# Why should priests be afforded greater privilege than lawyers?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [October 24, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978 "2009-10-24T18:01:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\
**Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978/81 "2009-10-28T13:50:48Z")

</div>

> [@Lemur866](#):
>
> It wouldn’t have changed a thing. Because that priest really could have been required to testify, because this happened in Canada.

I guess they could try, but I would hope the priest would refuse to break the seal of the confessional. Would he be prosecuted for obstruction of justice or something?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\
**Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978/82 "2009-10-28T14:20:23Z")

</div>

> [@Muffin](#):
>
> My argument boils down to ‘if the gang of bad guys won’t come clean, then a confidentiality or privilege exception might make the difference when dealing with one of the bad guys who is sitting on the fence and might be turned, so let’s have such an exception.’

That’s a slightly different argument than saying the privilege absolutely facilitated the abuse cases of the Church, isn’t it?

Your current argument is perfectly reasonable. I disagree with it, both as to lawyers and as to priests. (I should say by way of complete disclosure that I have a licentiate in canon law).

But with that potential bias admitted, I will say that in my view there is value in society sanctioning an outlet that will encourage admission of wrongdoing to a safe outlet. I’m convinced in the overwhelming majority of cases, a priest will encourage admission of guilt to the authorities, or even make the granting of absolution conditional upon such admission. I grant that it’s not 100%, but it’s positive enough that society on balance benefits from the structure of the rule.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\
**Post date:** [October 28, 2009, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978/83 "2009-10-28T15:08:51Z")

</div>

> [@gigi](#):
>
> I guess they could try, but I would hope the priest would refuse to break the seal of the confessional. Would he be prosecuted for obstruction of justice or something?

Well, exactly. Even if a priest had been ordered to testify about what he heard in confession, the likely result would be that he would refuse to speak.

And then the Judge would charge him with contempt of court, or whatever the Canadian equivalent is.

And then the priest would either break his promise to the confessor (and get excommunicated by his church) and testify. Not a likely result in my opinion.

Or he’d clam up and refuse to testify and serve out whatever penalty the secular authorities deem proper.

And the thing is, either the priest is a big ol God believer who takes his vows as a priest seriously, in which case he won’t testify, or he’s a predator covering up for his scumbag buddies, in which case he won’t testify.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-should-priests-be-afforded-greater-privilege-than-lawyers/514978.md?page=4)