In recent developments concerning Pope Leo XIV, parallels are drawn to other figures within the Catholic leadership regarding his management of sexual abuse allegations involving priests under his watch. While some victim advocates are urging accountability for Leo, who was once Cardinal Robert Prevost until his election, questions have been raised about his handling of abuse cases during his past roles in Chicago and Peru. Many are hopeful that as pope, Leo XIV will enforce stricter measures against bishops accused of mishandling similar issues.
Anne Barrett Doyle, representing the advocacy organization BishopAccountability.org, has emphasized the need for Pope Leo XIV to earn the trust of victims and their families rather than being granted trust automatically. Unlike other dioceses, Prevost didn’t release a list of accused individuals during his leadership. Additionally, there have been claims that during Prevost’s recent Vatican service, transparency was limited, and no disciplinary actions were taken against complicit bishops.
However, some give Prevost credit for advancing the cause of survivors tied to an abusive Peru-based Catholic movement that was later disbanded by Pope Francis. Abuse survivor and journalist Predo Salinas, a founding member of Ending Clergy Abuse, acknowledged Prevost’s critical support.
Pope Leo XIV has not been directly implicated in any abuse but is scrutinized for potentially inadequate responses in specific cases in Chicago and Peru. Earlier this year, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests initiated a formal complaint against Prevost, alleging misuse of ecclesiastical authority in two particular instances. This was intended to trigger an investigation based on rules set by Pope Francis for examining the handling of abuse cases by church authorities.
One incident dates back to Prevost’s tenure as the Midwest regional head of the Order of St. Augustine in Chicago, involving priest James Ray, who faced restrictions due to abuse claims. However, in spite of these restrictions, Ray continued living in a friary, and it’s claimed that Prevost did not communicate these details to neighboring institutions potentially affected.
Another troubling scenario arose during Prevost’s time as bishop of Chiclayo, Peru, where allegations against priests involving the abuse of minors were addressed imperfectly. Although actions like suspending certain priests were taken, critics argue the bishopric, under Prevost, failed to thoroughly engage victims or report the incidents to civil authorities.
Despite these criticisms, many advocate for recognizing Prevost’s positive deeds, notably concerning the case with the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae, a controversial movement in Peru. Pope Francis’ dissolution of this group due to severe allegations highlighted the ongoing struggles the Church faces.
As Pope Leo XIV steps into his role, advocates like Gemma Hickey from Ending Clergy Abuse express hope for transformation: “Let this pope be remembered not for the global abuse crisis he inherits, but for how he ends it.” Reflecting on necessary improvements, Prevost has previously underscored the importance of transparency and support for victims, believing silence is a poor recourse. The Church’s track record presents both challenges and opportunities for meaningful change moving forward.