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

=== Assistant: Below is a rephrasing that is explicitly aligned with McConkie’s letter, using his own logic, vocabulary, and boundary … ===
Below is a rephrasing that is explicitly aligned with McConkie’s letter, using his own logic, vocabulary, and boundary conditions—without overstating authority or denying accountability. This version would stand up if someone placed it side-by-side with the 1981 letter.

==== McConkie-Compatible Rephrasing ====

Church boundary:
Members are free to hold personal views on matters that are not binding doctrine. However, only those who are ordained and appointed have authority to teach what the doctrine of the Church is or to direct its members. To publicly advance one’s own views as doctrinal truth, apart from that appointment, is to create dissension and to act outside the priesthood order by which the Lord authorizes teaching, governance, and ordinances in His Church.

==== Why this is explicitly McConkie-consistent ====

Each clause maps directly to his letter:

===== 1. Freedom of personal belief (non-binding matters) =====

McConkie allows private disagreement but forbids public elevation of it:

: “Individuals should… do research and make discoveries… what they write should be in harmony…”

✔ No thought control
✔ No claim of infallibility

===== 2. Teaching authority is tied to ordination and appointment =====

Directly from McConkie:

: “It is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is.”

✔ Authority is jurisdictional, not intellectual
✔ Teaching ≠ thinking

===== 3. Self-appointment is dissension, not courage =====

McConkie’s warning:

: “You do not have a divine commission to correct me or any of the Brethren.”

✔ The issue is order, not disagreement
✔ Acting without appointment is the breach

===== 4. Priesthood authority authenticates ordinances and governance =====

McConkie grounds legitimacy in priesthood order:

: “The Lord’s house is a house of order and those who hold the keys are appointed…”

✔ Ordinances require authorization
✔ Authority is functional, not merely symbolic

==== Ultra-Concise Version (If You Need One Sentence) ====

Members may hold personal views on non-binding matters, but only those ordained and appointed have authority to teach or define doctrine for the Church; presenting oneself as an independent doctrinal authority constitutes dissension and departs from the priesthood order by which the Lord governs His Church and authorizes its ordinances.

==== Key Advantage of This Framing ====

This wording:
* Cannot be dismissed as authoritarian
* Acknowledges prophetic accountability
* Preserves HOS degree boundaries
* Uses McConkie’s own structural logic
* Separates conscience from commission

If you want, next I can:
* Show how critics misread McConkie as silencing inquiry
* Produce a CARM-ready paragraph using this language
* Map this directly onto your HOS degree chart
* Contrast this with Protestant authority collapse

Just tell me where this is going.