Leo Promotes Hicks to Archbishop of New York as His Chancellor “Marries” His Boyfriend

Michie said:

Here’s what makes the Joliet story more than a sordid local headline: the bishop under whom it happened is being rewarded with one of the most powerful sees in the country. Leo XIV has appointed Ronald Hicks, until now the Bishop of Joliet, as the next Archbishop of New York, with installation set for February 2026.

Continued below.

Leo Promotes Hicks to Archbishop of New York as His Chancellor “Marries” His Boyfriend

Joliet’s canon-law chancellor “marries” his boyfriend; Charlotte bans kneeling; Leo XIV canonizes Vatican II—while Rome delivers Christmas greetings to itself.

bigmodernism.substack.com

Click to expand...

chevyontheriver said:

One does not get to be a diocesan chancellor by accident. That position is highly vetted. So somebody knew. And appointed him anyhow. Is that somebody now made the next archbishop of New York? How many people are complicit in this Lavender? Is it from all the way at the top?

Click to expand...

Gnarwhal said:

Have you heard +Hicks speak? It was probably him.

Click to expand...

chevyontheriver said:

I knew more about Dolan at this point than about Hicks. Dolan was an admixture of good and not so good. Hicks, aside from hearing his chancellor got married to another man, I know little about. Apparently he is TLM tolerant. We'll see. But the central heresy of the day seems to be the homoheresy that knows no bounds. It's like we are supposed to tolerate it or even approve of it as long as there is no provable molestation of underage individuals.

Is it too much to ask that the clergy of the Catholic Church keep their pants on? I guess so. They seem to say being celibate does not mean being chaste. 'Chaste' is such an old-fashioned word anyway.

Click to expand...

Wolseley said:

I have reached a point, in my advanced age, where I don't even pay attention to pronouncements coming from higher clergy any more. Bishops and cardinals blather on in their heterodox verbiage, and I pretty much ignore all of it.

I keep myself, as much as I can, in a position of fidelity to the Revealed Truth of the Faith, and I try to maintain that to the best of my (admittedly flawed) ability. If something comes down from a chancery that I find is in conflict with Scripture, Dogma, or Apostolic Tradition, I ignore it and keep practicing the Catholic Faith according to what the authentic Faith has always taught.

I can't help or change what prelates decide to do; all I can do is keep myself on the straight and narrow path of what I know to be the Truth. So when they promote "synodality" that invites agnostic laypeople to take a hand in deciding church morality, or they allow their homosexual minions to "marry" their boyfriends, or they declare that the Latin Mass is an abomination and must be replaced with a "Spirit of Vatican II"-style dog-and-pony show with liturgical dancers in rainbow caftans and music that sounds like it was cribbed from a 1971 Pepsi commercial, I shrug my shoulders, turn my back on it, and walk away.

I used to get absolutely livid, for example, at stuff that Cardinal Baloney out in Los Angeles used to promulgate; but any more, I just shrug, and go grab my Rosary and say five decades for my Usual Intentions, i.e., the forgiveness of my sins, the strengthening of my faith, and the salvation of my soul.

Click to expand...