Let's look at the peculiar situation of the unfinished school expansion. The parish took out a $6 million loan from the archdiocese for a school expansion that remains incomplete. The parish hasn't released enrollment history statistics (if indeed it even keeps them), but the Thursday visitor's account of how classes have been reduced over the years suggests it had peaked well before 2017. This in turn raises the question of whether the expansion, and the loan that financed it, were justified.
What led to an apparent long-term decline in enrollment isn't clear, in part because the parish has churned headmasters, which would keep any single one from getting a good handle on circumstances. However, I would guess that informal scuttlebutt over Dcn Orr's conduct with pubescent boys had something to do with it even before the archdiocese forced Orr's retirement. That Phillips had a pattern of enabling Orr couldn't have helped his case with the archbishop.
That several observers familiar with prudent budgeting and financial reporting would express the concerns they did on Thursday about the 2019 parish report suggests there must have been similar concerns of longer standing in the archdiocese, since it would have a schools department tasked with much closer supervision of the Atonement Academy. And the 2019 report, deeply flawed as it is, suggests an attempt at transparency that goes well beyond the attitude that must have prevailed under Fr Phillips.
Regarding the parish atmosphere, in particular the peculiar episode recounted in the google review a visitor cited Thursday, I sent this e-mail to Fr Lewis:
Fr Lewis, one of your parishioners referred me to a google review from a visitor to an Our Lady of the Atonement mass who said that, although he was Catholic, he was not allowed to receive communion. I cited this in today’s post on my blog, but it occurs to me that there may have been some misunderstanding – although the visitor apparently found an attempt to ask a priest about the parish after mass was unsatisfactory.So far, he hasn't replied. The consensus among visitors responding to Thursday's post was that we simply don't know enough about what happened in that episode to draw any firm conclusions, but it's clear that Fr Lewis has either been told not to communicate with me, or he has better things to do. This is unfortunate, since it would be an opportunity for him to set the tone. I could draft a perfectly reasonable reply that would go something like,Can you clarify whether there may have been some misunderstanding on the visitor’s part as to whether he could receive the Sacrament at OLA as a Catholic, or explain what the rule was that prevented him from receiving it?
Many thanks!
Mr Bruce, thanks for your e-mail. I'm simply not familiar with the incident the reviewer mentions, but our ushers' job is to facilitate the process for anyone in the pews who wishes to receive the Sacrament and make no judgment on eligibility. I spoke with Mr ____, the head usher, who tells me he isn't familiar with any such episode, so I can't be more helpful in this.However, Fr Lewis so far hasn't sent this reply or any other. But the report from a parishioner that the parish has discontinued a Sunday leaflet that might contain useful background eliminates that particular remedy in any case.We're preparing a brief backgrounder in our Sunday bulletin, though, that does explain some practices unique to the ordinariate that might make things clearer for visitors and eliminate any possible misunderstandings. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and we'll keep this in mind going forward.
It's hard not to conclude, though, that OLA is working steadily to evolve from a full ordinariate parish to a group-in-formation, and its school from a full school to a home school co-op. Apparently Fr Phillips tours ordinariate parishes giving useful advice on how to do this.
