In recent years, we have witnessed painful situations in which publicly recognised Christian leaders have had to face serious allegations of sexual immorality, manipulation and abuse of spiritual authority.

In some cases, following a period of silence, they have issued statements of repentance. The sin is acknowledged, personal and family suffering is discussed, thanks are given they have issued statements of repentance, and a new chapter under God’s mercy is announced.

The Bible teaches to recognise the fruits of repentance and offers guidelines to distinguish a sincere confession from a statement which, while emotional, may prove insufficient

But we need to ask ourselves a key question: what should true repentance look like when the person who has sinned is a pastor who has abused the trust of others?

All Evangelical Focus news and opinion, on your WhatsApp

We cannot judge the heart of anyone. Only God fully knows human motivations. However, the Bible does teach us to recognise the fruits of repentance and offers guidelines to distinguish a sincere confession from a statement which, while emotional, may prove insufficient.

This distinction is particularly important when we are talking about those who exercise spiritual authority over others.

 

Confessing sin means naming things properly

The Apostle John writes, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins” (1 John 1:9).

The word ‘confession’ implies honestly acknowledging sin before God. It is not simply admitting that we have made mistakes or fallen short of our own expectations.

Abuse is abuse, adultery is adultery and harassment is harassment. Each form of behaviour carries its own responsibilities, consequences and pastoral approach. I have come across cases where all three of these sins are present, yet only the one deemed most acceptable by the restorer is acknowledged.

When Nathan confronted David, he replied: “I have sinned against the Lord” (2 Samuel 12:13). He did not attempt to justify his adultery, the abuse of his power or the harassment that led to Uriah’s death. Psalm 51 reveals the depth of his acknowledgement: 'For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me'.

In cases of pastoral abuse, generic expressions can be particularly problematic. It is not the same to say “I made mistakes in my relationships” as it is to acknowledge the misuse of pastoral authority, the manipulation of vulnerable people, and deceptive behaviour when such acts are proven.

Repentance begins when we stop softening the language we use to describe our sin.

The repentance begins when we stop softening the language we use to describe our sin

This does not mean that intimate details or the identities of the victims should be revealed. Their dignity and privacy must be protected. However, the public confession must be proportionate to the seriousness of the acknowledged acts.

In my pastoral experience, I have observed that leaders who have engaged in serious misconduct often do not initially acknowledge the full extent of what has happened.

Their initial confessions are usually limited to what they consider to be acceptable to the pastoral team to whom they are accountable.

However, as the process progresses, new people affected, hidden behaviours, and other sinful conduct related to the initial events come to light as if there were a web of deceit gradually being unravelled.

In many cases, it can take a year or longer before the person responsible fully acknowledges the seriousness of their actions, the extent of the harm caused, and the consequences for those affected.

That is why an initial confession, however sincere it may seem, should not be confused with a full acknowledgement of the truth or sufficient mature repentance.

 

True repentance does not make excuses

Paul makes a fundamental distinction: “For godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation […] but worldly sorrow brings death” (2 Cor 7:10).

Not all sorrow over the consequences of our actions is repentance. We may regret losing our ministry, our reputation, our followers, or the trust of our family.

We may suffer deeply because of the public scandal, yet still not understand the harm caused to others.

I recall a well-known musician and singer, a great composer, who wept bitterly after getting the pianist in his band pregnant. But he wept because he realised he was going to lose everything he had worked for over the years; he did not weep for his sin.

Repentance does not mean explaining why I ended up doing what I did, but acknowledging that I am responsible for doing it

Therefore, sorrow for being caught is not necessarily the same as sorrow for sinning. True repentance involves abandoning excuses and taking responsibility for our actions.

This is particularly important when the behaviour has been repeated over many years. A series of conscious decisions, cover-ups and deceptions cannot be explained as a momentary downfall.

We should neither turn our emotional wounds, marital difficulties, or personal problems into excuses that ultimately shift the blame onto other people. Those circumstances may require therapeutic attention, but they do not remove moral responsibility.

Repentance does not mean explaining why I ended up doing what I did, but rather acknowledging that I am responsible for doing it.

This does not oblige one to admit to false accusations. Everyone has the right to respond truthfully to allegations made against them.

However, this right of self-defence should not be used to minimise behaviour that has been acknowledged or proven.

 

Behaviour that contradicts repentance

The Bible not only speaks of words of repentance, but also of the behaviour that must accompany them.

Proverbs 28:13 states: “Whoever conceals their sins will not prosper, but whoever confesses and renounces them will find mercy.” The text sets out two conditions: confession and turning away. At the same time, it draws our attention to the behaviour of those who commit sins: concealment.

Therefore, when a leader publicly declares their repentance yet continues to engage in deceitful behaviour, manipulation, or concealment, there are serious grounds to question the authenticity or maturity of the repentance process.

When someone publicly declares repentance yet continues to use deception and manipulation to protect their image, this directly contradicts the fruits of true biblical repentance

Through various disciplinary and restoration processes, I have witnessed behaviours that are particularly worrying and which seriously call into question the authenticity of some leaders’ repentance.

One of the most revealing of these is the use of fake social media profiles to anonymously defend one’s own reputation, respond to criticism, or discredit those who report misconduct. Such practices have also recently come to light and warrant serious consideration.

When someone publicly declares their repentance yet continues to use deception and manipulation to protect their image, this directly contradicts the fruits of true biblical repentance.

Such actions cannot be regarded as mere minor errors; when confirmed, they are serious signs that patterns of behaviour still need to be addressed and corrected. A word to the wise is enough.

Below, I outline some of these behaviours that I have witnessed first-hand, and which should set off alarm bells in any restoration process:

• Creating fake social media profiles to defend oneself against accusations, appear to have independent support or anonymously attack accusers. If this behaviour is proven, it constitutes a continuation of the deception rather than a sign of repentance.

• Discrediting victims by portraying them as liars, resentful, unstable or self-serving without evidence. It is particularly serious to do so indirectly, by using followers, friends or associates.

• Continuing to send messages containing intrusive, intimate and sensual questions to other potential victims while “accounting for his actions”.

• Manipulating the account of events by withholding relevant information, deliberately distorting dates, minimising the seriousness of the behaviour or altering the version of events depending on the circumstances and audience.

• Admitting only what has already been discovered while deliberately concealing other behaviours or potential victims from those overseeing the process.

• Using spiritual language to silence criticism and portraying any questioning as an attack by the enemy, spiritual persecution or a lack of Christian forgiveness.

• Pressuring those affected to withdraw complaints, remain silent, accept certain versions of events or participate in a reconciliation they do not wish to undertake.

• Faking accountability by claiming to be subject to pastoral supervision, while concealing information from those responsible, or by selecting only counsellors who are willing to endorse decisions that have already been made.

• Rushing to restore one’s public image by using testimonies, support campaigns, or statements from friends to rebuild one’s reputation before adequately addressing one’s responsibilities and the consequences of one’s actions.

Not all of these behaviours are equally serious, nor do they constitute definitive proof of a person’s spiritual state. The facts must be verified and the right to a legitimate defence against false accusations must be respected.

However, when deliberate behaviour involving deception, retaliation or manipulation is proven, it cannot be regarded as a minor detail.

It is inconsistent to publicly ask for forgiveness while continuing to discredit or intimidate, either directly or indirectly, those who have reported harm.

Paul exhorts: “Put away falsehood, and speak the truth, each one to his neighbour” (Ephesians 4:25). Genuine repentance does not involve fabricating fictitious support, manipulating public opinion or controlling the narrative of what happened. It requires truth.

There are five further aspects that true repentance must include, particularly when the person who has sinned is a pastor who has abused the trust of others. We will look at those in a future article.

You can read the first and second articles in this series.

Marcos Zapata, evangelical pastor, president of the Spanish Evangelical Alliance and member of the Psalm 15 Table in Spain.