Good, but...

I found your point of view surprising, since I would say there is quite enough information to understand everything needed for the psychological and dramatic impact to build up uninterruptedly. It is generally a film in which parts remain mysterious but likely explanations are easy to make up.

Chantal, the countess' daughter, is lacking attention and love, as is made obvious in many ways. The countess herself, as is said explicitly by Miss Louise and seen by the picture she uses as a bookmark or by her glance to his photograph during the main discussion with the priest, has never gotten over losing her other child. Thus, the classical sibling rivalry for attention is made worse by a mother who seems to care more for the dead one than the remaining one. Then, the count puts his affair ahead of his family. For instance, as Chantal says, "They don't even draw the curtains". In the words of the countess, she's suffered "absurd humiliations", probably referring to the count's behavior toward his family. To top it all, the plan to send Chantal away to presumably relatives shows that her parents have given up on her, and it's also a surprising departure from the count's objection that "Chantal, sad? You must be joking", which shows that he either doesn't know her that much or doesn't care if he gives up. The "him" Chantal is referring to is obviously her father, as in her rebuke to Ambricourt's "If you loved your father, you wouldn't be in this state of revolt", saying "I no longer respect him. I think I hate him. I hate them all."

The first scene when Chantal and the priest meet in church is related to a request by Chantal to intervene in her family. As the count says, "My family's always been on good terms with your predecessors, terms of mutual respect and friendship. But no priest shall meddle in my family matters!" The details are irrelevant. That her father has an affair with the governess is out of debate. That's one of the first things shown in the film, with the couple seeming bothered to be seen with one another by the priest! And the relationship is clearly acknowledged by both Chantal and the countess.

Chantal is clearly upset that her mother cannot prevent the affair or even that she fakes not noticing it. In the countess' words "After putting up all these years with countless infidelities (...) Shall I care more about my daughter's pride than my own? Let her put up with it as I have." Chantal : "She's a fool and a coward. Never could stand up for her own happiness", about her mother.

It's not clear that the priest has only met the countess once before his main discussion with her. It's a film in which events between two discussions are alluded to. There are ellipses, if you prefer. Torcy saying that he's heard "some disturbing things about you. But no matter. I know how malicious people can be" easily reminds of Ambricourt's drinking habits, among other things. I would not say the countess never displays her personality. Beyond what we suspect from others' behavior, in her discussions with the priest, she's on her guard : "On seeing you, I felt you had come with some purpose in mind", "And that you also meant to keep it to yourself". That she still has concerns about religion is shown too, "How little we know what a human life really is". Her frustration with her family is expressed during the conversation, and it's in sync with what we hear from others.

The priest is said to be awkward with people, and it's just normal in the course of his activities that he will be troubled by encounters with people he doesn't necessarily has the time to fully understand, or that preferred to stay aloof, since "The people here are malicious. Believe me, I know.", says the count. His focus on that family can be explained in many ways. First, Louise is often the only person in the church, so she has more access to the priest than other inhabitants, and uses that to complain about her situation "Her Ladyship is very kind, but Miss Chantal enjoys humiliating me and treats me like a servant". The count is rich, and as the priest says, "A good first impression could spell success for my plans for a youth club and sports program. The count's influence and wealth could help me to achieve them". Besides, about the count : "He's said to be hard on his farmer, and he's no model parishioner. Why has he so quickly become the so desperately rare friend, ally and companion?" The count's uncle says "My nephew is moving heaven and earth. The bishop, a simple man, takes him seriously". This family is influential and central in the village. As for the hostility of the rest of the village, we can mention the poisoning, the bad welcome by Seraphita's mother, the gossip alluded to by Torcy, the angry man who wants to bury his wife, people who shun him when the countess' corpse is displayed, his church that remains mostly empty, children who laugh at him, Louise's letter that he should ask for a transfer. The one bringing him a rabbit is the count, the one who's become "a friend". Furthermore, it's not that he did not consider eating regular food, it's that he stopped doing so. That's told in the beginning of the movie, "I deliberately cut out meat and vegetables". His stomach cancer was beginning.

It's generally a very dense movie and many other things can be understood if one pays attention. For example, in his relationship with children, we see him write in his diary "But why such hostility? What had I done to them?". Many things can be said. First, experience of life will simply tell us that some taunting is just to be expected, that's it's children's way of trying a newcomer. That the priest wonders what he has done them just tells that he takes things too seriously, that he lacks experience, that he's sometimes too sensitive and should worry less about such trifles. However, things are not equivalent in all locations, and he's indeed in a bad parish and a more serious trap by Seraphita is set later on, showing that difficult family relationships or a bad local atmosphere makes children take on others. His sometimes clueless approach just makes him a likely target.

I would strongly recommend that you watch it again. It's one of my favorite movies. Every gesture, every reply, every camera move is striking and I find it absolutely invaluable as a psychological portrait, a social indictment, or an artistic experiment. Several explanations could be given for its meaning. Most of all, it attacks indifference and pettiness by contrasting an over-eager near-saint with a hostile village giving him a bad welcome and not interested in what he has to say. A heartbreaking story of hope and good intentions broken down by reality? A consolation for those who have felt alone and rejected by a world they did not understand, but remained certain that they had the truth? A celebration of perseverance in the face of repeated failure? A social critique of selfish, material people without empathy? A masochistic comedy about the uselessness of religion? You be the judge, but to me it's a supremely moving film.