The original document itself, in PDF, is a little difficult to parse for one (like myself) not well-versed in canonical law. My point with the diary, however, is not merely to point out that this law (which was kept secret until recently) is part of a long tradition of silence and secrecy designed to protect priests, not parishoners (which I'll explain in a second), but also that Ratzinger's timing was telling. In the midst of a storm of controversey and media attention, reiterating the church's arguably callous stance on sexual abuse sends a very clear message: don't air our dirty laundry or you can be kicked out. It's the spirit of the timing with which I quibble as much as the letter itself.

The reason I don't believe, from my layman's reading, that the law itself is designed to protect the sanctity of the confessional is that it refers to the conduct of church officials at all levels. An alleged victim making a complaint against a priest would not be, in many cases, confessing to the Bishop in ritual fashion. It is my understanding that parishoners don't often get the opportunity to confess to those of Bishop level and above. Unless the sexual activity itself took place in the confessional, this law enacts new restrictions on the conduct of the victims, and uses the threat of excommunication to back them up. Were the law designed simply to protect the sanctity of the confessional, it would be a different (although still arguable) matter.