LDS authority matrix

Purpose

Every disputed claim receives three independent scores. Present doctrinal status does not erase historical authority. Historical authority does not make a claim eternally canonical. Prophetic significance depends on what authority and divine certainty were claimed at the time, not only on the label later writers apply.

Classification fields

Field	Values	Question
Source class	canon; accepted revelation; united council; signed presidency statement; handbook/manual; individual public sermon; private writing; member belief	What kind of document or speech is this?
Speaker authority	Church president; First Presidency; apostle; general authority; local leader; member	Who had authority to speak, and for whom?
Council support	unanimous; signed; repeatedly concordant; mixed; opposed; unknown	Did the presiding quorums act together?
Presentation	revelation; commandment; doctrine; policy; counsel; speculation; unclear	What did the source call its own claim?
Repetition	one occasion; repeated by one leader; repeated across leaders; institutional curriculum	How broadly and consistently was it taught?
Enforcement	canonized; temple or ordinance requirement; disciplinary; administrative; rhetorical; none	What did the institution require members to do or believe?
Reception	common consent; official publication; correlated teaching; contested; private	How did the Church receive and transmit it?
Later status	retained; narrowed; reinterpreted; policy-reversed; doctrinally repudiated; silent	What did later leaders do with it?
Present status	binding; official teaching; authorized explanation; permitted opinion; rejected; unresolved	What may fairly be attributed to the Church now?
Prophetic test weight	high; medium; low	How directly does error bear on claimed revelation or moral guidance?

Provisional source hierarchy

Source	Present-doctrine weight	Historical-evidence weight	Notes
Standard works	Highest	Highest	Canonical, but interpretation and the Bible's textual qualification still matter
Official Declaration accepted by the Church	Highest	Highest	Best-documented model of institutional revelatory change
United First Presidency and Twelve decision	Very high	Highest	Doctrine and policy must still be distinguished; D&C 107 supplies a council rule
Signed First Presidency statement	High	Highest	Can show official teaching at its date even if not canon
Proclamation	High	Highest	Signatories, common-consent status, and later use must be recorded
Current handbook/manual	Medium to high	High for its period	Establishes authorized teaching or practice, not automatic canon
Individual conference sermon	Medium	High for speaker's teaching	One statement may be opinion; repetition and reception increase weight
Journal of Discourses sermon	Low by itself	High if text is reliable	Never canonized as a collection; contemporary editorial claims and use still matter
Leader's private or commercial writing	Low	Medium to high for personal belief	Institutional influence must be demonstrated separately
Member folklore	None	Variable cultural evidence	Cannot establish official doctrine

Case-study questions

Adam–God

How many distinct sermons survive, and in what textual form?
Did Brigham Young label the teaching as revelation, doctrine, inference, or speculation?
Did the First Presidency or Twelve teach, contest, or enforce it during his lifetime?
When did later leaders first reject it, and on what authority?

Plural marriage and exaltation

What does Doctrine and Covenants 132 require, and what did later sermons add?
Which claims were presented as universal conditions of exaltation?
How did Official Declaration 1 alter practice, and did it formally reinterpret the claimed doctrine?

Race and priesthood

Separate the restriction, its claimed revelatory basis, and the theories used to explain it.
Identify which claims appeared in signed presidency statements, manuals, or repeated sermons.
Compare Official Declaration 2 with the current essay's repudiation of past theories.

Church name

Separate scriptural naming, corporate/legal names, public nicknames, policy, and prophetic emphasis.
Track whether reversals were presented as revelation or communications strategy.

Open questions

Does the “all fifteen” formulation describe a necessary rule, a reliable heuristic, or only the normal visibility of core doctrine?
Can members reject a president's teaching as opinion while he is alive and still satisfy LDS duties of sustaining and obedience?
What official mechanism identifies an earlier prophetic error when no new canon or declaration addresses it?
When the current Church repudiates the rationale but not the claimed revelatory origin of a past policy, what exactly has changed?

Next updates

Add a source key and exact locator to every proposition.
Replace provisional weights with explicit rules derived from official sources and historical use.
Populate the four case studies before drafting a final verdict.