*380.* _Priest, Pastoral Duties._—Where a priest published from the altar that “Peter Servatius is excommunicated, because he laid hands on the priest to put him out of the church, and he has no more benefit of the prayers of the church. I will not pray for him, and consider him a lost sheep and withdraw all my pastoral blessings from him. If he die, the burial rights of the church will be denied him,” such remarks were held defamatory, unless they were spoken in the proper discharge of the priest’s clerical and pastoral duties and without malice; and the case should have been submitted on the evidence to a jury.(677) *381.* _Church Record, Excommunication._—An entry of a church record that “A report raised and circulated by A. B. against Brother C., stating that he made him pay a note twice, and proved by A. B. as false,” is libelous.(678) But an entry of excommunication of a member made in the record and shown to other members, is not libelous, the latter being properly a part of the record and the former extraneous.(679) *382.* _Will, Libel, Action._—The will of a priest contained a statement that a relative had received $300 from him for clothing, maintenance, education, etc., and promised to repay it, but paid no part of it. Then testator bequeathed said $300 to two legatees to collect for their own use. The relative filed a petition asking the estate of the priest to be held liable for a libel in the sum of $50,000 and the court held that as the right of action did not accrue until after the death of the testator, there was a right of action against the estate. As the case never got beyond the probate court, its authority is doubtful.(680) *383.* _Language, Insane, Good Faith._—Unless the language is used by the bishop in the line of his duty, a statement that a priest is irresponsible and insane, that he was removed from his position of priest for good reason, and that he has been guilty of ecclesiastical disobedience, is slanderous _per se_. To make a communication between a bishop and priest privileged it must have been spoken in good faith and in belief that the speaking of it came within the discharge of the bishop’s duty.(681) *384.* _Rector, Bigamy, Tobacco, Liquor._—In a case where the rector of an Episcopal church called upon a man charged with bigamy and after a private conversation the minister wrote a letter to the district attorney on behalf of the prisoner, it was held not privileged because it was not made in confidence of the relation and was not kept as a secret.(682) A letter from a church member of one congregation to the elders of another congregation advising them of the unfitness of a clergyman appointed to the latter parish, and stating that he used tobacco and liquor, that he was an untruthful man, and that his family was no credit to the community, was quasi-privileged; and in the absence of proof that the charges were false and malicious was not actionable.(683)