Priestly Loneliness and Disquietude: A structural problem?

Loneliness is not in itself an evil. It shows, in fact, the truth of the human being as a creature in need of the Absolute. The suffering this involves, if accepted as the truth about oneself and not as a curse, can allow one to experience solid and deep relationships. First and foremost there is the relationship with the Lord, because one has come to recognize that without Him life becomes unbearable and meaningless.

There is indeed a dimension of loneliness in every state of life, as married people know, a radical emptiness, which nothing and no one can fill. This impossibility, if not accepted, can lead to illusory investments in the other, unrealizable claims and relationship failure. It is significant that the crisis of celibacy and the crisis of marriage appeared at the same time.

Loneliness makes one uncomfortable when it finds a person distant from his or her deepest self, lacking meaningful relationships, losing oneself in the to-do list, the gossip of the moment, the illicit pursuit of pleasure, hoping that this will fill the emptiness that torments. All this also applies to those who, like the priest, are called to a life of celibacy. Loneliness has multiple aspects, which can make it either desired or feared, hence the importance of understanding how and when it can become toxic rather than being a means of truth.

Some epochal changes

There are first of all structural reasons for loneliness: the limited number of key reference points, of places and times when one can feel refreshed, the thinning and aging of communities. Pope Francis, in an address to the Curia, said that we are in a situation of post-Christianity, and perhaps there is not yet sufficient awareness of this: “Christendom no longer exists! […]. We need a change in our pastoral mindset, which does not mean moving toward a relativistic pastoral care. We are no longer living in a Christian world, because faith – especially in Europe, but also in a large part of the West – is no longer an evident presupposition of social life; indeed, faith is often rejected, derided, marginalized and ridiculed.”^[1]

The dissolution of the social fabric is accompanied by a lack of adult role models and a sense of isolation accentuated by the recent Covid-19 pandemic. Hence there is an increased fragility in people at all levels.

Another structural reason behind the malaise is the increasing bureaucratization and complexity of life.

Added to all this is the digital revolution and the advent of social networks, especially involving the younger generations, where skill in the use of new technologies is often not matched by an adequate critical sense, especially when one is seeking in these technologies a remedy for loneliness.^[2] In fact, the Internet, along with wide-ranging possibilities at various levels – information, data, speed of contact and undoubted pastoral opportunities – gives rise to the age-old problems of the offline world (loneliness, meaninglessness, suffering, depression), but on a qualitatively different scale.

And so, as in Kafka’s short story The Metamorphosis, it can also happen that the priest wakes up one day and discovers that he has become something completely different from what he had thought he was: a social worker, a provider of services and material goods of various kinds, or a victim of something he studied in theology textbooks but from which he has been unable to protect himself, sometimes with tragic outcomes.

Some data

For some time now there has been a striking increase in suicides among priests in Brazil. During the year 2018, 17 priests took their own lives and 10 more in 2021.^[3]

As early as 2008, a survey conducted by the organization Isma Brasil, which interviewed 1,600 priests, religious men and women, noted that the main cause of stress in religious life was the absence of privacy, as well as adequate time and space for self-care. The Bishops’ Conference of Brazil also launched investigations. Experts consulted pointed to overwork, lack of leisure, loneliness and loss of motivation among the possible factors that lead some religious to suicide, so do accusations of abuse. However, it appears from the interviews conducted that the most common problem is depression: “A young priest in a country like Brazil, where he may be faced with too much pastoral work, can develop an over-anxious attitude, which easily flows into activism, which then leads to stress, and this into anxiety and depression. He is often alone and does not know how to take care of himself.”^[4]

Lack of privacy seems to be one of the most prevalent characteristics causing distress among priests. In France, research funded by the French Bishops’ Conference and Mutualité Saint Martin on the health of the 6,400 diocesan priests under 75 years of age working in the 105 dioceses was presented on November 25, 2020. The previous survey of this kind dated back to the 1980s, but this was the first time such a study was conducted in France. The response was remarkable. More than 50 percent responded (3,593), a sign that the research was seen by the priests as a sign of the bishops’ concern.^[5]

The majority of priests (70 percent) worked in cities, and the remainder (30 percent) in rural areas, resulting in a very different workload. Fourteen percent had one church or chaplaincy at which to officiate; 40 percent at least five; 20 percent more than 20; and 7.5 percent had 40. The average workload was 9.4 hours a day, but 25 percent of the priests had to travel 1,200 kilometers a month to officiate in the various places; another 17 percent traveled between 2,000 and 5,000 kilometers. One of them confessed that he was not a shepherd with the smell of sheep, but with the smell of gasoline… For many, there were no days off. Although the situation was not as dramatic as in Brazil, there had been seven suicides of priests in France over the course of four years.

But above all, the problem of isolation emerged. Fifty-four percent of priests were alone, although they might have some help around the house or church. Twenty percent exhibited depressive symptoms, compared to 15 percent among those living in a priestly community. Nine percent had moderate depression, and 3 percent had moderate-to-severe depression, a total of 240 priests. In two thirds of cases, priests say they participate in support groups and get spiritual accompaniment. They reported significant help from friends and relatives was strong, but somewhat less from the hierarchy.

When asked in general how they felt, the vast majority answered “well” or “fairly well” (93.3 percent), yet 40 percent felt a low degree of personal fulfillment and a sense of malaise in relation to the Church hierarchy, often due to management problems. Two out of five priests had alcohol problems and 8 percent were alcoholics. However, what worried the bishops most was that 2 percent of their priests suffered severely from burnout: 7 percent experienced “extreme fatigue” and 76 percent fatigue to some degree; only 15 percent seemed exempt.

What about Italy?

Studies on distress among priests have also been carried out in Italy. Research conducted in 2005 in Padua (one of the dioceses where there are more priests than elsewhere, 806 at the time of the research) showed very similar results to what was found in France.^[6] The interviews revealed two large groups (124 priests each) that gave contrasting responses: for the first group “everything was fine,” while the second group felt “burned out,” with high levels of depression, lack of involvement and low personal fulfillment. There were other categories, fewer in number, but experiencing a situation quite similar to that of the “burned out.”

Living with other priests does not seem to affect the situation. Both the group of satisfied priests and a large part of the dissatisfied (58 percent) lived alone. A large part of those who have an intense pastoral ministry lived with other priests but also experienced problems. With regard to age, the most at-risk groups were the youngest (under 30) and the oldest (over 70). With the former, perhaps lack of experience and fragile affectivity play a role; with the latter, it was the difficulty of growing old, of leaving assignments and roles that somehow gave them a priestly identity.

A higher degree of education – doctorate, university life – seemed to provide greater protection against life issues, leading to increased interests and intellectual curiosity. Those who exercise a ministry focused on helping and listening, such as hospital chaplains, confessors and seminary staff, expressed a particular sense of personal fulfillment.

Some possible causes

The authors of the research sought to understand the causes of the malaise of the priests interviewed. Among them, burnout emerged above all, although most of them did not use this term and often did not even know it; rather, precise external causes were detected (multiplicity of commitments, complexity of issues, the feeling of being mere “machines of the sacred,” delivering aseptic services to indifferent faithful).^[7]

Others complained of a lack of care for the inner life and a consequent emotional emptiness, leading them to view celibacy as a burden. The formation received was another cause of burnout. There was an exaggerated insistence on helping others and giving of oneself, at the expense of personal care and creating a climate of communion and friendship in the seminary and later with other priests.

More recent research conducted by Alessandro Castegnaro, president of the Socio-Religious Observatory of Triveneto (Osret) comes to the same conclusions, as listed below:

1) A growing sense of inadequacy to deal with today’s issues, due to lack of preparation and especially lack of legal and personal protection (such as having access to a supervisor). Rather than the time devoted to ministry, the cause of the discomfort is largely related to increasing bureaucratization: the number of issues is compounded by their complexity. The priest is faced with tasks for which he has not been prepared; administrative and legal skills are required of him that he does not possess. All this ultimately makes him more like a bad manager than a good pastor. One pastor summed up his situation this way, “Even fathers of families have to take care of the boiler; I have seven of them!”

This unease seems destined to grow, because priests often have several parishes to administer, without residing in any of them, and to administrative tasks are added canonical, civil and criminal responsibilities. Hence the difficulty in entrusting such tasks to others: “Delegating functions without delegating responsibilities is impractical […]. Of particular note are the effects that all this has on liturgical celebrations, and not only in cases where the priest is now reduced to experiencing a kind of Eucharistic race on festive occasions. The priests themselves recognize a lack of communication skills and suffer as a result.”^[8]

2) Burnout is one of the main consequences, which for the priest, in comparison with other professions, has as its defining characteristic “depersonalization,” that is, the tendency to experience relationships with people without emotional participation, in a bureaucratic and repetitive way – a terrible vulnus that deeply undermines one’s sense of self, which has always been associated (and recognized) along with with the priest’s “humanity.”

3) Loneliness, especially among younger priests, linked to a sense of depersonalization. In fact, it is not so much a social or familial loneliness, but a “ministerial, ecclesial” one that is poor in relationships, especially with the faithful, accentuated by the fact that priestly fraternity has never been experienced: “The presbyterate in particular, beyond a superficial veneer of camaraderie, does not seem to be an environment capable of activating humanly rich relationships. Thus, a problem emerges that directly affects human relationships in the Church […]. The priests does not constitute a team, the self prevails over the we. There is a lack of pastoral supervision and a lack of opportunities to develop pastoral workshops, which would allow a comparison with the lived experiences of the brethren. And so everyone is left alone with his own problems.”^[9]

This situation triggers a vicious cycle: burnout accentuates the priest’s negative self-perception and makes such a life choice less and less attractive to a young man; the decrease in vocations in turn forces the priest into an increasingly heavy workload that threatens to overwhelm him. His first thought becomes how to survive all this, selecting objectives leaving some unfulfilled or living in a perpetual state of emergency.

Alone by choice?

Research suggests that the syndrome almost never comes on suddenly. Yet despite needing help, a large proportion of priests seem reluctant to ask for it and receive it, convincing themselves that they must find the solution to their malaise themselves.

Respondents particularly note that they have never cultivated true fraternal friendship with other priests.^[10] Others prefer to be alone rather than being in the company of other priests,^[11] mainly because of the fear of feeling judged.^[12] Solitude thus becomes a form of protection.

One has to wonder if a certain mode of formation, which leads to thinking of priestly ministry as an adventure to be experienced alone, may also contribute to this situation. The diocesan priest is usually thought of as living alone: communal life is proper only to the seminary years. Hence there is a tendency to experience them as an artificial parenthesis, very different from the “real” life that will await after ordination, and thus to consider the other seminarians as companions on a momentary journey from which he will be separated once he reaches his true life’s tasks.

A seminary rector, Enrico Brancozzi, in his research recognizes this tendency summarized by the meaningful, and commonly used, expression “becoming a priest,” a process that the Church is certainly called upon to evaluate, but which risks separation from the Christian community, leading to the ministerial loneliness that is at the root of the problems detected by the research.^[13]

Archbishop Erio Castellucci, vice-president for northern Italy of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, presenting the study by Fr. Enrico Brancozzi, notes other reasons that can lead the priest to present himself as an “I” and not an ecclesial “we.” Among these he notes above all the sacred vision of the priest, rather than of a forgiven sinner, unworthy to be called to this great responsibility, and therefore in need of the community’s support more than others: “However much Vatican II, by relaunching the baptismal priesthood, had already left aside the categories of the priest as mediator between God and peopler or of the priest as another Christ, there has been no lack of them in the period following the Council, and there is still no lack of recovery of this sacred vision.”^[14]

All of this does not allow for the expression of the future priest’s truth as a man, his affectivity, fragility, past wounds, fears of ministry, especially the desire to establish friendships with his fellows.

A structural problem?

Thus the question remains whether the institution encourages this trend, even if unintentionally. If so, the priest’s problems should be considered not simply as personal, but structural, requiring structural changes.^[15]

This is a lesson that also comes from the humanities. The consequences of trauma depend largely on how the person reads it, on his or her points of reference, and especially on whether he or she is alone in doing so or has someone beside him or her who can help. Feeling part of a community constitutes one of the main forms of protection: “Cultural factors, and in particular the predominant system of assessing experience, has a crucial influence on how one deals with suffering […]. Psychological trauma is different from physical trauma: individuals do not passively register the impact of an external force, but engage actively, seeking a solution.” Instead, it turns out to be much more detrimental to health to live a lonely life that is overprotected but lacks strong and deep bonds.^[16]

Many firms and multinational corporations have realized this and have launched initiatives to address the distress of their employees that culminates in burnout, depression and suicide; in other words, they have understood the profound unity between quality of life, personal serenity, and quality of work.^[17]

Addressing the problem even in the ecclesial ministry setting is a duty, not only because evangelical charity demands it, but also because of the very reason for the choice of vocation, being called to proclaim a message of salvation through one’s life.

Some proposals

Without taking anything away from those who live their ministry with satisfaction and gusto, special attention must be paid to those who live in situations of distress and do not seem to find a way out. St. Paul reminds us that “if one part suffers, every part suffers with it” (1 Cor 12:26). Fraternity is not a formula for handling emergencies, a cure for distress, but the ordinary way in which one is called to respond to the Lord’s call.

However, talking about structural changes does not mean excluding the freedom and responsibility of each individual. The documents of the magisterium rightly insist that the first person responsible for formation is the candidate himself. This applies all the more to the priest.^[18] While stimulating the need to note the suffering of those close to them, the fact always remains that they are adults, called moreover to become responsible for the good of others.

After reviewing the results of the survey, the French Bishops’ Conference, discussed possible avenues for intervention and especially prevention: combating the loneliness of priests by focusing on the quality of housing; the creation in each diocese of a hub to help with healthy living in ministry (a socio-health center for active priests), where there are also competent people to deal with economic, legal and administrative issues; and the establishment of pastoral supervisors and mediators to whom priests can turn in case of difficulties.

Even the Final Communiqué of the 69th General Assembly of the Italian Bishops’ Conference in 2016, speaking about priestly fraternity, recommended the importance of “facilitators” of relationships and communion.^[19] It is important to check what follow-up and implementation this invitation has had in the various dioceses.

An interesting example of structural change is the one recently initiated by Archbishop Delpini about the reconfiguration of the community life of seminarians in the diocese of Milan. It involves extended time in a parish, together with other seminarians (from three to five), and family involvement.^[20] The purpose is to foster fraternity, experience with other vocations, the domestic dimension, and in particular the presence of women in formation situations, something already recommended by Pastores Dabo Vobis and reiterated by the Nuova Ratio.

In the most difficult cases, a period of detachment can be considered, to be spent in a more protected setting, always maintaining the possibility of interfacing with diocesan leaders, so as not to leave the priest simply in the care of others.^[21]

At the level of continuing education

Luca Bressan’s survey of seminaries shows how they have become less and less a preparation for the presbyterate, but rather a prolonged time of vocational verification, and not infrequently of the faith journey itself; the problems and tasks of ministry are thus delegated to the time after ordination.

Hence the importance of ongoing formation.^[22] Associations have sprung up in Italy with the aim of offering a “check-up” for priests and their dioceses. One of them is the Centro Studi Missione Emmaus, whose purpose is “to flank and support the leaders of a Diocese or Religious Community, without replacing them, but facilitating and developing synergies that enhance the resources present.”^[23] Once the main diocesan, or interdiocesan, issues have been taken into consideration, a procedure marked by progressive stages is proposed.

This would involve, for example, an annual meeting of a few days (designed perhaps in two groups, so as to allow substitution at Masses) in a pleasant facility, could be a good start to regain the taste for being together and for a truer and more fraternal exchange. In this context, reviewing recent events with the help of competent people, who are also able to offer possible help with cura personalis, already constitutes a way of confronting the problem and calmly resuming the thread of one’s life and ministry. When these proposals have been implemented, the results seem to have been encouraging.^[24]

Spiritual accompaniment, the rereading of one’s faith life accomplished with the help of a wise and trustworthy person, has always been recommended in the history of the Church. In the moment of crisis this figure is particularly valuable. On such an occasion there is indeed a strong risk of identifying oneself and the ministry with one’s problem, failing to notice other aspects, equally present, that can give a different and more realistic interpretation to what is happening. This should avoid spiritualizing the problem, but also without loading it with larger meanings that draw on one’s personal history.

It remains indispensable, however, in the light of what has been written so far, that the theme of fragility be dealt with initially in formation and also in continuing education, making use of the contribution of the human sciences, the importance of which has been repeatedly reaffirmed by the magisterium, especially since the Second Vatican Council. It is no accident that the primordial temptation was based on fragility, considered a curse to be eliminated and not the privileged channel of God’s grace. Henri Nouwen clarified this fundamental point of biblical experience by introducing the term “wounded healer,” that is, the one who can heal, like the crucified one, through his own wounds, which he has taken on without denying them.^[25]

Embraced fragility enables us to live out true relationships, under the banner of mercy and compassion toward the fragilities of others. Contrary to an over-determined vision of sacredness and perfection, it is fragility that makes us similar to a God who is a loving Father, and who in Jesus wanted to share it to the full. It is this that makes priestly ministry credible.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32009/22072446.0723.9