Not sure about your first or your last points there, Joe, I have to say. In fact, looking back again, I am sure you have them both wrong -

i. It is the facts that the Guest adduced, not what his identity may be, which matter here. I am sure he will have good reason for acting anonymously. But even were he acting merely perversely in remaining anon., that would in no way affect the significance of his allegations, whose probable truth you appear to acknowledge.

ii. No; he is looking in the right place for final resolution of the matter: it is ultimately "Rome", the Vatican, which must acknowledge the fault or it remains a stain on the reputation of the Church whose ultimate authority & fountainhead it is, whatever redress might have been provided by civil law and the competent national legal authorities. The Belgian government or police or courts could not have produced the necessary absolution for the responsibility of the Church for the sins and crimes that the perpetrators within that Church had committed. Until that has been achieved, the matter remains unresolved, and the 'remedy' unadministered.

Hope my meaning clear here.

~Michael~