Editing Openai/6954271b-6dd0-8000-b680-35e44f6d4478 (section)

=== Assistant: Here are three refined rephrasings, ordered from most formal / doctrinal to more conversational, all preserving your HO… ===
Here are three refined rephrasings, ordered from most formal / doctrinal to more conversational, all preserving your HOS logic, priesthood accountability, and boundary clarity. None introduce authoritarian language; each makes the structure explicit.

==== Church boundary: ====
Members may hold personal views on non-binding matters. However, only those who are ordained and authorized may speak or teach in a way that represents the Church or directs its members. To publicly present oneself as an independent doctrinal authority is to create dissension and to reject the priesthood order by which ordinances and governance are divinely authorized.

==== The Church allows personal disagreement on matters that are not binding doctrine. What it does not allow is self-appointment as a spokesperson or teacher for the Church. Speaking authoritatively without ordination introduces dissension and undermines the priesthood authority that legitimizes Church teaching and validates its ordinances. ====

==== Members are free to hold personal views on non-essential beliefs, but only those who are ordained are authorized to teach or speak for the Church. Setting oneself up as an independent doctrinal authority constitutes dissension and rejects the priesthood structure through which Church authority and ordinances are established. ====

==== - Separates belief freedom from teaching authority ====
* Avoids the phrase “no dissent” (which invites misunderstanding)
* Makes ordination the operative boundary, not opinion
* Grounds authority in priesthood order, not institutional power

If you want, I can:
* Tighten this to a single-sentence aphorism
* Make it explicitly compatible with McConkie’s letter
* Translate it into a Protestant-contrast version
* Insert HOS degree labels directly into the language

Just tell me the use case.