Priests and lawyers, the two have parallel duties, although their domain are poles apart: the former is lawyering, as it were, for the life hereinafter, while the latter is counselling for the earthly concerns. Both professions, or vocations though, have a sacred duty: to keep confidential all information relayed in the discharge of their functions.
And here lies the torment.
In a catholic community, the most informed person is the priest. Owing to his calling, he has to know the events in his parish; and owing too to his profession, he has information on what goes in the private lives of his parishioners. The parishioners who go to a confessional pour out their souls to the minister. Lawyers, in any community, catholic or otherwise, are well-informed about the private lives of their clients as they pour our their fears if they are charged, or anger if they are the aggrieved.
But whatever information they received in confidence, priests and lawyers have the duty to keep them precisely confidential. Short of this, these two violate the sacred oath they have taken, which oath invoked God, with right palm on the Bible.
A neophyte priest or lawyer will initially suffer the information overload. His few years in the practice of his calling will naturally be stressful. But experience and the passing years will teach him how to take things in stride, else, his sojourn on earth will be brief.
But even with the long experience, the lawyer and priest, are sometimes confronted with information that has strong relevance not only of the private lives but of the public welfare in general. There are informations received in confidence which have direct bearing on the welfare of the community. It is this kind of information which causes great tension, and dilemna; it’s weight on the lawyer or priest, is at times unbearable. Supposed there is an event which proved too disastrous to the community and you have the information on who caused the tragedy, but owing to your sacred vow, you cannot reveal any information. Imagine the weight of the burden that you carry.
The philosophical debate has not been resolved. It is raging still. Should private interest be sacrificed in the altar of public welfare? But if the lawyer or priest be compelled to reveal information received in confidence in the course of the practice of his calling, will not the public interest be sacrificed in the long run? If you have lawyers who cannot keep the sacred vow of secrecy, then who among the public will go to the lawyer and confide his case. In the long run, the administration of justice will suffer a paralysis. The bedrock of legal counselling will collapse.
Lately, the Philippines is beset with two issues of international concerns. These issues are all-over the tri-media, and everytime the news are flashed on tv or print, I would almost puke when lies are spread, repeated, and for every repetition, the lies are getting bigger, and the agony is that you know the truth, but the truth, by force of the oath, cannot come into the light.
I have been re-examining my oath. Should I break the oath of confidentiality so that the public interest be served? But to do so is to betray my client, and ultimately, I will be a traitor to the calling which , from the moment I was of age, I could not think of any other profession except lawyering. Betraying my client, is a treachery to the person that I have become.
Everytime I read the news, and the falsity of the assertions, I may have to take a deep gulp, close my mouth, and bury inside the truth as a symbol of loyalty to my client and my profession.
Posted by tmpjr70 
