Repentance is a bedrock teaching of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and is consistently mentioned in its literature and discourse. In a 2019 address, Church President Russell Nelson urged members to “identify what stops you from repenting. And then, change! Repent! All of us can do better and be better than ever before.”

How does the church define repentance on a practical level? To its prospective members, they lay out simple steps in a missionary pamphlet titled “The Gospel of Jesus Christ”. Some of those steps include recognizing that you have sinned, stopping the sin, confessing your sins to the Lord, asking for forgiveness and making restitution. Considering that daily repentance is expected of its millions of members, it’s also fair to expect the church to properly repent for its wrongdoings and errors.

An important area that warrants repentance is its financial practices. On Feb. 21, the church was charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission for “failing to file forms that would have disclosed the Church’s equity investments” of $32 billion held by its chief investment firm, Ensign Peaks. They instead filed forms for 13 other shell companies “that obscured the Church’s portfolio” in what church officials explained was an effort to “maintain the privacy of the portfolio.” Ensign Peak’s chief information officer acknowledged that the obfuscating of church assets was done knowingly because the firm wanted “to avoid ‘attention’ that would be ‘potentially damaging.'” Many believe that LDS leaders fear increased financial transparency would disincentivize members from paying tithing.

In a press release responding to the SEC’s charges, the church stated: “We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed.” The use of passive voice to convey that “mistakes (were) made” aligns with the subsequent defense that “the Church’s senior leadership never prepared or filed the specific reports at issue,” and presumably is not responsible for the misconduct. LDS leaders in essence deflected blame onto Ensign Peak officials and lawyers instead of taking responsibility. This response fits within a broader pattern of senior leadership dodging accountability for their wrongdoings. In a 2015 interview, First Counselor in the First Presidency Dallin Oaks said that the church does not “seek apologies” and “we don’t give them.” While the church in this instance expresses vague “regret,” they do not genuinely apologize nor demonstrate sufficient accountability for a significant and illicit breach of financial transparency.

The SEC’s recent sanctioning of the church has sparked broader conversations about church leadership and its precarious relationship with accountability throughout history. For example, leaders have never apologized to people of African descent for prohibiting them from receiving the priesthood and worshipping in the temple, a policy that remained in effect until 1978. While they have disavowed past racist teachings, including notions that Black people were cursed and less valiant in the premortal existence, they have failed to acknowledge the painful reality that they deprived Black members access to the highest and holiest rituals in LDS theology. This is to say nothing of countless racist statements and teachings that were for decades infused into theological frameworks, including a prevalent mid-20th century idea that Black people were members of an “inferior race.” To this day, scriptures describing dark skin as a “curse” remain in the LDS canon. To adequately repent, the church should sincerely apologize for their former white supremacist practices, explicitly condemn past racist teachings and fundamentally restructure leadership with equitable racial diversity.

LGBTQ+ people deserve an equally sincere apology. For decades, church rhetoric has delegitimized and demonized LGBTQ+ people, including repeated attacks in the mid-20th century that framed homosexuality as a viral contagion that would destroy familial and societal harmony. The church also justified decades of conversion therapy (also known as reparative therapy) in an attempt to root out homosexuality from its members.

In recent decades, LDS leaders have adopted a gentler and more welcoming tone regarding LGBTQ+ people, a rhetorical shift that sociologists Ryan Cragun and Edward Sumerau refer to as “sodomy to sympathy.” Their doctrinal models, however, still maintain the sinfulness and inferiority of homosexual relationships and transgender experiences. And perhaps the most tragic aspect of the church’s violence against queer people is manifest in disproportionate levels of suicidality among LGBTQ+ youth within the church. Surely, the church can apologize to LGBTQ+ members, past and present, candidly acknowledging their past injustices and restructuring their teachings so that all sexual and gender identities are considered equal.

Repentance is also needed for the way the church has long treated women. Throughout the 20th century, church leaders grounded male economic opportunity and female domestic labor in appeals to divine order, frequently urging women to “maintain their place as a woman.” Until 2019, women made temple covenants to their husbands while men made temple covenants to God. This hard-line patriarchal framework has gradually softened into a more nuanced or “soft” patriarchy with more egalitarian language now used to frame the marital partnership.

Nevertheless, women continue to be denied access to priesthood leadership on the grounds that supposedly essential sexual differences mandate a separation of roles (i.e., the priesthood and motherhood). However, this “separate but equal” paradigm quickly breaks down, as a career-oriented man can constantly access the domestic and familial sphere — they can cook, clean and nurture their children. A woman, on the other hand, cannot access priesthood leadership positions, including leading congregations and stakes, serving as General Authorities and giving priesthood blessings. In this way, men have access to the priesthood and fatherhood, whereas women only have access to motherhood. The church should apologize to women for relegating them to second-class members and begin providing them equal ecclesiastical opportunities.

As a practicing Latter-day Saint, I am frequently called to repentance by ecclesiastical leaders. And although I disagree with numerous church teachings, I always welcome invitations to become a more compassionate and charitable version of myself. While I understand that LDS authorities may reject the proposals I have articulated due to fundamental theological disagreements, I sincerely ask them to model the same principles of repentance, honesty and accountability they so emphatically preach to their members.

In a moment of refreshing candor, Apostle Dieter Uchtdorf acknowledged in a 2013 address: “To be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles or doctrine.” Although vague, this humble statement serves as an effective starting point for the church’s repentance process. They can initiate that process by openly acknowledging and apologizing for their wrongdoings, especially those that have harmed others, and implement institutional and theological changes that accept and embrace individuals they have long marginalized and oppressed.

Keith Burns is a graduate of Sarah Lawrence College who specializes in Mormonism and sexuality.

Newsletter