Reading comp PrepTest 104 · Section 2 · Question 11

Passage

Questions 7-14  .        By the mid–fourteenth century, professional  . associations of canon lawyers (legal advocates in  . Christian ecclesiastical Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph Note
    • Phenomenon introduced (professional canon lawyers guilds, unlike other guilds, rarely disciplined members)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definitions
      • Professional associations of canon lawyers: legal advocates in Christian ecclesiastical courts (first sentence)
      • Christian ecclesiastical courts: courts that dealt with cases involving marriage, inheritance, etc. (first sentence)
    • Comparison
      • Professional associations of canon lawyers did not play a prominent role in enforcing standards of conduct, unlike other guilds at the time and modern professional associations do (second sentences)
    • Example of a professional association of lawyers hobbling conduct enforcement efforts, according to the author:
      • Florentine guild forbade its members to play any role in the discipline of another member (fifth sentence)
      • Few recorded examples of disciplinary enforcement are initiated by clients and not fellow lawyers (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "might expect" (second sentence); "often did" (second sentence); "seems not to have happened" (second sentence); "little fervor" (third sentence); "erring" (third sentence); "some even" (fourth sentence); "few" (last sentence); "apparently" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph Note
    • Two possible explanations for phenomenon (1. canon lawyers were more ethical, or 2. discipline was less efficient)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • List of two explanations for why canon guilds, rarely disciplined members
      • They all followed the rules, or they didn't but the enforcement mechanisms were so bad no one was caught/punished (first through last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "[a]t first glance" (first sentence); "seem" (first sentence); "possible" (first sentence); "may have" (second sentence); "possible" (last sentence three)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph Note
    • Author on why explanation 2 is more likely (1: civil courts, with similar rules and members, disciplined more frequently)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparisons, according to the author:
      • The econd explanation is more plausible than the first (first sentence)
      • Unlikely that church lawyers were more ethical than civil court lawyers (last sentence)
    • List of reasons why the second explanation is more likely, according to the author:
      • First reason: Non-church legal courts show plenty of examples of disciplinary proceedings, and these courts had similar rules and members as the church courts (second through last sentences)
    • Author attitude: "makes it clear" (first sentence); "more plausible" (first sentence); "many more" (second sentence); "could well indicate" (third sentence); "seems inherently weak" (last sentence); "especially" (last sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph Note
    • Author on why explanation 2 is more likely (2: church records reveal many complaints about ethics violations)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • List of reasons why the second explanation is more likely, according to the author (continued from previous paragraph):
      • Second reason: Church authorities complained about ethical failures and lack of disciplinary measures (first sentence)
    • Examples of complaints, according to the author:
      • Council of Basel declared the canon lawyers were lacking ethics and directed Cardinal Cesarini to address the problem (second sentence)
      • In England, there were many complaints about the lack of a functioning discipline system (last sentence)
    • Author attitude: "deplored the shortcomings" (first sentence); "extraordinarily rich" (last sentence)

Paragraph 5

  • Paragraph Note
    • Implications of explanation (caused lawyers to defend themselves rather than discipline members)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
      • Criticism about ethics in the profession caused solidarity among lawyers, which caused them to start a professional association to defend themselves rather than improve ethics (first through last sentence)
    • Author attitude: "paradoxical result" (first sentence); "apparently" (first sentence); "may actually have" (second sentence); "may also have" (last sentence)

Main Point:

Although professional associations of canon lawyers ostensibly were created to uphold professional standards since the mid-fourteenth century, there weren't many disciplinary proceedings against members because these associations may have focused more on defending members from critics than enforcing ethical standards.

Key Lines?

Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 (P1, S2) - Phenomenon introduced

P2, S1 - Two possible explanations introduced

P3, S1 - The author chooses the second explanation

P3, S2 - First reason why

P4, S1 - Second reason why

P5, S2 - Conclusion regarding the real purpose of the association

Meta-Structure?

Phenomenon/Explanation: This passage utilizes a Phenomenon/Explanation Major Meta-Structure. In the first paragraph, the author introduces the central phenemonon: although other medieval guilds played a prominent role in enforcing their own professional standards, professional associations of canon lawyers did not seem to do this much at all. The author then gives two possible explanations to the rarity of disciplinary proceedings: either all these canon lawyers followed the rules, or they didn't but the enforcement mechanisms were so bad no one was caught or punished. The author then explains why the latter is the more likely reason, using comparison and example minor Meta-Structures to support their explanation.

The main point is generally the author's explanation in a Phenomenon/Explanation passage. The author more or less summarizes their explanation in the last sentence of the passage. But we decided to flesh out the explanation a bit more. So, we summarized the author's explanation as: "Although professional associations of canon lawyers ostensibly were created to uphold professional standards since the mid-fourteenth century, there weren't many disciplinary proceedings against members because these associations may have focused more on defending members from critics than enforcing ethical standards."

Last Thoughts?

This author hits for the minor Meta-Structure cycle — there are comparisons, examples, cause and effect, and lists galore. Given the sheer number of important details in this passage, we expext a higher-than-usual percentage of Minor Point, Author Agree, and Application questions.

Question prompt

According to the information Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the main point and any relevant parts of the passage and notes, if necessary, to anticipate what might happen in the scenario described

Answer Anticipation

For questions that ask us to infer, from a few details in the passage, what must be true in a novel situation, we can start by quickly finding and reviewing those details. Once we review that part of the passage, we can anticipate what might happen in the hypothetical situation described. We should consider how the hypothetical situation applies to what we reviewed and whether it might follow a similar or distinct pattern to that described in the passage.So first, let's figure out when the passage discussed the documentation of disciplinary action. Our note for the fourth paragarph is, "Author on why explanation 2 is more likely (2: church records reveal many complaints about ethics violations)." The reference to "records" suggest that paragraph brings up documentation. In that paragraph, we are told that English churches kept extraordinarily rich records about the complaints about the the disciplinary system's failures (P4, S3). That tells about complaints when disciplination *doesn't* occur, so it doesn't really help us on this question.Where else does the passage discuss possible documentation of disciplinary action? Our note for the first paragraph brings up discipline, so we can check there. At the end of the of that pargraph, the author says there are few recorded examples of disciplinary proceedings against canon lawyers, and these proceedings were initiated by a dissatisfied client rather than from other lawyers (P1, S6). That's going to help us! We can look for an answer choice that presents a situation that would provoke a client — not another lawyer — to pursue disciplinary action.

Answer choices

  1. A
    betraying a client's secrets Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem

    (A) Does this present a situation that would provoke a client to pursue disciplinary action against a canon lawyer?

    It sure seems to! The most common documented examples are from dissatisfied clients (as opposed to, say, other lawyers), according to the first paragraph (P1, S6). If a lawyer revealed a client's secrets to the other party, the client would be justifiably upset at the lawyer's failure to uphold attorney-client privilege (not to mention the lawyer's basic incompetence). This would almost certainly lead any reasonable client to seek disciplinary action against the lawyer. And, according to the first paragraph, this is the type of disciplinary action the guilds might actually document and enforce.

    On an Application question, only the most confident and experienced test-takers would select an answer choice without reading all the choices. So, we should probably mark this one as a solid contender but refrain from selecting it until we've eliminated the remaining options.

  2. B
    bribing the judge to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this present a situation that would provoke a client to pursue disciplinary action against a canon lawyer?

    No, this does not match our anticipation. This benefits a client, who would not likely complain about an ethical violation that helps them! And, as we're told in the passage, lawyers (and judges, who are almost always former lawyers) rarely pursued disciplinary action against other lawyers (P5, S3).

  3. C
    misrepresenting credentials in order Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this present a situation that would provoke a client to pursue disciplinary action against a canon lawyer?

    No. There's no harm to a client described here, so it's not what we're looking for. We can cross it off.

    Still, quite a few test-takers choose this one, so let's figure out why it's wrong. First, let's remember the question stem. We're looking for a situation where there would be documentation of disciplinary action against a "canon lawyer." If someone "misrepresent[ed] credentials" to get into a lawyers' guild, they would not be a lawyer. If they were a lawyer, they would not have to misrepresent their credentials! Even if the guild pursued disciplinary action against this person, it would not be against a "canon lawyer."

    Second, and even if this person was a lawyer (perhaps a non-canon lawyer trying to get into the canon guild), we're told that these guilds rarely brought disciplinary action against other lawyers out of "professional solidarity" (P5, S1). So, this would not be a situation that would likely result in disciplinary action.

  4. D
    spreading rumors in order Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this present a situation that would provoke a client to pursue disciplinary action against a canon lawyer?

    Not quite, although, understandably, many test-takers select this option. While it's *possible* that spreading rumors to discredit an opposing lawyer may harm the opposing client, this answer choice doesn't tell us how much it would hurt the client or whether the client would become aware of this indiscretion. Moreover, lawyers don't typically owe the same level of professional responsibility to *opposing* clients that they owe to their own clients. Technically, the opposing client isn't even this lawyer's client. So, it's unclear whether the opposing lawyer's client would have a cause for complaint in this situation.

    This isn't an awful answer by any means. But in comparison to (A), this answer choice provides us less reason to believe the guild would document a disciplinary action against the attorney.

  5. E
    knowingly helping a client Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this present a situation that would provoke a client to pursue disciplinary action against a canon lawyer?

    Nope. In fact, this describes a circumstance in which a client benefits from the lawyer's ethical lapse. A client probably wouldn't tell on the lawyer who helped them!

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A Credited 64%
  2. B 5%
  3. C 10%
  4. D 13%
  5. E 8%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion