The prophet has the tiller and can steer the boat wherever he wishes in accordance with his revelation.

The odd part of Mormonism is the we also have revelation as individuals. Any individual can revoke the prophet in any part of his or her life but cannot remove the prophet from the tiller.

The silent affirmation of denial of priesthood to the blacks for many generations of prophets did not make it right. It was obvious to many that the direction the boat was going was not right, but the tiller was still in the hands of the prophet.

You have to ask, then, right for whom. Were we ready? Was he ready? Were they ready? Does God tell us to do immoral things because we are not ready for the moral ones?

What was wrong with conking Laban on the head and tying him up rather than cutting off his head? Does God need to know that we will do anything, moral or immoral, for him like Abraham?

Hmmm. This sounds like the demiurge.

Another piece of this that I found powerful is the reminder that we do our best toward the rules. I think that the patterns can exist to help us check our consciences and choices, to make sure we are at least desiring the direction they teach, and doing all we can head in that direction, even if it seems that our lives at the moment will never unfold in that way. In those situations where there really is a true exception (like the woman in the example above who feels inspired to divorce…and I think we all know of situations like this), the realization that we will be blessed according to our sincere efforts and not necessarily the external “perfectness” of our lives can bring great comfort.

So, for example, take two women who have been married to a man for ten years. Both women are righteous, temple-worthy women. Suppose we could prove somehow that there were no other variables in their lives that would make them or their receptiveness to and possession of light and truth different. They hear the prophets repeatedly teach against divorce. After years of tumultuous and difficult marriages, and lots of prayer, one feels inspired to leave her husband, the other feels inspired to stay.

The reception of personal revelation of either woman will not change the doctrine or the authorized position of the Church. Since neither woman (and, by extension, none of us) is authorized to receive revelation for the Church/world, any personal choice or response to conscience is limited in scope to one’s personal life. The variable in such a scenario above is the personal situations of the women, not the Church’s general positions and teachings on marriage and divorce.

I’ve been rereading the Worldwide Leadership meeting that came out with our magazines a couple of months back. They reiterated this point — prophets teach the rules, we seek personal revelation for our personal choices and circumstance — but no personal choice or inspiration or conscience can change the rules/doctrine/patterns. Again, it boils down to the limits of personal revelation and agency. And the recognition that with personal choice comes accountability. And the gratitude that the atonement is there to help with the messiness of mortality as we struggle to do our best with what we know and what we have.

Your final paragraph reasserts your argument that there is a finite jurisdictional limit beyond which a prophet has no authority to speak. You have stated that twice now, in two different ways, but you have yet to tell me where you are getting that idea. I find no support for it anywhere.

They are men that lead the Church and receive revelation for the Church. When they speak for the Church, the debate is over. There is no need for me to write a letter to voice my dissent.

But when they speak beyond the Church, beyond their jurisdiction, they shed their mantle and what they say is judged solely on the merits. No authority, only the strength of their argument.

This sums up some of what I was thinking a lot better than what I said earlier.

Or at least it considers one facet of what I think can affect/influence conscience. We are told that the light of Christ is given to all. But our choices along the way and how we respond to the influences around us can affect whether our conscience becomes more light-filled or dimmed with time. I don’t think the conscience is supposed to be a sociocultural filter in the ideal, but of course we all are affected by such forces to some degree because we are mortal. (All the more reason I’m grateful there is a God to help us along, and an Atonement!)