Assisting the Guilty 41
Jewish law also requires one to inform a Jew of harm that might befall him and which could be avoided.? This tension reflects the conflict inherent in Leviticus 19:16, between its two provisions (a)“thou shall not go about as a bearer of tales among your people”? and(b)“do not stand by while your brother’s blood is being shed.” Though the stricture against disclosure of confidential information results in a moral code“even more restricted in some respects than presently accepted canons of professional confidentiality,”** the countervailing obligation to help others and divulge secrets for that purpose applies not only to saving lives but also to preventing monetary loss. It is understood by contemporary halakhic authorities that no person has the right to divulge information of a personal nature concerning a fellow man or woman simply to satisfy the curiosity of a third party. The crucial consideration is thus the“need to know” in the sense of avoiding potential harm. Respect for privacy and the inviolability of the professional relationship certainly do not take precedence over the protection of the lives and safety of others. This latter consideration is of sufficient weight to oblige a physician, attorney or member of the clergy to take whatever measures may be necessary to eliminate the danger. If, however, no danger exists or if the danger can be averted by other means, he may not violate the confidence. The desire to see an evil doer brought to justice and punished for his crime is not, in itself, sufficient reason to justify a breach of confidence.?” It is clear that a cloak of strict confidentiality ordinarily obtains in any discussion that a rabbi has with a member of his or her congregation. Its breach can only be justified, according to Jewish law, in circumstances in which lives or money will be saved and“the prevention of the destruction of the world”? will be advanced.
Conclusion
Modern rabbis face a delicate dilemma in circumstances in which criminal behavior is disclosed to them during the course of their Professional responsibilities. In addition to the presumption of confidentiality regarding any communication given to a rabbi, there is the question of the rabbi’s a priori relationship to secular authority. In no instance does Jewish law suggest that a rabbi is an agent or assistant to the police or prosecuting authorities. Such