The worst possible defense.

 The press is, as usual, making an absolute hash of the current story.  They can do so with impunity, however, as the only defense the Church has is the worst defense imaginable: "It wasn't that bad." 

Assuming we have that much.  The reports, as they now stand, are not terribly informative.  One report I read this morning said that the Missionary Oblates who ran the school are fighting in court to stop their records from the school from being released.  Another report, issued by the Archdiocese of Toronto, (which is not involved in the case) states that the Oblates' records are in a museum and archive in BC, and the issues with releasing the records have to do with privacy concerns.  Catholics are asking over what time frame the deaths occurred, under what circumstances, etc.  Good questions, but they won't save anyone.

Let me explain by bringing up the paedophilia/ephebophilia scandal.  The press made it sound as though 50-75% of all Catholic priests were paedophiles.  Studies indicate the number was closer to 1.5-3%, almost exactly the percentage of paedophile men in the population.  The not terribly good news was that the priests were no worse than average.  The terribly bad news is that they were no better.  But at the very least that means the problem was not as bad as reported.  Whom exactly does that comfort?

In LA, when it was announced that a class action suit was being launched against the church over child and youth rape, thousands upon thousands came forward to take part in the suit.  The press reported that.  Before long there was a second report that the police had been investigating the cases and found that at least half the claims were simply not credible and were people hopping on board the lawsuit in the hopes of an easy payday.  The press was considerably less enthusiastic in reporting that, if at all. So, again, we may claim that the press is mistaken, because the abuse wasn't that bad.

Shall we go to those who were abused and tell them their abuse was part of a larger pattern which, though bad, wasn't that bad?  Who would say that?  Who could think it? 

And so here.  There are rumours flying about.  One Facebook page had people speculating that the dead bodies in the ground were probably the infants from girls who had been raped by the priests, and the babies were smothered the moment they were born to cover up the crime.  Several people responded that it wouldn't surprise them in the slightest.  Comments such as those sound like they come straight from the old Know Nothings and the Orange Lodge.  However, without evidence, they are free to speculate as they please.

But even if it were to be proved that the bodies in the ground in Kamloops died because of, say, disease running rampant through the dormitories rather than by the direct abuse of the staff, and the two hundred plus dead died gradually over the course of one hundred years, so there was an average of but two a year, would that make it better? Would it become acceptable? Who would think that? Who would be exonerated? Shall we then go to the First Nations survivors and tell them it wasn't that bad?

No: it really was bad, and horrific.  There is nothing that can mitigate that.

Pray for all those who lie in the ground, that they may be at peace, and for the survivors. Don't tell them it wasn't that bad.  It is the worst possible defense, but the indefensible deserves no better, and not even so much.