I’ve heard it said Catholic doctrine dictates that the Pope is infallible, but Catholics don’t really believe it.
Mormon doctrine on the other hand admits that the prophet is fallible,
but Mormons don’t really believe it.
That’s just a humorous highlight of the difference between the LDS Church and other religions, but most especially their respective followers.
I have a Catholic friend who grew up in South Dakota, had relatively no contact with Mormons there and yet she decided to blindly attend college at BYU.
“Notre Dame is Catholic, but so what? Right?”
I think I laughed for a full day when she told me that story. She lasted a year in Provo before transferring to a west coast state university. She had no concept that Notre Dame to Catholicism is not the same as BYU to Mormonism.
I suppose it could be said that the Mormon default is to accept the unwritten as if it were the written law. I’ve heard many a Gospel Doctrine lesson where the “spirit of the law” was actually defined as the draconian “letter of the law” and only God himself can make an exception. More liberal-minded Mormons are constantly doing battle within themselves to rationalize why their “spirit of the law” ways are OK in the bigger picture.
As a result of this phenomenon, my former Mormon self was fond of feeling the need to clarify the line between “The Gospel” and “The Church”; the LDS “Gospel” being the spiritual or eternal truths while the actual earthly manifestation of it all here and now is “The Church.” “The Gospel” was perfect and true; “The Church” was a human structure and therefore possibly imperfect. The problem is that actually defining that line is as easy nailing Jell-O to a wall. I also don’t think anyone really believes that version… unless you are one that visits this blog, that is.
Popular beliefs as dictated in modern LDS speeches, lessons and articles don’t really allow a difference, do they? There’s really no skills ever taught or discussed for critical thinking or evaluating contradictions and making a personal choice.
Take even minor issues like clothing. When I was 14 my bishop prevented my father from ordaining me to the Aaronic Priesthood office of a Teacher because he wasn’t wearing a tie. In the late 70’s we could pass the Sacrament in a god-awful flowery, silk, wide-collared dress shirt…but we had to wear that tie!
Years later when I served as Deacon’s Quorum Adviser, white shirts became the holy grail of personal worthiness. You couldn’t pass the Sacrament in the popular 90’s pastel. As far as I know it wasn’t ever a written rule but I think a GA once talked in General Conference about how nice and respectful some white-shirted deacons passing the Sacrament appeared. SMACK! It was suddenly policy everywhere.
My bishop, for whom I served as executive secretary, once told me that even an adult priesthood holder not wearing a white shirt indicated rebellion. Black and white. The Unwritten Order of Things.
I understand that the new Church Handbook of Instructions says that white shirts and ties are recommended because those are more dignified, but not required. My point is that to a Mormon’s ears, that’s as good as required. It’s a tendency that Mormon leaders must be aware of and I’m therefore surprised they are 
as careless as they are with silly minor issues like that. Look at the hoopla that followed Gordon B Hinckley’s offhand comment regarding women having more than one earring. Is there any middle ground anymore?
Then, there’s the oft-repeated example of perfect obedience where a wagon driver on a narrow mountain road can choose to drive the wagon close to the edge of the cliff (symbolizing personal thought and adaption) or near the mountain (symbolizing obedience to even minor random advice from Church leaders).
Somewhere along the way, the current church invented this concept that the leaders can never be wrong and they removed the checks and balances of power that once accounted for human error. Even on small things they somehow know better and I’m better off obeying than questioning because that way I’ll be blessed in the end. It’s safer to obey… well, just about anything big or small, written or unwritten, the spirit of the law AND the letter of the law, the gospel AND the church.
Search, ponder and pray… well, really just pray because why exert the energy to search or ponder when there’s danger for discovery or “thinking too much” there. As long as the leaders are searching and pondering, I’m safe just praying right?
Dad's Primal Scream 
Greg,
I feel for you my brother – because we are sharing life experiences, not using the Mormon terminology. When you say you’ve already missed weddings…aghh! That kills me and just points to me how wrongs it all is. What twisted structure would keep a Dad from his child’s wedding.
Are you familiar with the other post-Mormon resources available? There are discussion boards, meetings and so many more of us out here than you’d ever imagine.
Take care and come back and share more. You’re story of having older children is why I feel like I do. I know what’s in my future.
Dad
I came upon your blog sort of by accident, if there is such a thing. I left the church several months ago. It’s encouraging and I take comfort in the fact that there is someone out there who can express so well the sadness and frustration I feel at the thought of my children being stuck in a false belief system, with the added sorrow of knowing that I was highly instrumental in their being where they are. I was among the worst of the devout: two-year mission, taught for 4 years at the MTC while attending BYU, temple marriage, 5 children, stake high council, branch pres., and a completely obsessive student of the scriptures and all things Mormon. I used to listen to Gen. Conference while working as a carpenter for God’s sake. It was nuts.
Now that I’m out, I want very much for my children to listen to reason, and thankfully, one of them is: my oldest daughter, who lives in the same town as I do (Reno), was having some doubts of her own, and I didn’t know about it. When I composed a letter to my family about my leaving the church, I sent her a copy, and now I am glad I did. We have had many discussions about it and she is about halfway out. We’ll see.
As for the rest of the children, all of them live in Utah. One is an RM who wouldn’t read my letter at all, saying it was anti-Mormon literature! Another son claims not to believe in God or anything, and is pretty neutral. My other daughter is married and just had a baby, and the youngest son is preparing to go on a mission.
I’ve already missed two weddings, and had to wait outside while my ex-wife and her husband were there for the ceremony. That was tough. All I could do was grin and bear it, but I may not even attend the next one. I will have a heart-to-heart with my youngest son and let him know that if I’m to be excluded from his wedding, I likely will not attend. Then everyone will be even more condemnatory of my position as an evil apostate. But I have taken a firm stand, letting everyone know what I believe and how I feel. Some were quite threatened by one so faithful now decrying the faith, but are slowly coming around as I show them that I still love them, that this has been a painful and difficult experience, and not an easy choice for me, and seeking for common ground and understanding with them.
Still, I want them to know that I will not be bullied either by them, or the church, nor the culture thereof, and if they can support that, great, if not, so be it. Thank God I have a life outside of the circle of family and former Mormon friends.
Thanks for listening,
Greg
Awesome thoughts. So true.
Your post made me smile. I wrote a similar essay last week. The irony with all this is that God’s great gift to his children is agency and yet good members of the Church as so willing to surrender that agency for spiritual salvation. Isn’t that the plan Lucifer proposed? Doesn’t make much sense, does it?