Dear Norman: Please answer directly if you wish to respond at all. In the November 12, 1977 issue of Sh’ma, Rabbi Norman Lamm attempts to bring Talmudic and various other Halakhic material sources to bear on the situation of Watergate and the new former White House tapes and satisfactorily proves the point that a ruler is not above the law. He has, however, overlooked at least one substantial argument which the President has used and which Rabbi Lamm, as a congregational rabbi, may well in the future be required to use. I am speaking of the governmental privileged information or material security at the governmental level. As a future rabbi, I expect to speak with my congregants concerning such problems as love affairs or business difficulties to which they may have belonged and the like which could irretrievably damage them, their futures, and their families should such information not remain confidential. I believe that it is the duty of a rabbi to refuse to disclose such information regardless of the penalty. On the national level, disclosure of national security matters is of even greater consequence as it may cause treaties to be broken, relations to become strained, and possibly even wars. The President, as the head of the country and the sole person in whose information is vested, must be entrusted with such matters and if he feels he is acting correctly irreproachably, then I must seek and believe him to be made public or even semi-public. Differences with the President must be ironed out in private consultation and not via international confrontation which I doubt is a valid or safe way. Even the “Jewish Chronicle” this summer, learned, and reported, that leaks and worst likewise be shunned. I believe that all Americans, especially congregational rabbis, and other professionals who are generally taken into one’s confidence, must realize that not all information is meant for all ears. While the President is not above the law there is a thin line between wh…