Well, well, somehow you're getting yourself all worked up into a frizzy. Indictment? Where did I say anything about an indictment? As for immunity, perhaps you are unaware that the Pope in fact has diplomatic immunity as the head of a sovereign state, Vatican city-state. Furthermore, this is not something new, but is quite well founded on tradition. B16 doesn't have to answer to the charges in Texas, or in Philadelphia, or in a hundred other places in the world where the priests of Newchurch are currently being charged with embezzlement, murder, rape, and other such high crimes and misdimeanors. Will the Pope address these things individually? Probably not. But take a look at the good popes of the past. How many of them, when faced with such crises said nothing to reprimand and punish the Chruch's criminals individually, or worse, promoted the perpetrators to higher offices where they could continue their contemptible malfeasance?
Regarding Delay and Earle, I am not talking about politics here. If you want to discuss politics you'll have to find someone else to pester.
As for my "general level of competence," I wonder what office it is of which you presume I am in possession?
I was only sending you a friendly message to offer you a gentle warning that might help you to avoid being too disappointed when (and if) nothing comes of promised improvements. I have known more than one person who has left the Church in disgust when corruption overwhelmed them. I was hoping that your apparent optimism might not become the flash point of your abandonment of all hope. I was trying to do you a favor. I had no ill intention. But sometimes when someone is close to drowning they refuse a lifeline. I'm sorry.
If as you claim the Pope was "personally charged" as a "named accomplice" in a U.S. Federal District Court, that can only be an indictment, as charges are not brought by information in federal court unless the defendant waives indictment, and it does not appear that BXVI has waived anything. Nor is one "charged" or named as an accomplice in a civil case. Those are criminal terms of art (except for quasi-criminal statutory actions such as SEC fraud cases, which don't concern us here). So either you are very confused about the facts, or you are ignorant of the law. (And if you don't think this is "political", you are also quite naive.)
In either case, you seem to me to be far too eager to trash BXVI, both by your tone and by the general tenor of your posts in the religion forum.
If you are simply sending a "friendly message" or a "gentle warning" or presuming to throw a lifeline, you are going to have to moderate your tone. Because your post sounds like you are simply seizing another opportunity to trash the Pope and the Vatican.
And you can't tell me anything about disappointment, you'd be telling Noah about the Flood. I used to be an Episcopalian.