Louisiana ‘Vos estis’ complaint remains unanswered

A Baton Rouge whistleblower says the Vatican has not responded to his report

The Vatican has not yet responded to a whistleblower complaint in the Diocese of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, after local Catholics alleged that diocesan officials did not appropriately address allegations of sexual misconduct against a priest assigned in the diocese, including an alleged admission by the priest of sexual contact with minors — an admission the priest denies.

St. Joseph Cathedral, Baton Rouge. Credit: Farragutful/wikimedia. CC BY SA 3.0

While a local whistleblower filed in February a report with the U.S. bishops’ third-party reporting system, he says he was told by officials in the Archdiocese of New Orleans that they have not yet received direction on the matter from the Vatican’s Dicastery for Bishops.

Vos estis lux mundi, the Vatican’s policy on addressing allegations of abuse or neglect of duties by bishops, requires that the dicastery “provid[e] the appropriate instructions on how to proceed in the specific case” within 30 days of receiving a complaint.

—
An adult Catholic male in the Diocese of Baton Rouge told The Pillar that in September 2025, he met with Fr. Charbel Jamhoury, a Lebanese Maronite priest who was then pastor of St. Isidore the Farmer parish in Baker, Louisiana.

Soon after, the man reported to the diocese inappropriate conduct on the part of the priest.

The man, a frequent parish volunteer and sacristan in his 60s, said that Jamhoury had spent several months developing a relationship with him, frequently asking for his assistance with projects in the rectory and inviting him for coffee.

In hindsight, the man said the priest was aiming to gain his trust. “There were numerous coffee meetings with him, and he constantly called me, asked me for opinions on this, and opinions on that. And I honestly think that the Lord had me blinded till that last meeting,” he told The Pillar.

The man alleged that in late September, Jamhoury met with him in the parish rectory and attempted to coerce him into a sexual relationship — reportedly holding the man’s hand, recounting a history of his own sexual activity, touching the man’s lips, kissing his fingers, urging the man to massage him, and proposing sexual contact.

Further, his report to the diocese alleged that Jamhoury disclosed to him prior possible acts of child sexual abuse — specifically, oral sex with minors, allegedly recounting his preference for such activity in graphic detail.

For his part, Jamhoury told The Pillar that he “absolutely” did not try to initiate sexual contact with the man, and did not recount to the man a history of oral sex with minors. He also denied holding the man’s hand, kissing his fingers, or touching his lips.

Instead, the priest said that the man “was abusing me,” though he declined to elaborate on the nature of that abuse.

—
After the incident, Jamhoury’s parishioner reported the incident to the diocese in October 2025, and a preliminary investigation into the allegations was commenced — even while the priest reportedly told parishioners he had been falsely accused of misconduct.

The priest was not removed from ministry, nor was the investigation formally announced in the parish.

“From the day after it happened, [Jamhoury] was in defense mode,” the man told The Pillar.

But the man said his initial interactions with diocesan officials were discouraging.

At an initial meeting with diocesan officials, he said, “I didn’t know the procedure and the protocol. I just knew that I was supposed to be bringing this to the Church’ s attention.”

“But the very first question kind of blew my mind.”

“It was basically like ‘what are you trying to get out of this?’ Did I want money? Am I trying to get paid for this?”

The man said he wondered if he had done the right thing, but “I was led by the Holy Spirit to bring this priest to exposure.”

As the investigation proceeded in October 2025, the man said he received no updates, and that in the following weeks, his family did not receive status updates or any other information from the diocese, hearing only once, from diocesan vicar general Fr. Jamin David, that the matter was “in the bishop’s hands.”

While he was waiting, the man confided in a friend, Luke Zumo, a local physical therapist who is active in the Baton Rouge diocese.

Zumo requested a meeting with the bishop in late November and early December, and was invited instead to meet with Fr. David on Dec. 11, 2025.

He told The Pillar that he expected at the meeting to speak to the alleged victim’s character — a man whom he described as “a man with no guile in him; a man who is humble and childlike and docile.”

“I was there to tell them that [the man] would not make this up — he could not make this up.”

“This is,” Zumo alleged, “a good man who was targeted, groomed, and manipulated by an experienced groomer.”

Zumo said that at the December meeting, he told diocesan vicar general Fr. David he was most concerned about the priest’s alleged attestation of other sexual abuse — and about how the diocese had handled it.

“I said, ‘I’m here, Fr. Jamin, as a Catholic, to tell you that I know what you have in writing on your desk. I know that Father Charbel made a vile and explicit mention of a desire and a history of activity with minor boys of a certain age. And if my priest at my parish were accused, if there were allegations of this type of statement and behavior, and he were neither removed from the parish temporarily, nor were I alerted to the fact that there were these allegations, let me tell you, Father, I would be feeling a lot of strong feelings’.”

Zumo said he told the priest that he would inform families in the parish about the allegations if the diocese did not plan to do so. And he said that while David told him that the priest had admitted to “boundary violations” — asking for a backrub and holding the man’s hand — David did not address the other allegations in question.

Zumo told The Pillar that he asked the vicar general to inform Baton Rouge’s Bishop Michael Duca about his concerns, and that he submitted on the same day a letter to Bishop Duca outlining his concerns.

A week later, on Dec. 17, with no response to his letter, Zumo told David that as a mandated reporter, he felt obliged to contact local law enforcement officials, to express his concern about a possible admission of child abuse.

“So I called the sheriff’s office and reported what I know to the sheriff’s office,” he recalled. He made an appointment to speak with an investigator the next day.

“And then, three minutes after I hung up the phone, Bishop Duca called me.”

According to Zumo: “[Duca] says, ‘Luke, you don’t need to call law enforcement. You’re just going to muddy the waters. There are no victims in this case and Fr. Charbel is not a danger to anyone.’”

Zumo said he was dumbfounded that the bishop would discourage him from contacting law enforcement officials. He said Duca asked him for a meeting — the same meeting Zumo said he’d been trying to schedule for weeks.

“And I said, ‘Well, Bishop Duca, I’ve already reported this to law enforcement as a mandatory reporter for our diocese, so I’m not sure what we’ll talk about at this point. I’ve been trying to talk with you for the last three weeks.’”

Still, the next day, Zumo met first with investigators, and then with the bishop.

He said the bishop told him that Jamhoury had admitted to boundary violations and was in need of help. But Duca allegedly added that he did not have a priest to replace Jamhoury at his parish, and that “if we just dramatically yank him from the parish, that’s going to destroy his reputation and it’s going to destroy his life. So I’m just trying not to destroy this priest’s life.”

Duca reportedly told Zumo that he wasn’t sure who to believe in the case, while Zumo insisted that a failure to take the alleged child abuse admission seriously was a “betrayal” to the families of the diocese.

Zumo again emphasized, he told The Pillar, that if the diocese did not remove Jamhoury, or alert families of the substance of the allegation, he would begin speaking publicly.

Ten days later, the weekend after Christmas, Fr. David celebrated Masses at St. Isidore’s parish, announcing that Jamhoury would be taking a prolonged retreat for healing. Zumo said the announcement implied the priest had health issues, as did an email sent to parishioners.

Zumo said that in late January, Jamhoury returned to Baton Rouge. Duca allegedly disclosed that Jamhoury admitted to misconduct with a second adult male.

The man Jamhoury allegedly attempted to coerce in September, along his family, met with Duca in early February. Duca reportedly told them that Jamhoury had undergone an assessment, and was judged psychically and psychologically fit to resume priestly ministry.

But on February 7 and 8, Duca celebrated weekend Masses at the parish, and announced that Jamhoury had been removed as pastor.

A few days later, Duca emailed Jamhoury’s alleged victim explaining that the priest — who was not incardinated in the Baton Rouge diocese — had been prohibited from public ministry in the diocese.

“We have removed his safe environment credentials and will not be reassigning him to any assignment in the diocese. He is forbidden to do any ministry in the Diocese. He has agreed to this and we are working to help him settle affairs here and to move most probably to his monastery in Lebanon,” the email said.

But while a Feb. 10 announcement from the diocese said that Jamhoury had been removed as pastor in response to “a report of serious boundary violations,” the report did not mention that the priest was forbidden to undertake ministry in the diocese, or that his safe environment credentials had been removed.

And while reports to the diocese included Jamhoury’s alleged admission of sexual activity with minors, the Feb. 10 statement said “no allegations of physical sexual abuse or criminal activity have been reported to diocesan officials in this situation or at any time during Father Charbel’s service in the diocese.”

The statement, Zumo argues, was misleading, and failed to accurately reflect the reality of the allegations made against Jamhoury. And given that the priest did not return to Lebanon, and has continued to visit with families in the diocese, he regards the situation as potentially dangerous.

Further, Zumo said, Jamhoury has reportedly told local Catholics that he was “exonerated,” or that it was the man who made sexual advances toward him. That, Zumo insists, has created a dangerous situation.

“If you ask the average Catholic in Baton Rogue, they think everything is fine with Fr. Charbel,” Zumo maintained. “And he’s still moving around freely, and telling people lies about what happened. But the diocese won’t clear up what’s not true about what they’ve said.”

For its part, the diocese of Baton Rouge told The Pillar by email that in response to a report of “serious boundary violations,” and “after extensive conversation with all parties involved and an investigation which also included interviews by law enforcement, the diocesan investigation, and the full health assessment of Father Jamhoury, Bishop Duca determined that Father Charbel be removed from his office as Pastor of St. Isidore effective immediately, and this was accomplished in early February.”

The diocese did not respond to follow-up questions from The Pillar.

In addition to denying the allegations, Jamhoury told The Pillar that the allegations against him were not public “because this is the decision of the bishop and myself not to make it public when this started.”

Jamhoury said that when the allegations were first raised against him, he “decided to leave [the diocese]” in order to avoid the prospect of a lawsuit against the diocese.

But the priest suggested the diocese had not handled the case according to a defined process, adding that he has “not received” from the Baton Rouge diocese the substance of the complaint against him.

Duca, Jamhoury said, “didn’t want to give me the complaint.”

He added that while he initially planned to leave Louisiana, that plan changed when he learned that Duca’s withdrawal of his safe environment “credential” meant that he would not be able to serve in another U.S. diocese.

“I told [the diocese] it’s unfair, and you are building a statement against me based on unknown facts,” he said, referring to the allegation against him.

Jamhoury added that he underwent a psychological assessment at the request of the diocese, in order to cooperate.

But “when I heard [the parishioner] saying words like this, I told the diocese — I suggested for this guy … an investigation and to check on his mental status,” the priest said.

“And I said that they can not … find something wrong on my behalf because of [his] words, when they don’t know exactly if they are correct or not,” the priest insisted.

Jamhoury said he told Duca: “I’m not leaving Baton Rouge until I get my credentials” — adding that he was working to enlist both a civil and canon lawyer to assist in his defense.

—
For his part, Zumo made a report to the Catholic Bishop Abuse Reporting Service in mid-February, regarding “concerns of Bishop Michael Duca and his Vicar General Fr. Jamin David interfering in an abuse case and minimizing/ignoring the potential involvement of minors.”

Zumo’s report said that Duca and Jamin failed to inform the Office of Child and Youth Protection and diocesan review board of the allegation, and “also withheld it from local law enforcement” — all in violation of the diocese’s own “policy regarding sexual abuse of minors and vulnerable adults by diocesan personnel.”

He reported that despite “an explicit admission from the priest that he misses oral sex with pubescent age boys,” the diocese “ignored the priest’s mention of desiring oral sex with pubescent age boys,” when it should have been handled through a diocesan process, and reported to local law enforcement.

Further, Zumo reported that Duca discouraged him from making a law enforcement report, minimizing the situation as a “misunderstanding.”

“To this day, the diocese has not revealed the true nature of the allegations to anyone. Neither the priests nor the laity of the Diocese of Baton Rouge are aware of the actual allegations, and thus parents have not been given the opportunity to speak with children or vulnerable adults under their care to find out if there was ever a problematic interaction with Fr. Charbel Jamhoury,” Zumo reported.

Because the Diocese of Baton Rouge is in the metropolitan province of New Orleans, the report was forwarded to the New Orleans archdiocese.

Zumo said he has been informed by archdiocesan officials that the complaint was sent in early March to the Dicastery for Bishops in Rome, which is required by Vos estis lux mundi to “proceed without delay, and in any case within thirty days from the receipt of the first report by the Pontifical Representative or the request for the assignment by the Metropolitan, provid[e] the appropriate instructions on how to proceed in the specific case.”

But Zumo says he was told in late April by archdiocesan officials that they have not yet received a response from the Vatican dicastery, and do not know when to expect one.

—
As he waited, Zumo and other local Catholics decided they had an obligation to speak publicly, in order to warn other families.

In a “letter to laity” they distributed to families, Zumo and others explained that the allegations against Jamhoury “include statements made by Fr. Charbel that are concerning for minors.”

“Due to the serious nature of the allegations and our Bishop’s proportionate response, it would be prudent to have an informed conversation with your children (or any vulnerable person under your care) to learn if they ever experienced an uncomfortable or inappropriate interaction with Fr. Charbel, or if they witnessed anything inappropriate between Fr. Charbel and another person,” the letter said.

“If you learn anything of concern or have personally experienced any problematic behavior from Fr. Charbel firsthand,” the letter urged, Catholics should contact police investigators and the diocesan director of child and youth protection.

“Our sincere request is that this letter not be shared on social media but only amongst those who have come into contact with Fr. Charbel. As Catholics, we must remember the gravity of the sin of detraction. Please be sure that you use discretion and only share this letter with whom it is necessary with the intent of seeking healing for any potential victims. Social media is rarely the forum for pursuing truth and healing in a Christ- like manner. We love our Diocese and our Bishop. We love our priests and our laity. The goal of this letter is solely to present you with the necessary information to have informed conversations with vulnerable people in your household and to empower potential victims who have remained silent for any reason to come forward, bring their wound to the light, and seek healing,” the letter concluded.

The Archdiocese of New Orleans has not responded to requests for comment from The Pillar.