Privileges are always subject to exceptions in certain circumstances. For example, the attorney-client privilege is subject to the “crime-fraud” exception, which removes the privilege when such communications are “in furtherance of contemplated or ongoing criminal or fraudulent conduct.” This exception applies regardless of the severity of the “criminal or fraudulent conduct” at issue.
Similarly, every other privilege is subject to certain exceptions, so the questions becomes, what makes the clergy-penitent privilege any different?
This is particularly true given that the clergy-penitent privilege did not exist at common law, but rather is a creature of statute which must be narrowly construed.
The United States Supreme Court has held, “exceptions to the demand for every man’s evidence are not lightly created nor expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth.”
The clergy-penitent privilege, like all privileges, is in “derogation of the search for truth,” and, as such, is properly subject to limitations in certain circumstances. One such circumstance is the reporting of child abuse, where clergy members are often uniquely situated to obtain information which may help prevent such atrocious crimes.