Ratzinger’s action or inaction led to a child being molested.
Sometimes before 1980 the Rev. Peter Hullermann plied a boy with alcohol and then molested him. The parents went to the diocese, who told them not to go to the police, that the case would be handled inside the Church, and that Hullermann would never work with children again (Number 3 Lie after The check is in the mail and I will love you in the morning).
In 1980 the diocese of Essen sent Hullermann to Munich for treatment. Ratzinger, as archbishop, allowed him to live in a rectory. This is Ratzinger’s last involvement with the case that the Vatican admits.
The vicar general, the Rev. Gerhard Gruber, on his own authority allowed Hullermann to work in the parish. The Hullermann molested another child, apparently very soon after he came to Munich, possibly while Ratzinger was still archbishop of Munich. In 1986 Hullermann was convicted of this molestation, but was returned to parish work in Garching, where he remained until 2008, working with the youth of the parish.
In 2008 he was transferred to a pilgrimage church in Bad Tölz, where least until a few days ago he was an active priest.
The Vatican has been attacking the media for reporting the facts, but has not denied the facts.
Why did Ratzinger turn the case over to Gruber and not follow up on it to learn what had happened? The Vatican says that Ratzinger was busy, with 1,200 priest in his archdiocese. Too busy to protect children? Alas, that has been the problem all along. And even in the United States (and Boston had 1,200 priests) bishops at least followed abuse cases and made the decisions (generally bad ones) and did not simply hand the cases over to subordinates. Why did Ratzinger, after he went to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and started handling these abuse cases, after he became pope, never trouble to find out what had happened to Hullermann?
An honorable man, a man of integrity, accepts responisility for the bad things that his lack of diligence allowed to happen. Is the Pope a man of integrity who will publicly admit his failure, or will he try to evade responsibility and blame the messengers for reporting his failure?