Forming the Mind and Heart of the Priest

Culture is the air one breathes; it is the environment in which one’s habits, values, and patterns of thought are engendered. Psychological data has shown that current cultural factors and influences pose major threats to the appropriate development of men and women, either causing psychological underdevelopment or maldevelopment; “these threats include divorce, single-parent families, child abuse, institutional childcare, technology, media and the sexualized culture.”[1] Consequently, men considering the vocation to the priesthood, and those presently in priestly formation, are not exempt from the detrimental impacts of the present culture, such as the lack of emotional and intellectual integration which have resulted in an escalation in personality and mood disorders, such as depression, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorders.[2] It is not insignificant, then, that the most recent edition of the Program of Priestly Formation acknowledges that, “through no fault of their own, the requisite qualities for formation are often missing in new seminarians,” and that “a significant imbalance is present between the lifestyle promoted by contemporary society and priestly formation.”[3] In many ways, this reflects a growing awareness that the formation of the priest must begin with who he is and who he is called to become.

Here we will consider the indispensable role of human formation[4] and the practice of psychology in the counseling and ongoing development of seminarians. To do so we will take note of various psychological findings in the American priesthood, the development of affective maturity, the role of seminary formators, and, ultimately, configuration to Christ.

Psychological Findings in the American Priesthood

Eugene Kennedy and Victor Heckler, in their work The Catholic Priest in the United States: Psychological Investigations, synthesize the conclusions of their psychological investigation of American priests in one phrase: “The priests of the United States are ordinary men.”[5] One might also extend Kennedy and Heckler’s synthesis and say that the priests of every epoch and culture are indeed “ordinary men.” Men living out the priesthood, or seeking to live out the priesthood, are genuinely human. This means that while these men orient themselves and others toward the divine, they themselves face the real limitations of their earthly humanity. Further, there are various theological descriptions of the essence of the priest, such as alter Christus, another Christ, or acting In persona Christi capitis, in the person of Christ the Head. Though much is to be said about these theological realities which link the priest directly to Jesus and allow him to share in the one priesthood of Christ, “Theological realities manifest themselves in the psychological realities of the priests’ lives.”[6] That is, priests in all of their “sincerity and good will . . . cannot shatter or transcend the bonds of their own humanity in the process.”[7] In sum, grace builds upon nature.

One of the highlighted results of priestly psychological investigation is psychological underdevelopment. A large percentage of priests appeared to be underdeveloped persons, which illustrates that “these priests reached a level of overall personal growth that is not equal to that which is expected of them at their age and in view of their careful selection and lengthy training.”[8] The underdeveloped person is affected, then, by “the human experiences which they have missed or which, for one reason or another in their personal histories, may have been distorted for them.”[9] Moreover, Kennedy and Heckler stipulate that “it may be that the selection and training process tended to mask rather than reveal the lack of development in many of the candidates for the priesthood.”[10] These results are revelatory of the fact that a large percentage of males in the United States suffer from underdevelopment.

Let us now consider the psychological difficulties that have resulted from the lack of development in the American priesthood, stemming from the general male population in the United States. “First of all . . .” Kennedy and Heckler point out, “. . . the problems of underdeveloped priests are not cognitive in nature . . .” but rather are “. . . emotional in character.”[11] Concerning these emotional deficiencies, the investigation draws attention to four principal effects: (1) difficulty in relationships; (2) intellectualization; (3) lack of an integrated psychosexual identity; (4) superficiality in expressing the faith.

First, underdeveloped priests find difficulties in interpersonal relationships, describing a sort of “pain involved for them in this conflict between wanting the psychological experiences of being close to people and yet finding it awkward and difficult to get themselves into close relationships with others.”[12] Second, the investigation records intellectualization, or intellectual defense. Priests may use this defense mechanism to “move sideways through multiple adjustments to their lack of growth,”[13] rather than move forward and deal with their problems of developmental maturity. Intellectualization allows the priest to “smooth over” his lack of growth and avoid feeling inner conflict.[14] Next, psychological findings have pointed to a non-integration of psychosexual identity in underdeveloped priests. In this way, the underdeveloped priest lacks “instruction or emotional understanding of the meaning of sexuality in their own lives.”[15] Notably, it has been found that many underdeveloped priests “function at a pre-adolescent or adolescent level of psychosexual growth.”[16] Lastly, studies show that this proportion of priests astonishingly convey a “general inability to articulate a deep level of personal religious faith: what is presumed to be central in their lives is found to be peripheral and frequently superficial.”[17]

In sum, Kennedy and Heckler assert that priests “could be far more effective personally and professionally if they were helped to achieve greater human and religious maturity.”[18] Greater and more serious efforts in the psychological development of priests are necessary for personal, emotional, and intellectual integration. Though the psychological developmental process of men living the priesthood begins much before their priestly training, it is ideal for seminaries to identify and address prominent psychological deficiencies found in the male population today to help form integrated men after the heart of Christ. This has practical implications for those entrusted with formation: it calls for patience, attentiveness, and a willingness to accompany men not only in what they do, but in who they are becoming.

Becoming Men of Communion: Growth in Affective Maturity

Made in the image and likeness of God, man is made for communion, relationship with the other. This communion of persons is primarily found in the Divine Trinity, which sets the paradigm for human relationships. The future priest, “called to build up the ecclesial community . . . increasingly lives the richness of his own affectivity in the gift of himself to God, One and Three, and to his brethren, particularly those who are suffering.”[19] In other words, the seminarian must become a man who is able to become gift for others and, in turn, is able to receive the gift of another.[20]

Suzanne M. Baars identifies relationship as the source of identity. In this way, a solid sense of self and identity is necessary for the candidate to the priesthood to make a free and lavish gift of self. Baars goes further to assert:

 “It is primarily our relationships with our parents or other significant caretakers which first form our identity and our sense of ourselves as good, worthwhile, and loveable . . . these relationships can strengthen or weaken us and, thereby, directly affect our capacity to love.”[21]

The first house of formation of the seminarian can be said to be the domestic church, the family. This process of giving and receiving affirmation and love within the family fosters growth and freedom while, ultimately, “[permitting] the affecting heart to develop at the center of a life lived open to others.”[22]

Baars keenly notes the role of the mother and father in the affective development of the person:

“One might say that the mother’s love is the first gaze which draws the boy into a mutual relationship . . . When he is older, it will be the father’s love which calls him into a new kind of relationship, one which affirms his place in the masculine world and strengthens him to be courageous as well as gentle in teaching, preaching, and evangelizing.”

This encounter of affirmation, of reception and gift, allows the candidate to grow in his priestly identity and love others in a generative manner. Having received the unconditional love of his parents, and primarily of God, the candidate will no longer seek to possess material goods or other persons for his own self-gratification; rather, he will move out from the self to become gift for the other. What is necessary in seminary formation, then, is the formation of affirming love: “The formation of persons, in its essence, comes through personal relationships,” and in this way, “seminary structures and rules are meant to facilitate relationships, thus securing not knowledge alone but true understanding.”[23]

Since the “disintegration of the family is commonplace” in contemporary culture, and men are losing the art of building relationships due to technology, media, and the sexualized culture, seminary rectors and formators do well to foster an environment which authentically affirms the men in formation. The way in which the seminary environment and formators interact with the candidate can either exacerbate psychological issues of development or assist in the growth of affective integration. As such, it is important that rectors and formators perceive their roles as spiritual fathers in the lives of priestly candidates. The seminary then becomes a kind of family unit. The seminary, in this way, becomes the place where men learn to receive and communicate gift, and in turn these men are then able to become generative chaste spouses of the Church.

Seminary Formators: Accompaniment and Practical Application

Let us now turn toward the role of seminary formators as those who accompany and co-discern with men pursuing the priesthood. Msgr. David Toups articulates that “the seminary formator is called to accompany and journey with each man entrusted to his guidance through the seminary process.”[24] Toups goes further to say that “this is no mere functional role, but a genuine presence in the seminarian’s life and discernment process . . . [who prepare] shepherds after the heart of Christ.”[25] Accompaniment must begin with the act of acceptance: accepting the man in his current state and guiding him to the fullness of who he is called to be.[26]

According to the Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood, “every formator should have a good knowledge of the human person: his rhythms of growth; his potentials and weaknesses; and his way of living his relationship with God.”[27] Formators then must have a basic formation for the guidance of men toward the priesthood. This may include basic knowledge of anthropology, sociology, psychology, theology and the Magisterium’s directives on priestly formation. In regards to the preparation and education of formators, the Guidelines for the Use of Psychology further asserts, “It is desirable that bishops — by making use of various experiences, programs and institutions of good reputation — provide suitable preparations in vocational pedagogy for formators.”[28] In the same vein, the Ratio Fundamentalis affirms, “Those who are marked out to become formators need a specific preparation and generous dedication to the important task of formation.”[29]

Awareness of the “emotional residue”[30] of seminarians is also helpful in guiding these candidates on the way of integration and formation. Since it is probable that a significant portion of the men in formation have experienced some kind of familial trauma,

“Seminarian[s] may project unresolved hurts from [their] past experiences . . . onto persons in authority . . . unconsciously attributing undesirable feelings or emotions onto someone rather than admitting to or dealing with the unwanted feelings.”[31]

In this kind of situation, it is ideal that the formator bring awareness to the “emotional residue” that the seminarian is harboring. Ultimately, “unaddressed projections will hinder the seminarian’s ability to grow in freedom and make the choices formation requires.”[32]

Moreover, there are certain communication skills for formative dialogue that are helpful in the accompaniment of seminarians. These communication skills include: (1) reflective listening; (2) open-ended questions; (3) summarizing; (4) empathy; (5) affirmation; (6) assessment.[33] Let us briefly take note of each of these communication skills for formative dialogue. First, reflective listening involves two steps: “the formator seeks to understand what the seminarian meant by what he said” and then, “seeks to confirm the accuracy of what he understood.”[34] Within this type of encounter, “the seminarian perceives that his formator has a genuine desire to understand him.”[35] Second, open-ended questions are “‘door openers’ that invite the seminarian to describe an experience in greater detail.”[36] Essentially, open-ended questions help the formator to avoid making “premature judgements” and may help lead into a more profound dialogue.[37]

Next, summarizing “recounts to the seminarian observations made of the seminarian’s patterns of thought, feelings and behaviors, be these strengths or weaknesses.”[38] This will allow the seminarian to verify or correct the formator’s observations and can help in pinpointing specific areas of growth or commendation. Subsequently, empathy is “[the] disposition [that] communicates respect, understanding, and care for the seminarian” and, ultimately, “embodies the sentiments of Christ.”[39] Furthermore, there is affirmation which is, “a recognition of the seminarian’s strivings,” which can also “incite hope and growth in self-confidence.”[40] Lastly, there is assessment which “seeks to ascertain the degree to which seminary formation is being interiorized.”[41] Though human qualities are not quantifiable, they can be observed and described for further assessment. All in all, the formator ought to use the skills at his disposal, communicate effectively, and, most importantly, help each candidate to deepen his knowledge of self and his knowledge of Christ the Good Shepherd.

Configuration to Christ: Theosis by Conformity to Christ’s Human Nature

St. Irenaeus, early Church Father, expressed, “The glory of God is man fully alive.” One can conclude that the glory of God not only consists in the spiritual wholeness of man, but also in the integrity of the whole man; this includes his psychological and biological wholeness as well. Whom can man look to as the pattern of the fullness of human life? This pattern, or model, is found in Jesus Christ. Christ has two natures, human and divine, and His divine nature does not absorb or obliterate his humanity. Jesus is truly the Divine Logos made flesh.

To bring healing, renewal, and sanctity to the mind and heart of man is not a work he does on his own efforts alone; it is always in cooperation with grace. In tandem with human formation and the practice of psychology, grace does what man cannot do alone, which is deification. It is important to note here that formation to the priesthood is primarily oriented toward becoming Christ. Jean Corbon, in his Wellspring of Worship, asserts, “We become God by being more and more united to the humanity of Christ.”[42] Jesus, in his humanity, grew psychologically and physically: “And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man.”[43] In union with Christ, the seminarian will be impelled by the Holy Spirit to grow in virtue, surrender his vices and disordered attachments, and allow his formators and counselors to guide him in and to freedom.[44] Ultimately, in uniting himself to the humanity of Christ, the seminarian in a very real way extends the Mystery of the Incarnation in his very flesh and bones.

Conclusion

The culture is the environment in which one’s habits, values and patterns of thought are brought about. Though one breathes in the air of one’s cultural disparities, through various helps one is able to filter out what would otherwise hinder proper psychological development and human flourishing. As detailed above, contemporary culture has caused psychological underdevelopment or maldevelopment in men and women in the United States. Consequently, as candidates for the priesthood are ordinary men, heeding an extraordinary call, they are not immune to the negative effects of the present culture. In sum, to help aid the healthy psychological development of seminarians, it is imperative that seminaries foster, by way of its rectors, formators, and counselors, environments that help guide each man in becoming who he is meant to be; a man whose humanity has been healed, integrated, and conformed to the mind and heart of Christ.

[1] James Keating, ed., Seminary Theology III: Seminary Formation and Psychology (Omaha, NE: Institute for Priestly Formation, 2013), 49.

[2] Ibid, 52.

[3] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Program of Priestly Formation, 6th ed. (Washington, DC: USCCB, 2022), 119.

[4] Pope John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis: Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation, 1992 (Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1992), n. 43. “The whole work of priestly formation would be deprived of its necessary foundation if it lacked a suitable human formation.” In other words, human formation is the “necessary foundation” of the other dimensions of priestly formation.

[5] Eugene Kennedy and Victor Heckler, The Catholic Priest in the United States: Psychological Investigations (Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1972), 3.

[6] Ibid, 6.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid, 7.

[9] Ibid, 6.

[10] Ibid, 7.

[11] Ibid, 8.

[12] Ibid, 9.

[13] Ibid, 8.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid, 11.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid, 16.

[19] Congregation for Catholic Education, Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood, (2008), no. 2.

[20] Keating, 13.

[21] Ibid, 15.

[22] Ibid, 16.

[23] Keating, 22.

[24] Marysia Weber, The Art of Accompaniment: Practical Steps for the Seminary Formator (St. Louis, MO: En Route Books & Media, 2018), 1.

[25] Weber, 1.

[26] Ibid, 2.

[27] Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood, no. 3.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Congregation for the Clergy, Ratio Fundmentalis Institutionis Sacerdotale (L’Osservatore Romano Vatican City, 2016) no. 49.

[30] Weber, 22.

[31] Ibid.

[32] Ibid, 22.

[33] Ibid, 57.

[34] Ibid, 58.

[35] Ibid, 59.

[36] Ibid, 62.

[37] Ibid, 63.

[38] Ibid, 64

[39] Ibid, 65.

[40] Ibid, 67.

[41] Ibid.

[42] Jean Corbon, The Wellspring of Worship, trans. Matthew J. OConnell (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2005), 218.

[43] Luke 2:52 (RSV).

[44] 2 Corinthians 3:17: “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” (RSV)