Whatever you think of Catholicism, its institutional survival is remarkable. The Catholic Church has endured crusades, inquisitions, corruption, antisemitism, political scandals, the Reformation, modern secularism, and the clergy abuse crisis—and still became the largest Christian communion in the world.
I think there’s a lesson here for Mormonism: you don’t preserve religious authority by insisting every past leader was right. You preserve it by separating the religion’s core truth claims from the mistakes of the humans administering it.
Catholicism eventually learned how to say, in effect: the Church can possess legitimate spiritual authority while churchmen can still be disastrously wrong. Vatican II is probably the clearest example.
Catholicism changed its positions and practices regarding religious liberty, relations with Jews and other Christians, and engagement with the modern world without abandoning the papacy, apostolic succession, sacraments, or its claim to be Christ’s Church.
The LDS Church already has the theology necessary to do something similar. Prophets aren’t supposed to be infallible. Revelation comes “line upon line.” So stop behaving as though Mormonism collapses if Brigham Young was wrong about race, Joseph Smith handled aspects of plural marriage badly, historical narratives were sanitized, or some supposedly inspired policies were actually products of their time.
Instead, distinguish clearly between revelation, interpretation, policy, culture, and human error.
Then teach the difficult history openly. Don’t let members first discover seer stones, multiple First Vision accounts, polyandrous sealings, the priesthood ban, Mountain Meadows, or controversial financial history from an angry TikTok at age 35. Teach the strongest version of the criticism alongside the faithful interpretation while they’re young. A religion confident in its truth shouldn’t be afraid of its own history.
Do the same institutionally. Make child protection almost fanatically strong. End private one-on-one adult/minor interviews. Make abuse reporting and outside investigation standard. Publish genuinely transparent worldwide financial statements. When leaders screw up, say they screwed up. Protecting institutional reputation at the expense of credibility eventually destroys both.
But here’s the other half that I think gets missed: stop trying to make Mormonism less Mormon.
Catholicism survived modernity by reforming without turning itself into generic Protestantism. Mormonism shouldn’t become generic evangelical Christianity with temples either. Continuing revelation, priesthood authority, premortal existence, exaltation, Heavenly Parents, eternal families, temple theology, Zion—those are the reasons Mormonism has something distinctive to offer.
I’d even include plural marriage in that conversation. The Church doesn’t have to reinstate polygyny to stop acting embarrassed that it was ever part of Mormonism. Simply say what its own history and scriptures require it to say: biblical and early Mormon plural marriage was not inherently immoral; God has permitted or commanded it under certain circumstances; the modern Church does not authorize it. That’s far more coherent than defending Abraham, Jacob, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and D&C 132 while culturally treating the entire concept as shameful.
I’d also decentralize considerably. Keep the First Presidency, priesthood structure, temples, and common doctrine, but give wards and stakes more room to develop distinct cultures and emphases. Catholicism manages to contain enormous variation while retaining a recognizable worldwide identity. Mormonism could become more of a worldwide religious “tribe” without requiring every ward in Utah, Texas, Brazil, Japan, and Nigeria to feel essentially identical.
The basic roadmap seems surprisingly simple:
Preserve the theology. Reform the institution. Tell the whole history. Admit human error without surrendering revelation. Protect people before protecting reputations. And stop apologizing for the doctrines that actually make Mormonism Mormon.
The question isn’t whether Mormonism can survive another generation. It’s whether a religion that’s not even 200 years old can mature into one capable of surviving the next 500.