Certainly that's the case with Ratzinger's 2001 letter and Crimen Sollicitationis. That's why I linked to both documents and invited anyone to read them for themselves.
Those with eyes to see will read the words the words there which encourage secrecy, lies, cover-ups and evasion.
Others will remain blind.
That aptly describes your persistent misrepresentation of both documents. Like your misinterpretation and misrepresentation of Scripture, the Catechism, and even the life history of many Catholics, you have chosen to selectively report details out of context in ways that maximize your agenda of falsehoods. I am not going to discuss or debate your falsehoods, only confront and correct them. One cannot have an honest discussion with dishonest persons.
You wrote:
“It has become painfully obvious that some Roman Catholic apologists can read the black and white print and not understand the words.”
It has become painfully obvious that anti-Catholics can lie even to the point of claiming something is in a document when it is not.
“Certainly that’s the case with Ratzinger’s 2001 letter and Crimen Sollicitationis.”
As we see in how particular anti-Catholics completely make up something that is not in Ratzinger’s 2001 letter or Crimen Sollicitationis.
“That’s why I linked to both documents and invited anyone to read them for themselves.”
That’s why anti-Catholics repeatedly make false claims rather than actually present proof.
“Those with eyes to see will read the words the words there which encourage secrecy, lies, cover-ups and evasion.”
Those with eyes to see will read the word and see they don’t say what anti-Catholics lyingly claim they do.
“Others will remain blind.”
Anti-Catholics are so blind that they believe lying is something God wants - as long as you’re lying against His Church.