You wrote:
“The evidence has been posted dozens of times. In black and white. In English.”
Nope. Not once. No where in paragraph 13 does it say what you claim it says. How can you post something that is so obviously untrue as that claim and then turn around and claim you posted the evidence?
“If you cannot understand that evidence, or choose not to read that evidence, then that is not my problem.”
You posted no evidence. Again, you apparently do not understand what a “prescription” is. Why keep claiming that something is in there that is not in there?
“It is a problem within the RCC.”
No, we actually can read - apparently anti-Catholics can’t.
“A BIG problem.”
The problem belongs solely to anti-Catholics. Again, post evidence for your claim. Can you?
Ratzinger's letter of 2001 reiterated the secrecy outlined in CS and further stipulated that this secrecy was to be maintained by all parties involved for 10 years beyond the victim's 18th birthday.
That's what your future pope wrote. That's why he was accused of obstruction of justice and that's why he had to appeal for diplomatic immunity so as not to be prosecuted.
You have a problem in your church and it's not going to go away as long as you blame everyone else for that problem.