and Advice ■ The clergy communications privilege does not apply unless the confider consults the member of the clergy “for the purpose of seeking spiritual counsel or advice.” § 90.505(l)(b). No reported Florida decisions address this requirement of the privilege. Courts from other jurisdictions have interpreted similar statutory provisions to exclude from the operation of the privilege communications made for purposes not related to religious or spiritual concerns. E.g., Magar v. State, 308 Ark. 380, 826 S.W.2d 221 (1992) (finding privilege inapplicable to defendant’s admission to minister’s accusation of sexual abuse of minors where conversation was initiated by minister for disciplinary purposes and not for spiritual counseling); Burger v. State, 238 Ga. 171, 231 S.E.2d 769 (1977) (<HOLDING>); Keenan v. Gigante, 47 N.Y.2d 160, 417
holding wife did not have a duty to warn a police officer who was shot while escorting her home that her husband had threatened to kill any police officer holding trial court erred in finding purported wife unavailable to testify and admitting her sworn prior statements in lieu of her live testimony where record did not support courts ruling in light of its own finding that remarriage of wife and defendant was fraudulent and wife did not refuse to testify if claim of privilege was denied holding that statements elicited from a defendant in violation of his miranda rights could be introduced to impeach that defendants credibility when the jury was instructed that the statements were not to be considered as evidence of his guilt holding that lofton would have no standing to appeal the district courts determination that his wife waived her spousal testimonial privilege holding defendant could not claim privilege concerning conversational statements to clergy member who was his friend and frequent companion concerning defendants intent to kill his wife and her lover