More church anarchy: autonomous quorums

Seven, autonomous priesthood quorums

The Lord has organized His priesthood into seven different quorums: a quorum of deacons, teachers, priests, elders, seventies, apostles and high priests. There are also presidencies, some of which also form presiding quorums, such as the first presidency, stake presidencies, high councils and the bishoprics, but I will not delve into these latter quorums.

Each of the seven priesthood quorums is autonomous and most are presided over by a president with two counselors, taken from the quorum itself (see D&C 107:60-63.)  There is no inter-quorum regulation delineated in the Lord’s scriptures. The teachers do not regulate the deacons, the priests do not regulate the teachers and deacons, the elders do not regulate the priests, teachers and deacons, and so on and so forth.

Quorum councils

A quorum convenes as a council. A council is “an assembly of men summoned or convened for consultation, deliberation, advice, or agreement upon some concerted action”. When a quorum convenes as a council, it does so to decide amongst themselves how to discharge the priesthood duties that pertain to their particular office and calling.

The seven priesthood quorums have presidents with counselors, and these presidents, or servants, serve the quorum by teaching them the duty of their office as given in the covenants, while they are sitting with them in council.  (See D&C 107:85-89.)

Quorum keys remain with the quorum

No one outside of the quorum has jurisdiction over the quorum. No single person, group or quorum has a right to tell another quorum of the church how to discharge their duties. This is because the keys of the quorum pertain solely to the quorum members.

This shows that each priesthood quorum is autonomous, meaning that they are independent or self-governing. (Joseph Smith’s much quoted saying comes to mind: “I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves.”)  To illustrate this principle, let’s consider the deacons’ quorum.

A deacons’ quorum is to consist of 12 deacons presided over by a presiding deacon (see D&C 107:85.) The duties of this quorum is ”to warn, expound, exhort, and teach, and to invite all to come unto Christ” (D&C 20:59) and “to watch over the church, to be standing ministers unto the church” (D&C 84:111.)  When the quorum convenes as a council, they consult one with another, deliberate, give each other advice and come to some agreement as to how they should discharge these duties, meaning how they are going to warn, expound, exhort, teach, invite, watch and minister. They are the ones who make this determination. If assignments are given, they are the ones who make the assignments.

Neither the deacons’ quorum president, nor anyone outside of the quorum, can tell the deacons how they are to discharge their duties, nor can they assign deacons to do this or that. The deacons themselves, operating as individual deacons, or as a quorum convened in council, make all of these decisions, for no one else holds the keys to this office and quorum.  (See D&C 124:143.)

Decentralized power and autonomy

This self-government is designed to decentralize the authority and power in the church, that no ecclesiastical tyrants can start to abuse the Lord’s people. It is yet another check and balance that the Lord has set up to keep his people humble, looking alone to Him as the author and finisher of their faith, and not to any one man, or group of men, with concentrated power and authority.

Mutually beneficial inter-quorum cooperation

In addition to the duties that pertain to specific quorums, the Lord has also allowed certain quorums to be paired up in their duties, so that there may be assistance, if occasion requires. Specifically, if occasion requires, the deacons’ quorum may assist the teachers’ quorum in all their duties, the priests’ quorum may assist the elders’ quorum in most of their duties, and the seventies’ quorum may assist the apostles’ quorum in all their duties.

Such assistance may come individually, as a teacher asking a deacon to help him in his duties, or as a quorum-wide petition, the teachers’ quorum asking the deacons’ quorum to assist them in some duty they must perform.

There is to be no extortion in the church of Christ

None of these petitions for assistance are commandments or obligations. In other words, although it is the duty of a deacon to assist a teacher in all his duties, that duty only devolves upon him “if occasion requires.” And who decides if the occasion requires? The deacon does. The same goes for quorum-wide calls for assistance. The teachers’ quorum has no right to demand assistance from the deacons’ quorum. They can only request it and if the convened deacons’ quorum are agreed that occasion requires it, they are then duty-bound to extend such assistance.

This same principle applies to all of the other priesthood quorums.

Taking back the power

If you are part of a priesthood quorum that is no longer autonomous, there is a solution: simply assert the rights to the priesthood you have been given and take back your quorum’s (and your own) priesthood autonomy. It is, after all, your duty to do so:

Wherefore, now let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office in which he is appointed, in all diligence. He that is slothful shall not be counted worthy to stand, and he that learns not his duty and shows himself not approved shall not be counted worthy to stand. Even so. Amen. (D&C 107:99-100)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist


  1. You say the president of a quorum cannot dictate the members of that quorum. At first, this didn’t sound right to me (after all, what would the point of a president be, if he can’t give orders to those beneath him?)

    But then I thought about it some more…

    The president of the quorum is supposed to be called and set apart by the members of the quorum. In other words, the president received his authority from the members. This is similar to “government by the people, for the people.” He serves the quorum at their call.

    But just like in a self-government system, we appoint the police-man, but after he’s appointed, the police-man now has authority to arrest any individual citizen who fails to uphold the will of the whole body of citizens. Does this mean the president of a quorum has authority to execute certain actions upon/against individual members ONLY if that action is the will of the entire body? Never his own personal will? Just like the police officer, he can only execute the laws that were agreed upon by all citizens… he can’t make up his own laws and execute them…

    Interesting thoughts…

  2. You say the president of a quorum cannot dictate the members of that quorum. At first, this didn’t sound right to me (after all, what would the point of a president be, if he can’t give orders to those beneath him?)

    Also — when the Lord uses the word “President” [and its verb form “Preside”], it doesn’t mean what Gentiles mean when they use the word:

    but jesus called them to him
    and saith unto them

    ye know
    that they which are accounted to rule over the gentiles
    exercise lordship over them
    and their great ones
    exercise authority upon them
    but so shall it not be among you
    but whosoever will be great among you
    shall be your minister
    and whosoever of you will be the chiefest
    shall be servant of all
    for even
    the son of man
    came not to be ministered unto
    but to minister

    Being a “president” in the church of God has no meaning or value — meaning there is nothing special that I get for having joined the church of Christ. There is nothing special or noteworthy about being LDS, about having the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost, about holding the rights of the priesthood, about having access to temples, or about presiding in priesthood quorums or as a husband in the home, etc. — and that’s the point.

    Jesus described His kingdom as one in which the greater serve the lesser and the presiders minister to the concerns of their stewardship. The presidents are not the ones habitually obeyed, sitting atop some power hierarchy by divine appointment – but, in the Lord’s vernacular, the leaders are in fact stewards who have the responsibility to provide for the maintenance and welfare of the concerns of their stewardship. Those who preside the most must serve the most, or consider themselves to be the servant of the most and act accordingly.

    So — there is no “point” to being a president, and that’s the point.

  3. Abused women think men are the problem and so they come to conclude it best not to remarry. Abused saints think authority is the problem therefore seek autonomy wherever they can find it. You can have autonomy, but your autonomy will be your undoing. God often compares his kingdom to the human body. Is there any cell in the human body which exists independent of the rest of the body? Any cell or group of cells which divide themselves from the body die in due time.
    God’s house is a house of order. In unity there is power, in division there is weakness. Abraham Lincoln borrowed a saying from Christ, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

  4. noblenarcissist asked:

    Is there any cell in the human body which exists independent of the rest of the body? Any cell or group of cells which divide themselves from the body die in due time.

    How about a fertilized egg? Or that one in a billion sperm that actually makes it to the egg and fertilizes it? I’m just throwing things out there off the top of my head. Justin, I think, is the resident scientist. He could probably best answer these questions.

    Even if Justin does come back with some cells that can live apart or independently from the rest of the body (apart from my own examples), in principle I agree with what you wrote. Each priesthood quorum is autonomous in that they govern themselves, yet each one is still tied to the church, which is the body which they serve.

    It is true that unity is a gospel principle, but homogeneity is not. The nervous system can’t do what the circulatory system does, not do we expect it to. Should it even try the entire body will suffer from the effects. Each system is specialized and more or less self-governing, yet their duties pertain to the link that they have with the rest of the body. Just as the nervous system does not serve itself, but the body, so a priesthood quorum is not designed to be self-serving, but to serve the church body.

    So, yes, should a priesthood quorum separate from the body of the church, it serves no purpose, for its purpose is to serve the church, not its own interests. But a priesthood quorum that operates autonomously, still connected to the body, is a specialized system, which is what it was designed by God to be. If the various quorums were not meant to be specialized systems, there would be no need for the various offices of the priesthood. One single priesthood office would do for the entire church body. But this is not the case, because, as you have stated, the priesthood is patterned after the physical body, or the physical body is patterned after the priesthood, depending on your perspective.

    So a return to cell specialization, or cellular differentiation, is the gospel pattern, not homogeneity under the guise of “unity.”

  5. Is there any cell in the human body which exists independent of the rest of the body? Any cell or group of cells which divide themselves from the body die in due time.

    How about a fertilized egg?

    The fertilized egg is the human body. It’s not independent of the rest of the body — it’s just alone, in that it is the whole of the human body.

    I think noblenarcissist point would be that, even you take something like your sperm example — they can “live” apart from the body because of the nourishing fluid the prostate provides, so there’s always some inter-dependency throughout.

    I’ve always said that you can’t quite tell if we’re a brain who has a stomach to provide calories for it to work — or if we’re a stomach who’s got a brain to think of where to find food for it to digest.

    Each priesthood quorum is autonomous in that they govern themselves, yet each one is still tied to the church, which is the body which they serve.

    The quorum would be analogous to an organ — which is why the scriptures describe the church of God as an organism [a human body].

    Each organ is independent, to some degree, in that: it does it’s own thing, it has it’s own genes to govern what it needs, it can be surgically taken out and kept “alive” with technology, etc.

    But as an organism, each organ is entirely inter-dependent and connected with the others, in that: chemical signals from one can increase or decrease certain activities in others, tasks of one organ require things produced or governed by others, etc.

    Though we can “divide” the organs into separate organ systems and functions — there’s never any clear-cut division, the picture is always blurry because there is so much inter-connection and positive and negative feedback between everything.


    It is true that unity is a gospel principle, but homogeneity is not.

    is a good way of putting it. I wrote in The Unity of God:

    The universe is a fragmented web […] a flow of information that moves through all the variety of interconnected “things” – as wind or water moves. And we are sym-phonic beings — and should not be content with mono-tony: rows-and-rows of uniform, conformed, industrialized, factory-farmed, marketed, commoditzed sameness.

    All of our “mono-“s [mono-theism, mono-culture, mono-gamy] share the common feature of being less robust and less diverse caricatures of a natural and diverse state of Reality. All of our –archy’s and –ism’s are just temporary, arbitrary, and illusionary attempts to control things that are what they are because they are natural, diverse, and without someone to “rule” it all.

    Statists want to see God as “ordered”, “ordering”, “imposing”, etc. They pattern Him after the cosmic monoarch because they arise from cultures that were predominately monoarchy-s — and “chaos” or “undirected activity” is a problem that causes them anxiety and fight-or-flight stress. But there is nothing to be feared from “chaos” — for it is only the unknown we fear when we look upon chaos, nothing more.

    It’s not about a battle between “chaos vs. order” — that’s the wrong debate. It’s about fearing the chaos or desiring the order — pitting one against the other.
    But it’s not about “fighting” chaos with order or about embracing chaos “over” order. For example, the family is an ordered unit. The higher entropy [greater disorder, “chaos”] state would be for each of the members to exist as separate ego-islands, unto themselves. Yet we order ourselves into families — and are protected against the effects of entropy by virtue of our organization as a community [called “family”].

    And our brains aren’t active by virtue of having some “King Neuron” who runs the whole show — rather it has its strength according to the number of connections running between all the neurons together.

    All enduring communities are organized in a more fractal, nature-like interplay and cooperation between the unique units.

    I don’t want not to be “anti-order” — rather anti-archy: the imposed order, force, coercion, or compulsive order. Any “-archy” is that linear, meccano-like corporate conformity and mono-tonous sameness. It says to tie-up all your sticks into neater and tighter bundles, making sure they are all the same size and length — it’s strong like a brick-wall is strong.

    Any an-archy says, let things organize theirselves as they will naturally tend to when they’re left alone — like the cellular cooperation within and between a body’s organs, like atomic cooperation between fundamental particles. The life in this universe is absolutely built-upon the enduring qualities of such interactions and communities.

    Human interactions, then, become less of an oppressive power-pyramid — and something more like a dance, something that we could imagine to be fun to experience with others [see Gimme some a that Mormon-hippie love, with a side of anarchy].

    It works like nature does [which can seem “chaotic”, depending on how you look at it] — without an outside foreman being habitually obeyed by the “underlings”.

    The very people who fear chaos and therefore try to use means of imposed order — end-up causing more chaos. When order is imposed, when interactions are controlled — from above or from outside [out of obligation or “duty”] things get out of a natural equilibrium or balance — and get more out of control.

    Until we end-up spending all our energy fighting to control what our attempts at control have caused. These will always tend to dehumanize the very people it’s seeking to “serve” by “giving them order” — and those it tends to dehumanize most, are the ones who think they lead it.

    When fear drives your actions — it doesn’t quite matter what the goal is, how noble or honorable it may be — fear is still driving, and it will lead nowhere worth going.

  6. As a computer programmer we try to keep things in separate packages to make them more understandable, but at the same time each package has an interface to other packages in which they operate on each other. The relationships can get rather incestuous at times, but in theory you try to restrict contact to the least amount possible to get the job done. I imagine that’s somewhat how God designed our bodies. It’s just that our bodies are so multi-functional, it’s hard to keep things simple. I think he’s done a pretty good job at compartmentalizing things though.

    Although the heart has complete control over the management of blood, the brain still controls how much work the heart has to do by choosing what activities the body does. So in a sense you could say the brain is controlling the heart, although if the heart decided to stop working the brain would die. So it’s in the brains best interest to not overburden the heart, because it’s survival depends on the condition of the heart. I think this very well describes the optimal relationship between man and wife.

  7. …or Priesthood and Church. Although they can work independently of one another, when they work together they can accomplish so much more.

  8. Yeah, when I wrote this essay, I did not have in mind independence from the church, but autonomy among the priesthood quorums. By this I mean that each quorum and office is specialized, not subordinate to each other. Depending on the circumstances, the duty to do some particular activity falls to one office and quorum, in another set of circumstances the same duty might fall to a different office and quorum. We are so accustomed to looking at the priesthood of God in the same that way we are brought up in Babylon, as a hierarchy. But the priesthood is not designed that way. It designed both horizontally and vertically, but not in the way of Babylon. Horizontally, in that each of the offices are on the same standing before the Lord, or are quorums of equals.

    Whereas other officers of the church, who belong not unto the Twelve, neither to the Seventy, are not under the responsibility to travel among all nations, but are to travel as their circumstances shall allow, notwithstanding they may hold as high and responsible offices in the church.

    In the eyes of the Lord, all the offices of His church are “as high and responsible” as are the Twelve and Seventy elders. Every office of the priesthood is on equal grounds with every other office, but each is specialized. So, when we read something like this:

    The high priest and elder are to administer in spiritual things, agreeable to the covenants and commandments of the church; and they have a right to officiate in all these offices of the church when there are no higher authorities present.

    Our Babylonian minds immediately think of a hierarchy, and thus, answer the question, “What is higher authority than a high priest?” with, “The Lord must be referring to the First Presidency, the Twelve and the Seventy. These must be the higher authorities.” But we’d be wrong. The higher authorities spoken of in this scripture are the organized quorums of the church. So, if church is organized with priesthood quorums, even if they have only a deacons’ quorum organized, that quorum is the higher authority, and if a high priest comes in, he must defer to the deacons. This principle is in keeping with the scripture that says that “many high ones shall be brought low” and “many low ones shall be exalted.” Some might scoff at this and say that they scriptures speak of high and low offices, and that is true, but this distinction only applies to the distinction between the two priesthoods, which are called the higher priesthood and the lower or lesser priesthood. So, when the scriptures speak of “lower offices,” it is only referring to the offices that pertain to the lesser priesthood, meaning the Aaronic priesthood. It does not mean to say that an elder is a lower office than a high priest, or even that a priest, teacher and deacon is a lower office than a high priest. Only that the office of a high priest is specialized to be able to fulfill the duties of a bishop, priest, teacher and deacon. That is the only meaning of the scripture. An elder also has this same specialization.

    From that Wikipedia entry I linked to above about Cellular Differentiation:

    A cell that is able to differentiate into all cell types of the adult organism is known as pluripotent. Such cells are called embryonic stem cells in animals and meristematic cells in higher plants. A cell that is able to differentiate into all cell types, including the placental tissue, is known as totipotent.

    The offices of high priest and elder are patterned after the pluripotent and totipotent cells, in that they may be re-differentiated into all other offices and callings. Nevertheless, once they are differentiated (even as elders and high priests), they are locked into their specialization. The pattern of pluripotent and totipotent cells is taken from God Himself, who is and can be all things to all things. Nevertheless, God is also specialized, in that there is a Father, a Son and a Holy Ghost, each dividing up their duties, yet they are one or united, like all the differentiated cells that, despite their differences, have the same DNA.

    If we look at how the various churches of the world utilize the office of a deacon, we see that there are still some vestiges (among, for example, the Roman Catholics,) of this “higher shall be lower” and “lower shall be higher” doctrine:

    At Mass, the deacon is the ordinary minister of the proclamation of the Gospel (in fact, a priest, bishop, or even the Pope should not proclaim the Gospel if a deacon is present) and of Holy Communion (primarily, of the Precious Blood).

    But mostly what you see among all the denominations is Babylonian subordination, one office being higher in authority than another. We LDS also are following this same pattern with our bishop’s messengers, extra-quorum adult “advisors” who end up really being the quorum leaders and other bishop assignments to these quorums. All such extra-quorum influences subverts the authority of the quorum and keep it locked up under subordination to a “higher authority.”

    Obviously, I don’t expect things to change overnight in the church, for we are set in our ways, but these scriptural principles are especially applicable to tribes of Christ.

    Oh, yeah, one last thing. I mentioned that the priesthood is also ordered vertically.

  9. And they form a quorum

    This post is really just an extension of a previous one. The principle, as I understand it, is encapsulated by the following scripture:

    of necessity | there are presidents | or presiding officers | growing out of | or appointed of | or from among | those who are ordained to the several offices in these two priesthoods |

    The words “growing out of” indicate that the Lord is speaking of a living thing, an organism. Thus, once there is a sufficient number of men ordained to a specific office, this body of men undergoes a transformation, of sorts, even a metamorphosis, and three presidents “grow out of them” and the entire group is now called something new: a quorum.

    Once they form a quorum, regardless of the priesthood office, their quorum becomes equal in authority to all the other quorums of the church, though their duties and/or how they choose to discharge them may differ markedly from other quorums.

    Quorum formation is like the formation of a plasma double layer, which both insulates from the surrounding environment and also provides an ordered means of interacting with it. Just like double layers, quorums serve a gathering function, gathering like things together while keeping unlike things on the outside.

    The scriptures say that three presiding high priests “form a quorum”. This is the First Presidency. And the Twelve Apostles “form a quorum, equal in authority and power to the three presidents”. And the Seventy “form a quorum, equal in authority” to the Twelve Apostles. And “the standing high councils, at the stakes of Zion, form a quorum equal in authority…to the traveling high council.” And “the high council in Zion form a quorum equal in authority…to the councils of the Twelve at the stakes of Zion.”

    The scripture stops here, but the pattern remains the same, right down to the very last quorum of deacons. Once a priesthood quorum organism is formed, with three presidents “growing out of” it, it becomes equal in authority to every other quorum. This is why “a general assembly of the several quorums…constitute the spiritual authorities of the church”. (Were the several quorums of the priesthood of unequal authority, there would be no reason to call for a general assembly to decide an appeal. Only an assembly of equal authorities, as in equally high, would be necessary.)

    Lastly, the reason why even the offices of the lesser priesthood are considered part of what constitutes “the spiritual authorities of the church” is because all priesthood is of Melchizedek, everything being an appendage (or growing out of) the high priesthood, or the office of a high priest. That there are two divisions, it is true, but it all derives from the same source.

  10. Certainly the quorums are equal in authority IF they are united. In general it’s easier to get a united voice when you have fewer members. So that generally would give greater authority to the Quorum of the Twelve over the rest of the quorums. Also it gives each member in the Quorum of Twelve greater weight than members in other quorums.

    When you talk of hierarchy as being Babylonian and thus not of God, I would say that some methodologies just work and so you’ll see them being employed both by God and man. The stark difference I find between the order of God’s kingdom and that of man is the way members get into offices of high authority in each. In man’s kingdom it’s by way of election, where each candidate tries to convince the majority of the ruled to vote him into office (bottom up). In God’s kingdom, it is God who decides who gets into positions of authority (top down). Recall when the prophet Samuel (one elected by God) was rejected by the people in favor of the Babylonian form of government. The people wanted to elect a king, so they elected Saul. God allowed them to do it, but he said to Samuel, “They are not rejecting you, but they are rejecting me.” By rejecting God the people chose slavery over freedom. I believe we find ourselves in a similar situation today. That’s why you see such fervor amongst Mormon voters. They put their trust in the arm of flesh, thinking a man can turn the tide of our economy and foreign affairs. It cannot be done without the blessing of God… and as Jonathan Cahn has shown with his Harbingers, America has lost God’s blessings and is destined for destruction, no matter who wins the Presidency.

  11. This,

    So that generally would give greater authority to the Quorum of the Twelve over the rest of the quorums.

    seems to disagree with

    of necessity
    there are presidents
    or presiding officers
    growing out of
    or appointed of
    or from
    among those who are ordained
    to the several offices in these two priesthoods

    of the melchizedek priesthood
    three presiding high priests
    chosen by the body
    appointed and ordained to that office
    and upheld by the confidence
    and prayer
    of the church
    form a quorum of the presidency of the church

    the twelve traveling councilors
    are called to be the twelve apostles
    or special witnesses
    of the name of christ in all the world
    thus differing from other officers in the church
    in the duties of their calling
    and they form a quorum
    equal in authority and power
    to the three presidents previously mentioned

    the seventy
    are also called
    to preach the gospel
    and to be special witnesses unto the gentiles
    and in all the world
    thus differing from other officers in the church
    in the duties of their calling
    and they form a quorum
    equal in authority
    to that of the twelve special witnesses
    or apostles just named

    and every decision
    made by either of these quorums
    must be by the unanimous voice of the same
    a majority may form a quorum
    when circumstances render it
    impossible to be otherwise

    D&C 107:21-28

    which LDSA mentioned above to show that authority is never in terms of “greater” or “lesser” — but equal.

    And even if we grant that one quorum [or president in a quorum] is “greater” — I pointed out above that, in the Lord’s vernacular, “presiding” implies being under the most and “leading” implies serving the most.

    I don’t know that I have the energy to respond to:

    In man’s kingdom it’s by way of election, where each candidate tries to convince the majority of the ruled to vote him into office (bottom up). In God’s kingdom, it is God who decides who gets into positions of authority (top down).

    other than to point out that God works by both a calling and an election — and that both must be “made sure”.

    And that you have the directionality of the kingdoms of the earth and the kingdom of God entirely backwards. The gentile kingdoms are top-down, one-man habitually obeyed by the underlings, kinda hierarchy power-pyramid.

    The kingdom of God is described as the exact inverse [“so shall it not be among you”] — such that the leaders are up-held, from the bottom — by the voice of the people. And the “great ones” are the underlings ministering to and serving the people they have been called and elected to “preside over” — in an anarchic, egalitarian unity.

  12. Certainly the quorums are equal in authority IF they are united.

    I just wanted to clarify that if and when D&C 107:32 is ever invoked

    And in case that any decision of these quorums is made in unrighteousness, it may be brought before a general assembly of the several quorums, which constitute the spiritual authorities of the church; otherwise there can be no appeal from their decision.

    the principle is not one of unanimity, but of the voice of the people, which is based on the majority principle. For example, see Selection 39, Revelation on Trying a Member of the First Presidency for Membership in the Church, Joseph the Prophet, 12 January 1838, which can be read here.

    Disclaimer: I ain’t sayin’ that that link contains bona fide revelations, so please don’t hold me to them.

  13. D&C 107:28 does say:

    a majority may form a quorum
    when circumstances render it
    impossible to be otherwise

    so I would imagine that the same applies to a “general assembly of the several quorums” — i.e., a majority, or the “voice of the people” as manifested by a majority vote.

  14. I would think that 12-13 year old boys are not capable of really performing those duties. They may, in the vague sense that our church has come to view doctrine, but not in reality. I wonder whose idea it was to make all children across the board, ages 12-17 have these priesthood duties that most of them are not mature enough to even want to do, let alone do them?

    I really would like to see priesthood positions a) be voluntary (no social stigma if one is “only” a deacon or priest, or no priesthood at all) b) be given only to those mature enough to fulfill the duties (and who are willing to do so).

    Also, I don’t see in the D&C where deacons are to pass the sacrament. Where is it?

    Well, I suppose I’ve gone off on a tangent. Returning you back to the subject at hand.

    “How about a fertilized egg?”
    A fertilized egg cannot live outside the body all by itself. It has to be coddled in a petri dish or stay inside a body to stay alive. So, in reality, it cannot live independent of others. I doubt an egg coud even be fertilized outside, autonomously.

    I agree with the idea of autonomous in it’s sphere. In other words, one not better than another, one not exclusively commanded by another.

  15. “could” not “coud”

  16. This is a correction to the above post (and likely other posts of mine have perpetuated the same error) :

    There are no deacons’, teachers’ and priests’ quorums mentioned in the scriptures. See this comment and this comment.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s