were they still attending that church?! Their daughter had told them she was molested at the summer camp operated by the church!!! What is wrong with these people?! Their poor daughter. If you feel like you have to attend a religious service, at least pick another church! Jeez!

Meanwhile child rape apologists keep telling us this is just "human behavior", and religion is in no way culpable for creating a child rape culture where epidemics of molestation grow unchecked by secular accountability.

Meanwhile unsuspecting parents keep providing religious organizations with a fresh supply of victims, deluded into believing church organizations are immune from evil and their religious leaders actually care about their well being more than their money. Those same apologists are working overtime to convince everyone that religious organizations should somehow be exempted from child rape protection laws that govern other organizations that deal with children.

Yep, kinda funny how those apologists see so much evil with atheists, but can't even manage to see it in their own mirror.

They also contacted the police (granted they may not have if the family hadn't reported first).

that the accused was not named in public by the church prior to formal charges being filed. Actually I think that is prudent.

They fired him for an unrelated matter (alcoholism) because they could probably objectively prove that. That took immediate action to remove him from access to children (unless there are prior accusations that were not followed up on - nothing about that appeared in this story).

I am not sure I see much wrong the church did. Maybe they didn't properly vet the employee. That is what a civil trial might demonstrate. This is a far cry from moving the accused around while trying to suppress the accusations.

I wonder how this would have played out without the initial police report from the family. That was a very wise decision on their part and something that should happen in all of these cases.

...but you think it's "prudent" not to mention his name to their parents?

Wow, just wow.

Shouldn't that be part of the police investigation. How do you avoid a potential defamation lawsuit if the initial accusation is false? The police should ask for a list of all children that have been around this individual, and the police then go and question those families.

Maybe I am misunderstanding the process. Here is a recent story about a public school teacher. Did the school district inform the parents prior to charges being filed? Should they have?

https://whotv.com/2019/05/31/des-moines-teacher-arrested-for-alleged-sexual-abuse-of-teen-at-school-where-she-taught/

The answer to your first question is to make use of the team of lawyers they already have on retainer. The idea that you can't even mention to the congregation that an employee of the organization is under investigation for child rape is ludicrous.

As far as your other questions go, they are not in any way, shape, or form a defense of the church's behavior and look more like...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

That's all sorts of fucked up. "Jesus loves you only if you promise not to sue us."

Preach one thing and do the opposite. Feh!