Short answer. Yes, within limits. Rule 130, Section 24 bars examining a minister or priest, without the consent of the affected person, about any confession or advice given in a professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs.
What the law says
A minister, priest or person reasonably believed to be so cannot without the consent of the affected person, be examined as to any communication or confession made to or any advice given by him or her, in his or her professional character, in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs.
Rule 130, Section 24 — Disqualification by reason of privileged communication[s]. Read the full provision →
What the clause covers
The privilege reaches both directions of the exchange: any communication or confession made to the minister, and any advice given by them. So it is not only what the penitent said but what was said back. Two conditions frame it. The exchange must have occurred in the minister's professional character, and it must have been in the course of the discipline enjoined by the church to which that minister belongs. Both conditions describe a religious office being exercised, not a friendship that happens to involve a member of the clergy.
"Reasonably believed to be so"
The clause protects a communication made to a person reasonably believed to be a minister or priest. This mirrors language used elsewhere in the same section for lawyers and physicians, and it is deliberate. A person seeking spiritual counsel is in no position to verify ordination, and a privilege that failed because of a mistake about status would be unreliable exactly when it is relied on. What matters is the reasonableness of the belief at the time of the confidence.
Whose privilege it is
The bar operates without the consent of the affected person. That is the person whose confidence is at stake, not the minister — so the minister cannot simply choose to disclose, and equally, the affected person can consent to disclosure. This is the same structure the section uses for the lawyer and physician privileges: the professional holds the confidence, but the person who entrusted it holds the key.
The limits worth being clear about
The clause is anchored to church discipline and professional character. Conversations with a member of the clergy that are social, administrative, or connected with the running of an organisation are not automatically within it, however sincere. Note too what the clause does not do: it prevents the minister from being examined, and does not by itself make the underlying facts unprovable if they can be established from independent evidence.