So, Exactly Why Did Abp Gustavo Remove Fr Phillips In 2017?

I should start this by saying I have no position on exactly why Abp Garcia-Siller removed Fr Phillips, other than to say he wasn't the first archbishop to make the attempt. This post here refers to discussion in a 2017 Our Lady of the Atonement parish meeting in which Mr Wilson referred to an attempt by Abp Flores to remove Fr Phillips, which was forestalled only at the intervention of Cardinal Law. This contradicts the current legend promulgated by Fr Phillips via Mary Ann Mueller that the relationship with Abp Flores was deeply spiritual.

What we know as a result of input from parish insiders and other visitors familiar with the Archdiocese of San Antonio is that there were multiple issues, any of which in a secular environment would have led to termination or major demotion:

• Violation of archdiocesan policy regarding the bishop's appeal, whereby Fr Phillips had parishioners pay their pledges to the parish, which the parish forwarded to the archdiocese only at the end of the year
• A large mortgage for expansion of the school, although the expansion was never completed and the building is largely empty
• As of 2016, four reports of abuse by Dcn Orr, which the archdiocese learned of belatedly because Fr Phillips did not follow policy and report the complaints.

What often happens in such personnel actions is that there's a buildup of issues that eventually culminates in a "last straw" event. We simply don't have Abp Gustavo's desk calendar, nor Fr Phillips's schedule, for 2016, but it's hard not to avoid thinking there would have been one or more meetings over the Orr complaints that belatedly reached the archbishop, but there would also have been friction with the chancery over financial issues as well. Nor do we know precisely when Fr Phillips renewed the parish application to join the North American ordinariate, which he'd withdrawn in 2012.

But it's hard not to think Fr Phillips initiated these discussions prior to his removal in January 2017. Certainly if Abp Gustavo learned of such discussions indirectly, he could well have seen this as Fr Phillips going behind his back to save his career and as an act of bad faith. This could certainly have been a "last straw" event, but also certainly not the only possibility. My regular correspondent pointed to wording in the archbishop's letter to the Atonement parish of January 19, 2017 regarding "expressions in the life of the parish that indicate an identity separate from, rather than simply unique, among the parishes of the archdiocese."

My feeling is that this wording is extremely vague, and in and of itself it would not constitute grounds for removal. It's worth recognizing that that personnel issues are confidential. If the archbishop said he’s disputing with Phillips about financial irregularities or covering up for Orr, that would be a breach of confidentiality and potential liability. What we now know of the timeline was that Orr had been forced into retirement as of 2016, very recently, and I’ve got to assume this was on the archbishop's mind. But probably other things were as well.

There would have been a buildup of issues over some period of time. For Phillips to change his mind over the ordinariate could well have been a last straw, in particular effectively giving the archbishop a rude gesture. The wording in the letter had the benefit of being vague and not flirting with breach of confidentiality.

My regular correspondent then asked why Bp Lopes was so much more explicit in the reason for inhibiting Fr Phillips. For one thing, the accusations against Orr had been made public since the archbishop removed Phillips. But in addition, Bp Lopes was in a more difficult position, since he'd come in as a white knight to rescue the parish in 2017, which Fr Phillips had been able to play as at least partial vindication. So Bp Lopes was forced in effect to be shocked, shocked in accounting for his action.

I continue to think that, had the parish stayed in the archdiocese and a consistent policy on Fr Phillips's removal been followed in 2017 -- which I think has been shown to have been the right move all along -- the parish would have dealt with the issue then, the wounds would have healed, and the parish would be in a better position to move forward now. What we see now, Phillips gone, the Latin mass ended, a substantial faction of parishioners departed, would have been an inevitable result in 2017 as well.

Except that the parish going forward would have had the support of an influential archbishop who'd placed a confidant in as administrator, the advice of experienced archdiocesan staff, and a certain lesson in what it really means to be mature adults in a serious Catholic environment.