Benefit of Clergy

The term benefit of clergy, as a form of community corrections, has its roots in England during the Middle Ages. Following its inception, the benefit of clergy had quite a complex and changing history (Sawyer, 1990). As noted by Cross (1917), laws during this time favored the upper classes, who subsequently dominated Parliament. Because of a desire to protect personal property, crimes such as petty theft and arson carried sentences of death. The harshness of these penalties disrupted the fair administration of justice.

During this same period, the Holy Roman Catholic Church was very powerful. A struggle for power ensued between the Church and the sitting ruler in England at the time, King Henry II. His efforts to diminish the power of the Church became evident in his attempt to secularize all courts. More specifically, he focused on diminishing the power of the ecclesiastical courts by trying priests, monks, clerics, and nuns in the secular court system. In response to these efforts, the Holy Roman Catholic Church instituted its own variation on the administration of justice by the creation of the benefit of clergy. Priests, monks, clerics, and nuns accused of violating the law were to have their cases heard by the ecclesiastical court, thus altering the role of the Church to being one of an administrator of justice. The most compelling difference between the two court systems was that the Church viewed negative behavior as sinful as opposed to a violation against mankind. The punishments administered by the Church served the purposes of reformation and forgiveness as opposed to simply being punitive. Regardless, the origins of the benefit of clergy were based less on compassion and were more indicative of the Roman Catholic Church's effort to thwart the secular court movement and King Henry II's attempts to consolidate power in England.

Although this court arrangement at first mediated injustices for members of the clergy, the ability of the Church to effectively function in the role of law enforcement was questionable. Eventually, the religious court system began to mirror the injustices occurring in the secular system. Historical documents reveal an attempt to mitigate the severity of capital sanctions by juries, who would commit perjury to do so. Mitigation was accomplished by acquitting individuals accused of less serious felonies such as petty theft, in spite of clear evidence of guilt. Those juries not willing to fully acquit, however, would often find offenders guilty of misdemeanors in lieu of the more serious felony. Finally, the ability of the criminal court to enforce the laws diminished, whereas the power of civil court to regulate individual behavior increased.

Simultaneously, a combination of higher literacy rates, the proliferation of slavery, the use of pardons, and an increase in transportation prompted Parliament to develop exceptions to the legal protocol, resulting in the benefit of clergy being available to the general public. By 1603, the English benefit of clergy was expanded to the public as a mechanism for courts to mitigate the harshness of penalties (death) for felony offenses deemed “clergyable.” Felonies such as murder, horse stealing, and certain arson, religious, and robbery offenses were omitted from this list and so remained punishable by death. Other felonies such as manslaughter, murder without malice, and larceny were considered “clergyable” and eligible for exemption from death.

...