That's completely false, DE.
And you know it is.
The role of the Prefect of the CDF is that of the Vatican's chief theologian.
The purpose of that office is to oversee the teaching of theology in the Church's universities and seminaries and to review the theological writings of the various bishop's conferences as well as to author theological position papers.
That, after all, was the Pope's specific professional expertise: he was a theological advisor to the German episcopate at the Second Vatican Council and he spent 26 years as a professor of theology.
The office that in normal course was supposed to deal with cases of abuse by clergy was, not to surprisingly, the Congregation for the Clergy.
In 2001, Cardinal Ratzinger - displeased by the lackluster investigative progress of the Congregation for the Clergy - requested that this responsibility be transferred from them to his own CDF, his office.
And from that point on, there was a serious change: it is from that time that we see the Church launching systematic investigations, retiring bishops, demoting and laicizing offenders, meeting with victims' groups, putting together cooperation protocols with law enforcement and agreeing on restitution, etc.
Saying that he was in charge of such investigations from 1981 to 2001 is simply false. He was in charge of such investigations from 2001 to 2005 and only because he stood up and demanded that more be done and took that responsibility upon himself.
And it should also be remembered that the Church is not structured like a corporation: it is a society.
That society is governed by Canon Law and every Catholic has certain rights under Canon Law - just because there is a rumor or an allegation about a specific priest it does not mean that he can just be summarily excommunicated, fired and laicized. Just like the accused in a secular trial, he has rights under Canon Law including due process.
It is one thing to say that there is a rumor that a specific bishop had knowledge of specific crimes committed by a priest under his supervision. It is entirely another to prove that in a court of Canon Law.
That's completely false, DE. And you know it is. The role of the Prefect of the CDF is that of the Vatican's chief theologian.
Actually, Dr. E is quite correct. This is what is stated in Wikipedia:
In office, Ratzinger fulfilled his institutional role, defending and reaffirming Catholic doctrine, including teaching on topics such as birth control, homosexuality, and inter-religious dialogue. Leonardo Boff, for example, was suspended, while others were censured. Other issues also prompted condemnations or revocations of rights to teach: for instance, some posthumous writings of Jesuit priest Anthony de Mello were the subject of a notification. Ratzinger and the Congregation viewed many of them, particularly the later works, as having an element of religious indifferentism (i.e., Christ was "one master alongside others").
The Congregation is best known for its authority over the teaching of Church doctrine, but it also has jurisdiction over other matters, including cases involving the seal of the confessional, clerical sexual misconduct and other matters, in its function as what amounts to a court. In his capacity as Prefect, Ratzinger's 2001 letter “Crimen Sollicitationis” which clarified the confidentiality of internal Church investigations into accusations made against priests of certain crimes, including sexual abuse, became a target of controversy during the sex abuse scandal.[17] While bishops hold the secrecy pertained only internally, and did not preclude investigation by civil law enforcement, the letter was often seen as promoting a coverup.[18] The Pope was accused in a lawsuit of conspiring to cover up the molestation of three boys in Texas, but sought and obtained diplomatic immunity from prosecution.[19]