^^^ You can still get insurance to cover the corporation (church) for the vicarious liability for the acts of the employee committing the abuse; but the employee is still not covered. I have that sort of insurance for my healthcare facilities. As a result, most sexual abuse or contact lawsuits these days sue the employer on the basis of negligent hiring, supervision or retention, to bring it under the coverage for vicarious liability.
And the law review article is correct in that the old policies were written with the idea of intent; and coverage was found under those policies under the argument of there was no intent to harm by committing sexual abuse, and any harm was an accident and therefore there should be coverage. This is how there is insurance coverage for the lawsuits alleging abuse occurring many years ago. The insurance policies in effect then could be interpreted to provide coverage.
The insurance companies now write the coverage with very specific exclusions that provide that any sexual abuse or contact is not covered, regardless of intent, and any abuse or contact is an intentional act and not an accident. You will likely see a similar exclusion in your homeowner's or umbrella liability policies.
