The Archidiaconal Hope for Development

One of the striking features of the interviews was the almost universal conviction that empathy is not fixed but formable. Archdeacons frequently expressed a deep confidence that clergy can increase their emotional intelligence through self-awareness, reflective practice and intentional learning. This hope was not naïve; many also acknowledged that certain clergy present entrenched patterns of emotional avoidance, rigidity or narcissistic behaviour. Yet even where empathy was limited, Archdeacons tended to see possibility rather than inevitability.

Several Archdeacons described clergy who, although initially emotionally clumsy, ‘grew into’ their pastoral identity through experience, feedback and supervision. One, for example, emphasized the role of self-awareness: clergy who learned ‘what kind of place people are in’ improved dramatically in ministry as they became more attentive to the emotions of others.

Another spoke of the need for clergy to confront their own inner dynamics. He described a smaller number of priests who were unable to recognize their own emotional reactivity or relational contributions to conflict, lamenting their tendency to ‘blame other people exclusively’ or to avoid ‘addressing their own part in it’. Yet his frustration was accompanied by a recognition that some clergy who receive skilled supervision or participate in honest reflective practice can come to see themselves more clearly and thereby become more pastoral.

Archdeacons frequently emphasized the significance of a reflective stance in ministry. They commended clergy who possess ‘the ability to be self-reflective’, to recognize the emotional currents in interactions and to adjust accordingly. A number explicitly contrasted reflective practitioners with clergy who were ‘rigid’, ‘cut and dried’ or lacking in nuance. This aligns with broader empirical–theological scholarship. Emslie’s (Reference Emslie2016) work on ministerial formation repeatedly highlights the role of reflective practice in shaping clergy who can hold emotional complexity and navigate pastoral uncertainty. Francis et al. (Reference Francis, Emslie and Payne2019), too, have shown that emotional intelligence is linked to psychological health, vocational satisfaction and spiritual maturity, all qualities that are strengthened, not diminished, through reflective processes (Doehring Reference Doehring2006).

In short, Archdeacons’ hope for the development of empathy rests on three assumptions:

1. (a) self-awareness enables emotional growth;

2. (b) emotional intelligence is enhanced through reflective, relational and theological learning and

3. (c) ministry itself, when accompanied by supervision and good role models, is a crucible for empathic maturation.

Their experience suggests that the Church must not accept fixed-deficit models of emotional capacity but must foster environments in which clergy can grow into their empathic vocation.

Contemplative Spirituality as Emotional Integration

A particularly rich thread in the interviews concerned the relationship between empathy and contemplative practice. Some Archdeacons articulated a deep intuition: contemplative spirituality is not merely devotional but emotionally forming. Prayer, particularly contemplative or centring prayer, was repeatedly identified as a practice that integrates the inner life, confronts emotional defences and cultivates presence.

One Archdeacon explicitly referenced Thomas Keating, whose work on centring prayer frames contemplation as a journey into the ‘false self’ (Keating Reference Keating1999). This false self, according to Keating, is shaped by compulsions, fears and emotional wounds that distort perception and diminish capacity for authentic relationships. Contemplative practice becomes a slow but profound confrontation with these inner distortions, allowing the practitioner to inhabit greater freedom, compassion and emotional openness (cf Bingaman Reference Bingaman2011; Reference Bingaman2016).

Several Archdeacons recognized similar patterns among clergy. One noted that empathy requires ‘a connection with our own inner lives’, a willingness to face one’s own vulnerability and emotional complexity. Another argued that clergy who are grounded in prayer are more capable of attending to the emotional states of others, because they have learned to attend to their own inner landscape with honesty and gentleness. Others spoke of the way contemplative practice fosters a non-anxious presence, a phrase resonant with both family-systems theory and the contemplative tradition (Friedman Reference Friedman2011; Keating Reference Keating2000; Shapiro et al. Reference Shapiro, Carlson, Astin and Freedman2006). One Archdeacon noted that emotionally intelligent clergy ‘tend to be self-controlled… non-anxious’, qualities frequently associated with contemplative stability.

A further insight was that contemplative prayer nurtures the capacity for deep listening – to God, to self and to others. As one Archdeacon put it, good clergy practice ‘dual listening’, attending both to God and to the person before them (cf Matthew 22. 37-39). This dual attentiveness mirrors the contemplative posture, which seeks to cultivate receptivity rather than control (Pacheco Reference Pacheco2025).

From a theological standpoint, empathy rooted in contemplation becomes a participation in the missio Dei, a sharing in the divine attentiveness to the world. Contemplation is less about acquiring spiritual experiences than becoming a vessel through which the compassion of Christ can flow into pastoral encounters. A growing body of empirical research from a variety of religious traditions indicates a significant association between contemplative practice and emotional intelligence, particularly through enhanced emotional awareness, regulation and empathic capacity (Chu Reference Chu2010; Sharp Reference Sharp2010; Schutte and Malouff Reference Schutte and Malouff2011; Benner Reference Benner2012; Klimecki et al. Reference Klimecki, Leiberg, Ricard and Singer2014; Charoensukmongkol Reference Charoensukmongkol2014; Milicevic et al. Reference Milicevic, Milton and O’Loughlin2016; Łowicki and Zajenkowski Reference Łowicki and Zajenkowski2017; Valosek et al. Reference Valosek, Link, Mills, Konrad, Rainforth and Nidich2018; Yacoub Reference Yacoub2018).

The Formation Ecology: Theological Colleges, Supervision and Role Models

If empathy is developable, the question becomes not merely whether clergy can grow in emotional intelligence, but how the Church’s formation structures either foster or inhibit that growth. Archdeacons’ reflections offer a mixed picture.

1. a. The Formative Power of Theological Colleges and Training Institutions

Several Archdeacons expressed concern that some ordinands arrive in curacies or clergy in incumbencies without having undergone sufficient emotional formation. A recurring theme in the interviews was the presence of clergy who had ‘no awareness’ of how they came across to others, who lacked basic relational skills, or who reacted defensively to feedback. These deficiencies raise questions about the emotional formation provided, or not provided, by theological colleges and training pathways.

The insights of medical education research are particularly instructive here. Numerous longitudinal studies show that empathy declines during medical training – particularly once students enter high-pressure clinical environments (Hojat et al. Reference Hojat, Mangione, Nasca, Rattner, Erdmann, Gonnella and Magee2004; Hojat et al. Reference Hojat, Shannon, DeSantis, Speicher, Bragan and Calabrese2020). This decline is associated with emotional exhaustion, institutional cynicism and the internalization of professional norms that prioritize efficiency over relational presence. Conversely, some medical researchers cite low scores due to the use of self-report measurements (Colliver et al. Reference Colliver, Conlee, Verhulst and Dorsey2010) or the challenge of defining empathy accurately (Sulzer et al. Reference Sulzer, Feinstein and Wendland2016; Ferreira-Valente et al. Reference Ferreira-Valente, Monteiro, Barbosa, Salgueira, Costa and Costa2017).

Pederson’s (Reference Pederson2010) analysis of research indicating lack of empathy in physicians led him to suggest the problem is often ‘a double-blinded, dichotomized clinical gaze’, where the clinician ‘tends to separate biomedical aspects from other aspects of human experience … [which] … often neglects the interpretational, moral and existential aspects of both the patient and the physician’ (p. 599). This asymmetric dichotomy means the physician needs ‘to reflect on the horizon from where they understand the patient’ and their own ‘paradigms, prejudices and situatedness’ so preventing ‘important frames of reference from being acknowledged’ and possibly undermining the physician’s own self-understanding. Courses to place doctors in the patients’ shoes will be ‘in vain if interpretational, existential and moral aspects [are] neglected on both sides of the table’ (p. 600).

One might think that theological and ministerial training would not be troubled by a ‘clinical gaze’ if the substantial training core is of the humanities, but dichotomization may be evident if the basis and structure of the training is of the social sciences. The first, arguably, existentially discerned and valued, the latter ontologically led and empirically investigated. A common, and somewhat unfair, jibe directed to theological colleges is that they are ‘too academic’ (Griffiths Reference Griffiths1990; Markham Reference Markham2010; cf Higton Reference Higton2012), and the beauty of faith, spirituality and religious experience is conjugated from the present tense to the imperfect (Bell Reference Bell2005; cf Oakley Reference Oakley2017; Anderson Reference Anderson2025). More than ever, the Church needs formation of the ministers who offer empathic ministry, where the fundamental vocation is discipleship rather than theological virtue. Keating (Reference Keating2017) suggests that ‘unlike in universities, the academic portion of a seminary is not its sole glory… in seminary, the converted, educated, and virtuous man lying on the cathedral floor is the community’s glory’ (p. 40), and ‘the real test of a successful academic program is not the transfer of massive quantities of data from professor to seminarian, but the transmission of a love for theology and philosophy from professor to student’ (p. 41).

If ministerial training environments emphasize academic achievement, managerial competence or ecclesiastical performance more than spiritual formation and emotional maturity, clergy may become skilled technicians rather than empathic pastors (Emslie Reference Emslie2016). Archdeacons noted these risks in ministerial formation. Some clergy, they observed, had absorbed models of priesthood that were ‘authoritarian’, ‘combative’ or ‘chronically anxious’. Others had been influenced by mentors who modelled emotional avoidance or relational distance. In such environments, the empathic disposition necessary for pastoral ministry can atrophy.

1. b. The Formational Significance of Supervision

Supervision featured prominently in Archdeacons’ accounts of emotional development. Many noted that clergy who engaged meaningfully in supervision, whether spiritual direction, pastoral supervision or reflective accompaniment, were far more likely to grow in self-awareness and relational skill. However, they also observed that some clergy resisted supervision, preferring autonomy or avoiding vulnerability. Where supervision is absent or perfunctory, clergy may lack structures for confronting emotional blind spots or for processing pastoral pain. Conversely, when supervision models emotional honesty, theological reflection and pastoral curiosity, it becomes a powerful catalyst for empathic growth.

In a study investigating the interactive relationship dynamics between psychoanalyst supervisors and supervisees (205 participants, including 78 supervision dyads), Nagell et al. (Reference Nagell, Steinmetzer, Fissabre and Spilski2014) found not only impartation of knowledge and analytical competence from supervisor to supervisee but also significant identity development of the supervisee, plus mutual satisfaction of both parties. Hawkins and Shohet (Reference Hawkins and Shohet2006) affirm the need for ‘fearless compassion’ as a key skill and capacity for supervisors (p. 220). An in-depth qualitative study of six Church of Scotland probationers’ experience of supervision in their placements, and their supervisors’ experience of supervision training led Denniston (Reference Denniston2018) to suggest that ‘the skilled supervisor will work with the trainee to make explicit what is implicit thereby enabling not only personal transformation at a deeper level and engagement with the critical process on the candidate’s own activities, actions and thought processes but also helpful critique of the organisation’ (pp. 137-138). Further, ‘there is sufficient evidence that good-quality reflective practice can lead to personal transformation and improved practice as well as organisational transformation’ (p. 145).

1. c. The Role of Exemplars and Ministerial Culture

The presence, or absence, of healthy role models was another prominent theme. Several Archdeacons spoke of clergy who had been shaped by incumbents or trained by incumbents with poor relational habits. As one observed, some curacies perpetuate cycles of emotional unintelligence: ‘If you have a supervisor who’s rigid or anxious, the curate often becomes the same’. This reflects findings in social learning theory: emotional behaviours are caught more than taught (Horsburgh and Ippolito Reference Horsburgh and Ippolito2018; Yen Reference Yen2022).

Archdeacons also described diocesan cultures that either promote or undermine empathy. Dioceses facing scandal, conflict or chronic anxiety, for example, may cultivate defensive or risk-averse clergy. Conversely, dioceses that prioritize well-being, mutual support and reflective practice appear to foster clergy who are more relationally grounded and emotionally flexible.

The formation ecology thus comprises multiple interacting systems:

• • theological colleges and training courses

• • curacies

• • diocesan cultures

• • supervisory structures

• • peer networks

• • liturgical and spiritual traditions

• • personal psychological histories

Empathy develops (or declines) within this complex ecology. It is not the product of any single factor but emerges from the interplay of institutional culture, spiritual practice, personal disposition and ongoing reflection (Doehring Reference Doehring2018; Jia et al. Reference Jia, Kang, Wang, Ma and Liu2024).

Reflection

The archidiaconal reflections gathered in this study demonstrate a profound conviction that empathy and emotional intelligence are not static traits but developable vocational capacities. Through self-awareness, reflective practice and theological formation, clergy can grow into deeper relational sensitivity and pastoral wisdom. Contemplative spirituality, particularly in the tradition of Thomas Keating, offers a pathway towards emotional integration, enabling clergy to confront the false self, inhabit their vulnerability and cultivate the attentive presence at the heart of pastoral care.

Yet this growth depends on the formation ecology within which the clergy are trained and supported. Theological colleges must prioritize emotional formation as seriously as academic and liturgical competence. Supervision must be robust, relational and reflective. Role models must embody empathy rather than defensiveness. And diocesan cultures must foster openness, curiosity and compassion rather than anxiety, cynicism or emotional avoidance.

Empathy, in Anglican ministry, is not merely a psychological trait. It is a spiritual posture, a fruit of formation and a sign of vocational maturity. If the Church attends seriously to its development, it may yet nurture clergy who minister with the emotional depth, contemplative presence and Christ-like compassion needed for the flourishing of God’s people.

Role Clarification and Emotional Boundaries

Archdeacons repeatedly emphasized that emotionally intelligent oversight begins with clarity of role. Several described their early years in archidiaconal ministry as marked by over-functioning – stepping in too quickly, rescuing clergy, absorbing emotional distress that did not belong to them. Over time, they learned that effective oversight requires clear emotional and vocational boundaries. One Archdeacon, for example, reflected that emotional intelligence in senior clergy is evident in ‘senior leaders who don’t rescue, but work with you’, cultivating self-awareness rather than dependency. This Archdeacon explicitly described emotionally intelligent leadership as involving the ability to avoid projecting one’s own anxieties or narratives onto clergy.

In their oversight duties, Archdeacons often encounter clergy in the midst of conflict, burnout or emotional regression. Without emotional boundaries, the temptation is to take on the emotional burden of the parish, stepping in as fixer, interpreter or surrogate leader. Yet Archdeacons noted that such over-involvement can undermine both the priest’s agency and the parish’s capacity for growth. An emotionally intelligent Archdeacon instead ‘holds the space’, offering presence, clarity and accountability without collapsing into rescue or control.

One Archdeacon’s reflection on parish emotional dynamics, describing congregational behaviour as akin to ‘toddler tantrums’ or ‘teenage strops’, illustrates this need for boundaries. When a parish is emotionally dysregulated, reactive or immature, the Archdeacon must exercise differentiation: empathically attuned yet not drawn into the emotional reactivity of the system. Emotionally intelligent role clarity involves three key practices:

1. a. Emotional Differentiation

Archdeacons described the necessity of remaining connected yet not engulfed by the anxieties of clergy or congregations. This mirrors the concept of the ‘non-anxious presence’ in family systems theory: emotional closeness combined with firm self-differentiation. Speaking from the experience of leading large churches, an Archdeacon discovered that if he reflected stress to parishioners ‘it comes back to you in spades’ for ‘the whole organisation becomes neurotic … but you can lead in a non-anxious way, which actually takes a lot of emotional intelligence (which can) ‘pervade the organisation rapidly in a much more positive way’.

1. b. Avoidance of Projection

Formerly, clergy were expected to act somewhat as parent figures (Clarke et al. Reference Clarke, Spurr and Walker2022), thus receiving their congregation’s emotional projections (p. 598), but several Archdeacons spoke of ministers whose insecurity, anxiety or conflict-avoidance distorted their oversight and self-understanding. In contrast, other clergy may be tempted to exercise a ‘paternal, or even patrician role’, as one Archdeacon described, ‘their train is on the way to glory, and they’ve absolutely got the plan and they’re taking no prisoners as they go through’. The emotionally intelligent minister understands their role, learns to recognize their own internal responses to emotional projection and prevents those reactions from shaping their pastoral judgements.

1. c. Resisting the Rescuer Role

Repeatedly, Archdeacons described the importance of not taking responsibility for clergy emotional management. One noted that some clergy ‘are not willing to address their part’ in conflict situations, preferring to externalize blame. Rescuing such clergy only entrenches unhealthy patterns. Joynt (Reference Joynt2017) argues for Christian leadership as the best of servant and steward leadership, whereby the latter steps back to allow subordinates to take on responsibilities, which allows room for learning and development.

Through such practices, Archdeacons cultivate an oversight that is both compassionate and principled, rooted in empathy, but protected by emotional boundaries that preserve the integrity of their vocation.

Pastoral Oversight as Empathic Presence

Archdeacons overwhelmingly described effective clergy, and effective oversight, as grounded in empathic presence. High-functioning clergy were regularly characterized as those who ‘bring the best out of people’, who build trust and who create environments of psychological safety within their parishes. This quality of presence is equally central to archidiaconal ministry.

1. a. The Archdeacon as Trusted Listener

Several Archdeacons described their pastoral visits as opportunities to listen deeply, to discern what clergy are not yet able to articulate and to provide containment for the emotional life of a parish. The ability to detect emotional currents – anxieties, frustrations, unresolved conflicts – was seen as essential for effective oversight. One Archdeacon described emotionally intelligent clergy as those who demonstrate ‘attention to other people… [and] the ability to see when someone is struggling, to know what kind of place people are in’. By implication, Archdeacons must exercise the same relational attunement: understanding the affective atmosphere of a parish, recognizing the unspoken tensions and responding with sensitive and proportionate intervention.

1. b. Trust-Building Through Empathy

Archdeacons frequently remarked that trust, whether between clergy and congregation or clergy and diocese, is fundamentally relational. One Archdeacon spoke of the importance of ‘presence’, ‘listening’ and ‘avoiding being judgemental’ as markers of pastoral intelligence. Clergy trust their Archdeacons when they perceive them as emotionally available, attuned and fair-minded. Several Archdeacons contrasted this with the suspicion that arises when oversight is experienced as bureaucratic, managerial or emotionally detached. Clergy who feel unseen or misunderstood are less likely to engage openly with diocesan structures, thereby undermining the very oversight the office is charged with exercising.

1. c. Empathy as Diagnostic

Archidiaconal empathy often functions diagnostically. Through the emotional cues of clergy and congregations, such as hesitations, irritations, silences and affective shifts, Archdeacons discern underlying dysfunctions. This attentiveness helps them to identify emerging conflicts, burnout, boundary violations or pastoral breakdown before they escalate. One Archdeacon observed that low-empathy clergy often ‘get stuff done’ but ‘leave a trail of emotional wreckage’. An empathically skilled Archdeacon notices this relational damage early, addressing patterns that clergy themselves may fail to see.

1. d. The Archdeacon as Non-Anxious Guide

Archdeacons spoke of the importance of being a stabilizing presence during times of conflict. Their pastoral intelligence involved not only empathy but the capacity to offer calm, grounded leadership that does not mirror the anxiety of the system. Clergy often rely on their Archdeacons to help them navigate emotional turbulence, and this requires both empathic listening and emotional containment. Thus, oversight becomes a relational ministry, in which empathy is not sentimentality but interpretive wisdom, an ability to stand with, speak into and guide the emotional life of clergy and congregations.

Managing Low-Empathy Clergy

Archdeacons were sober in their assessment of the challenges posed by low-empathy clergy. They described individuals who were rigid, emotionally tone-deaf, judgmental or unable to recognize their own role in relational difficulties. Such clergy often generated significant conflict, parish decline or emotional harm. Archdeacons identified several strategies for addressing these challenges:

1. a. Careful Placement

Archdeacons repeatedly emphasized the importance of matching clergy to contexts that align with their emotional and interpersonal capacities. Low-empathy clergy may function acceptably in parishes where expectations of interpersonal intimacy are lower or where the congregational culture is more transactional. Conversely, placing such clergy in relationally complex or pastorally sensitive parishes often leads to spiralling conflict. Several Archdeacons lamented situations in which poor placements had produced unnecessary crises.

1. b. Increased Supervision and Support

Archdeacons distinguished between clergy who lacked empathy but were willing to learn, and clergy who were resistant to insight. For the former, they emphasized the importance of structured supervision, mentoring and reflective practice. One Archdeacon described how clergy can grow through ‘self-awareness (including social awareness)’ and ‘self-reflective’ practice. Supervision becomes not a policing mechanism but a developmental one – helping clergy notice emotional cues, interpret conflict and understand their own contributions.

1. c. Communication Coaching

Archdeacons noted that some clergy had never learned effective communication skills. They struggled with tone, timing and emotional nuance. Such individuals benefit from communication coaching, conflict-resolution training or restorative practices. One Archdeacon described clergy whose emails were ‘categorical’ or emotionally blunt, leading to misunderstandings and escalating tensions. Training in interpersonal communication helps clergy recognize relational dynamics and adjust their responses.

1. d. Conflict Work

When relational breakdowns occur, Archdeacons often facilitate mediated conversations, conflict mapping or restorative circles. Their empathic oversight enables them to identify the emotional drivers of conflict and to help clergy engage with these issues constructively. However, they noted that low-empathy clergy often resist this process, either because they cannot recognize emotional cues or because they are unwilling to acknowledge their role.

1. e. Facilitating Transition When Necessary

Archdeacons acknowledged that, in some cases, empathy deficits are so entrenched – and the pastoral damage so extensive – that transition becomes necessary. This might involve moving clergy to different roles, negotiating exit pathways or initiating capability procedures. This step is taken reluctantly and only after substantial support and intervention. Yet Archdeacons recognized that the health of the congregation sometimes requires decisive action. One Archdeacon estimated that 15–20% of his diary was consumed by situations caused by low-empathy clergy, absorbing emotional energy even beyond work hours. The personal cost of such oversight is significant and often unsustainable without institutional support.

1. f. Reflection

For Archdeacons, empathy is not peripheral to oversight but its animating centre. Emotionally intelligent oversight involves clear boundaries, reflective self-awareness, relational attunement and the capacity to discern and respond to the emotional life of clergy and congregations. High-functioning clergy embody these qualities and enable flourishing; low-empathy clergy require careful management, structured support and sometimes transition. Archidiaconal practice, therefore, reveals a crucial insight: empathy is not only a pastoral virtue but a structural necessity. Without it, oversight collapses into bureaucracy or burnout; with it, oversight becomes a ministry of healing, discernment and relational stewardship essential to the health of the Church.

Empathy as Participation in the Compassion of Christ

Within Anglican pastoral theology, the ministry of the cure of souls has long been understood as a participation in the compassionate ministry of Christ: the Good Shepherd who knows his sheep, gathers the lost and heals the wounded. Empathy, in this sense, is not merely a psychological skill but a Christological participation: a sharing in the divine attentiveness by which God regards, accompanies and restores human beings. The Archdeacons interviewed repeatedly affirmed that emotionally intelligent clergy are those who convey a sense of being with people: ‘attending’, ‘not being judgemental’ and ‘entering into somebody’s world’.

These descriptions resonate strongly with the New Testament depiction of Jesus, who was ‘moved with compassion’ (splagchnizomai, e.g., Lk 10. 33) and whose ministry is marked by deep emotional responsiveness to the suffering, confusion and longing of others (Lk 7. 13; Mt 9. 36; 14. 14; and the Father for his lost son in Lk 15. 20). Discussing the Prologue of John’s Gospel, David Ford (Reference Ford2019) states that ‘God is seen as free to express fully who God is, in full self-giving as a particular human being, and as doing so in Jesus, the Word become flesh’ (p. 214), and proceeds to ask, ‘How might we follow the gaze of one who looks in compassion on our world, and calls us to love as he loves?’ (p. 221).

The compassion of Christ is the self-giving attentiveness through which God’s reconciling love is mediated in human form. Empathy, therefore, becomes a mode of discipleship: clergy participate in Christ’s compassionate ministry when they attend carefully to the emotional and spiritual lives of those entrusted to their care. When Archdeacons praise clergy who ‘bring the best out of people’ or ‘create trust’, they are describing the fruits of a ministry shaped by the compassion of Christ.

This theological framing suggests that empathy is more than affective resonance. It is a sacramental posture, an embodied sign of Christ’s ongoing presence in his Church. The empathic priest mediates Christ’s compassion not through dramatic acts but through the steady, patient and humble practices of pastoral attention. However, this requires some theological reflection, for, as Frances Young (Reference Young2013) points out, ‘compassion requires a love which transcends anxiety, is calm and calming’. This quality of God, divine apatheia, is unhurt by the other’s suffering, yet the one who attends and is alongside affirms ‘God’s goodness, justice, love and providential care’ (p. 383).

The Priest as One Who Listens to God and to God’s People (‘Dual Listening’)

Several Archdeacons employed a striking phrase to describe emotionally intelligent clergy: they practice ‘dual listening’. They listen simultaneously to God and to the person before them, allowing pastoral judgement to emerge from the intersection of divine prompting and human presence. Clergy serve in an ‘ambiguous space between the sacred and the secular’ (Emslie Reference Emslie2025a), requiring them to attend simultaneously to relationships with others, with God and with themselves (Turcan Reference Turcan2025). This is a deeply Anglican notion, rooted in the conviction that pastoral ministry requires discernment of the Holy Spirit’s activity within the concrete realities of parish life (Emslie Reference Emslie2025b; Norrington and Douglas-Smith Reference Norrington and Douglas-Smith2025). Empathy, in this view, is not an alternative to spiritual attentiveness but its necessary correlate. To listen to God without listening to people risks abstraction or spiritualized avoidance; to listen to people without listening to God risks sentimentality or functional secularism. Empathy integrates these two forms of listening. It enables the priest to attend to the often-fragile emotional signals by which parishioners communicate their needs, fears and hopes, and to discern within them the whispers of grace.

This dual-listening posture reflects the incarnational logic of Anglican ministry: God meets people not in disembodied truths but in the texture of their lived experience. The emotionally intelligent priest recognizes that the Spirit’s movements are often subtle, mediated through the hesitations of a grieving widow, the anxiety of a churchwarden in conflict or the guarded vulnerability of a teenager exploring faith. Empathy becomes a hermeneutical tool, a way of interpreting both the emotional world of the parishioner and the prompting of the Spirit within that encounter.

Kenosis, Humility and Relational Holiness

Anglican practical theology frequently draws on the Pauline notion of kenosis, the self-emptying of Christ (Philippians 2. 5-11), as a paradigm for pastoral leadership (Ramsey Reference Ramsey and Ramsey1985; MacKinnon Reference MacKinnon and MacKinnon1987; Carr Reference Carr and Carr1989; Chapman Reference Chapman2005). Empathy contributes to kenosis by facilitating a form of self-displacement: the temporary bracketing of one’s own needs, assumptions and emotional reactions in order to attend fully to the reality of another. This is not self-erasure but humble presence, a willingness to let the other’s story, rather than the minister’s agenda, take precedence. Coakley (Reference Coakley and Hampson1996) tempers this from a feminist perspective, arguing that ‘self-emptying is not a negation of self, but the place of the self’s transformation and expansion into God’ (p. 108). MacKinnon (Reference MacKinnon, Sykes and Clayton1972) argued for the undergirding of Christology in all conceptualizations of kenosis, for ‘it is the notion of kenosis which more than any other single notion points to the deepest sense of the mystery of the Incarnation’ (p. 251), which means, for the minister and the people of God, participating in the reality of Christ’s presence and ongoing ministry. Archdeacons often praised clergy who were ‘self-controlled’, ‘non-anxious’ and capable of listening without imposing themselves. These qualities signal not weakness but spiritual maturity. They reflect a humility that resists defensiveness, seeks understanding before judgement and remains open to being changed by the pastoral encounter. In the cure of souls, humility is not the opposite of confidence but the ground from which wise pastoral authority emerges.

Empathy also contributes to what may be termed relational holiness – the sanctification of relationships through practices of attentiveness, forgiveness, mutuality and compassion (cf Vignoles et al. Reference Vignoles, Chryssochoou and Breakwell2004; Emslie Reference Emslie2025b). Holiness, in this sense, is not an escape from human intimacy but its transfiguration. When Archdeacons speak of emotionally intelligent clergy as those who can ‘see when someone is struggling’, ‘avoid being judgmental’ or ‘really listen’, they are describing ministers who embody relational holiness in the day-to-day fabric of parish life. Conversely, low-empathy clergy, those who blame others, miss emotional cues, or leave ‘a trail of emotional wreckage’, undermine relational holiness, eroding the trust, stability and mutual regard upon which congregational health depends. Theologically, such patterns represent not simply pastoral weakness but a failure to embody the relational character of the gospel itself.

Empathy thus functions as a virtue of ecclesial communion. It creates the conditions for shared discernment, collaborative mission and mutual upbuilding. In its absence, relationships become transactional or adversarial; in its presence, they become sites of grace.

Reflection

Empathy, when viewed through the lens of Anglican theology, emerges as a central dimension of the cure of souls. It is rooted in attentiveness, self-knowledge and relational presence. Thereby, it is participation in the compassion of Christ, a mode of dual listening that holds together attentiveness to God and neighbour, and a practice of kenosis and relational holiness that reflects the shape of Christ’s own ministry. Archdeacons, in their testimony, intuitively grasp this theological truth: emotionally intelligent clergy are not simply efficient or likeable, rather they are those who minister in a way that incarnates divine compassion. Empathy, therefore, is not a therapeutic technique but a dimension of pastoral attentiveness shaped by theological commitments and ecclesial practices. Neither is it an adjunct to pastoral practice, but an essential expression of the gospel within the life of the Church.

Selection: Discerning Capacity for Emotional Reflexivity

Archdeacons repeatedly distinguished between clergy who lacked empathic sensitivity and those who lacked the capacity or willingness to reflect on their emotional impact upon others. This distinction is critical. Empathy, as understood in both psychological and theological literature, is not a fixed personality trait but a developable capacity shaped by reflexivity, relational openness and emotional regulation (Teding van Berkhout and Malouff Reference Berkhout van Teding and Malouff2016; Wu et al. Reference Wu, Yao, Lu, Zhou, Kong and Hu2024). The challenge for selection, therefore, is not to identify candidates who already embody mature empathy, but to discern those who demonstrate the conditions under which such capacity can be formed.

Current selection processes already attend to personal maturity and relational aptitude, yet the archidiaconal evidence suggests that these assessments may benefit from greater empirical and methodological precision. Studies of emotional intelligence and pastoral functioning indicate that self-report measures alone are unreliable indicators of relational competence (Núñez et al. Reference Núñez, -HerreraVillacura, Celedón, Ulloa, Ramos, Spencer and Fresno2022). More informative are structured behavioural interviews that invite candidates to narrate experiences of relational strain, feedback or emotional failure, and to reflect on how these experiences were understood and integrated (Blackman Reference Blackman, Goldstein, Pulakos, Passmore and Semedo2017).

Such approaches align well with Anglican traditions of vocational discernment, which prioritize attentiveness, teachability and humility over performative confidence. They also respond directly to Archdeacons’ observations that clergy who struggle most in ministry are often those who externalize blame, resist feedback or lack insight into their emotional responses. Selection processes that attend explicitly to emotional reflexivity may, therefore, reduce later pastoral strain without narrowing the Church’s understanding of vocation.

Formation: Emotional Intelligence under Conditions of Constraint

The implications for formation become clearer when archidiaconal testimony is read alongside evidence from Periodic External Reviews (Durham University 2025) of Theological Education Institutions (Church of England 2025). Recent PERs consistently commend the quality of community life, pastoral support and reflective practice within initial ministerial education (e.g., Cranmer 2024; Ripon 2024; Sarum 2024; Eastern Region Ministry Training Course 2025). Students are frequently described as developing resilience, collaborative capacity and professional relational boundaries (e.g., St Augustine 2023; St Mellitus 2023; St Hild 2025). These evaluative judgements map closely onto the dimensions of emotional intelligence identified in psychological research and assumed in archidiaconal expectations.

At the same time, PERs reveal a persistent structural ambiguity. Emotional and relational competencies are typically treated as outcomes of formation rather than as explicit pedagogical aims. Empathy, emotional regulation and self-awareness are assumed to emerge through participation in community, engagement in placements and exposure to good practice. While such immersion is undoubtedly formative, it relies on an implicit model of emotional learning that is increasingly strained by the realities of contemporary training pathways.

For most ordinands, initial theological education now takes place over two years (or three for those under thirty), within programmes already dense with academic, liturgical, pastoral and missional requirements. PERs themselves acknowledge the intensity of these pathways and commend institutions for achieving substantial outcomes within a limited time. Yet compressed formation inevitably limits opportunities for the slow, iterative work through which emotional patterns are recognized, tested and reshaped. In such contexts, reliance on implicit formation risks leaving significant aspects of emotional development under-articulated and unevenly supported (Lu Reference Lu2021; Magezi and Madimutsa Reference Magezi and Madimutsa2023).

This tension is particularly evident in relation to placements. PERs consistently affirm the value of placement learning in integrating theory and practice, yet research suggests that experiential learning is emotionally formative only when accompanied by structured reflection and skilled supervision (Szilagyi et al. Reference Szilagyi, Palmer, Galchutt, Langstraat and Fitchett2025). Without such scaffolding, placements may reinforce existing emotional habits rather than foster new capacities. Archdeacons’ accounts of clergy who reproduce anxious, avoidant or controlling relational patterns encountered earlier in ministry align with this evidence and underscore the limits of unstructured experiential formation.

Importantly, PER recommendations for development frequently concern precisely those areas most strongly associated with emotional intelligence: consistency of reflective practice, clarity of formational outcomes and systematic attention to professional boundaries. While framed in institutional rather than psychological terms, these recommendations point to a shared concern about the translation of formational values into durable ministerial dispositions.

Reframing Formation: From Implicit Expectation to Intentional Practice

If empathy is both vocationally essential and developmentally contingent, then formation must move beyond assuming its emergence and towards intentionally cultivating it. Archdeacons consistently noted that clergy who grow in empathic capacity are those who engage seriously in reflective practice, supervision and spiritual discipline. Formation environments must therefore support these practices not as optional enrichments but as integral to ministerial preparation.

First, reflective practice should be embedded systematically within curricula. Supervised theological reflection and structured pastoral case discussion enable ordinands to attend to their own emotional responses, relational assumptions and patterns of reactivity. Such practices cultivate the interpretative skills necessary for navigating the emotional complexity of parish ministry (Kondrath Reference Kondrath2005; Gubi Reference Gubi2019).

Second, explicit attention to emotional literacy and interpersonal dynamics is warranted. Teaching that addresses emotional recognition, conflict navigation, group processes and trauma-informed pastoral care equips clergy with conceptual and practical resources for empathic engagement (Sorin Reference Sorin and Bhatnagar2009; Herrington et al. Reference Herrington, Taylor and Creech2021). Archdeacons’ descriptions of clergy who appear blunt, rigid or relationally unaware indicate the cost of leaving such learning implicit.

Third, contemplative formation merits renewed emphasis. Practices rooted in the contemplative tradition foster emotional integration, attentiveness and stability of presence (Andrei Reference Andrei2023; Woodbury-Moore Reference Woodbury-Moore2024). Archdeacons frequently associated empathic capacity with habits of prayerful attentiveness, suggesting that emotional intelligence in ministry is shaped not only by technique but by sustained spiritual discipline.

Oversight: Supporting Growth and Addressing Persistent Deficits

The implications for oversight follow directly. Archdeacons described the disproportionate time and emotional labour required to manage clergy with persistent empathic deficits, sometimes occupying a substantial proportion of their working week. Research suggests that while empathic capacity can be enhanced through targeted intervention, outcomes vary considerably depending on individual and contextual factors (Wu et al. Reference Wu, Yao, Lu, Zhou, Kong and Hu2024). Oversight responses must therefore be differentiated and realistic.

Structured supervision emerges as a critical resource. Clergy with limited emotional awareness benefit from regular, skilled supervision that identifies relational blind spots and supports reflective growth (Ravalier et al. Reference Ravalier, Wegrzynek, Mitchell, McGowan, Mcfadden and Bald2023). In some cases, targeted coaching in communication and conflict management may be appropriate, with evidence indicating that such interventions can improve relational functioning and reduce pastoral conflict (Tjernæs et al. Reference Tjernæs, Ringnes and Stålsett2024).

Deployment decisions also warrant attention. Empirical studies consistently demonstrate that clergy well-being and effectiveness are shaped by person–context fit (Rosales et al. Reference Rosales, Fung and Lee2021; Village Reference Village2024). Aligning clergy capacities with parish demands reflects both pastoral care and organizational responsibility, consistent with the CofE’s Covenant for Clergy Care and Wellbeing (Church of England 2020).

Where empathic deficits persist and cause recurrent harm, early intervention and managed transitions may be necessary. Prolonged relational strain is associated with emotional exhaustion and diminished pastoral effectiveness (Barnard and Curry Reference Barnard and Curry2012; Hydinger et al. Reference Hydinger, Wu, Captari and Sandage2024). In such cases, decisive action may serve not only institutional interests but the well-being of clergy and congregations alike.

Concluding Integration

Taken together, the evidence presented through this study suggests that empathy and emotional intelligence occupy a critical yet under-articulated place within the CofE’s ministerial ecology. Archdeacons, inspectors and researchers converge in recognizing their importance, even when employing different vocabularies. The challenge is not a lack of awareness but a lack of alignment between expectation, formation and support. While the study is located within the Church of England and is context-specific to the archidiaconal role, the dynamics explored here resonate with wider Anglican patterns of oversight and ministerial formation. The study does not call for the psychologization of ministry, but for a more explicit theological and institutional account of the emotional capacities through which priestly vocation is exercised. Selection, formation and oversight are interdependent processes rather than discrete stages through which such capacities are discerned, shaped and sustained. Attending seriously to empathy at each stage may not resolve all the pressures facing clergy, but it offers a more coherent and humane framework within which those pressures can be borne.