{"id":931,"date":"2020-10-26T18:50:26","date_gmt":"2020-10-26T08:50:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.pbw.id.au\/blog\/?p=931"},"modified":"2021-04-22T15:20:38","modified_gmt":"2021-04-22T05:20:38","slug":"jeremy-bentham-on-the-seal-of-confession","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2020\/10\/jeremy-bentham-on-the-seal-of-confession\/","title":{"rendered":"Jeremy Bentham on the seal of confession"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) was a philosopher, economist and writer on jurisprudence. He is most well-known for his development and expounding of utilitarianism. He considered that the object of legislation should be \u201cthe greatest happiness of the greatest number.\u201d Bentham was an atheist, and a strong proponent of the separation of Church and State. In 1827, John Stuart Mill edited Bentham\u2019s writings on jurisprudence into the five volume Rationale of Judicial Evidence.<\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

His opinion concerning the seal of confession is of topical interest. In Rationale<\/em>, Bentham considers the case<\/a> where priests can be forced<\/a> to testify concerning any felony, but the application to the case of child sexual abuse is obvious, though less widely applicable.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Bentham takes as context for his arguments a country in which Catholicism is \u201cbarely tolerated,\u201d and its withering desired, though no coercion is applied to that end; for example, the United Kingdom of the early nineteenth century. Of countries where Catholicism is granted equal standing with other religions \u2013 contemporary Australia for instance \u2013 he writes that the necessity of protecting the seal of confession \u201cwill probably appear too imperious to admit of dispute.\u201d Apparently not.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

There are two strands to his argument. In the first, he argues that, if priests were obliged to reveal confessional conversations about criminal matters, criminal prosecutors would, as a matter of course, call a Catholic accused’s confessor to testify. In any case, the possibility would inhibit the penitent in confession. To quote Bentham:<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

A regulation to any such effect would therefore\u00a0be a virtual proscription of the exercise of the Catholic religion.<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

The atheist Bentham understood, as today’s legislators and royal commissioners (and not a few priests) pretend not to, that the Sacrament of Penance is essential to the practice of Catholicism.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

The other head of argument is that the regulation is \u201cpreponderantly vexatious\u201d; that is, in the main it would be unreasonably burdensome to those affected, without any corresponding benefits. Penitents could only restore themselves to good grace with God at the risk of the exposure of their crime; while to remain without absolution is at the risk of their immortal soul (although Bentham does not use such an expression.) To priests, \u201cit would be an order to violate what\u2026is\u2026amongst the most sacred of religious duties.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

The advantage gained by the coercion\u2014gained in the shape of assistance to justice, would be casual, and even rare: the mischief produced by it, constant and all-extensive. \u2026the alarm itself\u2026would be a most extensive as well as afflictive grievance.<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

He then addresses the losses to the body politic incurred by this policy. The Sacrament of Penance exists to restore the sinner to a life of Grace. It is called Penance, because that is required, along with a firm intention of amendment. The words of Jesus were, \u201cGo, and sin no more,\u201d and that is the basis of the Sacrament. The fact that anti-Catholic and anti-Christian bigots, who refuse to comprehend this, infest the media and seemingly the Parliament and the courts, does not alter the reality.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Confession of crime, Bentham says, is of service to justice precisely because of the assurance that it will stay in the confessional. The service is in repentance, reformation, amendment and possible reparation: \u201csuch are the well known consequences of the institution.\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Further, even if the penitent shows no sign of permanent amendment, it may well remain to the priest, provided it can be done without risk of drawing attention to the penitent, to make arrangements that interfere with possible future crimes. This opportunity for the prevention<\/em> of crime would not exist without the seal.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

All of these arguments apply to the legislation in Queensland, but this legislation is a refinement of perniciousness in a number of ways. There were cases scattered through nineteenth century in which a priest was called to break the seal in testimony. When he refused, he was committed for contempt of court. All of the ill-effects sketched above were in play, but the priest was not required to initiate<\/em> a prosecution by betraying the penitent to the police.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

The Queensland legislation affects priests in two ways. A priest commits a crime if he \u201cknows there is a significant risk\u201d that an adult alleged offender will commit a child sexual offence, and the priest is associated with an institution. Maximum penalty:five years. One can be \u201cassociated\u201d with an institution by \u201cproviding a service\u201d to a child in the institution. For example, a priest visiting a school to provide religious instruction, and perhaps hearing some confessions. If a teacher at a school confesses to a visiting priest his sexual attraction to pubescent boys, also confessing that he has not acted on the attraction, does that constitute a \u201csignificant risk\u201d? How does the priest determine that? If he does not know the penitent well, can he be sure he isn’t being set up? No actual child sexual offence needs to have been committed to make an offender of the priest. This is a nightmare, made exponentially worse by the memory of the pernicious prosecution of Cardinal Pell. What is being criminalised here is failure to report the possibility<\/em> that a crime might be committed. Chew that over. This is the Department of PreCrime<\/a>, Queensland style.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

It is also now a crime if an adult, say a priest, \u201cgains information that causes the adult to believe on reasonable grounds, or ought reasonably to cause<\/em> the adult to believe, that a child sexual offence is being or has been committed\u2026\u201d (My emphasis.) Note that is not necessary to show that the priest actually<\/em> believed such a thing. Still, this one is only worth three years.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

There are \u201creasonable\u201d excuses. One of these is that the alleged victim has since turned sixteen, and the priest \u201creasonably believes\u201d that the victim does not want the information disclosed. This opens a window onto an important aspect of the Sacrament, and an absurdity in the legislation. Ephebophilia, the sexual attraction to adolescents \u2013 in these cases generally boys \u2013 is a major driver of child sexual abuse. If a sixteen year old tells a priest in confession about abuse, but does not want that revealed (he is, after all, in the confessional) then the priest has an \u201cexcuse\u201d not to reveal it. If the same thing happens with a thirteen, fourteen or fifteen year old, it is a crime not to violate the seal of confession. Are the latter not able to assess whether they want the story told, while a sixteen year old can?<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

For some victims of abuse, the security and privacy of the confessional is their only refuge. They are unable or unwilling to reveal the abuse, but in the confessional they can safely seek the counselling they desperately need. The very fact that this \u201cexcuse\u201d has been written into the legislation shows that this is understood, but as far as our legislators are concerned, teenaged victims have no choice in the matter until they have turned sixteen. Yet these same legislators wring their hands and broadcast how much they care about the children. They care not so much about the children, as about the politics.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

Bentham wasn\u2019t finished, in the Rationale<\/em>, on the topic of the shielding of confidential discussions. Ought a lawyer, he asks, be compelled to give evidence concerning conversations with his client \u2013 party, plaintiff, or defendant? \u201cAnswer<\/em>: Yes.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

The considerations which forbid the compelling or admitting the Catholic confessor to disclose misdeeds revealed to him in confession \u2026 neither these nor any other considerations of a like tendency, will be found to have any application to the lawyer\u2019s case.<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

None of the salutary effects of confession, says Bentham, \u2013 repentance, remorse, amendment, reparation, the prevention of further crime \u2013 apply in the case of the lawyer for a guilty criminal or dishonest plaintiff or respondent. The profession, in his observation, was mired in hypocrisy.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\r\n

It is a maxim among the brotherhood\u2014a maxim not only acted upon but avowed\u2026\u2014that\u00a0right<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0wrong<\/em>\u00a0are creatures of their creation\u2026<\/p>\r\n

It is in virtue\u2026of this same maxim, that, for the benefit of Self and Co. they have licensed Co. to render to malefactors that sort of support and encouragement for the rendering of which, those to whom they have not communicated the licence are, under the name of\u00a0accessaries after the fact<\/em>,\u00a0dealt with by them as felons.<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

As in Bentham\u2019s day, the \u201cconfessions\u201d of clients to their lawyers are still, of course<\/em>, protected by professional privilege. To the best of my knowledge, no-one has suggested that the seal of lawyer-client confession be attacked in the same way and for the same reasons. The same police force that persecuted Cardinal Pell is now the subject of another royal commission because of systematic violation of that privilege in cases which were not<\/em> focussed on the protection of children.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

How heart-warming it is to see the number of lawyers who draft our legislation and warm the leather in our Parliaments.<\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) was a philosopher, economist and writer on jurisprudence. He is most well-known for his development and expounding of utilitarianism. He considered that the object of legislation should be \u201cthe greatest happiness of the greatest number.\u201d Bentham was an atheist, and a strong proponent of the separation of Church and State. In 1827, … Continue reading “Jeremy Bentham on the seal of confession”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[29,18,52,21,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-931","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-belief","category-faith","category-law","category-politics","category-culture"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8SCfl-f1","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":855,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2020\/03\/the-burden-of-proof-and-the-pell-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":0},"title":"The Burden of Proof and the Pell Case","author":"admin","date":"Sat 7th Mar '20","format":false,"excerpt":"[Originally published by Quadrant Online on 30th December 2019. Published in Quadrant Magazine March 2020.] The conviction of the guilty is just; it is the unremarkable business of a just criminal jurisprudence; but the conviction of the innocent strikes at the heart of Justice. If it happens through error or\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Faith"","block_context":{"text":"Faith","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/belief\/faith\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":118,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2007\/10\/dad-died\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":1},"title":"Dad died.","author":"pbw","date":"Sat 6th Oct '07","format":false,"excerpt":"Dad died on Tuesday the 22nd of May. He had a fall in the nursing home, where he was under house arrest due to his dementia, or, to be more precise, his inability to remember short to medium term events. He would wander, and lose track of the time and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Family"","block_context":{"text":"Family","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/personal\/family\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":735,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2019\/05\/the-willing-suspension-of-disbelief\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":2},"title":"The Willing Suspension of Disbelief","author":"admin","date":"Tue 7th May '19","format":false,"excerpt":"[Published in Quadrant April 2019, and on Quadrant Online as Memoirs of an Abused Altar Boy, which included links to various documents.] \u2026so as to transfer from our inward nature a human interest and a semblance of truth sufficient to procure for these shadows of imagination that willing suspension of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Faith"","block_context":{"text":"Faith","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/belief\/faith\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":116,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2007\/10\/heart-failure\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":3},"title":"Heart failure","author":"pbw","date":"Sat 6th Oct '07","format":false,"excerpt":"I got a call from the counselling service of the John Tonge Centre yesterday. The autopsy report had finally been delivered. Congestive heart failure due to cardiac amyloidosis. There was no trauma to the brain. Jen's hunch had been correct. Dad's death was coincidental to the fall. In fact, the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Family"","block_context":{"text":"Family","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/personal\/family\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":926,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2020\/10\/who-won\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":4},"title":"Who won?","author":"admin","date":"Mon 26th Oct '20","format":false,"excerpt":"On the morning of April 7, national television relayed the announcement of my verdict from the High Court. I watched in my cell on Channel 7 as a surprised young reporter informed Australia of my acquittal and became still more perplexed by the unanimity of the seven justices. That is\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Faith"","block_context":{"text":"Faith","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/belief\/faith\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":71,"url":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/2012\/02\/from-pio-to-bultmann-and-back\/","url_meta":{"origin":931,"position":5},"title":"From Pio to Bultmann and back","author":"pbw","date":"Sun 26th Feb '12","format":false,"excerpt":"C. Bernard Ruffin, in his book Padre Pio: The True Story, wrote: Padre Pio was almost an exact contemporary of Rudolph Bultmann (1884-1976)...\u00a0Bultmann wrote in Kerygma and Myth: \"It is impossible to use electric light ... and at the same time to believe in the New Testament world of demons\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Faith"","block_context":{"text":"Faith","link":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/category\/belief\/faith\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/931","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=931"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/931\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":949,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/931\/revisions\/949"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=931"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=931"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pbw.id.au\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=931"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}