Australia courts and maybe laws by now require a priest to answer qurstions in a child abuse case, including about the child, perp, etc, who gave info IN confessional. Some priests refuse to divulge any confessionl material, as should be, but not all due to govt pressure
I don’t see how making a priest testify about what he heard in the confessional complies with the rules of evidence. In most cases, the penitent can confess anonymously. The priest is forbidden to inquiry after someone’s indentity.
This means the court is asking the priest to guess (speculate) which penitent confessed which crime or that the priest simply trusts that when Jim Beam volunteered that he was Donald Duck that he was telling the truth.