Depending on the religion and jurisdiction.
Multiple faiths use the term “parish” and observe confession.
In Catholicism- the “big one” often pictured with confession and penance, a priest violating the seal of confession will generally be severely punished and default excommunication is generally the prescribed penalty unless there are very specific circumstances.
That said not all faiths or denominations of a faith observe these rules and the laws of various jurisdictions vary. For example in some places a priest cannot be forced to provide information from a confession even by a high court or in legal matters. In others priests can be compelled or forced to break the seal.
Under various jurisdictions and faiths or denominations or even congregations there may be rules about when a priest may be obligated to divulge information from a confession. Some might require that reports of sexual abuse or certain crimes be reported. Others might allow priests discretion in acting..
.. in a morally consistent manner, and others may outright forbid the priest from doing so.
Of course, in theory most such rules have loop holes. If I tell you that I will throw water on Dave as a prank when he walks into the office and you see Dave in the parking lot and tell him to bring his umbrella inside- if Dave figures out what is going on- you didn’t divulge anything I told you in confidence did you? Of course that’s a silly example- but it illustrates that it is entirely possible to pass information without directly violating any sort of direct confidence. One can quibble on semantics but rules and laws are at their heart semantics.
So can you take recourse legally? Hard to say. I mean- in America you can sue anyone for anything. The suit may be refused by the court or it may be tossed out or it may be heard and lost, but you can literally sue someone for waving hello at you if you want to waste your time and money and possibly be subjected to legal penalty or recourse for frivolous legal action or harassment.
You can possibly get the priest in trouble with the church, and it is likely that their flock would lose trust in them if they knew their confessions may not be private. That’s largely why confessions are private. So that people can confess their earthly sins with some measure of anonymity because usually confessions imply that you will go to “hell” or similar if you don’t receive penance and you must confess to do that. So instead of making people go to hell because they are embarrassed or worried about secrets getting out, a sacred confidence was created by the church to allow anyone to say anything and receive their penance so that they might be judged by god but have a chance to repent.
While I think the whole concept is daffy and many others may agree, it isn’t my place to decide how others live. If two people chose to live within this religious system and those were the rules-
The priest is clearly wrong.
Multiple faiths use the term “parish” and observe confession.
In Catholicism- the “big one” often pictured with confession and penance, a priest violating the seal of confession will generally be severely punished and default excommunication is generally the prescribed penalty unless there are very specific circumstances.
That said not all faiths or denominations of a faith observe these rules and the laws of various jurisdictions vary. For example in some places a priest cannot be forced to provide information from a confession even by a high court or in legal matters. In others priests can be compelled or forced to break the seal.
Under various jurisdictions and faiths or denominations or even congregations there may be rules about when a priest may be obligated to divulge information from a confession. Some might require that reports of sexual abuse or certain crimes be reported. Others might allow priests discretion in acting..
Of course, in theory most such rules have loop holes. If I tell you that I will throw water on Dave as a prank when he walks into the office and you see Dave in the parking lot and tell him to bring his umbrella inside- if Dave figures out what is going on- you didn’t divulge anything I told you in confidence did you? Of course that’s a silly example- but it illustrates that it is entirely possible to pass information without directly violating any sort of direct confidence. One can quibble on semantics but rules and laws are at their heart semantics.
The priest is clearly wrong.