Lima Newsroom, May 13, 2025 / 15:56 pm (CNA).
The current bishop of Chiclayo, Peru, Edinson Farfán, is publicly defending the actions of his predecessor, Bishop Robert Prevost — now Pope Leo XIV — in the face of accusations that he covered up sexual abuse in the diocese.
Responding to a question at a press conference about the issue, Farfán stated: “That’s a lie. He has listened, he has respected the processes, and this process is still ongoing… believe me, I am the most interested person in justice being served and, above all, in being able to help the victims.”
The bishop of Chiclayo was referring to the allegations of three sisters who met with Prevost in 2022 to report that they had been abused by a priest years earlier when they were minors. They allege that the then-bishop did not open an effective canonical investigation and that the accused continued to celebrate Mass.
Farfán said he has accompanied the alleged victims: “I have asked for their forgiveness, we have wept together, and they have undoubtedly been treated well; there is a close relationship. I hope we can reach satisfactory closure.”
He added that the canonical process is ongoing, assuring that “the cardinal, Pope Leo XIV, has been the most responsive to these cases in the Peruvian Church, and he has listened to us; he has allowed us to achieve justice.”
Pope Francis appointed Prevost as apostolic administrator of Chiclayo in November 2014 and bishop of the same diocese in 2015. He later also served as apostolic administrator of Callao, also in Peru.
Chiclayo is the fifth most populated city in Peru with over 600,000 inhabitants.
At the press conference, Farfán also denied that the victims had received $150,000 in exchange for their silence, citing the public testimony of one of them, who wrote the following on social media in response to a series of accusations in the form of questions directed to Farfán: “I am one of the victims. We have not received any money, and I would never receive it in exchange for my silence. If this were true, with that amount I would at least have had the good sense to delete my posts, but that’s not the case. You can see everything on my profile.”
Farfán, an Augustinian like Pope Leo XIV, was appointed bishop of Chiclayo on Feb. 14, 2024, when then-Cardinal Prevost was prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops, the Vatican body that oversees bishops worldwide and nominates candidates.
International concern and demand for reform
Farfán’s defense of the new pope contrasts with the international reaction of survivor groups, especially SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests), which issued a statement following Leo XIV’s election expressing concern about the new pope’s record in handling abuse allegations, both in Chicago, where he is originally from, and in Peru.
In an open letter, SNAP charged that, when Leo XIV was provincial of the Augustinians, he allowed a priest accused of abuse to reside near an elementary school in Chicago and that as bishop of Chiclayo, victims reported a lack of action and transparency in the investigation, even allowing the accused priest to continue celebrating Mass after the complaint was lodged.
In the letter, SNAP demanded that decisive measures be taken within the first 100 days of the pontificate, including the creation of an independent global truth commission, the adoption of a universal zero-tolerance policy, international agreements ensuring transparency and accountability, a reparations fund financed with Church assets, and a global council of survivors with real authority to oversee and enforce these measures.
The Vatican’s reaction
ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner, contacted the Vatican press office for a response, and its director, Matteo Bruni, responded by saying that “this is news that’s been around for some time, as far as I know, and the diocese has already responded in a fairly clear statement.”
The statement Bruni referred to was published Dec. 12, 2023, by the Office of Social Communications of the Diocese of Chiclayo, noting that in April 2022, several young women lodged complaints with the Diocese of Chiclayo against Father Eleuterio Vásquez Gonzáles for sexual harassment. This led to his dismissal from the parish and the opening of both internal and criminal investigations, although both of these were later closed due to lack of evidence.
“After receiving the complaints, the accused priest was summoned and asked to leave the parish and cease exercising his ministry. A preliminary investigation was initiated and then sent to the Holy See,” the text states, adding that the “Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, seeing that the accusations brought against the accused priest have not been sufficiently proven, consequently decided to close the case pro nunc.”
In response to subsequent news media and social media coverage of the case, the diocese said it had reopened the investigation, imposed precautionary measures on the priest, “and ordered him not to exercise his priestly ministry.” It also reaffirmed its rejection of any conduct that would harm minors and vulnerable people, emphasizing the presumption of innocence while the case continues and “zero tolerance for this type of conduct.”
The Diocese of Chiclayo emphasized in the text that, in accordance with “the instructions from the Holy See,” it will continue “developing appropriate measures of prevention and action for the good of the Church” so that “pastoral activity is not affected by behaviors that seriously damage it.”
Diego López Marina and Victoria Cardiel contributed to this article.
This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
And what about Rupnik?
Hmmm?
Those are just words of the third person. It is the Pope himself who should publicly address those accusations.
I remember speaking to our bishop after the Royal commission, telling that if he indeed is committed to a removal of any possibility of abuse, he must do away with silence which traditionally surrounds an act of abuse in the Catholic Church. When I speak about it, I always offer an example of two families.
In a normal family, if its member was abused, a victim is protected, taken care of while an abuser is punished/thrown out of the family cycle. (This is actually both a natural and God’s norm, to protect a victim and to punish an abuser.) Everyone knows who the abuser is. A victim is being healed via an attitude of her family, their words and actions which convey that she is not guilty and there is no shame for her in the fact that she was abused. The shame belongs to an abuser.
In a pathological family the reaction to abuse is exactly the opposite. A victim is blamed and abuser is not, all shrouded with silence, a victim is urged to be quiet “to protect the honor of the family”, an abuser remains a member of a family. If a victim continues making a noise, she is painted as “bad” and often ostracized.
This pathological process is what has been routinely happening in the Catholic Church, decades after decades. It is precisely that enables the abuse to happen again and again. The system of suppression of a victim and protection of an abuser is there; it only takes a few people with pathology of a psyche to activate it. From here follows that the system must change, and first of all the rule of silence. I see this task as enormous and probably worthy of the Pope’s effort. If the new Pope manages to uproot all that, he will definitely enter into history. However, it is not a matter of setting “protective policies”. It is about resetting the whole Church in accordance with a normal human psyche (and thus with Christ).
Thank you Anna for this and all you have done on this forum in the service of Christ.
If St. John Paul II could meet with Mehmet Ali Ağca, surely Pope Leo (if he thinks it is appropriate for the healing of the victims) could offer an invitation for the victims to come see him in Rome. What could be more important on his agenda than to show that the Pope cares and wants to do whatever he can to bring justice to victims? Why not finish as Pope what he started as the Bishop of the Diocese of Chiclayo? Obviously, as a Canon Lawyer, Pope Leo knows that he could also act ASAP on other lingering abuse cases like Rupnik, Zanchetta, et al.
After the Mercy Alone heteropraxy (Sola Misericordia) of the last pontificate, it’s high time for some papal justice. The unity of Christ demands both mercy and justice.
Br. Jaques suggests: “His past is irrelevant.” How so? Are we not all products of our past. The Cardinal would not have become pope if cardinal had not in the past preceded his name.
Anna above suggests: “This pathological process is what has been routinely happening in the Catholic Church, decades after decades.” Then: “It is about resetting the whole Church in accordance with a normal human psyche (and thus with Christ).”
–Who has the right to declare or to define a ‘normal human psyche’? NB: Why is Christ placed in parens?
–What is the verifiable evidence for ‘pathology’ in the Catholic Church? Who has the right to declare what is and what is not evidence for pathology?
As for CNA’s reporting on SNAP, we prudently recall the Catholic League’s reporting on the same:
http://www.catholicleague.org/snap-exposed-unmasking-the-survivors-network-of-those-abused-by-priests-2/
When all truth is revealed at the Final Judgment all truth will then be revealed. Until then, I for one shall take the pathology of the Catholic Church with salt. Christ Himself made Her His Bride; let wo/men make of Her what they will.
The foot dragging is apparent, and ONE of three accusers says THEY were not paid hush money. This all was known prior to Prevosts election, and yet, with those hanging allegations, he was still elected in only 4 ballots, showing strongly even on the 1st, showing a strong curial push to place him since he checked too many other boxes.
Business as usual in Rome, who ignores scripture that bishops should be free of taint of scandal.
This is a helpful clarification from the Diocese. It is hard to trust after so many scandals. The faithful long for appropriate justice and transparency. Let us pray for our Pope Leo to know and do God’s will in all matters.
The Church has spoken, Leo IS Pope. His past is irrelevant. He is who he is now and we must accept him as such and move on with him NOW and support him in the future.
“(Pope Leo’s) past is irrelevant.” That is false. Of course Pope Leo’s past matters. Irrational ignorance is not obedience. Leo’s track record is supposed to be a reason why he was elected. St. Augustine wrote his Confessions as a Bishop! More, the Word of God did not cover up St. Peter’s sins. God showed us how St. Peter repented, unlike Judas, who murdered himself in despair. There could have been a passage in the Gospels about St. Judas the Repentant Martyr, running to embrace Christ on the Cross, only to be nailed to a tree next to the St. Repentant Thief. No, Sacred Scripture says that the Apostle Judas despaired and murdered himself, eventually being replaced as an Apostle by St. Matthias – happy feast!
We HAVE to get this out of the way, and that means that the Pope must meet it head on, admit to any wrongdoing and then we can move on, but NOT until then.
The longer this ‘business as usual’ goes on the more it hurts the Church, and the more people just give up on Her.