Your implication seems to be that American Catholic men are selfish, and that the "liberal" way is to settle for marriage rather than commit to celibacy and the priesthood. The permanent diaconate disproves that contention; there are plenty of men who would serve the Church if given the chance.
There are myriad reasons why men do not consider the priesthood. Among them is a general decline in the prestige of the religious vocation and its stature in society, putting off making lifetime decisions (Catholics are, in keeping with the general trends in society, marrying later as well), and a view that the priesthood is a haven for homosexuals (I've heard this objection a couple of times from young men in my parish). I'm continually told that the FSSP seminary is busting at the seams. However, the FSSP administers less than 1% of parishes in the United States and limits itself to the Tridentine sacramental rites, so the FSSP is not going to be much help in the rest of the Church.
Perhaps, initially, the Church limits the married men who might enter the priesthood to men over 40 or 50, men who may not have as many family obligations. Or, these men could serve "part time" (as some retired priests do today) and serve some of the outlying parishes in danger of closing.
At the very least, all of this should be discussed. Right now, the Church hierarchy seems to be afraid that, if the issue of mandatory celibacy is even broached, the rationale for it might fall apart.
Why isn't a serious discussion encouraged between clergy and young men to try to find out why they are not interested in the priesthood? I don't get the impression that most priests or bishops today much care about encouraging men to consider the priesthood, or why men have no interest in following them.
If IBM had trouble attracting candidates for employment, you can bet your life that the top priority of IBM executives would be to find out why nobody wanted to work for them, and how to resolve the problem.
But, the Catholic Church thinks corny stuff like sending clay chalices home with families whose kids are all grown and in other professions, who are then told to pray for more priests and deacons, will work.
It works for deacons: we have five men in our parish in line to join the next training class. But we have only one man in the seminary.
Why is the diaconate ordaining 750 men per year in the US, but only 400 priests are ordained?
The Church hierarchy has no answer to these questions, and they should.
Yes, you are exactly right, this is a serious problem. It is almost as if many bishops and priests have an institutional death wish. (Which isn't surprising, if they are liberals: as James Burnham pointed out, liberalism is the ideology of Western suicide)
>>>>>>>>Why is the diaconate ordaining 750 men per year in the US, but only 400 priests are ordained? The Church hierarchy has no answer to these questions, and they should.<<<<<<<<<<<
Agreed, again. I will reiterate the example I gave yesterday, of an approach that works. My sister's pastor is an energetic, charismatic young priest from Eastern Europe, who doesn't allow altar girls, strongly encourages every boy in the parish to be an altar boy precisely so that they may be exposed to the priesthood, and then provides the boys with an inspiring role model. The result: six young men from the parish are now in the diocesan seminary, whereas many vastly larger and more affluent suburban parishes never produce a vocation.
>>>>but only 400 priests are ordained?
500, actually.
Why isn't a serious discussion encouraged between clergy and young men to try to find out why they are not interested in the priesthood? I don't get the impression that most priests or bishops today much care about encouraging men to consider the priesthood, or why men have no interest in following them.Personally, I think that your request that the Church try to talk to young men and determine why they aren't interested in vocations would be a good idea, but then that would require the Church to actually TALK to young men about vocations, something most priests have not done for decades.But, the Catholic Church thinks corny stuff like sending clay chalices home with families whose kids are all grown and in other professions, who are then told to pray for more priests and deacons, will work.
Used to be that many parish priests considered it part of their mission to talk to the young men about vocations. It worked, that put the idea in many heads. Even today, when you go to parishes where the priest talks to young men about it you very often a high level of vocations.
Were priests (and parents, of course) to start fostering vocations by actually discussing it with young men instead of sending home clay chalices, I think the vocations level would rise dramatically. The "pray for vocations" movement, when its not accompanied by one on one interaction, is about as successful as never discussing sex or drugs with your kid, and then simply hoping they don't get into it. You want something from a kid, talk to them about it.
As it stands, if you ask these young men why they didn't chose a vocation, the standard answer would be that they never thought about it. Becuase they didn't. Becuase no one asked them to.
patent