InfoVaticana: “Verified evidence confirms that the document was sent by the victims’ organization SNAP to the Secretariat of State in April 2025.
Days before the Conclave, Infovaticana published a report exposing serious deficiencies in the handling of a child sexual abuse case when Robert Prevost was bishop of Chiclayo. The document detailed significant omissions in the handling of the notorious “Lute case,” a pedophile priest who abused two girls, ages 9 and 11, taking them to an isolated mountain resort, where he made them sleep in the same bed and abused them (there are testimonies that Lute took other minors there). The investigation remains open, and the victims have recently requested access to documents and evidence from the case.
The publication triggered a coordinated media campaign that will surprise those responsible for Infovaticana. Journalist Austen Ivereigh was the first to personally criticize the news: “It’s a Sodalicio campaign,” he said. Days later, the same theory was repeated in several media outlets—including Religión Digital, Vida Nueva, and even El País, which insisted on this line a few days ago and is now facing a lawsuit from the victims for having manipulated a recorded two-person interview with journalist Paola Nagovitch, the content of which had nothing to do with what was published. The official biography of the Pope, written by journalist Elise Allen, also echoes the same theory. Everyone agrees: the report was a “Sodalicio hoax,” a poisoning operation attributed to the so-called ecclesiastical far-right.
However, Infovaticana has had access to conclusive evidence that completely refutes this version. One of them is an audio recording, recorded in April 2025, in which a church official directly involved in the case acknowledges that it was SNAP (Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests)—the well-known American organization for victims of abuse in the Church—who sent the document to the Vatican Secretariat of State earlier that month. The objective, according to the recording, was for the text to reach the cardinals on the eve of a possible Conclave, to report on Prevost’s irregularities in handling sexual abuse complaints in Chiclayo. Infovaticana has verified the authenticity of the audio and compared its content with independent sources.
The confirmation that SNAP was the source of the report leaves no room for interpretation: the complaint about Prevost’s management came from an international victims’ organization with a long history of defending people abused by clergy, unrelated to the Sodalicio de Vida Cristiana or any conservative group within the Church. Founded in the United States in the 1990s, SNAP has been one of the main platforms for denouncing episcopal cover-ups and negligence worldwide, and its independence from any ideological movement is beyond question. It is difficult to imagine an entity more removed from the so-called “ecclesial far-right” with which this story was attempted to be linked.
In addition to the documentary evidence, other elements reinforce the conclusion that the “Sodalicio hoax” theory is baseless. None of the media outlets that disseminated it have presented any evidence linking the Sodalicio to the preparation or dissemination of the report. It was all mere speculation amplified by news outlets that, without verifying the facts, repeated the same slogan: “it’s all a far-right setup.” SNAP sent it to the Vatican. It wasn’t the Sodalicio. There can be no doubt.
Now that the true origin of the report is known—a victims’ organization with a recognized independence and reputation—it is worth asking why such a lie was spread so persistently. Why divert attention from a possible case of negligence in the handling of abuse to an institution that had no involvement whatsoever? Was it a failed communications strategy or a deliberate attempt to discredit those calling for transparency? At Religión Digital, for example, some of its leaders have publicly boasted of having promoted that narrative. Today, with the facts on the table, it would be worth asking whether they will maintain that SNAP is part of a conspiracy or whether they will recognize that, in journalism, verification always speaks louder than words.
Transparency should not have an ideology. And neither should the right of victims to be heard
