Robert_J

Vort, Thanks! While the handbook does say that, it is almost in the sense that there is not another presiding authority in attendance. If a General Authority were in attendance it wouldn't be the Bishop or the Stake President ,or for that matter a Mision President that would presiding rather it would be the General Authority, so I don't know if that technically answers the question.

The Mission President sat their quietly and said nothing which you would expect from a good leader. What I am being told is that the Mission President defers his keys to the authorized priesthood holder at the meeting which was the Bishop. This is strange to me as the Handbook in section 5.1.6 clearly defines that the Mission President holds the keys to Baptism and confirmation. I can appreciate that the Bishop is the authorized key holder for his ward, but does theat usurpt the keys the Mission President holds? I guess a part of the fundemental question is: Are convert baptisms a ward or stake event or are they technicaly a Mission event? If they are a ward event then I can possibly see the Bishop being an authorized key holder, but if convert baptisms are a mission event, which I think makes logical sense to me, since a person getting baptized is not being baptized into the ward but rather into the Church and it is not until after confirmation is the convert welcomed into the ward, then under that assumption the Mission President should preside

I agree completely, however if the Baptism of the new convert is the responsibility of the Ward, then why doesn't the Bishop interview th enew convert, just like he does for a child of record and then why does Handbook 2 state that confirmation is under the Mission Presidents direction? That is what is so odd and to me doesn't follow the logic of other lines of authority within the Church.

Thanks all for this discussion. What is interesting is that the Mission President holds the keys to the Melchizedek Priesthood, similiar to the Stake President, however in a Stake he does not exercise those keys. He does however hold the keys to Confirmition into the Church as defined in the General Handbook book 2,and authorizes the Bishop to oversee the confirmation process. Given that the Bishop does not have a right to interview a new convert prior to confirmation and that the Mission President has to interview the new convert in the event there has been something in their life, then why would the Bishop be the presiding authority. I agree if the Stake President or a General Authority is present they would preside, but why wouldn't the Mission President preside when there is a Bishop present. I initially thought it was because the Bishop held the keys to the Aaronic Priesthood, but that doesn't seem right because the Mission President holds the keys to the Melchizedek Priesthood, which includes the keys to the Aaronic Priesthood along with the keys to conversion and confirmation.

I have had a question that has been plagueing me over the last couple of weeks and it pertains to keys and presiding authority that maybe someone can give me some insight. I attended a convert baptism a couple of weeks ago and the Mission President was in attendance at the baptismal service. The Bishop conducted the meeting and stated that he was presiding. Shouldn’t the Mission President been the presiding authority since it was a convert baptism? Handbook 2 is quiet on the matter. Does anyone have any insight on this issue?