ARTICLES

Fantasyland

Merced Priest’s Behavior is Inappropriate, Says Steinbock

BY STEPHEN FRANKINI

Bishop John T. Steinbock of the diocese of Fresno on July 15, 2004 removed Father Jean Michael Lastiri from his position as pastor of St Patrick’s parish in Merced after the Roman Catholic Faithful (www.rcf.org) posted evidence on its website that Lastiri solicited adult male sex partners over the internet. In reply to the postings, Lastiri, 48, said in the Merced Sun Times, “I’m just shocked by it and dumbfounded by it all.”

A vigilant parishioner approximately one week before the Lastiri scandal erupted, observed what appeared to be the priest’s white automobile parked beside the church dumpster. According to the parishioner, the man from a distance appeared to be Father Lastiri or close friend and accountant/outreach minister, Walter Szymusiak. The man was removing items from the car to the dumpster. Later, the parishioners retrieved from the dumpster instant messages printed on a parish letterhead, which led to the discovery of Lastiri’s profile containing his photograph on the homosexual website, www.bear411.com.

On July 16, a statement appeared in the Modesto Bee (www.modbee.com/local/story/8854948p-9743509c.html) by Bishop Steinbock regarding Lastiri’s removal. In it he states: “On July 14, information came to me regarding a Web page and chat room of Rev. Jean-Michael Lastiri that was totally inappropriate. The very next day, July 15, I spoke with Father Lastiri who denied any inappropriate sexual activity on his part and declared that he only entertained fantasies through this activity on the Internet.

“Realizing that this was a compulsive and addictive behavior, I am removing Father Lastiri from St. Patrick’s parish and sending him to St. Luke’s Institute for appropriate psychological and spiritual counseling and appropriate therapy to help him deal with this problem. He will be leaving the parish on Wednesday, July 21, for a period of rest and reflection before going to St. Luke’s Institute on August 8.

“Any information that came to me as Bishop before July 14 suggesting inappropriate activity by Father Lastiri was gossip, rumor and innuendo upon which I could not act in justice. Fr. Lastiri apologizes for any pain he has caused the community and wishes to seek the appropriate help to overcome his compulsive behavior so that he may return, with God’s grace, to full ministry as a good and faithful priest.

“All good Christians in this life struggle to be faithful to Christ. Our faith, above all, speaks to us of God’s love and forgiveness. Fr. Lastiri has served well and has done a great amount of good amongst God’s people at St. Patrick’s as he struggled with this addictive behavior.

“Fr. Lastiri asks God’s pardon for any wrong on his part. He also asks the pardon of God’s people whom he has always tried to serve and bring God’s love through these many years. Please pray for Fr. Lastiri as he seeks help to overcome this addiction.”

Some have found it odd that Bishop Steinbock’s letter says merely that Lastiri’s fantasies are “compulsive” or “addictive,” not disordered or sinful. The bishop gives no indication of how long Lastiri will be gone, thus giving no indication of the seriousness of the problem. One is left with the impression that Lastiri’s problem is equivalent to someone who craves too much chocolate or checks his e-mail too often.

The bishop states Lastiri “struggled” with his addiction. According to the evidence (which no one seems to deny) on the Roman Catholic Faithful website, Lastiri posted seven solicitations for sex in various parts of the United States in 2004 alone. Another solicitation was for sex on his trip to Rome when Lastiri accompanied Bishop Steinbock on his ad limina visit with the pope. Two of those solicitations (Houston and Huntington Beach), according to parishioners, correspond with conferences Lastiri attended that were held by the National Organization for Continuing Education of Catholic Clergy, of which Lastiri is the Region XI (Nevada, California, and Hawaii) head. One solicitation was for sex in Las Vegas. Roman Catholic Faithful’s Stephen Brady called the New York New York Casino in Las Vegas during the period Lastiri said he would be in that city. The casino confirmed that Lastiri had checked in. Brady then called the parish, which stated Lastiri was in Las Vegas.

What is the evidence that the bishop refers to as “gossip, rumor and innuendo upon which I could not act in justice”?

On October 3, 2003, former FBI agent Thomas Walsh sent a letter to Bishop Steinbock accompanied by court documents related to a criminal case that resulted in the conviction of Joseph Banuelos for sexually assaulting a minor. The case occurred in 1991 after Banuelos was working for about two years at Holy Family Church in Visalia, where Lastiri was pastor at the time and residing at St. Thomas Catholic Church in Goshen. The court document states, “he [Banuelos] had at least friendship and quite probably according to others a homosexual relationship with one of the priests Father Lastiri.” [Emphasis added]

Who were these others? After doing some research, Walsh circulated a flyer containing one of the names of the “others” — that of Banuelos’ cousin. Walsh did not directly send his flier to the bishop, though.

Court documents for Banuelos also list the seized items that resulted from a search warrant that was served at St Thomas the Apostle parish on March 22, 1991. The list included dildos, assorted women’s undergarments, 53 hard core pornographic magazines, 250 lewd photos of men (including himself), and “framed photos and card to Banuelos from Lastiri.”

Walsh sent the above mentioned court documents to the bishop on October 3, 2003 and received a reply in a letter dated October 27, 2003. “The excerpt you sent me of a court paper dated June 10, 1991,” wrote Steinbock, “presents rumor and gossip relating to the priest and not fact.”

Steinbock’s hesitation to investigate Lastiri seems to follow a pattern. The March 22, 2002 San Francisco Chronicle reported that, while bishop of Santa Rosa, Steinbock testified in a California courtroom in March 2002 that he did not remove a former priest/youth minister, Donald Kimball, after Kimball confessed in 1987 to repeatedly molesting a teenage girl.

Kimball remained in his position for three years after his confession to Steinbock. Not until Kimball admitted to molesting six girls did the bishop jump into action. The bishop admitted he had made no serious inquiry and was concerned that a “public scandal” would occur if the information got out. “I asked him specifically how many girls he had touched under the age of 18. He said six,” Steinbock testified in a criminal trial. He lamented, “I was a little upset because I had understood it was only two, and now it went up to six.”

Even after discovering that Kimball had molested six girls, Steinbock offered to use his influence to garner him a job in the San Francisco archdiocese, a detention center or a hospital, provided he not work with youth.

To help Lastiri deal with his addictive behavior, Steinbock is sending him to the St Luke Institute in Silver Spring, Maryland. What is the likelihood that St. Luke can help Lastiri? What is its track record?

In an article in the February 1997 Catholic World Report, author Lesley Payne documents the testimony of priests and seminarians who claim they have been subjected to a “Church-run psychiatric gulag at St. Luke, which they said was operated by theological liberals, often by men who are openly homosexual.” Payne notes that, according to one patient, at St. Luke doctrinally “rigid” priests who pray “compulsively” are kept longer than others with more severe problems.

Payne writes that, according to the book, Lead Us Not Into Temptation by Jason Barry (an admirer of the institute’s founder, Father Michael Peterson), therapy at St Luke “included affirmation of priests’ homosexual orientation.” The article quotes a doctor who resigned from St Luke Institute in 1998: “I have become progressively uncomfortable with the moral tone of the Institute and its therapeutic programs. In my opinion, the Institute has been used as an outlet for the psycho-pathology of its founder and for other members of the staff from its inception.”

I asked Michael Rose, author of Good Bye Good Men and editor of Cruxnews.com, for comment. “St. Luke’s,” according to Rose, “like most similar institutions, is a serious problem for a number of reasons. First, it has been shown in many venues that St. Luke’s operating principles are not grounded in Catholic morality. Homosexuality is regarded as a gift and not a disorder. I don’t see how any bishop could expect to get any positive results by sending one of his priests to such an institution.”

“St. Luke’s,” continued Rose, “is tied into the clergy network of lavender cronyism, leading one to reasonably suspect that ‘treatment’ provided by the institute is a ‘going-through-the-motions’ cover.”

Dr George Maloof, a psychiatrist from San Francisco with over 30 years experience, agrees with Rose. Sending Lastiri to St. Luke, said Maloof, “is a standard approach the bishop is taking. St Luke Institute (from what I’ve read from other priests’ experiences) and other centers have been notoriously unproductive or counterproductive in helping priests correct their behaviors. But it helps the bishop show that he is doing something.”

According to Maloof, treatment at centers like St Luke gives “the Freudian you-must-express-yourself-or-you-are-neurotic view. You must express yourself genitally, or it’s bad for your mental health. The American Church has basically bought into that perverse view Freud came up with to destroy the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church says celibacy is noble, and Freud maintained one has to express oneself genitally. Freud’s intention was to reform society by releasing it of the inhibitions the Church imposed on people. These treatment centers try to get people to express themselves sexually.”

But can’t homosexuals be qualified to serve as Catholic priests? Maloof responded, “I think that a homosexual priest who is obviously fantasizing and addicted to pornography and masturbation is clearly not suitable to be a priest and probably should not have been allowed to be a priest in the first place. I think that when one is obviously errant and known to be homosexual, that is at least as valid a reason as pedophilia to suspend that priest. Until that happens, the trust and credibility of the Church will continue to suffer.”

According to Maloof, “homosexuality reflects a need that the person has to find someone of the same sex to be a parental figure. So, it’s arrested sexual development — arrested in childhood. There’s a natural tendency to want to go back to childhood, to get a better parent/child relationship with a person of the same sex — because he or she did not have that as a child. The homosexual person has become fixated on a genital connection to become close to a parental figure.”

For Maloof, there is a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. “Homosexuality develops out of childhood,” he said. “That is why homosexuals tend to look for younger people. He would do that if he as a child was seduced or involved in genital activity. Sexual behavior tends to become habitual. If one starts out as a child, one perpetuates the same kind of activity. That is the most definite factor when you talk about how homosexuals are inclined to children. A homosexual seduced as a child will tend to go after children.”

Many parishioners at St Patrick’s support their pastor — and their anger is being directed at the people responsible for discovering the evidence. Letters appearing in the Merced Sun Star were posted on the parish website (www.olmstpatrick.org) attacking the messengers. “Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone” was the title of the first letter. A Marilyn Cardoza writes, “this letter is for the group of parishioners who felt the need to have the Rev. Mike Lastiri removed from Our Lady of Mercy/St. Patrick’s Parish.”

Cardoza continues, “I hope you are sleeping well at night. I did not realize we had living and breathing ‘saints’ in our parish who are free from sin and guilt to be able to pass judgment on fellow parishioners and our priests. My hat’s off to you! You must feel a grand sense of accomplishment to know that you not only have ruined a person’s life career, but also have caused such turmoil and confusion in our parish community, it may be irreparable. Bravo.”

After his removal, Father Lastiri was allowed to post a message on the parish website in which he indicates he would leave July 21 for a “two week vacation I already planned.” The last posting by Father Lastiri on buddybear.net reads as follows: “Want sex. CA bear visiting Orlando on Friday, 7/23.... looking for fun in other bears/admirers ..... basqueoso on bear411.”

TOP