Photo credit, Vatican Pool/Getty Images
When, on May 8, 2025, American Cardinal Robert Prevost appeared on the central balcony of Saint Peter's Basilica under the name Pope Leo XIV, he was unknown to the general public, including many in Peru, where he spent a large part of his priestly life.
That day, Peruvian journalist Santiago Roncagliolo — who admitted to having had, until then, "not the slightest idea" about the identity of the new head of the Catholic Church — was commissioned to write a book about him.
“The only thing I knew was that he had been a missionary,” he said.
He nevertheless accepted the mission, believing that he could “bring a different perspective from that of a Vatican correspondent”.
"If there was a story, I could tell it; at least I could tell a side of it that the mainstream media wasn't covering," he added.
The result is *El pastor y los lobos* (“The Shepherd and the Wolves”), a work resulting from more than a year of investigation. To write it, Roncagliolo traveled to the regions of Peru where Prevost exercised his pastoral ministry and interviewed dozens of people who knew him. The work is more akin to a detective thriller than the biography of a man of the Church, while being intertwined with the childhood and youth memories of the author himself.
The writer — author notably of *The Accident*, *Deliver Us from Evil* and *The Maximum Punishment* — spoke with BBC Mundo before his participation in the Hay Festival in Arequipa, which was held from November 5 to 8, and just a few days before the visit of Leo XIV to Peru, scheduled from this Wednesday 11 until Monday 16 November.
End of content
Photo credit, Cortesía Santiago Roncagliolo
This book contains two biographies at once: not only that of the Pope, but also yours. Why did you decide to approach this work in this way?
End of Most read
Verified information at your fingertips
Click here and subscribe!
End of WhatsApp Promotion
Well, it was necessary to explain why the Pope exists. Why is it important? Why do 1.4 billion people listen to someone who doesn't tax them, doesn't have an army, and doesn't exercise direct authority? The only way to explain it was to draw on my own experience: that of a child raised in the Catholic faith, confronted with violence within his family and in his country. I talked about how that faith became a shield against fear and pain, and a source of meaning for a totally lost teenager — which I was then.
The father figure—as proposed by the Catholic Church—exerts a powerful appeal for those of us who have had violent or difficult relationships with our own father figures.
Why this particular pope? Was it simply because he had been a missionary in Peru, then bishop of Chiclayo?
In this case, what struck me is that this pope — trained in Peru in liberation theology — offers an approach to Christianity that resembles the one I grew up with. A view that God, or Christ, was neither an emperor nor a rich man, but the son of a carpenter; someone who was persecuted by an empire, who experienced exile, torture and, ultimately, assassination. A figure who is closer to guerrillas than to popes.
In this sense, this story resonated with my own conception of God. There was a story to tell, especially since in countries like Spain, where I live, many associate the Church with Francoism, whereas I, for my part, grew up in contact with priests who were rather subversive. Telling this seemed quite interesting to me.
“The Shepherd and the Wolves” offers a double image of Leo XIV. On the one hand, that of a man of the Church seeking to bring the Church closer to the faithful and concerned about their material conditions. On the other hand, that of a sort of special agent of the Vatican, sent to purge the Church of priests involved in abuse, corruption, or even having links with hired killers. Did we expect to discover these two facets in this man?
No, my main concern was that there might not be any story. I risked running into a priest who had spent every Sunday giving homilies, who had perhaps accomplished nothing in particular in his life, and who had become pope for purely bureaucratic reasons.
It was a real shock to discover this story, then to investigate the case in which he is accused of having covered up the facts; because, at this stage of the investigation, I wanted to believe him.
I wanted him to be a good man. In a world as cynical and sinister as the one we live in, whether it is truly possible to believe in someone's goodness has become a personal question.
Photo credit, Raul Sifuentes/Getty Images
You clearly point out that Archbishop Prevost, then bishop, was instrumental in the Vatican's decision to dissolve the Sodalicio de Vida Cristiana, an ultraconservative organization accused of committing sexual and other types of abuse. However, he was also implicated for having covered up a priest who was close to him: Eleuterio Vásquez Gonzáles, also called "father Lute", accused of having abused several little girls.
What emerges from this story is that this is a man who has dealt with the sins of the Church — sexual abuse, financial crimes, even priests going so far as to hire hit men.
He is a man who had to manage the gray areas within a Church – an institution which contains many of them, given its great opacity – and who knew how to do so without triggering wars.
I believe that this is precisely what Francis appreciated about him; that's why he chose it. Francis wanted to combat these excesses, but each of his interventions risked causing a schism. Conversely, this Florentine politician, subtle and discreet, proved much more effective in dealing with these issues.
I was surprised to discover a story that was more of a thriller than the kind of story one usually associates with a pope.
He said he wants to believe Prevost is a good person. What does he think of it today, once his investigation is completed?
I think he's a good man who dedicated his life to serving others, but he's not a superhero movie character.
In life, we have to make choices among the options available to us, between what is possible to do and what is not; and there will always be victims, as was the case here.
Good people do not spend their days performing virtuous acts to counteract individuals who commit evil.
If things were that simple, life would be like a Marvel movie. It is precisely this moral complexity that requires us to admit our imperfection, and therefore to forgive and ask for forgiveness.
In this story, I witnessed the best and the worst in human beings.
I have seen men abuse children and destroy their lives to satisfy desires that they could have satisfied, freely, with an adult. But I have also seen missionaries, lay people and so many other people who work and sacrifice their sexual and family lives to help those most in need.
Prevost comes from this environment, he is one of these people; he is, without a doubt, a good man. But there is a sentence, uttered by one of my sources, which I really like and which perfectly sums up what I think of him: "The allies of light cannot afford to be more naive than the allies of darkness."
Photo credit, Courtesy of Groupe Planeta
In his book, he failed to clarify whether he covered up any of the abuse cases he learned about; in any case, Father Lute was not the subject of an investigation by the Church: he was transferred to another parish, before resigning. Do you think that the bishop at the time, Mgr Prevost, acted correctly or did he fail?
When I spoke with sources close to him about how the case of this alleged attacker (Father Lute) was handled, the response was: "Certainly, but Father Lute is no longer part of the Church. We want the attackers to leave, and this one is gone."
In reality, the method was not very orthodox; but to do otherwise would have compromised all the other investigations that Prevost was carrying out – these investigations into abuses and crimes that we mentioned previously. The simple fact of opening and prolonging this procedure would have made him a suspect, thus ruining the other cases.
I don't know if there was another way out, like the ones you see in superhero movies. I don't know if there was a perfect solution.
Peru was one of three countries that Leo XIV visited during his first tour of Latin America. What does he expect from this trip?
The issue of sexual abuse is, surprisingly, its weak point.
During his trip to Spain, many victims complained of not feeling listened to. In France, this was less the case, as it paid more attention to the victims, but protests still took place.
I expected something to be done in Peru — a country where he personally knows the victims — but I don't see anything in that direction. However, I understand that the situation is very complex: it is a question here of dealing with the past - not the ongoing abuse, for which protocols already exist, but the suffering that was inflicted.
It seems that this visit will aim to bring hope to a people who greatly need it, and to show scenes of popular fervor - which is sure to happen, as it is so appreciated.
It does not appear that he will address social issues; perhaps this is due to the fact that a Fujimori [Keiko] is in the government, although he had been very critical of her father [Alberto].
Do you think that, without his visit to Peru, Prevost would have found himself on the throne of Saint Peter?
He would never have succeeded.
His journey to the Vatican — a place he never hoped to be and never did anything about — began in 2018.
That year, Pope Francis made a trip to Chile which turned into a disaster. He had just named a bishop (Juan de la Cruz Barros Madrid) implicated in a sexual abuse scandal, and he publicly defended him. The Chilean population then went into a rage: they deserted masses and public ceremonies, burned churches, while the international press reported the fiasco of this trip to Chile.
François then understands that it is imperative to change our attitude and that it is no longer possible to act as if these abuses were not taking place.
At this same period, in northern Peru, the affair of the members of Sodalicio broke out; the pope instructs the bishop of Chiclayo to handle this file, as well as to manage another situation in a diocese where the bishop maintains links with hitman networks.
François begins to perceive Prevost's management skills. Believing, moreover, that his own lack of knowledge of the Curia before his election to the pontificate constituted a handicap, he decided to appoint Prevost to the Dicastery for bishops - a body where he would make himself known to all those who, later, would be asked to vote during a conclave.
Francis very clearly expresses his wish that he become his successor. None of this would have happened, in the first place, without his work on the Sodalicio file, which demonstrated his ability to resolve such problems without sparking internal conflicts.
More than a year after his election, can we consider Leo
Leo XIV must continue the work of Francis, as is generally the practice. After John XXIII came Paul VI, after John Paul II came Benedict XVI; popes who consolidate what can be of the legacy of their predecessor, while rounding the corners and seeking to heal the wounds.
It must be said that a very long war has raged within the Church since the Second Vatican Council, opposing two camps. Francis embodies one of them, John Paul II represented the other; However, in this conflict, sexual abuse has been transformed into a weapon, which is a suicidal attitude.
Until recently, the practice was to stifle business; thus, all religious leaders of a certain age and with a certain authority have, at some point, covered up cases of abuse, because that was the prevailing norm.
Furthermore, this internal battle within the Church is, on a conceptual level, absurd: God does not take sides. Léon's mission is therefore not to win this war, but to put an end to it, to close these wounds.
For example, an initiative of its own consists of appointing, for the first time in history, a secular woman at the head of the Dicastery for Communication – a woman, however, ultra-conservative. These are subtleties that François did not envisage, but which Léon understands perfectly.
He authorizes the celebration of more traditional rites, while having excommunicated the Priestly Society of Saint Pius
If he gives the image of a man open to dialogue, he also clearly shows that, as soon as he perceives that this dialogue is leading nowhere, he does not hesitate to act firmly.
Photo credit, Fotoholica Press/LightRocket via Getty Images
If you had the opportunity to interview Pope Leo XIV, what would you ask him?
Well, the fact is that the Pope is not going to address the topics that interest me the most.
The book having already been written, and knowing full well that it will not provide me with the information useful for this investigation, I would actually ask him this question: what can I do to make the world a little better than it is in this current disaster?
It may seem strange, but a few years ago, democracies — and their leaders — were the ones who talked about human rights, respect for each person and peace.
Today, however, the leaders of democracies promote war, the bombing of innocents, and the persecution of people because of the color of their skin; while the one who speaks of human dignity, respect for human beings and the need to avoid suffering is the Pope.
Discover more
Look!
End of Look!
