The law should be clear that they should report the crime. They can say that they are aware of the
need to investigate a molestation of [Victim] by [confessor] without breaking any confidentiality.
Even if the law doesn't require that, they should do so.
They should report any known evidence, like other victims or video or photos or names of
witnesses (My wife saw me do it, so I came to confess).
The only thing I advocate as confidential is the testimony in a voluntary confession from the assailant to
his spiritual advisor, provided that the spiritual advisor kept it in confidence. In that case, the clergyman
should not be compelled to testify in court nor tell prosecutors what the assailant has testified to him.
They still would have already reported such crime (or possible crime) to authorities along with any
knowledge of evidence.
Remove that clergy privilege, and many people won't come forward to a clergyman for help. That help
often steers them toward getting the nerve up to do the right thing and face their crime. People feel
safe coming to their clergyman. The lawyer/client privilege is still in place if the clergy privilege were
taken away, but who confesses to a lawyer before they are arrested? The clergy privilege probably
leads to more successful convictions than it interferes with. Correct the "reporting" part of the law,
don't kill the privilege.