The EWTN News portal (January 26, 2026) profiles Ronald Hicks, appointed as “archbishop” of New York by antipope Leo XIV, emphasizing his work with Nuestros Pequeños Hermanos (NPH) in Latin America. The article portrays Hicks as shaped by “vulnerable communities” and highlights his admiration for “St.” Óscar Romero while celebrating his relational approach to ministry. This human-centered narrative exemplifies the neo-church’s abandonment of the Church’s supernatural mission.
Reduction of the Church’s Mission to Naturalistic Humanism
The article’s recurring emphasis on Hicks’ organizational management (“very organized, very responsible”) and emotional connectivity (“empathy,” “big heart”) reveals the conciliar sect’s fundamental error: reducing the priesthood to social work. Quas Primas (Pius XI, 1925) condemns this inversion by declaring: “When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony” (n. 19). Nowhere does the profile mention Hicks’ fidelity to the immemorial liturgical rites, his defense of dogmatic truth, or his efforts to combat modernist heresies – the actual marks of Catholic leadership.
Instead, we find this telling admission from Hicks:
“When I leave here after five years, how do I want to be remembered?”
This therapeutic focus on legacy-building stands diametrically opposed to St. Paul’s maxim: “I magnify my office” (Rom 11:13). True shepherds concern themselves with preserving the depositum fidei (1 Tim 6:20), not cultivating personal admiration. The article’s praise of Hicks remembering children’s names while omitting any mention of catechizing them exposes the operation’s naturalism – as if the Church existed primarily to provide psychosocial support rather than divine grace.
Problematic Associations and Theological Ambiguities
Hicks’ veneration of “St.” Óscar Romero warrants severe theological censure. The Salvadoran prelate promoted liberation theology condemned by Pius XII’s Ad Apostolorum Principis (1958) as “a false messianism.” Romero’s illicit canonization (2018) by antipope Bergoglio constitutes an act of apostasy, given his documented dissent from Humanae Vitae and collaboration with Marxist forces. That Hicks embraces this figure – while the article remains silent on his adherence to Quanta Cura’s condemnation of religious liberty (Pius IX, 1864) – demonstrates doctrinal corruption.
Similarly troubling is Hicks’ leadership of NPH – an organization founded by Fr. William Wasson, who implemented post-conciliar innovations decades before Vatican II. Wasson’s 1954 Mexico orphanage operated under the same humanitarian model later condemned in Lamentabili Sane (1907): “The sacraments merely serve to remind man of the presence of the ever-benevolent Creator” (Proposition 41). The article’s description of NPH providing “comprehensive support” absent any mention of sacramental life or doctrinal formation confirms this group operates as another conciliar NGO, not a Catholic apostolate.
Omission of Requisite Catholic Doctrine
The profile’s most damning failure is its complete silence on Hicks’ stance toward:
- The Traditional Latin Mass, suppressed by antipopes since 1969
- Modernist errors like religious liberty and collegiality condemned in Pascendi (1907)
- Moral issues like abortion and gender ideology
When Campos praises Hicks’ “capacity for resolving conflicts,” informed Catholics recognize this bureaucratic euphemism for doctrinal compromise. True bishops emulate Athanasius, who resisted 80% of the episcopate to defend Christ’s divinity – not managers seeking “unity among everyone” while souls slide toward hell.
Hicks’ statement that encounters with Christ make us “changed and transformed” employs Bergoglian ambiguities condemned by Pius X: “Revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God” (Lamentabili Sane, Proposition 20). Authentic conversion requires abjuring heresy and embracing Church teaching – not emotional “transformation” detached from doctrinal assent.
The Latin American Laboratory of Modernism
Hicks’ Central American tenure (2005-2010) coincides precisely with the conciliar sect’s full implementation in the region. The “preferential option for the poor” he absorbed substitutes Marxist class struggle for the hierarchy of holiness. Contrast this with Pius XI’s warning: “The Church cannot be reduced to a system of philanthropy” (Divini Redemptoris, n. 27).
The article’s claim that Latin America “changed” Hicks confirms traditionalist fears about post-conciliar missionaries exporting heresy. True Catholic missionaries converted nations by preaching extra ecclesiam nulla salus and eradicating pagan customs – not by building secular NGOs. That Hicks returns to the U.S. as a carrier of conciliar corruption – rather than a bastion of Roman orthodoxy – demonstrates the neo-church’s inverted evangelization.
As antipope Leo XIV installs another modernist operative in New York, faithful Catholics recall Pius X’s prescient judgment: “The enemies of the Church disguise themselves as friends, pursuing their secret warfare to destroy from within” (Pascendi Dominici Gregis, n. 3). Until true shepherds restore the lex orandi and lex credendi, such appointments will continue advancing the “abomination of desolation” foretold in Daniel 9:27.
Source:
How his Latin American experience shaped the new archbishop of New York (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 26.01.2026