1

Don Meehan
XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
XXX
XXXXXXXXXX
donmeehan@comcast.net

March 4, 2010

His Holiness, Benedict XVI

00120 Via del Pellegrino
Citta del Vaticano, Italy
benedictxvi@vatican.va

cc: purplecone2@msn.com

Most Holy Father:

I am sending you this gift (attached) of a CD recording of my song, La Senora de Guadalupe,

along with an original high quality original photo of the Tilma of Our Lady of Guadalupe. As a
singer, songwriter, musician, producer, engineer, I have always devoted my talents to promoting Our
Lady with several songs that I have written and recorded. This one is my best that I present it to you
and ask for your Apostolic Blessing. We are presently working on a plan to enlarge from the original
high quality negative, the photo to the actual size of the original, (41.75" x 67.25") and send to all
the bishops in the dioceses in the U.S.A. The quality of the large original negative we have insures
that it will be the closest thing to the actual Tilma, itself.
Along with my long and sincere devotion to Our Lady, I have been drawn to observe with
great interest, priests of dignity, integrity and zeal who continue to love and serve their Church, along
with those who have marred its name, and lowered the credibility to a dangerous and unacceptable
level. I have recently focused my prayers and novenas to Our lady of Guadalupe and Saint Juan
Diego to intercede on behalf of my dear friend, Philip Hower, and his lifelong desire and love for
God and his Church, to become a Roman Catholic priest.
I am extending here a final plea for Your Holiness to intervene on Philip’s behalf, inasmuch
as his good name and reputation has been totally damaged and wrecked by corrupt and sinful actions
of those in authority representing the Church. I will relate his story here as briefly as possible with
certain documentation. Additional reliable documentation and evidence is available. What is
interesting to note is that in years after Philip named certain priests of wrongdoing, their names were
in the news as either being suspended or forced to resign. Lately, Philip Hower has expressed a desire
to compose an Affidavit with Exhibits of evidence comprising even newer events which have
prevented his ordination.
Philip has fully completed all his studies for the priesthood, and probably at least $150,000
(American) or more, has been spent on those studies, which, at this point has been wasted and thrown
away by at least four American Bishops. However, corruption within the hierarchy has prevented his
ordination because he witnessed and reported corruption and homosexual activities within the
priesthood, and he was rewarded by being punished, banished, cut off and in effect fired, with no
foreseeable means for a decent livelihood or future. And as God is my witness, and to the best of my
knowledge, I swear to the truth of all evidence presented herein.
 2

Just before Philip completed all of his Harrisburg, PA Diocese sponsored studies at the
Josephinum Seminary in Columbus, Ohio, in May, 1986, then Harrisburg Bishop (and now Cardinal)
William Keeler assigned Philip to a parish in Selinsgrove, PA, in June thru August, 1985, to work as
a summer intern under the supervision of Father John G. Allen. During the internship he was
expected to share the priests’ residence with Father Allen. During that summer, Philip was ordered
by Father Allen to vacate the rectory on a regular basis. He learned from parishioners that Father
Allen engaged in inappropriate behavior with the young men from the local university located across
the street from the rectory, during those times when Philip was barred from the rectory. Philip
complained to then Bishop, now Cardinal Keeler, though appropriate channels that Allen was
committing various sexually related acts and possible criminal acts within the confines of the
Rectory. In September, 1985, Bishop Keeler punished Philip and cut him from sponsorship of his
seminary studies at Josephinum, because of his “whistle-blowing” in regard to Father Allen, and
banished him from the diocese. Years later, Father Allen was moved out of the parish by a different
bishop, and withdrawn from all active church ministry (Please see Attachment A below re
Father Allen –later 2002 - Details of Clergy Abuse Case Revealed)
As proof of Philip’s deep dedication and realization of his call from God, and despite his
shock at being dismissed by Bishop Keeler and banished from Harrisburg, Philip returned to
Josephinum as an independent student, obtaining a student loan and paying his own way. He
completed his masters of divinity degree in May ’87 and had all of the educational and internship
requirements necessary to be ordained, first, as a deacon, and next a priest. Afterwards, he taught
religious education but could not deny his desire to become a diocesan priest.
Philip contacted the Diocese of Tucson in February ‘87 and initially was told by then
Director, Father Steven Stencil, that he was welcome to interview and apply for ordination. He did an
application by mail and interviews with Father Stencil by phone. Later Philip finally met with Father
Stencil who placed him as a deacon in St. Francis of Assisi in Yuma, Arizona under Father Richard
Troutman. Philip learned later that Father Stencil had been in contact with the Josephenum in
Ohio and the Diocese of Harrisburg and had been instructed to prevent Philip’s ordination. It is
believed that Father Stencil’s having this information gave him a weapon, or device to lure
Philip into the later events of Father Stencil’s scheme of a promise of ordination, but then his
attempt to seduce Philip. (See Attachemt C below -two articles: "Priest Who Dodged
Charges Is New Problem for Tucson Diocese" and "Tucson Diocese stayed mum on priest's
trouble"
In early 1988, Philip and Father Joe Baker met with Administrator of Priests for the Church
in Yuma, Monsignor Richard O’Keefe, to bring to his attention the existence and depth of sexual
depravity and corruption in the Tucson Diocese. Philip, with ample evidence, rightfully named
Father Troutman and others in the Yuma area with depraved acts, and Father Stencil, who had
attempted to sexually assault Philip. Father Troutman, a known alcoholic, who almost died mixing
alcohol with drugs, tried to seduce Philip and was also known to frequently have his girlfriend, a
Catholic nun, sleep over in the rectory with him. Monsignor O’Keefe assured Philip that he was
aware of Father Troutman’s personal history and wrongful conduct and that he would personally
make certain that there would be no interference with Phil’s ordination as a priest. But he broke that
promise. O’keefe notified Father Troutman that Philip had revealed his (Father Troutman’s) sexual
misconduct. Father Troutman and others contrived and concocted a false story that Philip had been
intimate with Father Troutman’s homosexual lover, Bradley Jones, and others to cause harm to
Philip. Jones later admitted that he fabricated the defamatory and scandalous story about Philip at the
bequest of Father Troutman.
In August, 1988, Philip personally met with Bishop Moreno and informed him of the sexual
misconduct of Father Stencil and Father Troutman. Bishop Moreno’s response was to accuse Philip
 3

of a loss of faith in God and Christ, and that he appeared to be unsuitable for the priesthood; to cancel
Philip’s ordination as both a Deacon and a priest; to subject him to a psychological examination by a
confidant of Bishop Moreno and to banish Philip from the Tucson Diocese and from the state of
Arizona for a period of five years. Bishop Moreno corruptly cautioned Philip to be silent forevermore
about what he had observed regarding the two priests, lest he ruin any remaining opportunity he
might have to be ordained, and lest he cause damage to the Roman Catholic Church.
Philip sank into a deep and serious clinical depression, believing that he had no self worth, or
value and that his life’ destiny had been denied to him because he was in the eyes of God, unworthy.
Philip erroneously believed that the acts and words of the superiors were somehow condoned by
God, when in his heart he knew, but continued to suppress that those acts and words were inspired by
the most base and ugly motives of sexual depravity and by evil hands guided by evil minds. As the
depression grew and begun to overwhelm him, Philip entertained thoughts of suicide, but fortunately
he obtained supportive counseling.
On March 27, 2002 after 14 years, Phil was finally able to make an appointment with
Bishops Moreno and Kicanas in Tucson, renewing his request to become a priest. After Bishops
Moreno and Kicanas had reviewed their secret and other files prior to the meeting they again denied
Philip’s ordination. They claimed they were acting on spiritual and theological grounds and
republished the false, abusive and defamatory comments about Philip originally made by Father
Troutman and Father Stencil and by (then) Bishop Keeler. Philip’s depression was further aggravated
by the latest denial of his request for ordination. Word was spread throughout the Catholic
community that Philip Hower was a “whistle-blower” who could not be trusted, and who would
bring the wrath of law enforcement upon them, that he was not sexually perverted and was an
unsuitable candidate for priesthood, and that by dangling before him the slim carrot of hope of
ordination, his eternal silence thereby could be obtained. (Please see Moreno’s Admission – his
deposition - Attachment B)
Investigation has disclosed that in many other dioceses, priests, church workers, seminarians
who brought to the attention of the bishops incidents of sexual debauchery and depravity by priests
and bishops, were similarly banished and denied faculties, all as to avoid the exposure of secrets, that
is the vast numbers of perverted pedophile priests within its ranks. Father Troutmen was not
disciplined nor criticized for his attempt to defame Philip but was rewarded by Bishop Moreno – his
ascendance to position of pastor of the Tucson Northwest Region within the diocese of Tucson.
However, Stencil was finally suspended in 2002, according to the news reports.
(Please see Attachment C - Priest (Steven Stencil) Who Dodged Charges Is New Problem for
Tucson Diocese)
When all attempts to regain his desire to follow his calling to the priesthood had failed, Philip
learned that his old friend and counselor at Josephinum, Father David Choby, had been chosen to
become Bishop of Nashville. He renewed the previous friendship after many years and after spending
much time with Bishop Choby, invitation to his installation, invitation to his home, phone calls,
letters, telling, discussing fully the events of his being banished and his filing of a lawsuit against the
Tucson Diocese and Bishops Moreno and Kicanas and others to attempt to restore his good name and
reputation, Father Choby then invited Philip to move to Nashville and finally, gave him a firm
promise of ordination and located a pastor and parish for him to come to Nashville permanently.
With everything assumed to be in perfect order, with the destination being Bishop Choby’s promised
parish of the Good Shepherd in Decherd, Tennessee, Philip would have a house to himself and a big
yard for his two dogs. In short, Philip would have (and did have) all the considerations of a
seminarian, with seminarian's stipend, medical, dental, vision insurance benefits, and gas/car stipend,
full support, and since all of his studies were complete he would finally be ordained a priest. All
 4

these benefits were implemented except ordination and all of these proofs, receipts and documents
are available.
Based on Philip’s sincere trust in Bishop Choby’s integrity and sincere promises, Philip sold
and gave away many possessions, leased his home in Tucson, AZ and rented and loaded a 26 foot U-
haul van and drove 1800 miles to Decherd, Tennessee based on the Bishop’s promise, that the house
on parish grounds would be there waiting. When he arrived, Bishop Choby had suddenly gone to
Rome and the pastor denied any knowledge of his coming, and Philip was turned away by the pastor,
who claimed he knew nothing about Philip’s assignment. He was forced to go to a motel and his
belongings went to storage. The bishop’s secretary later also claimed that she didn’t know anything
of Philip’s assignment.
On or about December 4, 2008, Prentice Dean, the Nashville Vice Chancellor, informed me
that contrary to the word of Bishop Choby’s approval and promise of ordination, “was not
necessarily final approval.” Dean then informed me that “it required final approval from the bishop
and OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES.” Therefore, the appearance is that OTHER INTERESTED
PARTIES may have indeed, banned Philip Hower from ordination over the word of Bishop Choby.
This conversation with Prentice Dean and others at the diocese is well documented.
When Bishop Choby returned from his unannounced and unexpected Rome trip on or about
October 2-3, 2008, there was a different attitude than before. Alone, homeless, cold and hungry,
Philip finally met with the Bishop a few days later for an explanation. Philip had held no secrets from
Bishop Choby about his past, revealing any and all about the Tucson problems and treatment by
Bishops (now Cardinal) Keeler, Moreno and Kicanas. But then, Bishop Choby falsely informed
Philip that he knew nothing about Philip‘s life of those past years, nor about the lawsuit, and based
on Philip’s “whistle-blowing” on corruption in his past, that Bishop Choby would be
“uncomfortable” in ordination of Philip to be a priest. This change of attitude, this excuse, thee
apparent lies, this heartless and inhuman treatment of Philip Hower is in grave contrast to Vatican
announcements regarding homosexuality in the priesthood and seminaries. (Please see Catholic
News Service - attachment D) This attitude also suggests a possibility of several other possible
scenarios:
1 That Bishop Choby may have been afraid that certain hidden and secret homosexual
activities within his own diocese, and possibly his cathedral surroundings, might be revealed.
2 That perhaps even Choby and/or his associates may have been secretly homosexually
oriented.
3 That others at the diocesan level may have overstepped the Bishop’s authority in the final
decision to ordain Philip.
4 That Bishop Choby may have been ordered by his superiors not to go through with an
ordination for fear of exposing known corruption within the diocese.
5 Perhaps, you, Holy Father, or others within the Vatican, without all the facts on or about
September 30, 2008, may have instructed Bishop Choby during his trip to Rome to not ordain Philip
Hower, since Bishop Choby was unexpectedly in Rome at the very time of Philip’s arrival in
Decherd, Tennessee, and turned away from the parish home he was promised by Bishop Choby.
There is much more to be told about Bishop Choby, which, indeed, more truths of his
continued treatment of his “friend”, Philip Hower, is well documented. There is a strong hint of total
dishonesty and corruption emanating from the diocese of Nashville. After Philip was finally forced to
return to Arizona, Bishop Choby cut off any and all contact whatsoever with him refusing to answer
or return Philip’s phone calls. Although the evidence is clear, it is obvious that Bishop Choby’s
intentions are to deny and/or cover up his part in bringing Philip to Nashville with promises of
ordination.
 5

We hope to see a happy outcome for the life of Philip Hower and that you, Holy Father will
intervene and clear his name. At this time there appears to be no happy ending for this man, whom
Mother Teresa of Calcutta once told him, "Remember me each time you raise the Chalice"; a man
who has given many years of his life to answer his call from God to be a Catholic priest; a devout
and honest man who has struggled with his identity and now, at fifty years of age has lost all hope of
ever becoming a priest, has witnessed and obediently reported corruption within, but was rewarded
with punishment for it by those unwilling to accept truth and justice, which was the basis and
outcome of his years of studies at the Josephinum Seminary.
Finally, I ask, what more would the Holy Father want in a priest than the sincere and honest
dedication of a man like Philip Hower? Please, Holy Father, you have in your hands the power to
change this and restore the good name of Philip Hower, and I beg of you to do so.
All the facts are recorded for historians to know. My name is well known and certainly
respected with my history in the entertainment business and my work in exposing corrupt judicial
actions and wrongful convictions. Please see: http://www.scribd.com/DON%20MEEHAN Entering
the words - don meehan writer producer recording mix engineer – into a search engine such as
GOOGLE, will give an example of who I am. I am not just an insignificant little voice in the midst.
Presently, there is a book in progress and an American screenplay almost completed that depicts the
above facts and the perils and the ruined life of Philip Hower. The end of that story is yet to be
written. It can be a happy and glorious ending, or a sad one. But be assured that the story will go
down in history about the success or the failure of the Roman Catholic Church in it’s dealing with an
honest and worthy man, Philip Hower, whose desire, hard work and devotion to his religion and to
his God, was rewarded with shame, dishonor, banishment, and who was thrown away by the
aforementioned Holy Roman Catholic Church’s leaders and certain false and egotistical so-called
representatives of God. My deepest and sincerest prayers are that you, Holy Father, will change this
most terrible chapter in Church history. If I don’t receive an appropriate response from you,
personally, Holy Father, I can only assume that others have intervened to continue to bury the facts
of this case. And if that being the case, I will do all in my power to publicize and make these facts
known to present and future historians about how and why Philip Hower was thrown away by the
Catholic Church.
In relation to the Philip Hower story, the the 2005 Instruction is totally contradictory that
indicated: the Congregation for Catholic Education in accord with the Congregation for Divine
Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, believes it necessary to state clearly that the
Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to
holy orders those who practise homosexuality, present deep-seated homosexual tendencies or
support the so-called 'gay culture'."

Respectfully,

Don Meehan
Cc Philip Hower, et al

Attachment A re Father Allen –later 2002

Details of clergy abuse case revealed
 6

April 14, 2002

The pastor at St. Margaret Mary Alacoque Catholic Church in Penbrook has resigned following a
"credible" allegation of sexual misconduct nearly 23 years ago, the Diocese of Harrisburg said. Rev. John
G. Allen, pastor of the church since 1995, resigned April 5, the same day diocese officials confronted him
with the allegation, and has moved out of the parish and withdrawn from all active church ministry, the
diocese said. "It is with heavy heart, that I must inform you that on Friday, April 5, 2002, a credible
allegation of sexual misconduct was made to diocesan officials concerning your pastor, Father John
Allen," Bishop Nicholas Dattilo, who oversees the 15-county diocese, said in a letter to parishioners. The
accusation stemmed from an alleged incident involving a juvenile nearly 23 years ago, (1979) officials
said, declining to release more information. The allegation was reported to the Dauphin County district
attorney's office.

Aug 16, 2005

By Matt C. Abbott

The following are reprints of two recent articles from a publication titled Concerned Catholics Courier. They were
written by Diane Levero, who can be reached at CatholicCourier@aol.com .

HARRISBURG MAN AWARDED IN PRIEST SEX ABUSE CASE

Charges back allegations against priest named in RICO suit

Cardinal William Keeler named defendant in both cases

By Diane Levero

A 44-year-old Harrisburg man has received a settlement in a lawsuit alleging that a priest in the
Harrisburg diocese, Father John G. Allen, sexually abused him repeatedly when he was a teenager in the
1970s. The resignation of Father Allen as pastor of St. Margaret Mary Alacoque Church in suburban
Harrisburg, following a credible allegation of sexual misconduct, received wide news coverage at the time
it occurred, in April, 2002. Tthe subsequent lawsuit filed by William J. Hill against the Diocese of
Harrisburg, Cardinal William Keeler and Bishop Nicholas Datillo, and the resulting settlement in 2004
were not reported by the media.

In June, however, Mr. Hill revealed information to Concerned Catholics Courier regarding the lawsuit and
settlement.
Mr. Hill's allegations against Father Allen, which the Diocese of Harrisburg found credible, support
allegations made in a federal lawsuit filed by former seminarian Philip Hower charging priestly sexual
misconduct and subsequent cover-ups by various bishops, including Cardinal Keeler.

Mr. Hower's suit, filed August 4, 2004, in U.S. District Court in Arizona, alleges, under the federal
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a conspiracy to block his ordination to the
priesthood by a number of dioceses and their bishops, because he was a whistleblower who reported the
homosexual misconduct of various priests.

Attachment B - Moreno's Admission

 7

In a deposition, former Tucson Bishop Manuel D. Moreno comes clean about allowing pedophile priests
to take kids to Disneyland

• Bishop Moreno has expressed regret for condoning pedophilia.

Gustavo Arellano is a staff writer for the OC Weekly.

He's one of the most notorious pedophilic-priest shufflers in American Catholic history: Manuel D.
Moreno, former bishop of the Diocese of Tucson.

Moreno resigned last year after serving Southern Arizona for 21 years, a period during which
Moreno settled 11 lawsuits alleging child molestation by Tucsonan priests for $14 million. During
his tenure, Moreno also offered refuge to seminary classmates accused of sexual misconduct, like
Patrick Ziemann (former bishop of Santa Rosa, Calif., who resigned in 1999 after accusations
arose that he kept a priest as his personal sex toy) and Robert Trupia (nicknamed "Chicken
Hawk" by his fellow priests). At the time of Moreno's resignation, 17 more sex-abuse lawsuits
awaited Tucson-area parishioners, inching the current Tucson Catholic hierarchy toward the
once-unimaginable brink of bankruptcy.

Moreno is in failing health, preparing to meet his maker. Perhaps that explains why Moreno is
now openly admitting his complicity in the Tucson sex-abuse scandal. In an extraordinary June 2
deposition taken by Costa Mesa, Calif.-based attorney John Manly, who's currently representing
alleged sex-abuse victims in Tucson, Moreno acknowledged rumors that have been whispered
about by sex-abuse victims for years but had been studiously ignored by Tucson-area Catholics.

In the course of the two-hour deposition, held in Pima County Superior Court, Moreno
acknowledged, among other things, that he'd allowed priests he knew were child molesters to
take kids on trips to Disneyland, where priests would then molest them.

This shocking revelation involved Kevin Barmasse and Juan Guillen, two priests who are listed as
sex molesters on the Tucson diocese's Web site. In the case of the former, Manly asked Moreno if
he remembered a Los Angeles archdiocesan official pleading the following: "Manny, We've this
problem with this new priest, Kevin Barmasse. He got picked up by the sheriff (for an incident
with a boy in Long Beach). The attorney general wants him out of town. We'll pay his stipend, but
would you please take him?"

"Do you remember that (conversation)?" Manly asked Moreno.

"I just cannot remember," Moreno--who, earlier in the deposition, had affirmed the occurrence of
the conversation--responded softly. "If somebody said that they did, then it's my problem that I
forgot. Maybe it's psychological. Maybe it's denial."

Whether the discussion between Moreno and the Los Angeles prelate took place, one thing is
certain: Moreno allowed Barmasse to take children on diocese-sponsored trips to Disneyland,
despite knowledge of Barmasse's past. In one such visit--according to a lawsuit filed by Manly
against Moreno, Barmasse, and the Diocese of Tucson--Barmasse rented a condo in San Diego
after spending the day at Disneyland in 1988 with a 17-year-old Tucson boy. Court papers
describe how the priest "invited plaintiff to have evening prayer one night alone in his room."
Reflection soon turned into assault as Barmasse "removed much of the plaintiff's clothing and his
own, then straddled plaintiff and rubbed plaintiff's back and buttocks with his hands and aroused
penis."

Moreno also told Manly that he knew about the predatory Guillen, who's currently serving a 10-
year sentence for repeatedly molesting two brothers. In one instance, according to an Aug. 22,
2002, Yuma Police Department report, Guillen allowed a group of altar boys to sleep in his room
 8

at Immaculate Conception Church in Tucson during the summer of 1994 before they took a bus
to Disneyland the next morning. During the night, Guillen stripped a 14-year-old boy and
"attempted to anally penetrate (the victim). He tried in several positions, but was unable to and
finally stopped and put (the victim's) pants back on." Two weeks after the Disneyland trip, the
report continued, Guillen "masturbate(d the victim) with one hand. Guillen gave oral sex to (the
victim) until (the victim) ejaculated in his mouth."

By the time of this molestation, Tucson diocesan officials already knew about Guillen's
predilection for boys. A diocesan memo written by Monsignor Richard W. O'Keeffe on Aug. 3,
1992, opined that Guillen would "profit from this 'apparent wrongdoing,' as reported by
concerned people," referring to parishioners who informed O'Keeffe that Guillen was spending
too much time with the same boy--whom he'd later attempt to sodomize.

Moreno was unavailable for comment, but in his final years as Tucson's bishop, Moreno
expressed regret for condoning pedophilia with several letters and homilies to parishioners
asking for forgiveness.

Nevertheless, even the moderate religion Web site Beliefnet.com called Moreno one of the nine
worst bishops in the country, lambasting him for lording over a sex abuse-plagued diocese in
which "officials protected one another, lied to a victim's family, failed to counsel victims,
destroyed statements, did not notify child protective authorities and were uncooperative with
police."

At the conclusion of Manly's deposition, Moreno once again exhibited repentance.

"As you sit here today," Manly asked Moreno, "is there anything with ... any of the other cases
that you would do differently, if you could turn back the clock?"

Moreno stumbled a bit, then said, "Well, I wish we could have avoided them as much as possible.
I wish they had been the holy priests they're supposed to be. Perhaps I could have been more
strict in that. I don't know."

Attachment C - Priest Who Dodged Charges Is New Problem for

Tucson Diocese
Priest Who Dodged Charges Is New Problem for Tucson Diocese

By Blake Morlock
Tucson Citizen [Tucson AZ]
May 9, 2003

The Catholic Diocese of Tucson has been blasted and sued for allegedly protecting pedophiles, but it's facing a different problem
now.

The Most Rev. Gerald Kicanas, bishop of Tucson, must deal with a priest accused of sexual misconduct who state authorities
decided not to prosecute.

Prosecutors in the Arizona Attorney General's Office did not charge the Rev. Steven Stencil on allegations he inappropriately
touched a 17-year-old boy while running a Casa Grande parish in 2000.

A letter from the Attorney General's Office said there was insufficient evidence to prove sexual abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.

The diocese may still take action against Stencil. But the prospect of murky inconclusiveness may confront a diocese more
concerned with restoring trust than reasonable doubt, Kicanas said.

"It's the middle ground that is confusing," Kicanas said. "Certainly the diocese will be cognizant that there is a suspicion of child
 9

abuse and would not let him be around children if he is returned to ministry."

More is now expected of priests than is defined by civil law, Kicanas said.

"The covenant or protocol that we established calls for a higher standard (for church employees) than just being found guilty of a
criminal offense," Kicanas said.

A diocese Sexual Misconduct Review Committee will recommend to Kicanas a course that depends on whether evidence proves
Stencil a threat to children.

Stencil moved from Casa Grande to St. Mark's the Evangelist Catholic Church on the Northwest Side in 2000 but was suspended in
2001 after he slept in a hotel room with a minor during an overnight outing.

If the board determines he is a threat to children, he won't return to the ministry. But if he's exonerated he could return to active
status.

The Attorney General's Office took the case after Pinal County prosecutors declared they had a conflict of interest. Chuck
Teegarden, spokesman for the Pinal County Attorney's Office, said his office received a letter from the Attorney General's Office
stating: "Insufficient evidence exists to prove the elements of sexual abuse beyond requisite of reasonable doubt and we are
declining to prosecute this manner."

The man who made the sexual misconduct allegations against Stencil said the priest touched him during a pool party in 2000 when
people were playing in the water.

This is the first time the 15-member review committee has dealt with a case that civil authorities have dismissed for lack of evidence.

The panel was established in July 2003 after the Tucson diocese settled 11 lawsuits alleging priests sexually abused 16 boys during
the 1960s, '70s and '80s. It enforces a new set of rules put in place after the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops met last June and
adopted a harder line against sexual abuse as a sex scandal engulfed the church.

The next meeting of the diocese sexual misconduct panel is May 29.

Tucson Diocese stayed mum on priest's trouble

The Arizona Republic
By Nena Baker
The Arizona Republic
TUCSON - Whatever happened to Father Steve?
When a 17-year-old boy complained two years ago that a Tucson priest had molested him, the diocese
didn't call Child Protective Services. Instead, court filings show, it launched an internal investigation
that dismissed the priest's actions as accidental.
Months later, in February 2001, the diocese suspended the priest, the Rev. Steven Stencil, for violating
a diocese policy forbidding clerics from being in the company of minors overnight, diocese officials
said.
But diocese officials confirm they haven't told parishioners about suspending the ministerial faculties of
Stencil, 50, who led the diocese's program for youths interested in the seminary from 1986 to 1994.

Attachment D Catholic News Service

By John Thavis
Catholic News Service
OCT. 8, 2002
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican has prepared a draft document containing directives against the
admission of homosexuals to the priesthood, informed Vatican sources said.
The document takes the position that since the church considers the homosexual orientation as
"objectively disordered" such people should not be admitted to the seminary or ordained, the sources
said Oct. 8.
10