"The New York archdiocese has also struggled in recent years to encourage priestly vocations, with only two men applying to diocesan formation in 2024, and the number of priests declining by 51% between 1970 and 2020. In June, the archdiocese said it had 18 men in priestly formation, for a Catholic population of 2.5 million, with some 300 parishes."
That is one of the most heartbreaking paragraphs I've read in my years as a Pillar reader.
An absolute collapse of thick, practicing Catholic communities. I have been to some beautiful, crumbling, almost empty Catholic churches in my time spent in NYC.
Look, I’m a new comer to the Church but I honestly do not understand how that is possible. At my MDiv program in Protestant seminary we had tons of people from the five boroughs.
Yes training for the Catholic priesthood is categorically different than becoming a Protestant pastor, but how do we get to such numbers? Heartbreaking to put it mildly, insane and maddening in all actuality.
Some people do leave NYC to return to their home dioceses to attend seminary, but historically, many have applied to seminary in NYC despite being from elsewhere.
Additionally, Manhattan is only a small part of the Archdiocese, which also covers Staten Island and Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester counties to the north of NYC. Meanwhile, many of the young transients now live in Queens and Brooklyn rather than in Manhattan.
Vocations don't just happen, they have to be encouraged. There are smaller dioceses within US that are doing much better with vocations. I'm sure some best practices could be learned by NYC. I realize it's a very large diocese with a lot on Cdl. Dolan's plate, but I rarely see any news about him or any assistant bishops doing anything to promote vocations in the boroughs. There are other dioceses where the bishops seem to be doing much more and publicizing their efforts. I get the feeling that Hicks with his background will be paying a lot more attention to encouraging vocations than to appearing at celebrity events.
Guess I'll repeat my comment to the newsletter here:
I've been in the Joliet diocese for a couple of decades now. Hicks became bishop during Covid, and so, while he's been here five years, it "feels" more like two. In any event, commentary out there in the arena of the Catholic internet seems to assume that, since he was Cupich's auxiliary for a couple years, Hicks must be on the progressive side of the spectrum. But as a member of the diocese and a bit more attentive to these things than your average bear, I have to say that I don't see it. Pretty much anyone they put in would be to the left of Dolan - but that doesn't mean we'll see calls for lady deacons in the Big Apple any time soon.
I believe that your assessment is absolutely correct. Bishop Hicks is far, far more orthodox (read: far more solidly Catholic) than his profile might suggest.
Many view solidly Catholic as caring for the poor. With that you are correct. However “far more orthodox” implies a break from Pope Leo XIV. That is not the case. This is a great pick and many folks in NYC can’t wait for his arrival. Dilexi Te coming to the Big Apple, less tv interviews on political talk shows.
Honestly, I've spent the better part of five minutes trying to figure out what you mean? Are you implying Pope Leo XIV isn't orthodox in his adherence to the faith? Such a claim would be ridiculous.
What I am saying is that, often, Bishop Hicks is improperly categorized among Cardinals Cupich and Tobin and McElroy. If that's what you're looking for, you're going to be disappointed. His profile suggests a bishop that fits in that camp. He just doesn't.
If you're hoping for a bishop who believes deeply in the teaching of the Church and applies it with compassion and an eye for the poor, the unborn, the elderly, the vulnerable...you'll be pleased.
We will see- Hicks is closer to Cupich than he is to Strickland. If adherence to Vatican teachings and less internal division appeals to you, then you will be very pleased.
I don't think you'll find many people on this site who long for more Stricklands nor the divisiveness that would come with, yes, more Cupiches. Happily, as the article suggests and from a few people I've talked to who have worked with +Hicks, he may well be closer to Cardinal George than anyone. George, of course, was a giant in recent Catholic history, so it would be unfair to expect the soon-to-be-archbishop to live up to that legacy. But if that legacy is to what he aspires, both New York and American Catholicism will be in great hands for the next two decades.
We will miss Bishop Hicks in Joliet. He was tackling a lot of the challenges here with a clear action plan and seems to be a real pastor for both the lay and the priests.
It is not surprising that Pope Leo would pick someone that no one expected. Someone not trained at PNAC and someone who also has a heart for the poor and vulnerable, whether born or not. The culture warrior bishops had their time in the spotlight. Time to retire their “numbers.”
Although, with Cardinal Cupich himself just tweeting about filing a Becket Fund written legal brief today in a court case, the culture warrior bishops may just be getting warmed up.
Cardinal Dolan was the rector at the PNAC. He resided at the Pontifical North American College in Rome while studying at the PUSTA. Dolan earned a Licentiate of Sacred Theology in 1976 from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
I don’t have any in mind. I am, however, reminded of Villanova‘s men’s basketball defeating Georgetown in 1985. One of the greatest single-game upsets in NCAA title history. It’s quite apropos that one of Villanova’s graduate would also pull off one of the greatest stateside upsets in ecclesiastical history. Laudem Dei.
How could vocations have gotten to this point under Dolan? I always thought he was dynamic
He used to talk about how the Church could never settle for being in "maintenance mode" and just managing the decline and closures of parishes and schools.
But it seems that's exactly what happened in the Archdiocese under his watch. Did he just spend all his time selling things off, closing things, and paying abuse settlements? Sad end to his tenure....
The ultimate careerist bishop and Cupich protege is leaving my home diocese of Joliet! Hurrah! Most Joliet priests are probably opening up champaign bottles. The problem with Bishop Hicks is not that he is liberal or conservative, it is that he has done nothing for my diocese, not one thing has changed for the better. One diocesan priest with major health problems has requested to meet Bishop Hicks for the last 18 months and he is still waiting, while Hicks is busy at the USCCB. Meanwhile, his auxiliary Bishop Spies takes care of diocesan business.
Oh, you saw Bishop Hicks when the national Eucharistic Procession came through his diocese, but his priests call him the Hide and Seek Bishop, because his phone number is restricted to the priests of the diocese, so you only know where he is when he calls you from his restricted phone. Completely different from his predecessor, retired Bishop Conlon, who gave his phone number to every priest and told them to call him with any concerns. When one priest could not find a priest to substitute him in an urgent situation, Bishop Conlon came in and celebrated all the Masses on the weekend at that parish. Bishop Hicks is the complete opposite.
It is clear that the nuncio and the Dicastery for Bishops are not good judges of character and have let Bishop Hicks, probably soon Cardinal Hicks, achieve his career goals. I am sorry for you New Yorkers, but I am happy for the priests and lay people of my Joliet diocese to finally be rid of a bishop who was rarely seen in our diocese anyway.
Is it slander when one priest cannot work because of major lung problems, but Bishop Hicks has not met with him for 18 months? Should I call that priest and tell him: all that constant coughing you have whenever I talk to you and your documentation from the pulmonologist, while Bishop Hicks would not meet with you for 18 months (and has still not even called you) or allow you to use parish funds to fix your rectory filled with aspergillosis fungus (as found by official environmental testing) are all lies because Hank said so.
What about St. Joseph's Church in Joliet, a thriving parish important to the Slovenian community was set to close by Bishop Hick's order until a canon lawyer found such a blunder in the documentation submitted by the Joliet diocese that the Vatican rejected the bishop's appeal and told him to keep the parish open.Is the Dicastery for the Clergy slandering Bishop Hicks?
Is it slander when a young Joliet seminarian, one year from ordination to the trsnsitional diaconate asked me at a school gala to pray for him because he was about to be thrown out of the seminary for being too orthodox? And he was. One of many seminarians that have left under Bishop Hicks, which did not happen with Bishop Conlon or Bishop Sartain who truly promoted vocations, including by regularly meeting with men and boys discerning vocations (again Bishop Hicks gives that job to his auxiliary Bishop Spies). How about another priest, independently of the priests I have quoted, who was sent for "sensitivity training" because he spoke in a homily against homosexual relationships.
Thank you Hank for informing me that a bunch of good, solid priests and seminarians are all, independently of each other, slandering Bishop Hicks by telling me how they have suffered under his administration.
It’s slander cuz I think you’re lying on purpose. I genuinely think you’re lying, as I also know people in Joliet who also would call you a slanderous liar. People think that they can lie on the internet and no one will call them out for it.
Knowing people in some diocese is not living in a diocese for 20 years where I am familiar with a good chunk of the priests here. If I say something about the Archdiocese of New York, that would be hearsay. What I say about the Diocese of Joliet is all based on primary sources.
Thomas- you seem to be angry here. This appears to be more about you than either Hicks or the sick Priest you claim has been trying to reach Hicks. I don’t know the facts here- but Hank is right, this is slander. Leo made his choice, it’s going to be a very long pontificate for you if you don’t find a way out of internalizing your disagreements.
First of all, there is the concept of righteous indignation when others suffer because of bad leadership. I am not personally angry, but rather sad that the Vatican promotes careerists over humble men of faith. It does not change my faith. We have had to suffer through the pontificate of Pope Francis and maybe Pope Leo XIV (after this nomination showing the Holy Father is like his predecessor under the profound influence of Cardinal Cupich) is just a more polished version of him, but the Church will survive. Maybe instead of waiting for years to expose bad bishops after they have done much harm, it is best to expose the facts early on. Slander is lying. Everything I have said is true.
Joliet has been blessed before with some of the best bishops in the States such as the great Bishop Blanchette who fought against having Communion on the hand being allowed in the U.S. and the wonderful Bishop Sartain, one of best promoters of vocations. I pray with great hope for a good new bishop in Joliet, like maybe Bishop Cozzens. It is a truly happy day for me and the priests who I have seen suffer greatly because of Bishop Hicks, since neither they nor I plan to live in New York City.
I served at Hicks’ first Mass at the parish that now claims itself as Pope Leo’s home parish (since it merged with the parish that had merged with Pope Leo’s now-closed home parish). So Hicks and Pope Leo both share a home parish it seems.
It will be interesting to see how he fares over the years. I was never a big fan of Cardinal Dolan, even though I realize things could have been a lot worse had he not been there through the Francis pontificate. Bishop Hicks seems to be solidly orthodox and supportive (or at least not outright hostile) towards the TLM, which is better than a lot of other potential candidates I am sure. But NYC is a uniquely challenging archdiocese. There have been some questionable decisions, or lack of decisions throughout Cardinal Dolan's tenure. Lots of potential for outlandish and crazy incidents in a place as large and diverse as NYC. That circus of a funeral at St. Patrick's Cathedral a year or two ago comes to mind. Problematic rainbow parishes run by the Paulists. Celebrity priests like Fr. James Martin. Abysmal vocations over recent years. Will Bishop Hicks handle these kinds of things any better than Cardinal Dolan, or will he be too hesitant to make decisions that might cost him an invite to the next black-tie gala?
I'm not either optimistic or pessimistic. I'm not going to celebrate this pick or lament it. It sounds like Bishop Hicks has the tools and the mind to make good decisions. The primary question in my mind is whether or not he has the willpower to do so.
I was hoping he’d replace Cardinal Cupich. Sorry to see him leave the diocese. He’s visited our parish a few times and I’ve always been impressed. A few weeks ago he released a pastoral letter that’s worth reading. https://make.diojoliet.org/
Let us hope and pray that the advent of Hicks will also coincide with a jump-start for the beatification of Ven. Fulton Sheen. Can't help but feel Dolan is the one who's been holding that back for no good reason ever since he lost the lawsuit over Sheen's body (which lawsuit should never have happened given that New York was doing very little to promote his cause before that).
New York has skeletons in its closet (cough cough Spellman) and all this Fulton Sheen stuff threatens the institutional prestige of the Archdiocese’s leaders.
JD any insight on why Dolan’s letter was accepted so soon after turning 75? I’m not aware that he has any serious health issues. The recent practice has been to allow Cardinal Archbishops to stay on well past 75. Cardinal O’Malley stayed on until 80.
It's very sad how few vocations are in the Archdiocese of New York. Cardinal Dolan is such a blessing to the American Catholic community, but for whatever reasons the strategies for getting young men to open their minds and hearts to God's call have not been particularly effective as far as actual enrollment in seminary. I have one major concern: How is it that Cardinal Dolan, who turned 75 in February, is on his way out in NYC while Cardinal Cupich, who is 11 months older (and therefore submitted his resignation to Pope Francis in March 2024) is still there with no chatter about an imminent replacement? This is NYC, so this appointment has been on the minds of those in the Holy See for some time, pre-dating the death of Pope Francis. That a bishop in Joliet with experience in the Archdiocese of Chicago is headed to NYC when Chicago has the same need at the same time is puzzling to me. I know Cardinal Dolan really wanted to wrap up the litigation with Chubb to not leave that on his successor's desk. Maybe he's been petitioning to have his resignation accepted. Maybe Pope Francis was keener on leaving Cupich in Chicago for another year or so and therefore less work had been done to find the appropriate archbishop for Chicago. Bishop Hicks sounds like just the kind of prelate who will fit in an archdiocese with a need for vocations, a diverse and ever-growing Hispanic population (his time in Central America will serve him well), and he would have experienced the challenges facing urban and suburban parishes alike, so he seems well suited. There is one particularly younger priest (about 46 y/o) in NYC who I think would be an excellent bishop. I've been secretly hoping he was on track for appointment as an auxiliary bishop. Guess it was too much to hope that he'd be taking over the whole archdiocese!
Is it wrong that I want to make lawn signs that say "+Cupich Out 2026"?
"The New York archdiocese has also struggled in recent years to encourage priestly vocations, with only two men applying to diocesan formation in 2024, and the number of priests declining by 51% between 1970 and 2020. In June, the archdiocese said it had 18 men in priestly formation, for a Catholic population of 2.5 million, with some 300 parishes."
That is one of the most heartbreaking paragraphs I've read in my years as a Pillar reader.
An absolute collapse of thick, practicing Catholic communities. I have been to some beautiful, crumbling, almost empty Catholic churches in my time spent in NYC.
Look, I’m a new comer to the Church but I honestly do not understand how that is possible. At my MDiv program in Protestant seminary we had tons of people from the five boroughs.
Yes training for the Catholic priesthood is categorically different than becoming a Protestant pastor, but how do we get to such numbers? Heartbreaking to put it mildly, insane and maddening in all actuality.
I'm curious what the roster is at Dunwoodie these days. The Archdiocese must be a solid minority if numbers are this low.
I wonder if some people in New York attend seminary in their home dioceses since the population is so transient.
That being said that is very low even accounting for that.
Some people do leave NYC to return to their home dioceses to attend seminary, but historically, many have applied to seminary in NYC despite being from elsewhere.
Additionally, Manhattan is only a small part of the Archdiocese, which also covers Staten Island and Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester counties to the north of NYC. Meanwhile, many of the young transients now live in Queens and Brooklyn rather than in Manhattan.
Vocations don't just happen, they have to be encouraged. There are smaller dioceses within US that are doing much better with vocations. I'm sure some best practices could be learned by NYC. I realize it's a very large diocese with a lot on Cdl. Dolan's plate, but I rarely see any news about him or any assistant bishops doing anything to promote vocations in the boroughs. There are other dioceses where the bishops seem to be doing much more and publicizing their efforts. I get the feeling that Hicks with his background will be paying a lot more attention to encouraging vocations than to appearing at celebrity events.
Guess I'll repeat my comment to the newsletter here:
I've been in the Joliet diocese for a couple of decades now. Hicks became bishop during Covid, and so, while he's been here five years, it "feels" more like two. In any event, commentary out there in the arena of the Catholic internet seems to assume that, since he was Cupich's auxiliary for a couple years, Hicks must be on the progressive side of the spectrum. But as a member of the diocese and a bit more attentive to these things than your average bear, I have to say that I don't see it. Pretty much anyone they put in would be to the left of Dolan - but that doesn't mean we'll see calls for lady deacons in the Big Apple any time soon.
I believe that your assessment is absolutely correct. Bishop Hicks is far, far more orthodox (read: far more solidly Catholic) than his profile might suggest.
Many view solidly Catholic as caring for the poor. With that you are correct. However “far more orthodox” implies a break from Pope Leo XIV. That is not the case. This is a great pick and many folks in NYC can’t wait for his arrival. Dilexi Te coming to the Big Apple, less tv interviews on political talk shows.
Honestly, I've spent the better part of five minutes trying to figure out what you mean? Are you implying Pope Leo XIV isn't orthodox in his adherence to the faith? Such a claim would be ridiculous.
What I am saying is that, often, Bishop Hicks is improperly categorized among Cardinals Cupich and Tobin and McElroy. If that's what you're looking for, you're going to be disappointed. His profile suggests a bishop that fits in that camp. He just doesn't.
If you're hoping for a bishop who believes deeply in the teaching of the Church and applies it with compassion and an eye for the poor, the unborn, the elderly, the vulnerable...you'll be pleased.
We will see- Hicks is closer to Cupich than he is to Strickland. If adherence to Vatican teachings and less internal division appeals to you, then you will be very pleased.
I don't think you'll find many people on this site who long for more Stricklands nor the divisiveness that would come with, yes, more Cupiches. Happily, as the article suggests and from a few people I've talked to who have worked with +Hicks, he may well be closer to Cardinal George than anyone. George, of course, was a giant in recent Catholic history, so it would be unfair to expect the soon-to-be-archbishop to live up to that legacy. But if that legacy is to what he aspires, both New York and American Catholicism will be in great hands for the next two decades.
It sounds like you’re looking for a city councilman not a bishop.
I hope he proves worthy of his calling, in a difficult post.
We will miss Bishop Hicks in Joliet. He was tackling a lot of the challenges here with a clear action plan and seems to be a real pastor for both the lay and the priests.
Cardinal Pierre ending his career as a nuncio with quite the bang.
Indeed; Hicks's installation, presumably a month or two out, might be the last thing he does.
It is not surprising that Pope Leo would pick someone that no one expected. Someone not trained at PNAC and someone who also has a heart for the poor and vulnerable, whether born or not. The culture warrior bishops had their time in the spotlight. Time to retire their “numbers.”
I'm curious which NAC trained bishops you have in mind in this sense.
Cardinal Dolan?
Although, with Cardinal Cupich himself just tweeting about filing a Becket Fund written legal brief today in a court case, the culture warrior bishops may just be getting warmed up.
Cardinal Dolan was the rector at the PNAC. He resided at the Pontifical North American College in Rome while studying at the PUSTA. Dolan earned a Licentiate of Sacred Theology in 1976 from the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.
I don’t have any in mind. I am, however, reminded of Villanova‘s men’s basketball defeating Georgetown in 1985. One of the greatest single-game upsets in NCAA title history. It’s quite apropos that one of Villanova’s graduate would also pull off one of the greatest stateside upsets in ecclesiastical history. Laudem Dei.
An upset? That implies there was a favorite. Who, then, did you think was the odds-on favorite to go to St. Patrick's?
An upset would have been a non-Chicago guy landing there given who have been appointed to archbishoprics over the last 18 months.
How could vocations have gotten to this point under Dolan? I always thought he was dynamic
He used to talk about how the Church could never settle for being in "maintenance mode" and just managing the decline and closures of parishes and schools.
But it seems that's exactly what happened in the Archdiocese under his watch. Did he just spend all his time selling things off, closing things, and paying abuse settlements? Sad end to his tenure....
I once saw someone say that NY needed the episcopal version of a wartime consigliere, and Cardinal Dolan is no wartime consigliere.
Honestly I think Dolan just got old and comfortable.
The ultimate careerist bishop and Cupich protege is leaving my home diocese of Joliet! Hurrah! Most Joliet priests are probably opening up champaign bottles. The problem with Bishop Hicks is not that he is liberal or conservative, it is that he has done nothing for my diocese, not one thing has changed for the better. One diocesan priest with major health problems has requested to meet Bishop Hicks for the last 18 months and he is still waiting, while Hicks is busy at the USCCB. Meanwhile, his auxiliary Bishop Spies takes care of diocesan business.
Oh, you saw Bishop Hicks when the national Eucharistic Procession came through his diocese, but his priests call him the Hide and Seek Bishop, because his phone number is restricted to the priests of the diocese, so you only know where he is when he calls you from his restricted phone. Completely different from his predecessor, retired Bishop Conlon, who gave his phone number to every priest and told them to call him with any concerns. When one priest could not find a priest to substitute him in an urgent situation, Bishop Conlon came in and celebrated all the Masses on the weekend at that parish. Bishop Hicks is the complete opposite.
It is clear that the nuncio and the Dicastery for Bishops are not good judges of character and have let Bishop Hicks, probably soon Cardinal Hicks, achieve his career goals. I am sorry for you New Yorkers, but I am happy for the priests and lay people of my Joliet diocese to finally be rid of a bishop who was rarely seen in our diocese anyway.
Reads like slander.
Is it slander when one priest cannot work because of major lung problems, but Bishop Hicks has not met with him for 18 months? Should I call that priest and tell him: all that constant coughing you have whenever I talk to you and your documentation from the pulmonologist, while Bishop Hicks would not meet with you for 18 months (and has still not even called you) or allow you to use parish funds to fix your rectory filled with aspergillosis fungus (as found by official environmental testing) are all lies because Hank said so.
What about St. Joseph's Church in Joliet, a thriving parish important to the Slovenian community was set to close by Bishop Hick's order until a canon lawyer found such a blunder in the documentation submitted by the Joliet diocese that the Vatican rejected the bishop's appeal and told him to keep the parish open.Is the Dicastery for the Clergy slandering Bishop Hicks?
Is it slander when a young Joliet seminarian, one year from ordination to the trsnsitional diaconate asked me at a school gala to pray for him because he was about to be thrown out of the seminary for being too orthodox? And he was. One of many seminarians that have left under Bishop Hicks, which did not happen with Bishop Conlon or Bishop Sartain who truly promoted vocations, including by regularly meeting with men and boys discerning vocations (again Bishop Hicks gives that job to his auxiliary Bishop Spies). How about another priest, independently of the priests I have quoted, who was sent for "sensitivity training" because he spoke in a homily against homosexual relationships.
Thank you Hank for informing me that a bunch of good, solid priests and seminarians are all, independently of each other, slandering Bishop Hicks by telling me how they have suffered under his administration.
It’s slander cuz I think you’re lying on purpose. I genuinely think you’re lying, as I also know people in Joliet who also would call you a slanderous liar. People think that they can lie on the internet and no one will call them out for it.
Knowing people in some diocese is not living in a diocese for 20 years where I am familiar with a good chunk of the priests here. If I say something about the Archdiocese of New York, that would be hearsay. What I say about the Diocese of Joliet is all based on primary sources.
Thomas has often made these claims before. I've learned to ignore them. It's the best course, since you won't change his perception of reality.
Wow. 1st time here and I got the immediate same vibes. Why is he not banned?
Thomas- you seem to be angry here. This appears to be more about you than either Hicks or the sick Priest you claim has been trying to reach Hicks. I don’t know the facts here- but Hank is right, this is slander. Leo made his choice, it’s going to be a very long pontificate for you if you don’t find a way out of internalizing your disagreements.
First of all, there is the concept of righteous indignation when others suffer because of bad leadership. I am not personally angry, but rather sad that the Vatican promotes careerists over humble men of faith. It does not change my faith. We have had to suffer through the pontificate of Pope Francis and maybe Pope Leo XIV (after this nomination showing the Holy Father is like his predecessor under the profound influence of Cardinal Cupich) is just a more polished version of him, but the Church will survive. Maybe instead of waiting for years to expose bad bishops after they have done much harm, it is best to expose the facts early on. Slander is lying. Everything I have said is true.
Joliet has been blessed before with some of the best bishops in the States such as the great Bishop Blanchette who fought against having Communion on the hand being allowed in the U.S. and the wonderful Bishop Sartain, one of best promoters of vocations. I pray with great hope for a good new bishop in Joliet, like maybe Bishop Cozzens. It is a truly happy day for me and the priests who I have seen suffer greatly because of Bishop Hicks, since neither they nor I plan to live in New York City.
I served at Hicks’ first Mass at the parish that now claims itself as Pope Leo’s home parish (since it merged with the parish that had merged with Pope Leo’s now-closed home parish). So Hicks and Pope Leo both share a home parish it seems.
It will be interesting to see how he fares over the years. I was never a big fan of Cardinal Dolan, even though I realize things could have been a lot worse had he not been there through the Francis pontificate. Bishop Hicks seems to be solidly orthodox and supportive (or at least not outright hostile) towards the TLM, which is better than a lot of other potential candidates I am sure. But NYC is a uniquely challenging archdiocese. There have been some questionable decisions, or lack of decisions throughout Cardinal Dolan's tenure. Lots of potential for outlandish and crazy incidents in a place as large and diverse as NYC. That circus of a funeral at St. Patrick's Cathedral a year or two ago comes to mind. Problematic rainbow parishes run by the Paulists. Celebrity priests like Fr. James Martin. Abysmal vocations over recent years. Will Bishop Hicks handle these kinds of things any better than Cardinal Dolan, or will he be too hesitant to make decisions that might cost him an invite to the next black-tie gala?
I'm not either optimistic or pessimistic. I'm not going to celebrate this pick or lament it. It sounds like Bishop Hicks has the tools and the mind to make good decisions. The primary question in my mind is whether or not he has the willpower to do so.
I thought these things were supposed to be secret until the Vatican announces them. Loose lips and all that. :p
I was hoping he’d replace Cardinal Cupich. Sorry to see him leave the diocese. He’s visited our parish a few times and I’ve always been impressed. A few weeks ago he released a pastoral letter that’s worth reading. https://make.diojoliet.org/
Let us hope and pray that the advent of Hicks will also coincide with a jump-start for the beatification of Ven. Fulton Sheen. Can't help but feel Dolan is the one who's been holding that back for no good reason ever since he lost the lawsuit over Sheen's body (which lawsuit should never have happened given that New York was doing very little to promote his cause before that).
New York has skeletons in its closet (cough cough Spellman) and all this Fulton Sheen stuff threatens the institutional prestige of the Archdiocese’s leaders.
JD any insight on why Dolan’s letter was accepted so soon after turning 75? I’m not aware that he has any serious health issues. The recent practice has been to allow Cardinal Archbishops to stay on well past 75. Cardinal O’Malley stayed on until 80.
It's very sad how few vocations are in the Archdiocese of New York. Cardinal Dolan is such a blessing to the American Catholic community, but for whatever reasons the strategies for getting young men to open their minds and hearts to God's call have not been particularly effective as far as actual enrollment in seminary. I have one major concern: How is it that Cardinal Dolan, who turned 75 in February, is on his way out in NYC while Cardinal Cupich, who is 11 months older (and therefore submitted his resignation to Pope Francis in March 2024) is still there with no chatter about an imminent replacement? This is NYC, so this appointment has been on the minds of those in the Holy See for some time, pre-dating the death of Pope Francis. That a bishop in Joliet with experience in the Archdiocese of Chicago is headed to NYC when Chicago has the same need at the same time is puzzling to me. I know Cardinal Dolan really wanted to wrap up the litigation with Chubb to not leave that on his successor's desk. Maybe he's been petitioning to have his resignation accepted. Maybe Pope Francis was keener on leaving Cupich in Chicago for another year or so and therefore less work had been done to find the appropriate archbishop for Chicago. Bishop Hicks sounds like just the kind of prelate who will fit in an archdiocese with a need for vocations, a diverse and ever-growing Hispanic population (his time in Central America will serve him well), and he would have experienced the challenges facing urban and suburban parishes alike, so he seems well suited. There is one particularly younger priest (about 46 y/o) in NYC who I think would be an excellent bishop. I've been secretly hoping he was on track for appointment as an auxiliary bishop. Guess it was too much to hope that he'd be taking over the whole archdiocese!
Is it wrong that I want to make lawn signs that say "+Cupich Out 2026"?