I don't recall reading that letter before. It must be the very definition of indefensible.
You know......I understand the court ruling. I get that the duty to protect from a religious institution is going to be a hard case. Its a slippery slope that could be widely defined. But I think any human being who looks at this case, instinctively knows the wrong. Their "conscience bears witness" if you will.
For the society to use the defense that they don't have a duty legally to protect young ones, is just mind blowing. I realize that may be an over simplification. I wonder though how McCabe can just sit there and defend the actions of this elder body that recommended this guy as being "interesting" and "helping young ones".
Eden said it right. If this guy had expressed doubts about the slave.....no way that would not be on his letter. Molest a kid and come clean about it. Nah....we don't have to let anyone know.
Sick.....and ignorant. Truly a people disconnected from REALITY.