 .09 -.06 -.78*** 1 estm 16. Sex .04 .12 -.05 .11 .18* .03 .25*** .20** .39*** .24** -.09 -.14* -.21** .05 -.02 1 guilt 17. RSS -.01 -.03 .02 .06 .04 .08 .20** .21** .11 .18** -.04 -.05 -.11 .51*** -.44*** -.02 1 *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001, n = 198-204 NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 93

Table 5

Hierarchical Regressions: Sanctification (self) with Relational Variables

Rel. Sat. Sexual Sat. Sexual Freq.

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .04 .004 .02 Race -.14* --- .13 Sexual Orient .11 ------Gen. Relig. .01 .04 -.15 Step 2 .06** (.10**) .08*** (.09***) .07**(.08***) MG (self) -.12 -.23* -.12 SQ (self) .32** .39*** .34*** *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 202

Note. Race dummy coded (0 = Caucasian 1 = Other than Caucasian) Sexual orientation dummy coded (0 = heterosexual, 1= other than heterosexual) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 94

Table 6

Hierarchical Regressions: Desecration (self) with Relational and Individual Adjustment Variables

Rel. Sat. Sexual Sat. Sex Guilt

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .04 .004 .12*** Race -.11 ------Sexual Orient .14* --- -.07 Gen. Relig. .06 .13 -.15 Step 2 .04** (.08**) .03* (.04*) .02*(.14***) Desecration (self) -.21** -.19* .15* *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 201

Note. Race dummy coded (0 = Caucasian 1 = Other than Caucasian) Sexual orientation dummy coded (0 = heterosexual, 1= other than heterosexual) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 95

Table 7

Hierarchical Regressions: Desecration (self) with Rel. & Spir. Struggles

R/s Struggles

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .00 Gen. Relig. -.09 Step 2 .04** (.04)* Desecration (self) .22** *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 197 NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 96

Table 8

Hierarchical Regressions: Sanctification (R/s Community) with Relationship Satisfaction, Sexual Satisfaction, & Sex Guilt

Rel. Sat Sexual Sat Sex Guilt

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .04* .004 .12*** Race -.13 ------Sexual Orient .10 --- -.06 Gen. Relig. .01 04 .31*** Step 2 .06** (.10**) .04* (.05*) .02 (.14***) MG (r/s comm) -.18 -.19 .18 SQ (r/s comm) .35** .30** -.21* *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 199

Note. Race dummy coded (0 = Caucasian 1 = Other than Caucasian) Sexual orientation dummy coded (0 = heterosexual, 1= other than heterosexual) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 97

Table 9

Hierarchical Regressions: Desecration (R/s community) with Sex Guilt and Sexual Frequency

Sex Guilt Sexual Freq.

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .12** .03 Race --- .12 Sexual Orient -.10 --- Gen. Relig. .28*** -.06 Step 2 .02* (.14*) .04** (.06**) Desecration (r/s comm) .14* -.19** *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 199

Note. Race dummy coded (0 = Caucasian 1 = Other than Caucasian) Sexual orientation dummy coded (0 = heterosexual, 1= other than heterosexual) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 98

Table 10

Hierarchical Regressions: Desecration (R/s comm) with R/s Struggles

R/s Struggles

Beta R2 Chg (Total R2) Step 1 Controls .00 Gen. Relig. -.07 Step 2 . .06** (.08**) Desecration (r/s comm) .23** *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, N = 199 NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 99

APPENDIX B. SANCTIFICATION MEASURES

Sanctification of Sex in Nonmarital Committed Relationship

Self

Some of the following questions use the word “God.” Different people use different terms for God, such as “Higher Power,” “Divine Spirit,” “Spiritual Force,” “Holy Spirit,” “Yahweh,” “Allah,” “Buddha,” or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the “strongly disagree” response when needed. Considering your experiences of sexual intimacy with your current committed romantic partner, please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sacred Qualities of Sexuality Subscale 1. Being sexually intimate with my romantic partner feels like a deeply spiritual experience. 2. Our sexual relationship seems like a miracle to me. 3. Our sexual connection is part of a larger spiritual plan. 4. Our sexual relationship is holy. 5. The sexual bond I have with my romantic partner is sacred to me. 6. Our sexual relationship connects us to something greater than ourselves. 7. My sexual relationship with my romantic partner reveals the deepest truths of life to me. 8. There are moments when we are sexually intimate that time stands still and I feel like I am part of something eternal. 9. Our sexual relationship puts me in touch with the deepest mysteries of life. 10. At moments, being sexually intimate with my partner makes me very aware of a creative power beyond us.

Manifestation of God in Sexuality Subscale 11. God played a role in my decision to have a sexual relationship with my partner. 12. Our sexual relationship speaks to the presence of God/the divine. 13. I experience God/the divine through the sexual bond I have with my partner. 14. God/the divine’s essence is expressed in our sexual relationship. 15. Being in a sexual relationship with each other is a reflection of God/the divine’s will. 16. God/the divine has been a guiding force in our sexual relationship. 17. In mysterious ways, God/the divine deepens the sexual intimacy I have with my partner. 18. I feel God/the divine at work when we express ourselves sexually with each other. 19. There are moments when I feel a strong connection with God/the divine when I am sexually intimate with my partner. 20. I see God/the divine’s influence in our sexual relationship. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 100

Perceived Sanctification of Sex in Committed Nonmarital Relationship

Religious/Spiritual Community

Some of the following questions use the word “God.” Different people use different terms for God, such as “Higher Power,” “Divine Spirit,” “Spiritual Force,” “Holy Spirit,” “Yahweh,” “Allah,” “Buddha,” or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the “strongly disagree” response when needed.

People are exposed to a variety of religious teachings across their lives from organized religious groups and traditions. Taking all of your experiences into account, think about the most prominent message you currently perceive coming from organized religion/your religious community about sexual intercourse with a committed romantic partner outside of marriage. Considering your experiences with your current committed romantic partner, please indicate the degree to which this religious organization’s message agrees or disagrees with each of the following statements.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sacred Qualities of Sexuality Subscale 1. Being sexually intimate with your romantic partner is a deeply spiritual experience. 2. Your sexual relationship seems like a miracle. 3. Your sexual connection is part of a larger spiritual plan. 4. Your sexual relationship is holy. 5. The sexual bond you have with your partner is sacred. 6. Your sexual relationship with your partner connects you to something greater than yourself. 7. Your sexual relationship with your partner reveals the deepest truths of life to you. 8. There are moments when you are sexually intimate with your partner that time stands still and you feel like you are part of something eternal. 9. Your sexual relationship with your partner puts you in touch with the deepest mysteries of life. 10. At moments, being sexually intimate with your partner makes you very aware of a creative power beyond you.

Manifestation of God in Sexuality Subscale 11. God played a role in your decision to have a sexual relationship with your partner. 12. Your sexual relationship with your partner speaks to the presence of God/the divine. 13. You experience God/the divine through the sexual bond you have with your partner. 14. God/the divine’s essence is expressed in your sexual relationship with your partner. 15. Being in a sexual relationship with each other is a reflection of God/the divine’s will. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 101

16. God/the divine has been a guiding force in your sexual relationship. 17. In mysterious ways, God/the divine deepens the sexual intimacy you have with your partner. 18. You feel God/the divine at work when you and your partner express yourselves sexually with each other. 19. There are moments when you feel a strong connection with God/the divine when you are sexually intimate with your partner. 20. You see God/the divine’s influence in your sexual relationship. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 102

APPENDIX C. DESECRATION MEASURES

Desecration Scale

Self

Some of the following questions use the word “God.” Different people use different terms for God, such as “Higher Power,” “Divine Spirit,” “Spiritual Force,” “Holy Spirit,” “Yahweh,” “Allah,” “Buddha,” or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the “strongly disagree” response when needed.

Please rate to what degree each statement describes how you feel about engaging in sexual intimacy with your current committed romantic partner.

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all/ A little bit Somewhat Quite a bit Very much does not apply

1. This behavior was an immoral act against something I value. 2. The behavior was a sinful act involving something meaningful in my life. 3. This behavior was both an offense against me and against God. 4. Something evil ruined a blessing in my life. 5. Something sacred that came from God was dishonored. 6. This behavior ruined a blessing from God. 7. Something symbolic of God was purposely damaged. 8. A sacred part of my life was violated. 9. This behavior was a transgression of something sacred. 10. Something that was sacred to me was destroyed. 11. A part of my life that God made sacred was attacked. 12. I lost something I thought God wanted for me. 13. A violation of something spiritual to me occurred. 14. The Divine in my life was intentionally harmed through this behavior. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 103

Desecration Scale

Religious/Spiritual Community

Some of the following questions use the word “God.” Different people use different terms for God, such as “Higher Power,” “Divine Spirit,” “Spiritual Force,” “Holy Spirit,” “Yahweh,” “Allah,” “Buddha,” or “Goddess.” Please feel free to substitute your own word for God when answering any of the questions that follow. Also, some people do not believe in God. If this is the case for you, please feel free to choose the “strongly disagree” response when needed.

People are exposed to a variety of religious teachings across their lives from organized religious groups and traditions. Taking all of your experiences into account, think about the most prominent message you currently perceive coming from organized religion/your religious community about sexual intercourse with a committed romantic partner outside of marriage. Considering your experiences with your current committed romantic partner, please indicate the degree to which this religious organization’s message agrees with each of the following statements.

1 2 3 4 5

Not at all/ A little bit Somewhat Quite a bit Very much does not apply

1. This sexual behavior was an immoral act against something we value. 2. The behavior was a sinful act involving something meaningful in your life. 3. This behavior was both an offense against you and against God. 4. Something evil ruined a blessing in your life. 5. Something sacred that came from God was dishonored. 6. This behavior ruined a blessing from God. 7. Something symbolic of God was purposely damaged. 8. A sacred part of your life was violated. 9. This behavior was a transgression of something sacred. 10. Something that was sacred to you was destroyed. 11. A part of your life that God made sacred was attacked. 12. You lost something we thought God wanted for you. 13. A violation of something spiritual to us occurred. 14. The Divine in your life was intentionally harmed through this behavior. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 104

APPENDIX D. DEPENDENT VARIABLE MEASURES

Religious/Spiritual Coping Struggles- RSS

At times in life, many people experience struggles, concerns or doubts regarding spiritual or religious issues. Over the last month, to what extent have you had each of the experiences listed below? There are no right or wrong answers; the best answer is the one that most accurately reflects your experience.

Not at all/does not apply A little bit Somewhat Quite a bit A great deal 1 2 3 4 5

1. I questioned God’s love for me 2. I felt angry at God 3. I felt as though God had abandoned me 4. I felt as though God was punishing me 5. I wondered if God really cares 6. I felt as though God had let me down 7. I felt attacked by the devil or by evil spirits 8. I felt as though the devil (or an evil spirit) was trying to turn me away from what was good 9. I worried that the problems I was facing were the work of the devil or evil spirits 10. I felt tormented by the devil or evil spirits 11. I had conflicts with other people about religious/spiritual matters 12. I felt rejected or misunderstood by religious/spiritual People 13. I felt as though others were looking down on me because of my religious/spiritual beliefs 14. I felt angry at organized religion 15. I felt hurt, mistreated, or offended by religious/ spiritual people 16. I felt guilty for not living up to my moral standards 17. I worried that my actions were morally or spiritually wrong 18. I wrestled with attempts to follow my moral principles 19. I felt torn between what I wanted and what I knew was morally right 20. I had concerns about whether there is any ultimate NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 105

purpose to life or existence 21. I felt as though my life had no deeper meaning 22. I questioned whether life really matters 23. I questioned whether my life will really make any difference in the world 24. I struggled to figure out what I really believe about religion/spirituality 25. I felt troubled by doubts or questions about religion or spirituality 26. I felt confused about my religious/spiritual beliefs 27. I worried about whether my beliefs about religion/spirituality were correct 28. I worried that my spiritual/religious community would disapprove of my actions 29. I felt uncomfortable or avoided going to religious services (e.g., church or worship services) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 106

Relationship Satisfaction

Dyadic Adjustment Scale- Dyadic Satisfaction Subscale

All of the Most of the More often Occasionally Rarely Never time time than not 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. How often do you discuss or have you considered separation or terminating your relationship? 2. How often do you or your partner leave the house/place after a fight? 3. In general, how often do you think that things between you and your partner are going well? 4. Do you confide in your partner? 5. Do you ever regret that you got together? (or lived together) 6. How often do you and your partner quarrel? 7. How often do you and your partner “get on each other’s nerves?”

8. Do you kiss your partner? 1 2 3 4 5 Every day Almost Every Occasionally Rarely Never Day

9. The circles on the following line represent different degrees of happiness in your relationship. The middle point, “happy,” represents the degree of happiness of most relationships. Please fill in the circle which best describes the degree of happiness, all things considered, of your relationship.

Extremely Fairly A little Happy Very Extremely Perfect Unhappy Unhappy Unhappy Happy Happy

10. Which of the following statements best describes how you feel about the future of your relationship? NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 107

o I want desperately for my relationship to succeed, and would go to almost any length to see that it does. o I want very much for my relationship to succeed, and will do all I can to see that it does. o I want very much for my relationship to succeed, and will do my fair share to see that it does. o It would be nice if my relationship succeeded, but I can’t do much more than I am doing now to help it succeed. o It would be nice if it succeeded, but I refuse to do any more than I am doing now to keep the relationship going. o My relationship can never succeed, and there is no more that I can do to keep the relationship going. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 108

Frequency of Sexual Behavior

Over the past month, about how many times have you and your current romantic partner engaged in sexual activity?

__Not at all (0)

__Less than once a week

__1-2 times a week

__3-4 times a week

__5-6 times a week

__ Every day

__More than once per day NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 109

Sexual Satisfaction

Considering your sexual relationship with your current committed romantic partner, please rate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.

Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Neutral Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4 5

1. I am satisfied with my partner as a sexual partner. 2. After sex, I feel relaxed and fulfilled. 3. I have satisfying orgasm. 4. I feel that foreplay with my partner is very arousing. 5. I have good communication with my partner about sex. 6. I am satisfied with the variety of sexual positions and activities in which my partner and I participate. 7. I am pleased with the frequency with which my partner and I engage in sexual activity. 8. I am pleased with the intensity of sexual activity in which my partner and I engage. 9. My partner makes me feel sexually desirable. 10. I am sexually attracted to my partner. 11. My partner makes it clear that I provide them with a great deal of sexual pleasure. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 110

Depression

How often have you felt or behaved in the following ways DURING THE

PAST MONTH?

1. I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me.

2. I did not feel like eating; my appetite was poor.

3. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with help from my family or friends.

4. I felt that I was just as good as other people.

5. I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing.

6. I felt depressed.

7. I felt that everything I did was an effort.

8. I felt hopeful about the future.

9. I thought my life had been a failure.

10. I felt fearful.

11. My sleep was restless.

12. I was happy.

13. I talked less than usual.

14. I felt lonely

15. People were unfriendly.

16. I enjoyed life.

17. I had crying spells.

18. I felt sad.

19. I felt that people disliked me.

20. I could not get “going.” NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 111

Self-Esteem

Below is a list of statements dealing with your general feelings about yourself. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each statement.

Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree

1 2 3 4

1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself. 2. At times I think I am no good at all. (R) 3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities. 4. I am able to do things as well as most other people. 5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of. (R) 6. I certainly feel useless at times. (R) 7. I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others. 8. I wish I could have more respect for myself. (R) 9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure. (R) 10. I take a positive attitude toward myself. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 112

Sex Guilt

Brief Mosher Sex-Guilt Scale

Please indicate to what degree each of the following statements is true of your experiences.

Not at all Extremely true of me true of me

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1. Masturbation helps one feel eased and relaxed. (R) 2. Sex relations before marriage are good, in my opinion. (R) 3. Unusual sex practices don’t interest me. 4. When I have sexual dreams I try to forget them. 5. ‘‘Dirty’’ jokes in mixed company are in bad taste. 6. When I have sexual desires I enjoy them like all healthy human beings. (R) 7. Unusual sex practices are dangerous to one’s health and mental condition. 8. Sex relations before marriage help people adjust. (R) 9. Sex relations before marriage should not be recommended. 10. Unusual sex practices are all right if both partners agree. (R) NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 113

APPENDIX E. DESCRIPTIVE MEASURES

Romantic Relationship Questionnaire

Please answer the following questions about your experiences to the best of your knowledge.

1. Are you currently in a committed romantic relationship? __Yes ___No If yes: If no: skip to #8

2. How long have you been dating your current romantic partner? ____ NA ____months

3. Are you currently cohabiting (living in the same household) with your romantic partner? ___Yes ___No

4. Within your current committed romantic relationship, do you engage in any sexual behavior with your with your partner? This means engaging in any type of sexual touching including stimulating your partner’s genitals with your hand or vice versa.

__Yes __No

5. Do you and your partner engage in oral, anal, or vaginal sexual intercourse?

___Yes ___No

6. Are you engaged? Yes No

7. What do you think the chances are that you will marry your [current] partner in the

future?

1 2 3 4 5

No chance Almost certain chance

8. Have you ever been in an exclusive dating or romantic relationship?

____Yes ____ No

9. About how old were you when you first had sexual intercourse?___ (Have not) ___years

10. About how many sexual partners have you had in your life? ___ NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 114

11. How would you describe your current relationship status?

___I am single.

___I am in a “friends with benefits” situation.

___I am in one casual dating/romantic relationship.

___I am in more than one casual dating or romantic relationship.

___I am in one exclusive dating or romantic relationship.

___I am engaged to a partner.

___I am married to a partner. NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 115

Demographic Information

Please answer the following questions.

1. What is your age? _____

2. What is your gender? ___M ___F

3. What best describes your race/ethnicity?

___ Euro-American/Caucasian ___ African American/Black ___ Hispanic/Latino ___ Asian/Asian-American ___ Native American/Alaskan Native ___ Middle Eastern ___ Pacific Islander ___ Multi-racial/Multi-ethnic ___ Other (describe): ______

4. What best describes your sexual orientation?

___Heterosexual ___Bisexual ___Gay/Lesbian ______Other

5. What is your current year in college?

___1st ___2nd ___3rd ___4th ___5th ___Other (describe): ____

6. What is your major? (If not yet declared, answer “undeclared”) ______

7. What was your GPA for your previous semester’s classes? _____

8. What is your family’s average annual household income? o Under $10,000 o $10,000-$29,999 o $30,000-$49,999 o $50,000-$69,999 o $70,000-$89,999 o $90,000 & above NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 116

Global Religiousness & Biblical Conservatism

Please answer the following questions.

1. To what extent do you believe that God exists?

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at Totally all

2. What best describes your current religious affiliation?

_____ Protestant or Non-denominational (Christian) _____ Catholic (Christian) _____ Jewish _____ Muslim _____ Hindu _____ Buddhist _____ None _____ Other ______Other (Christian)

3. How often do you attend religious services?

_____ Several times a week _____ 2-3 times a month _____ Once or twice a year _____ Every week _____ About once a month _____ Less than once a year _____ Nearly every week _____ Several times a year _____ Never

4. How often do you pray?

_____ More than once a day _____ Once a week _____ Less than once a month _____ Once a day _____ A few times a month _____ Never _____ A few times a week _____ Once a month

5. How much do you agree with the following statement: “The Bible is God’s word and everything will happen exactly as it says.”

___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree

6. How much do you agree with the following statement: “The Bible is the answer to all important human problems.”

___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree NON-MARITAL SEXUALITY SANCTIFICATION & DESECRATION 117

7. Which of the following categories best describes your beliefs?

_____ Spiritual but not religious _____ Religious but not spiritual _____ Both religious and spiritual _____ Neither religious nor spiritual

8. Thinking about your religion, which of the following statements comes CLOSEST to your view? My church or denomination should…

_____preserve its traditional beliefs and practices _____adjust traditional beliefs and practices in light of new circumstances _____adopt modern beliefs and practices. _____don’t know