Catholic pastor C. Frank Phillips innocent of charges but guilty of something else . . .

. . . violating unspecified ” standards for behavior.” and so cannot do public ministry in the Chicago archdiocese.

Although Phillips was not found to have violated any church or secular law, archdiocese spokeswoman Paula Waters said there was other information that warranted his removal and a continued ban on his administering sacraments in public within the archdiocese.

Waters declined to detail the findings against Phillips.

Except to add:

“ . . . The review board “did not recommend that he be returned as the pastor of St. John Cantius. And so, based on their recommendation that he not return and on other factors, the cardinal decided that his faculties to minister would remain withdrawn.” [Italics added]

Question: Was the review board required by the cardinal to recommend that? Without doing so, they really did recommend it? A sort of Humpty Dumpty situation? Or Red Queen?

In any case, the review board that found Phillips innocent “did not make any recommendations,” his lawyer Stephen Komie said. “They returned a straight report.”

So: Why is Fr. P. banned in Chicago? Was it Humpty Dumpty’s “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less”? Or the Red Queen’s off-with-head scenario?

Either way, matters have gotten curiouser and curiouser, as Alice understood her situation.

via Chicago Tribune