I thought this document covered all instances of solicitation.
And if so, can't you concede that it might be perfectly ok for this document to remain silent on the latter subject?
Yes, if the latter subject wasn't intended for inclusion.
If you find the latter issue inadequately addressed, why must you blame it on a document which seems to be entirely unrelated?
Because I didn't understand it to be unrelated and I'm not sure that it is unrelated.. I believed it to cover all cases of solicitation within or related to the confessional.
If it only applies to people of the age of consent, it is an entirely different matter and would rightly be handled within church channels.
If the document is the same as being used the attorneys in civil litigation, "the document given to authorities by Carmen Durso of Boston and Daniel J. Shea of Houston.", it would be logical to assume that it applies to minors as well as adults.
What isn't clear is the relationship to the document and the particular case the attorneys handed it over for and if it is the exact same document unearthed by those attorneys.
Not related to. Only within. Solicitation refers exclusively to the behavior of a priest within the confessional. It doesn't cover any behavior which results from that solicitation. However such external behavior is covered by lots of other statutes within canon law, and any guilty priest would have to answer for those crimes in addition to the crime of solicitation.
I'm not sure, but you seem to be under the belief that a priest accused of solicitation would not be charged with the crimes which resulted from it. That's simply not true. Much like a bank robber who kills someone during his robbery is charged with both robbery and murder, an abusing priest who solicited illegal sexual encounters from his confessional would have to answer for the crime of solicitation as well as any sexual crimes which followed.
The problem with the current scandal is that bishops shielded their priests from all charges. They didn't charge them with solicitation and protect them from the rest.
...it would be logical to assume that it applies to minors as well as adults.
Regardless of what the Vatican thought was the most likely victim at the time, the document applies to the behavior of the priest alone. The identity of the victim does not change the seriousness or consequence to a priest for committing the crime of solicitation. It is always a grave matter.