Pastoral Privilege Doesn’t Apply in All Cases, Court Says

When a person confesses to a crime to a pastor, most people consider the confession privileged and inadmissible in court. But a recent ruling says that the context of the confession determines whether the pastor can testify – and whether what the pastor says can be used against the defendant.

USA Today reported that a three-person New Jersey appellate court ruled that a confession to a pastor is privileged only when the confession occurs in private and when the pastor is acting in a spiritual advisory role. Both qualifiers must be met. As a result, a pastor will testify in the trial of a man accused of molesting his two daughters because though the man approached the pastor with the information in private, the pastor refused to counsel the man and was not acting in an advisory role.

“This was a conversation between a defendant and his wife's pastor,” said Nancy Hulett, assistant Middlesex County prosecutor, to USA Today. “There was no spiritual component to the conversation; it was designed to protect the two children.”

The daughters reportedly told of the abuse to their mother, who reported it to her pastor, Glenford Brown. Brown contacted her husband, the defendant, and encouraged him to turn himself in to the police. The man acknowledged wrongdoing and then asked the Brown to counsel him. Instead, Brown told the man to seek psychological help. When the man asked Brown to baptize him, Brown declined.

At a pre-trial hearing, the judge ruled that defendant’s acknowledgement of guilt was privileged, so the appellate court’s decision overrides precedent. Depending on the outcome of further appeals, Brown will testify.

For more information on privilege and a pastor’s responsibility to report abuse, read attorney David T. Ball’s article, “Child Abuse: Balancing the Need to Report with Confidentiality.”