The quality of life,meaning in life,positive orientation to life and gratitude of Catholic seminarians in Poland: A comparative analysis

Abstract

The aim of the article is to examine differences in the quality of life (the psychophysical, psychosocial, personal, and metaphysical spheres) as well as gratitude, meaning in life and positive orientation to life between diocesan and religious seminarians and secular students. The influence of religiosity on quality of life and subjective well-being is the subject of numerous studies, but seminarians (i.e. people preparing to be priests) have rarely been included in them. The present research was carried out for the first time with a group of diocesan and religious seminarians in Poland and secular students. The study involved 296 participants—98 diocesan seminarians, 96 religious seminarians and 102 secular students in the control group. Results showed significant differences in the quality of life. Religious and diocesan seminarians scored higher than the control group members in the psychophysical, personal, psychosocial and metaphysical spheres. In addition, in terms of gratitude, and the presence of meaning in life, religious and diocesan seminarians achieved higher scores than the control group but lower scores in searching for the meaning in life. There were no significant differences between diocesan and religious seminarians except that only diocesan seminarians obtained significantly higher scores on positive orientation to life than the control group. Overall, results support the idea that seminarians have higher quality of life and subjective well-being than secular students. Research implications are discussed.

Keywords

Catholic seminarians gratitude meaning positive orientation to life the quality of life

Introduction

Research conducted in the psychology of religion and spirituality and positive psychology has shown that religiosity and spirituality positively correlate with generalized subjective well-being, quality of life and its selected indicators: meaning in life, sense of internal locus of control, optimism, positive self-esteem, gratitude, pro-social sensitivity and pro-social behaviour (Abdel-Khalek, 2019; Chamberlain & Zika, 1992; Ellison, 1991; Koenig et al., 2012; Vilani et al., 2019). Although these issues were widely studied in various social groups, young seminarians who were preparing for the priesthood were extremely rarely studied. There are two groups of seminarians: diocesan and religious seminarians. This is due to the fact that in Roman Catholicism since the fourth century, two types of clergy have been distinguished: diocesan and religious. The diocesan clergy usually staff local parishes and the office of local dioceses, and these priests work within the limits of a local diocese under the jurisdiction of its bishop. Priests from religious orders have provided special services like education, social welfare, itinerant preaching and mission activity. Religious priests work usually within the limits of their local provinces under the jurisdiction of its higher superiors (provincials). Research has shown (Gannon, 1979) that this dual, internal, structure of catholic priesthood has consequences for the formation of the seminarians with regard to different kinds of work satisfactions as priests, personal relations, sense of fulfilment, religious beliefs, priestly identity and commitment stability.

Diocesan and religious seminarians belong to a social group with a postulated higher-than-average level of religiosity and spirituality (Hemrick & Hoge, 1991; Hoge, 2002; Rossetti, 2015; Sunardi, 2014). Well-being literature indicates that a combination of psychological and spiritual factors contributes to priests’ happiness. Based on the broader literature relating religiosity to well-being, it can be assumed that seminarians have a higher quality of life. Indeed, studies on the state of happiness, contentment, low stress level, general well-being, physical and mental health and quality of life of seminarians and Catholic priests in the United States have shown that they belong to a social group with one of the highest well-being indicators (sense of the quality of life) in the country (Hemrick & Hoge, 1991; Hoge, 2002; Rossetti, 2015). In addition to the American clergy group, the literature on the subject lacks research describing psychological well-being and its correlates in culturally different groups of seminarians.

Poland is among the countries with the highest number of Roman Catholic clergy and candidates preparing for ordination. According to data from the Central Statistical Office of Poland (2018), in Poland there are 30,807 Roman Catholic priests and 3015 seminarians studying in 45 diocesan seminaries and religious seminaries. From a sociological point of view, this is a significant social group (Baniak, 2017, 2019), for which we have a minimal amount of published scientific data. Most of the research on Polish Roman Catholic clergy is conducted in the field of sociology of religion and focuses on the social identity of priests, their functioning in the structures of the institutional church, reasons for resigning from the priesthood, life in celibacy and the attitudes of lay people towards the clergy (Baniak, 2017, 2019; Tomaszewska, 2014). Psychological research in a group of active priests (Pietkiewicz & Bachryj, 2016) and former priests (Pietkiewicz, 2016) is usually of a qualitative nature, and studies that are carried out among seminarians often relate to the early stages of their education and are usually of a one-off and clinical nature. These studies usually include assessing the personality of priesthood candidates and dealing with crises. With few exceptions (Soiński, 2005, 2008, 2009a, 2009b, 2016), these studies are conducted for the internal use of church institutions and are usually not published in scientific literature.

Seminarians (i.e. candidates for diocesan and religious priesthood in the Catholic Church) are adult men who graduated from high school and undertook a 6-year period of philosophical and theological studies at the seminary. Unlike diocesan seminarians, candidates for religious clergy have a longer period of formation before becoming ordained priests. The differences between these two distinct forms of preparation for the priesthood are significant in psychological and sociological research conducted in this social group and concern the importance of environmental and cognitive factors, personality traits, values and religious orientation (Gannon, 1979; Sunardi, 2015).

Theoretical background of the presented research: quality of life

In the few studies on the well-being of priests and seminarians, quality of life refers to their state of happiness, contentment, low levels of distress, overall good physical and mental health and outlook and spiritual fulfilment (Sunardi, 2015). Taking these into account, our research was based on Straś-Romanowska’s (1992) concept of the quality of life, which is described as a multidimensional phenomenon consisting of four spheres of human life: biological, social, personal and metaphysical. In presenting the personalistic-existential model of the quality of life, Straś-Romanowska (1992) emphasized the harmoniousness of the arrangement of human personal spheres. The subject and metaphysical sphere are included in the spiritual dimension of the individual, whereas the psychophysical and psychosocial spheres belong to the naturalistic dimension. The quality of life in the psychophysical domain concerns the corporeal and appetitive sphere of the human being; it depends on biological, genetically determined mechanisms. At the level of emotions, it manifests itself as a feeling of tension or relief. The indicators of good quality of life in this dimension are satisfaction, the experience of pleasure, good physical well-being and the ability to relax and rest. The function of this sphere is to preserve health and life. The quality of life in the psychosocial domain depends on the satisfaction of needs such as the sense of security, affiliation, respect, acceptance and social identity. High subjective quality of life in this dimension means social adjustment, a sense of being the right person in the right place in a given community, the ability to establish and maintain relationships with other people and the experience of a sense of acceptance and self-worth. The quality of life in the personal domain is understood as a sense of personal identity, individuality and freedom as well as activity and self-fulfilment. Individuals scoring high on a given dimension take responsibility for their own life and decisions; they pursue their personal goals, interests and passions. The quality of life in the metaphysical domain is understood as a sense of deeper meaning in one’s life and perceiving the events in one’s life as elements of a larger meaningful whole. It is associated with the endorsement and pursuit of values such as good, truth, beauty and love. It is the domain of spirituality, which is identified (among other things) with religious experience. Individuals scoring high on this dimension experience their existence as transcending their self.

The personalistic-existential model of the quality of life (Straś-Romanowska, 1992) is similar to other multidimensional constructs of ‘quality of life’ that includes existential well-being, happiness, life satisfaction, religious satisfaction and negative affect (reverse-scored) which are used in the empirical research in the psychology of religion and spirituality (Hood et al., 2018). For example, Haas (1999) describes the quality of life as a multidimensional assessment of the current living conditions by the individual in the context of the culture in which he lives and professed values. According to her, this is a subjective sense of well-being, including physical, mental, social and spiritual dimensions. This concept is close to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) approach to quality of life, which distinguishes areas of existence related to the quality of life: physical, psychical dimension (including self-esteem, negative and positive emotions), independence (regarding mobility and ability to work), social relations, environment (including home environment, job satisfaction, health care) and spiritual dimension (including religious beliefs and worldview).

The quality of life in seminarians and generally in the clergy is not frequently a subject of psychological research. What we know from previous studies (Hemrick & Hoge, 1991; Hoge, 2002) devoted to issues such as quality of life in Catholic seminarians and priests in the United States is that seminarians are part of a social group with one of the highest levels of well-being in the country. It may be related to the intrinsic religious orientation as a factor increasing the quality of life. Studies show that this type of religious orientation is associated with quality of life and well-being in different populations (García-Alandete & Bernabé-Valero, 2013; Maltby et al., 1999; Saleem & Saleem, 2016). As regard to religious professionals, studies have indeed found that seminarians tend to have a stronger intrinsic religious orientation and lower extrinsic one than other groups (Mahalik & Lagan, 2001; Reinert & Bloomingdale, 2000). Empirical evidence indicated that intrinsic religiosity is a reliable measure of religious commitment (Donahue, 1985) and also of commitment to the priesthood (Zondag, 2001). Consistent with their high intrinsic religious orientation, seminarians have higher scores on spiritual support, spiritual openness and God consciousness, relative to other college students (Reinert & Bloomingdale, 2000). The presented research addresses these issues in relation to diocesan and religious seminarians in Poland. Based on the above research, it can be expected that seminarians have a higher quality of life than secular students.

Meaning in life, positive orientation to life and gratitude as indicators of quality of life

Viktor Frankl (2018) and existential psychologists and psychotherapists following his ideas believe that meaning in life is a fundamental factor in human existence (Batthyany & Russo-Netzer, 2014; Russo-Netzer et al., 2016). It can be discovered and built, according to Frankl (1963) in three dimensions: creating (art and science), experiencing (intimacy and love) and attitudes towards life. Emmons (2005) defines the meaning of life as the pursuit of important personal goals in combination with values whose development allows a sense of greater meaning, which in turn determines the quality of human life. He distinguishes four spaces of sense to which he belongs: work/achievements, intimacy/relationship, spirituality/religiosity and auto-transcendence. Empirical research supports the notion that religion is associated with a sense of meaning in life in different ways during the lifespan development (Bailey et al., 2016; Emmons & Schnitker, 2013; Kimball et al., 2016; Mattis, 2002). Steger et al. (2008) emphasize the need to differentiate time perspective in studies on the presence of meaning in life and the search for that meaning. What is important is the awareness of having a goal in the present and the need to pursue it in the future. The latter dimension of meaning in life (i.e. the search for meaning) is defined as activity involving constant effort, marked by perseverance and intensity in establishing or expanding knowledge about the significance of one’s life (Steger et al., 2008, p. 200). These two dimensions of time have a slightly different meaning for human life, but they are complementary. They might also be two distinct categories, independent of each other. An individual might have a high level of presence of meaning in life and at the same time a low level of searching for meaning. According to Steger, a person can have a high level of presence of meaning in life and a high level of searching for this meaning (Steger et al., 2006). This is due to the fact that, having meaning in life already (to a greater extent in some domains than in others), an individual constantly looks for it, develops and enhances its original sources, and discovers new ones. There might also be people who have a low level of presence of meaning in life and at the same time a high level of searching for it (Cohen & Cairns, 2012). There does not have to be a positive or negative correlation between these two dimensions, such as ‘I am looking for meaning because I don’t have it’ or ‘I am not looking for meaning because I already have it’. Steger observed that the dimension of searching for meaning in life was less strongly correlated with human well-being than the dimension of its presence (Steger et al., 2011).

More and more studies confirm the positive relationship of the presence of meaning in life with quality of life and well-being (Ryff, 1989; Shek, 1992). The presence of meaning in life is strongly correlated with psychological well-being and satisfaction with life (Krok, 2012). The research also concerned the relationship between the search for and presence of meaning in life and religiosity (Martos et al., 2010; Park, 2005, 2010). On this basis, it can be expected that seminarians as a religiously engaged group may have a higher presence of meaning and lower search for meaning in life than their peers – secular students.

The concept of positive orientation to life is increasingly used in research on psychological correlates of quality of life and mental well-being. In accordance with the approach proposed by Caprara, this concept means a personality trait conditioning the tendency to positively perceive, assess and receive life experiences by the individual (Caprara, 2009). It is assumed that the components of positive orientation are self-esteem, optimism and life satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2010). A high level of positive orientation coincides with more frequent experiences of positive emotional states, better quality of interpersonal relationships, higher rates of social adaptation and a sense of self-efficacy (Alessandri et al., 2012; Caprara et al., 2010, 2019). Data from studies on positive orientation indicate that it is a variable with a strong genetic basis and is characterized by high stability during life (Caprara et al., 2009). Positive orientation is treated as independent from the Big Five as an additional personality dimension with a complex character. Based on research on well-being, self-esteem and positive emotions, it can be expected that positive orientation is higher in the group of seminarians as more religiously committed than in the group of secular students (Abdel-Khalek, 2019; Koenig et al., 2012; Vilani et al., 2019).

In psychology, gratitude is understood as an emotional response to a gift and is sometimes placed next to hope, humility, awe and respect among the so-called ‘Sacred’ emotions or attitudes (Emmons, 2005). Studies show that gratitude has a significant impact on subjective well-being and is associated with many positive psychological states, including compassion, generosity, altruism, friendship, openness, cooperation, giving emotional support and trust as well as physical health (Algoe, 2012; Algoe & Way, 2014; Davis et al., 2016; Emmons & McCullough, 2003; Krause et al., 2015; Watkins, 2014; Wood et al., 2010). People who are grateful have a general sense of abundance, appreciate simple everyday pleasures and see and appreciate the contribution of others to their well-being. They are able to distance themselves from their material goods, judge others less based on what they possess, are less jealous and are more available to help and share their goods with others. Those who have a high level of gratitude have a broader view of the world, experience life as a gift and undergo it more consciously. They are open to new experiences, enjoy greater optimism and hope, have more vitality and life satisfaction, more often experience success in life and are easier to adapt to new conditions because they have more resistance to stressful situations and are easier to cope with them (Kossakowska & Kwiatek, 2014). Research results show that religiously motivated gratitude is a stronger predictor of psychological well-being than general gratitude, but only among those who were more religiously committed (Rosmarin et al., 2011). It is not known whether religious people are more grateful by definition, but research results confirm that gratitude as an attitude in life appears most often among those who consider themselves to be religious or spiritual (Hood et al., 2018). Therefore, people with a high level of religiosity are more likely to express gratitude, and a high level of gratitude is associated with their life satisfaction (Kossakowska & Kwiatek, 2014) and with the fact that gratitude is one of the most common emotions in the life of Catholic clerics and nuns (Samuels & Lester, 1985) and results from their relationship with God. Besides, gratitude is also associated with prayer frequency (Lambert et al., 2009) and religious involvement in general (Krause & Ellison, 2009). For this reason, we can expect greater gratitude from seminarians. This is in line with previous findings, where it has been shown that people who achieve higher religious scores (including seminarians) recognize the effect of divinity on their well-being, which triggers gratitude (Watkins et al., 2003). In addition, gratitude as a part of everyday mood positively correlates with various measures of religiosity, including interest in religion, religious involvement and internal religious orientation (McCullough et al., 2002). It was also noted that gratitude is linked to the frequency of prayer (Lambert et al., 2009), which is more common in the life of seminarians than their secular peers and is more important to them. This understanding of gratitude and its correlates allows for treating gratitude as an important indicator of the quality of life.

In view of the above data, we believe that the advantage of the present article is the observation of a large group consisting of both diocesan and religious seminarians as well as focusing on a global assessment of their quality of life including positive orientation, meaning in life, gratitude and quality of life in relation to the control group. The research problem was addressed with two main questions: (1) Are there differences in the quality of life in the psychophysical, psychosocial, personal and metaphysical spheres between diocesan and religious seminarians and the control group? (2) Are there significant differences between diocesan and religious seminarians and the control group in gratitude, positive orientation, the presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life? The first research hypothesis assumes that Polish seminarians differ in their quality of life in the psychophysical, psychosocial, personal and metaphysical spheres from age-matched secular students. The second hypothesis assumes that Polish seminarians differ in positive orientation to life, presence of meaning in life and gratitude from age-matched secular students. According to the works cited above, these differences are favourable for seminarians. An additional research topic is to identify possible differences in the variables analysed between diocesan and religious seminarians. No predictions were made for this question. It is difficult to predict the differences in measured variables between seminar types. Moreover, no studies are comparing these two groups in terms of quality of life and its indicators. Therefore, the research question about differences in this area is exploratory.

Method

Participants

The study involved 296 participants—98 diocesan seminarians, 96 religious seminarians and 102 students (only men) of Krakow universities who formed a control group. The average age in the sample of diocesan seminarians was 22.8 years (range = 19–28; SD = 2.02), while the average age in the sample of religious seminarians was 25.7 years (range = 19–31; SD = 2.96). In the control group, the average age was 22.2 years (range = 20–38). Two people did not indicate their age. Analysis of variance carried out on the three groups revealed significant differences in age between religious and diocesan seminarians, F(2, 293) = 42.153, p < .001.

Procedure

Data were collected from seminarians, from four diocesan seminaries and six religious seminaries in Poland in 2016–2017. The research was conducted with the consent of the rectors of seminars and the voluntary consent of the seminarians. Participants were informed and assured of anonymity. The study was conducted in groups in the lecture hall at the seminar with a prior appointment. Sets of questionnaires were distributed by the investigators who were present during their completion. Seminary superiors were not present during the study. When the participant finished the study, he put away a set of questionnaires in a box specially prepared by the researchers to increase the sense of anonymity and comfort. The study time lasted from about 45 to 70 min. Data on the control group came from students of Krakow universities. The research was carried out as part of the classes and was voluntary and anonymous. The students were asked by the researchers to take part in the research during their classes; if someone refused, they could leave the class earlier.

Measures

Questionnaire of Life Quality

To determine the psychological quality of life, the Questionnaire of Life Quality by Straś-Romanowska et al. (2004) was used. The questionnaire is an operationalization of the concept of the personalistic-existential model of the quality of life by Straś-Romanowska, which is understood as a specific way of life with accompanying feelings (Straś-Romanowska et al., 2004; Straś-Romanowska & Frąckowiak, 2007). The questionnaire covers four basic dimensions of well-being: psychophysical, psychosocial, personal and metaphysical. The Questionnaire of Life Quality consists of 60 statements, 15 for each dimension of well-being. Respondents reply to statements on a 4-point scale from ‘I strongly disagree’ to ‘I strongly agree’. The answer to each item is a maximum of 4 points. In the study, depending on the dimensions described, it is possible to calculate four indicators of the quality of life (psychophysical, psychosocial, personal and metaphysical) and a fifth indicator of the general quality of life, which is calculated as the sum of points from all four dimensions. The questionnaire has a detailed validation study and meets the requirements of psychometric goodness, which gives the basis for using this tool in research (Frąckowiak, 2012; Straś-Romanowska et al., 2004).

The P Scale (Positivity Scale; Caprara et al., 2012): The Polish version of the P Scale was used in the research to measure positive orientation. The scale is a self-report tool containing eight diagnostic statements assessed by the examined person using a 5-point scale. This version of P Scale has a one-factor structure. The tool shows satisfactory indicators of stability, internal consistency and validity independent of socio-cultural differences in the studied populations (Łaguna et al., 2011).

The Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ) (Steger et al., 2006) consists of 10 questions that can be answered on a 7-point Likert-type scale (from ‘absolute untruth’ to ‘absolute truth’). The questionnaire consists of two subscales: the presence of meaning in life (Presence, MLQ-P) and sense seeking (Search, MLQ-S). The MLQ questionnaire asks questions about three dimensions (meaning, purpose and significance) in life from two time perspectives (present and future). In the present perspective, the MLQ-P subscale measures the declared meaning obtained in life, particularly, understanding the significance of meaning in life (MLQ1), having a clearly defined life goal (MLQ4), a sense of knowing what makes life make sense (MLQ5), awareness of one’s satisfying goal in life (MLQ6) and negating the fact that one’s life has no goal (MLQ9). In the future perspective, the MLQ-S subscale measures the need for a person to search for and constantly give meaning and purpose in life. This subscale measures the following: declaring the need to search for sense (MLQ2), purpose (MLQ3), mission (MLQ8), meaning (MLQ10) and the need to give weight to one’s own life (MLQ7). A confirmatory analysis was performed on the original MLQ version, which confirmed the two-factor model of the questionnaire, consisting of 10 items with a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value of 0.09. Reliability analysis also confirmed the internal compatibility of the original MLQ version; Cronbach’s alpha was .86 for the MLQ-P subscale and .87 for the MLQ-S subscale. For the Polish version, Cronbach’s alpha as an indicator of reliability of the questionnaire for 10 test items was .79. For the subscale ‘presence of meaning in life’, Cronbach’s alpha was .86, and for the subscale ‘search for meaning in life’, it was .72 (Kossakowska et al., 2013).

Gratitude Questionnaire 6 (GQ-6) (McCullough et al., 2002) consists of six statements and assessments (e.g. ‘there are many things in my life that I am grateful for’) to which participants respond on the 7-point Likert-type scale. A confirmatory analysis of the original GQ-6 questionnaire showed a satisfactory fit to a one-factor model. The internal coherence measured by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.82. A confirmatory analysis of the Polish version of the questionnaire confirmed the univariate structure of the questionnaire to an average satisfactory degree (RMSEA = 0.085). The reliability analysis of the GQ-6 scale using Cronbach’s alpha for all test items was .71. This is quite low compared to the English (.82) and Taiwanese (.80) versions, but still satisfactory (Kossakowska & Kwiatek, 2014).

Statistical analyses

From the control group, 18 respondents (16%) did not complete the entire Questionnaire of Life Quality. This group also contained missing data: from the presence of and search for meaning in life, seven participants each; from positive orientation, eight participants; and from gratitude, three participants. The results of these study participants were removed from the analysis of these variables. In the diocesan seminarian group, the lack of data concerned gratitude (one case, 1%) and positive orientation to life (four cases, 4%). There was no lack of data among religious seminarians. The sample size, means, standard deviations, minimum and maximum values for all subjects are presented in Table 1. Data scanning revealed four outliers in the group of religious seminarians, two for the presence of meaning in life and two for gratitude. Outliers were detected using a box plot and the criterion of three standard deviations. Observations were removed from the analysis if their value exceeded three standard deviations from the mean (Table 2).

Table 1.

Means and standard deviations for the measured variables.

	N	M	SD	Min	Max
Quality of life in the psychophysical sphere	278	47.1	6.38	22	60
Quality of life in the psychosocial sphere	278	46.8	5.57	26	59
Quality of life in the personal sphere	278	48	5.88	26	60
Quality of life in the metaphysical sphere	278	51.7	6.02	28	60
A general quality of life	278	193.5	20.21	104	229
Gratitude	290	34.3	5.59	14	42
The presence of meaning in life	287	27.6	7.53	5	35
The search for meaning in life	289	19.2	8.09	5	35
Positive orientation	284	31.6	4.45	17	40

Table 2.

Comparison of diocesan and religious seminarians with secular students in the spheres of quality of life: psychophysical sphere, psychosocial sphere, personal sphere and metaphysical sphere.

Dependent variables	Group	n	M	SD	p value
Dependent variables	Group	n	M	SD	Religious	Control
Psychophysical sphere	Diocesan	98	49.32	5.5	n.i	<.0001
	Religious	96	48.58	4.96	–	<.0001
	Control	84	42.68	6.63	–	–
Psychosocial sphere	Diocesan	98	47.15	4.49	n.i	<.05
	Religious	96	48.14	4.98	–	.058
	Control	84	44.95	6.79	–	–
Personal sphere	Diocesan	98	50.14	4.58	n.i	<.0001
	Religious	96	49.44	5.17	–	<.0001
	Control	84	43.87	5.93	–	–
Metaphysical sphere	Diocesan	98	53.54	3.82	n.i	<.0001
	Religious	96	54.47	3.38	–	<.0001
	Control	84	46.24	6.92	–	–

Results

Differences in the quality of life between seminarians and controls

To answer the first research question and test the first hypothesis, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was carried out in which the four spheres of quality of life were entered as dependent variables, age as a covariate and group as the independent variable. Age was controlled because differences between diocesan and religious seminarians were observed. Religious seminarians were significantly older. The Bonferroni correction was used for multiple comparisons.

Tests of many variables showed that both belonging to the group (Wilk’s Λ = .599; p < .001; partial η² = .23) and age (Wilk’s Λ = .942; p < .01; partial η² = .058) are important predictors of the quality of life treated as a structure of four variables. The results obtained show that depending on the group, there are significant differences in the four spheres of the quality of life (Table 2). We observed a significant effect of the variable compared groups for the psychophysical sphere (F(2, 274) = 30.7; p < .0001; partial η² = .18), psychosocial sphere (F(2, 274) = 3.93; p < .05; partial η² = .03), personal sphere (F(2, 274) = 32.39; p < .0001; partial η² = .19) and metaphysical sphere (F(2, 274) = 58.59; p < .0001; partial η² = .30).

There were significant differences due to groups in all dimensions. In the psychophysical sphere, people from the control group obtained lower results than seminarians from both groups. A similar pattern was observed in the personal and metaphysical spheres. In the psychosocial sphere, differences occurred only between diocesan seminarians and the control group, while differences between religious seminarians and the control group were significant at the level of tendency (p = .058). Diocesan and religious seminarians obtained higher results than the control group in the psychosocial sphere. There were no differences between diocesan and religious seminarians in all spheres of quality of life.

Differences between seminarians and controls in gratitude, positive orientation to life, the presence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in life

To answer the second research question and test the second hypothesis, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed while controlling the impact of age on the variability of the above variables. Belonging to a group of secular students versus diocesan and religious seminarians was the independent variable. The Bonferroni correction was used in multiple comparisons. The results for gratitude indicated no effect of age. However (with age control), a significant effect of group membership was noted, F(2, 286) = 26.84; p < .0001; partial η² = .16. Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences (p < .001) in gratitude among diocesan seminarians (M = 35.06; SD = 5.17; N = 97) and the control group (M = 31; SD = 6.01; N = 99) and between religious seminarians (M = 37.07; SD = 3.38; N = 94) and the control group (p < .001). There were no differences between diocesan and religious seminarians.

Analogous analyses were performed for positive orientation to life. The results revealed a significant effect of age (F(1, 280) = 5.27; p < .05; partial η² = .018) and belonging to a group (F(2, 280) = 9.25; p < .001; partial η² = .062). Pairwise comparisons showed differences between diocesan seminarians and students from the control group. Seminarians had a significantly higher level of positive orientation (M = 33; SD = 3.75; M = 30.06; SD = 4.75; p < .001). There were no differences between diocesan and religious seminarians or between religious and control groups.

For the presence of meaning in life, there was no significant effect of age. However, the results revealed a significant effect of belonging to a group, F(2, 283) = 144.15; p < .001; partial η² = .51. Pairwise comparisons showed differences between diocesan seminarians (M = 31.39; SD = 3.51; N = 98) and the control group (M = 20; SD = 7.86; N = 95; p < .001) and between religious seminarians (M = 31.25; SD = 3.24; N = 94) and the control group (p < .001). Diocesan and religious seminarians had a higher meaning in life compared to secular students. Similarly, for the search for meaning in life, the effect of age was non-significant, and belonging to a group had a significant effect on the search for meaning in life, F(2, 285) = 18.82; p < .001; partial η² = .012. Pairwise comparisons showed significant differences (p < .001) between diocesan seminarians (M = 17.08; SD = 7.82) and the control group (M = 23.12; SD = 7.22) and between religious seminarians and the control group (M = 17.27; SD = 7.76; p < .001). The need to search for meaning in life was lower for diocesan and religious seminarians than for secular students.

Discussion

The results concerning the first problem confirmed our hypotheses, which predicted higher results in the psychophysical, psychosocial, personal and metaphysical spheres of the quality of life for seminarians compared to students. In comparison with their peers, seminarians (Sunardi, 2014) are characterized by more mature religiosity (more often than secular students, they declare that their religiosity is internally rather than externally motivated). In all spheres of the quality of life, diocesan and religious seminarians received higher scores than secular students, although, in the psychosocial sphere, the difference between religious and secular students was marginally significant (p = .058). The obtained results can be understood as the effect of religious commitment, understanding the decision to enter the seminar in terms of vocation, the consequence of life within institutions and communities that strengthen the identity and identification with specific values, goals and lifestyle, which promotes quality of life in the personal sphere. However, the religious experience of seminarians and understanding their own lives as part of a larger meaningful totality strengthens the quality of the metaphysical sphere. The obtained results also reveal a higher quality of life in the psychosocial sphere among seminarians. According to theory (Straś-Romanowska, 1992), it is the result of satisfying the need for security, belonging, acceptance and social identity. Living in a community of people with a similar system of values in both diocesan and religious seminaries meets these needs to a greater extent than in the case of secular students who are most often connected each other by accidentally meeting in the same field of study. Living in a structured religious community is also conducive to maintaining bonds and experiencing acceptance and self-worth. Similar reasons could also explain the higher score in the psychophysical sphere of seminarians. The seminar provides basic living conditions, meals and an ordered day plan. In the long run, seminarians do not have to make decisions about their profession and do not experience the anxiety associated with looking for a job. Their future in this aspect is more determined than in the case of secular students. This is in line with previous studies mentioned in this article (Rossetti, 2015) indicating that people with a sense of purpose in life (a mission, calling or meaning) live longer; are happier, healthier and more confident; and recover faster after various crises.

The results concerning the second research problem also confirmed our hypothesis. In the case of positive orientation, gratitude and the presence of meaning in life, diocesan seminarians achieved higher results than the control group but lower in the search for meaning in life. In the case of religious seminarians, higher scores were obtained in gratitude and the presence of meaning in life but lower in the search for meaning in life compared to secular students. There were no significant differences between diocesan and religious seminarians.

In the case of positive orientation, the hypothesis was confirmed only for diocesan seminarians, who had a higher level of positive orientation to life than the control group. This effect was not observed in religious seminarians. It is difficult to say whether this result comes from the initially higher level of positive orientation in the group of young people joining diocesan seminaries or if it is related to the specificity of the institution, which – giving a sense of security and predictability of the future – strengthens the individual’s tendency to assess life experiences in a positive way. At the same time, the lack of differences between diocesan and religious seminarians suggests that this is a relatively homogeneous group in terms of positive orientation. The preliminary nature of the present research, and consequently the use of a one-dimensional P Scale, provides data only in terms of the overall level of positive orientation. However, they do not allow for conclusions about differences in the structure of this variable in the studied groups. From the perspective of future analyses, it seems to be reasonable to use more complex measures of positive orientation to life. Taking into account components such as self-esteem, life orientation and life satisfaction should allow for the study of the observed correlation in a multi-faceted way.

The results confirming the predictions about gratitude are consistent with the results of studies showing that in the Polish population, gratitude is associated with a spiritual attitude towards life (Kossakowska & Kwiatek, 2014). The results of our research agree with the previously observed tendency that people who are more religiously involved not only have a greater-than-average (in the population) sense of coherence and social support but also feel more grateful towards God (see Hood et al., 2018; Kossakowska & Kwiatek, 2014). Indeed, higher gratitude among Catholic seminarians may consist of the understanding of calling as a gift from God and the opportunity to live, learn and maintain within the church.

The largest difference was observed in the presence of meaning in life, which is consistent with the findings on the impact of religious and spiritual aspects on the meaning in life (Emmons, 2005; Krok, 2012) and the significance of the meaning in life as a motivational and identity factor in the life of seminarians (Sunardi, 2014). The previous studies have observed (Steger et al., 2011) that the dimension of the search for meaning in life is less correlated with human well-being than the dimension of its presence. Our results suggest that among the measured variables, the meaning in life differentiates seminarians (both diocesan and religious) from secular students (control group). On the other hand, the search for meaning in life of the secular students surveyed is higher than that of seminarians. The effect of a lower presence of meaning in life and a higher search for meaning observed in secular students is consistent with the results regarding the quality of life in this group. The research on students revealed (Miller & Rottinghaus, 2014) that a high level of search for meaning in life positively correlates with the level of anxiety, which in turn might lead to a lower quality of life. In the group of seminarians, we observe a higher quality of life in all spheres, probably precisely because seminarians, through religious involvement and identification with the institution and the community, experience a higher meaning in life than lay students. The decision to enter the seminar indicates that the person identifies with the specific sense of life proposed by the religious institution ( ‘calling’) and therefore is less involved in the search for meaning than a secular student. Greater religious commitment and identification with institution values among seminarians can result in a higher meaning in life and a lower search for meaning in life than in secular students, and therefore, they experience a higher quality of life than their secular peers. This reasoning is confirmed by research (Ryff, 1989; Shek, 1993) indicating a positive relationship between a meaning in life and a quality of life. However, confirmation of this correlation on the sample requires additional research.

The aim of the research was also to check whether there are differences between diocesan and religious seminarians. The results quite clearly show that in terms of quality of life and its indicators (meaning, gratitude and positive orientation), there are no differences between types of seminarians. This suggests that this is a relatively homogeneous group, which remains consistent with previous studies, mentioned earlier, showing that in terms of well-being and quality of life indicators, clergy stand out from other social and professional groups (Rossetti, 2015).

Conclusion

The presented studies are the first of this type conducted on a group of Polish seminarians and constitute a starting point for raising further problems regarding the quality of life of this social group, particularly its conditions. The results obtained indicate that both diocesan and religious seminarians have a higher quality of life in all dimensions than secular students. The same is true of positive orientation in life, gratitude and the presence of meaning in life. Only in the search for meaning in life, the result is lower. In this study, positive orientation, gratitude and meaning of life were treated as indicators of quality of life, but they can also be understood as predictors. This is suggested by studies on the relationship between sense and well-being (Krok, 2012; Ryff, 1989; Shek, 1993; Steger et al., 2011). This is an issue to be realized in subsequent studies.

The presented research has significant limitations. First of all, it is difficult to determine to what extent the results, obtained from the seminarians, are related to the tendency to present themselves in a good light or to the idealization of their role and their own future. Indeed, research has shown that religiosity is related to a tendency to self-enhance and therefore respond in a socially desirable way (Sedikides & Gebauer, 2021). The young age of the respondents and the lack of confrontation with the realities of being a secular priest or religious priest can be conducive to seeing their future in an unrealistic way, as non-conflict and free of crises or doubts regarding decisions made. This tendency can be strengthened through faith in being called or chosen by God, and American studies in this group (see Sunardi, 2015) show that seminarians and Catholic priests against the general population always achieve higher results on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) Correction Scale (K scale measuring defensiveness in the MMPI questionnaire) and therefore have higher defence rates, although not at the clinical level. Therefore, in subsequent studies, it would be worth checking the impact of such variables as sensitivity to social approval, tendencies to see oneself in a better light or realistic assessments regarding future roles and functions. It would also be important to complement self-report measures with more direct observation of quality of life and/or peer reports. To observe changes in the quality of life and sense of life that has taken place over the years, it would be important to conduct longitudinal studies, especially in light of the secularization of societies and disclosed sexual offences against minors in various countries, including Poland, that are undermining trust in the Catholic Church. A seminarian who becomes a priest in an increasingly secularized society in which the clergy lose confidence and authority is exposed to a confrontation that undermines his belief in the sense of his decisions, the idea of his role and identification with the institution he represents.

The second limitation of the research is the lack of religious measurement which led to our inability to document that seminarians are indeed more religious than the university students, as well as to show that this difference in religiosity does indeed account for the differences in quality of life and subjective well-being. However, we based the research on the assumption that those who decide to enter the seminary are more religious than their secular peers. We also based this assumption on the results of research on a similar sample in which priests are characterized by higher religiosity than other groups (Rossetti, 2015).

Contribution and implications

The results of the research presented here suggest that the specificity that religiosity adds to universal and secular strategies of achieving satisfaction might consist of a motivating vision of the highest, indestructible value and the sense of life comprehensively understood as a subjectively interpreted ‘calling’. Although enhancing one’s well-being with religiosity is explained in the literature by various reasons, and our results overlap with previous ones, research still is far from proposing a comprehensive and satisfactory theory. The presented research suggests that the quality of life may be affected by a meaning in life, which can be strengthened through religious involvement. Considering the impact of religiosity on the welfare of seminarians, it should be remembered that religiosity – even when it has been internalized as the main motivation in shaping life – still remains one of the many factors and depends on sufficiently developed motives, strategies of achieving satisfaction and strategies to deal with difficult situations. This means that it can only raise meaning and support, which is initially already present in self-esteem, the pursuit of control, the ability to love, social sensitivity and a positive attitude towards life. Research also suggests that quality of life consists of many dimensions and that an important element is experiencing a deeper sense and perception of events in a broader context, which is usually part of open religiosity.

Based on the obtained results, implications can be derived for further studies. The next research may focus on comparing seminarians with secular people involved religiously (such as people from religious communities, e.g. The Light-Life Movement) to check if better quality of life, gratitude, sense and the positive orientation of seminarians are a derivative of the existential and identity ‘frameworks’ provided by the Catholic Church institution, whether they are derived from religious involvement.

Furthermore, the research allows drawing conclusions that a specific (and demanding) system of values, ordered life goals and identification with a specific social group are important for the quality of life of people on the threshold of their adulthood. The formation system of seminarians might foster the integration of identity, or at least some of its areas, which could translate into a higher quality of life in its individual spheres than in the case of secular students. The relationship between the integration of identity and the quality of life in this social group might be the subject of further research that could contribute to theories of development and changes in identity.

The results obtained relate to the extremely rarely studied population and thus open the possibility of research that includes other similar groups from other religious traditions. Furthermore, the presented studies include only men, but similar studies can be carried out among women who embraced religious vocation.

During the recent crisis in the church, the well-being of seminarians and priests was questioned, as either the possible contributor to or the consequence of this crisis. They are under extreme and careful scrutiny of public media and society which can affect their well-being. In this context, it is interesting whether the quality of life will change when seminarians become priests. Related to this is another proposal for a future research direction has to do with the possibility of comparing the data with a group of more experienced priests, of different age groups, to observe the differences in quality of life.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: The research was financed from the statutory funds of the Faculty of Philosophy of the Jesuit University Ignatianum in Krakow.

ORCID iD

Krzysztof Kwapis

References

Abdel-Khalek

A. M.

(2019). Religiosity and well-being. In Zeigler-Hill

Shackelford

T. K.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences (pp. 1–8). Springer.

Alessandri

Caprara

G. V.

Tisak

(2012). The unique contribution of positive orientation to optimal functioning: Farther explorations. European Psychologists, 17, 44–54.

Algoe

S. B.

(2012). Find, remind, and bind: The functions of gratitude in everyday relationships. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 455–469.

Algoe

S. B.

Way

(2014). Evidence for a role of the oxytocin system, indexed by genetic variation in CD38, in the social bonding effects of expressed gratitude. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9, 1855–1861.

Bailey

K. L.

Jones

B. D.

Hall

T. W.

Wang

D. C.

McMartin

Fujikawa

A. M.

(2016). Spirituality at a crossroad: A grounded theory of Christian emerging adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 8, 99–109.

Baniak

(2017). Bezżenność i czystość seksualna księży rzymskokatolickich w świadomości katolików świeckich i osób duchownych w Polsce. Założenia i rzeczywistość [Marriage and sexual chastity of Roman Catholic Priests in the minds of secular Catholics and Clergy in Poland. Assumptions and reality]. NOMOS.

Baniak

(2019). Losy powołań kapłańskich i zakonnych w Kościele rzymskokatolickim w Polsce w latach 1900 – 2018 [The fate of priest and religious vocations in the Roman Catholic Church in Poland in the years 1900 – 2018]. NOMOS.

Batthyany

Russo-Netzer

(Eds.) (2014). Meaning in positive and existential psychology. Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0308-5

Caprara

G. V.

(2009). Positive orientation: Turning potentials into optimal functioning. The Bulletin of the European Health Psychologist, 11(3), 46–48.

10.

Caprara

G. V.

Alessandri

Barbaranelli

(2010). Optimal functioning: The contribution of self-efficacy beliefs to positive orientation. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 79, 328–330.

11.

Caprara

G. V.

Alessandri

Caprara

(2019). Associations of positive orientation with health and psychosocial adaptation: A review of findings and perspectives. Asian Journal of Psychology, 22, 126–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12325

12.

Caprara

G. V.

Alessandri

Eisenberg

Kupfer

Steca

Caprara

M. G.

Yamaguchi

Fukuzawa

Abela

(2012). The Positivity Scale. Psychological Assessment, 24(3), 701–712.

13.

Caprara

G. V.

Fagnani

Alessandri

Steca

Gigantesco

Cavalli-Sforza

Stazi

M. A.

(2009). Human optimal functioning. The genetics of positive orientation towards self, life, and the future. Behaviour Genetics, 39, 277–284.

14.

Chamberlain

Zika

(1992). Religiosity, meaning in life, and psychological well-being. In Schumaker

J. F.

(Ed.), Religion and mental health (pp. 138–148). Oxford University Press.

15.

Cohen

Cairns

(2012). Is searching for meaning in life associated with reduced subjective well-being? Confirmation and possible moderators. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(2), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9265-7

16.

Davis

D. E.

Choe

Meyers

Wade

Varjas

Gifford

Quinn

Hook

J. N.

Van Tongeren

D. R.

Griffin

B. J.

(2016). Thankful for the little things: A meta-analysis of gratitude interventions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 63, 20–31.

17.

Donahue

M. J.

(1985). Intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness: Review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 400–419.

18.

Ellison

C. G.

(1991). Religious involvement and subjective well-being. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 32(1), 80–99.

19.

Emmons

R. A.

(2005). Striving for the sacred: Personal meaning, life meaning, and religion. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 731–745.

20.

Emmons

R. A.

McCullough

M. E.

(2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 377–389.

21.

Emmons

R. A.

Schnitker

S. A.

(2013). Gods and goals: Religion and purposeful action. In Paloutzian

R. F.

Park

C. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (2nd. ed., pp. 256–273). Guilford Press.

22.

Frąckowiak

(2012). Poczucie jakości życia osób długowiecznych [The sense of the quality of life for long-lived people]. Psychologia Rozwojowa, 17(1), 101–115.

23.

Frankl

V. E.

(1963). Man’s search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy. Washington Square Press.

24.

Frankl

V. E.

(2018). Wola sensu [The will to meaning]. Wydawnictwo Czarna Owca. (Original work published 1969)

25.

Gannon

T. M.

(1979). The impact of structural differences on the catholic clergy. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 18(4), 350–362.

26.

García-Alandete

Bernabé-Valero

(2013). Religious orientation and psychological well-being among spanish undergraduates [Orientaciones religiosas y bienestar psicológico de los estudiantes universitarios españoles]. Acción Psicológica, 10(1), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.5944/ap.10.1.7040

27.

Haas

(1999). A multidisciplinary concept analysis of quality of life. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 21, 728–742.

28.

Hemrick

E. F.

Hoge

D. R.

(1991). A survey of priests ordained five to nine years. Seminary Department of the National Catholic Educational Association.

29.

Hoge

D. R.

(2002). The first five years of the priesthood: A study of newly ordained Catholic priests. Liturgical Press.

30.

Hood

R. W.

Hill

P. C.

Spilka

(2018). The psychology of religion. An empirical approach. Guilford Press.

31.

Kimball

C. N.

Cook

K. V.

Boyatzis

C. J.

Leonard

K. C.

(2016). Exploring emerging adults’ relational spirituality: A longitudinal, mixed-methods analysis. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 8, 110–118.

32.

Koenig

King

Carson

V. B.

(2012). Handbook of religion and health. Oxford University Press.

33.

Kossakowska

Kwiatek

(2014). Polska adaptacja kwestionariusza do badania wdzięczności GQ-6 [The Polish Adaptation of the Gratitude Questionnaire GQ-6]. Przegląd Psychologiczny, 57, 503–514.

34.

Kossakowska

Kwiatek

Stefaniak

(2013). Sens w życiu. Polska wersja kwestionariusza MLQ. [Meaning in Life. Polish Version of MLQ]. Psychologia Jakości Życia, 12(2), 111–131.

35.

Krause

Ellison

C. G.

(2009). The social environment of the church and feelings of gratitude toward God. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 3, 191–205.

36.

Krause

Emmons

R. A.

Ironson

(2015). Benevolent images of God, gratitude, and physical health status. Journal of Religion and Health, 54, 1503–1519.

37.

Krok

(2012). Poczucie sensu życia jako mediator w związkach duchowości i eudajmonistycznego dobrostanu psychicznego [Meaning in life as a mediator in the relationships between spirituality and eudaimonic well-being]. Psychologia Jakości Życia, 12(2), 145–162.

38.

Łaguna

Oleś

Filipiuk

(2011). Orientacja pozytywna i jej pomiar: Polska adaptacja skali orientacji pozytywnej [Positive orientation and its measure: Polish adaptation of the positivity scale]. Studia Psychologiczne, 49(4), 47–54.

39.

Lambert

N. M.

Fincham

F. D.

Braithwaite

S. R.

Graham

S. M.

Beach

S. R. H.

(2009). Can prayer increase gratitude? Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 1, 139–149.

40.

Mahalik

J. R.

Lagan

H. D.

(2001). Examining masculine gender role conflict and stress in relation to religious orientation and spiritual well-being. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 2, 24–33.

41.

Maltby

Lewis

C. A.

Day

(1999). Religious orientation and psychological well-being: The role of the frequency of personal prayer. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4(Pt. 4), 363–378. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910799168704

42.

Martos

Thege

B. K.

Steger

M. F.

(2010). It’s not only what you hold, it’s how you hold it: Dimensions of religiosity and meaning in life. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 863–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.017

43.

Mattis

J. S.

(2002). Religion and spirituality in the meaning-making and coping experiences of African-American women: A qualitative analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 309–321.

44.

McCullough

M. E.

Emmons

R. A.

Tsang

(2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 112–127.

45.

Miller

A. D.

Rottinghaus

P. J.

(2014). Career indecision, meaning in life, and anxiety: An existential framework. Journal of Career Assessment, 22(2), 233–247.

46.

Park

C. L.

(2005). Religion and meaning. In Paloutzian

R. F.

Park

C. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality (pp. 295–314). Guilford Press.

47.

Park

C. L.

(2010). Making sense of the meaning literature: An integrative review of meaning making and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 255–301.

48.

Pietkiewicz

I. J.

(2016). Reaching a decision to change vocation: A qualitative study of former priests’ experiences. International Journal of Educational Vocational Guidance, 16, 379–404.

49.

Pietkiewicz

I. J.

Bachryj

(2016). Help-seeking attitudes and coping strategies among Roman Catholic secular clergy. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 8, 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000019

50.

Reinert

D. F.

Bloomingdale

J. R.

(2000). Spiritual experience, religious orientation and self-reported behavior. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 10, 173–180.

51.

Rosmarin

D. H.

Pirutinsky

Cohen

A. B.

Galler

Krumrei

E. J.

(2011). Grateful to God or just plain grateful?: A comparison of religious and general gratitude. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 389–396.

52.

Rossetti

S. J.

(2015). Dlaczego księża są szczęśliwi. Raport o psychicznym i duchowym stanie księży [Why priests are happy. Report on the mental and spiritual condition of priests]. Wyd. „Bernardinum”.

53.

Russo-Netzer

Schulenberg

S. E.

Batthyany

(2016). Clinical perspectives on meaning: Understanding, coping and thriving through science and practice. In Russo-Netzer

Schulenberg

S. E.

Batthyany

(Eds.), Clinical perspectives on meaning: Positive and existential psychotherapy (pp. 1–13). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41397-6_1

54.

Ryff

C. D.

(1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069

55.

Saleem

(2016). Role of religiosity in psychological well-being among medical and non-medical students. Journal of Religion & Health, 56(4), 1180–1190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-016-0341-5.

56.

Samuels

P. A.

Lester

(1985). A preliminary investigation of emotions experienced toward God by catholic nuns and priests. Psychological Reports, 56, 706.

57.

Sedikides

Gebauer

J. E.

(2021). Do religious people self-enhance? Current Opinion in Psychology, 40, 29–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.08.002

58.

Shek

D. T. L.

(1992). Meaning in life and psychological well-being: An empirical study using the chinese version of the purpose in life questionnaire. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 153(2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1992.10753712

59.

Soiński

B. J.

(2005). Potrzeby psychiczne u alumnów franciszkańskich [Mental needs of Franciscan seminarians. Theological annals]. Roczniki Teologiczne, LII(5), 143–164.

60.

Soiński

B. J.

(2008). Kryzysy doświadczane przez alumnów seminariów duchownych [Crises experienced by the Seminarians. Education. Theology and Dialogue / Edukacja. Teologia i Dialog, 5, 245–265.

61.

Soiński

B. J.

(2009a). Doświadczenie kryzysu przez alumnów franciszkańskich – zagrożenie czy szansa rozwoju? [Experience of the crisis by Franciscan seminarians – A threat or an opportunity for development? Franciscan Studies / Studia Franciszkańskie, 19, 23–44.

62.

Soiński

B. J.

(2009b). Zmiany wartościowania u alumnów franciszkańskich [Changes in valuation of the Franciscan seminarians]. Studium Franciscanum in Caritatae Facere, 251–270.

63.

Soiński

B. J.

(2016). Kryzys tożsamości w okresie formacji początkowej kandydatów do kapłaństwa i życia konsekrowanego [Identity crisis during initial formation of candidates for priesthood and consecrated life. Education. Theology and Dialogue / Edukacja. Teologia i Dialog, 12, 31–52.

64.

Central Statistical Office of Poland. (2018). Concise statistical yearbook of Poland. Zakład Wydawnictw Statystycznych.

65.

Steger

M. F.

Frazier

Oishi

Kaler

(2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93.

66.

Steger

M. F.

Kashdan

T. B.

Sullivan

B. A.

Lorentz

(2008). Understanding the search for meaning in life: Personality, cognitive style, and the dynamic between seeking and experiencing meaning. Journal of Personality, 76, 199–228.

67.

Steger

M. F.

Oishi

Kesibir

(2011). Is a life without meaning satisfying? The moderating role of the search for meaning in satisfaction with life judgments. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 173–180.

68.

Straś-Romanowska

(1992). Los człowieka jako problem psychologiczny. Podstawy teoretyczne [The fate of man as a psychological problem. Theoretical basics]. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.

69.

Straś-Romanowska

Frąckowiak

(2007). Rola relacji międzyludzkich w budowaniu jakości życia osób niepełnosprawnych (perspektywa personalistyczno-egzystencjalna) [The role of interpersonal relations in building the quality of life of people with disabilities (Personalistic and existential perspective)]. In Patkiewicz

(red.), Rola więzi w rozwoju dzieci i młodzieży niepełnosprawnej [The role of relationship in the development of disabled children and youth]. Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Walki z Kalectwem (pp. 47–57).

70.

Straś-Romanowska

Oleszkowicz

Frąckowiak

(2004). Charakterystyka Kwestionariusza Poczucia Jakości Życia [Characteristics of the Quality of Life Questionnaire]. Instytut Psychologii UW.

71.

Sunardi

(2014). Predictive factors for commitment to the priestly vocation: A study of priests and seminarians (Dissertations (2009-), Paper 421). http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/421

72.

Sunardi

(2015). Predictive factors for commitment to the priestly vocation: A study of priests and seminarians. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 76(4-B(E)). http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=psyc12&NEWS=N&AN=2015-99200-476

73.

Tomaszewska

(2014). Zostać Księdzem? Drogi powołania we współczesnej Polsce [To become a priest? Vocations in contemporary Poland]. WUW.

74.

Vilani

Sorgente

Iannello

Antonienti

(2019). The role of spirituality and religiosity in subjective well-being of individuals with different religious status. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1525. https://doi.org/10.3389/psyg.2019.01525

75.

Watkins

P. C.

(2014). Gratitude and the good life: Toward a psychology of appreciation. Springer.

76.

Watkins

P. C.

Woodward

Stone

Kolts

R. L.

(2003). Gratitude and happiness: II. Comparative analysis of rational-emotive and intrinsically religious irrationalities. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 13, 373–384.

77.

Wood

A. M.

Froh

Geraghty

(2010). Gratitude and well-being: A review and theoretical integration. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 890–905.

78.

Zondag

H. J.

(2001). Involved, loyal, alienated, and detached. The commitment of pastors. Pastoral Psychology, 49, 311–323.