Convert Baptism and Confirmation

[Juli]

My grandson, who is 9, recently finished the missionary discussions and chose a date for baptism. It has been a spiritual growth experience for all of us, and his mother has even started attending church again. One of his grandfathers is traveling out of state to baptize him. We have been told that he cannot be confirmed after the baptism because he is a convert and it must be done in sacrament. Because of stake conference and another conflict (family baby blessing at another ward), this means he has to wait two weeks to be confirmed. In addition, all of the out of state family will be gone. He is devastated, his mother is hurt and upset. He has been to cousins’ baptisms and has seen them get confirmed right after their baptism and doesn’t understand why he can’t.  (Additionally, another 10 year old in our ward was confirmed after his baptism a month ago.) The only explanation anyone will give us is that this is the policy. Why is policy being given more weight than circumstances and the best interest of the family and child? Is it really the best policy to make a child wait two weeks to be confirmed?

[pam]

I"m surprised they are being so strict on something like this.  Circumstances happen when family members have to travel. There is always room for making allowances.  

[CV75]

41 minutes ago, Juli said:

My grandson, who is 9, recently finished the missionary discussions and chose a date for baptism. It has been a spiritual growth experience for all of us, and his mother has even started attending church again. One of his grandfathers is traveling out of state to baptize him. We have been told that he cannot be confirmed after the baptism because he is a convert and it must be done in sacrament. Because of stake conference and another conflict (family baby blessing at another ward), this means he has to wait two weeks to be confirmed. In addition, all of the out of state family will be gone. He is devastated, his mother is hurt and upset. He has been to cousins’ baptisms and has seen them get confirmed right after their baptism and doesn’t understand why he can’t.  (Additionally, another 10 year old in our ward was confirmed after his baptism a month ago.) The only explanation anyone will give us is that this is the policy. Why is policy being given more weight than circumstances and the best interest of the family and child? Is it really the best policy to make a child wait two weeks to be confirmed?

I would ask the bishop or stake president directly.

[Juli]

We have asked them both. The bishop originally told us we could. The mission president is the one who is saying we can’t and they are deferring to him.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, Juli said:

My grandson, who is 9, recently finished the missionary discussions and chose a date for baptism. It has been a spiritual growth experience for all of us, and his mother has even started attending church again. One of his grandfathers is traveling out of state to baptize him. We have been told that he cannot be confirmed after the baptism because he is a convert and it must be done in sacrament. Because of stake conference and another conflict (family baby blessing at another ward), this means he has to wait two weeks to be confirmed. In addition, all of the out of state family will be gone. He is devastated, his mother is hurt and upset. He has been to cousins’ baptisms and has seen them get confirmed right after their baptism and doesn’t understand why he can’t.  (Additionally, another 10 year old in our ward was confirmed after his baptism a month ago.) The only explanation anyone will give us is that this is the policy. Why is policy being given more weight than circumstances and the best interest of the family and child? Is it really the best policy to make a child wait two weeks to be confirmed?

It appears the family has choices they will need to take into consideration through prayer to their Father in heaven. The policies that are placed in Church are done so through much prayer and fasting from those who have keys of the priesthood. I honestly don't understand why some members will accept policy when it suits them, but will reject policy when it doesn't. It is the Lord directing this Church, and the policies we have are directed by those who petition the Lord for his direction. 

The policy is "Converts are not confirmed at the baptismal service," and a convert is anyone older than 9 years of age. If a convert was confirmed after baptism a month ago, they may have done this in error and the mission president corrected this course and specifically said we follow the brethren. The argument/question you provide is a very similar argument/question people (in and out of the Church) are asking with regards to children being raised in alternative lifestyles. Why is policy more important than a child or family. The answer is simple. The policy is not more important than a family or a child. Obedience is the first law of heaven, and obedience should be our first thought.

The Church works through priesthood keys. The bishop and stake president of your grandson's stake do not hold the keys for confirming a member. These keys are held by the mission president. The bishop though is to ensure that a confirmation happens, in sacrament, as soon as possible after the baptism.

Here are the choices I can see you have:

1) Willingly accept the policy, and allow your grandson to see your obedience not your frustration, anger, or being upset because a person is obedient.

2) Talk with your bishop and stake president who can speak with the mission president who holds the keys of confirming a convert to the Church. There is nothing wrong with this, but everything good. After speaking with them they can take matters to the Lord in prayer; although, his will has already been made with the policy given. The Lord can still direct his servants otherwise.

What you and your family are now doing to the bishop, stake president, missionaries, and mission president should they feel strongly to keep with policy as given by the Lord's servants -- prophets and apostles:

1) It is better to obey than to sacrifice.

2) The first law of heaven is love of God, while the second is love of our neighbor. The following was given in general conference, "Which Way do you Face," which highlights these types of experiences that happen in the Church:

Quote

“Which way do you face?” President Boyd K. Packer surprised me with this puzzling question while we were traveling together on my very first assignment as a new Seventy. Without an explanation to put the question in context, I was baffled. “A Seventy,” he continued, “does not represent the people to the prophet but the prophet to the people. Never forget which way you face!” It was a powerful lesson.

Quote

Trying to please others before pleasing God is inverting the first and second great commandments (see Matthew 22:37–39). It is forgetting which way we face. And yet, we have all made that mistake because of the fear of men. In Isaiah the Lord warns us, “Fear ye not the reproach of men” (Isaiah 51:7; see also 2 Nephi 8:7).

3) The mission president, who holds the keys to confirmation, after discussion with missionaries and the bishop can then determine through prayer if they should go ahead in light of policy.

The most important aspect for your grandson is that he is baptized and that he is confirmed, not who is present at his baptism and not who is present at his confirmation; however, I have noticed with children and families, families who place their will above the Lord's servants in doing their best to do as the Lord has given in his handbook of instructions it rarely is good for the families who kick against the pricks.

Again, the most important aspect is that your grandson is baptized, and that your grandson is confirmed. It matters very little if family who is not within the state can't be there, what will matter though is how we responded to the Lord's servants.

This policy doesn't bother me though, when any of my children are baptized, I set a date and invite family members. If they can be there, then they can be there. If not, no big deal. This though is more evidence of why proper expectations need to be clear, and active members need to be more understanding. When the bishop, stake president, and mission president are following policy, until the Lord directs otherwise -- they know which way they face -- and that is a good thing.

[Tyme]

My daughter's baptism and confirmation were done on the same day. It was to accommodate family who were traveling a long distance. Only a knucklehead wouldn't accommodate for that reason. It's like the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. You are justifiably upset.

Edited January 26, 2019 by Tyme

[Jane_Doe]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

I would ask the bishop or stake president directly.

Agreed.  I would ask for an exception in this case, to accommodate family and the young person's feelings.  

[Grunt]

6 hours ago, Juli said:

My grandson, who is 9, recently finished the missionary discussions and chose a date for baptism. It has been a spiritual growth experience for all of us, and his mother has even started attending church again. One of his grandfathers is traveling out of state to baptize him. We have been told that he cannot be confirmed after the baptism because he is a convert and it must be done in sacrament. Because of stake conference and another conflict (family baby blessing at another ward), this means he has to wait two weeks to be confirmed. In addition, all of the out of state family will be gone. He is devastated, his mother is hurt and upset. He has been to cousins’ baptisms and has seen them get confirmed right after their baptism and doesn’t understand why he can’t.  (Additionally, another 10 year old in our ward was confirmed after his baptism a month ago.) The only explanation anyone will give us is that this is the policy. Why is policy being given more weight than circumstances and the best interest of the family and child? Is it really the best policy to make a child wait two weeks to be confirmed?

My wife was baptized a few weeks ago.  Due to an expected storm the following day and the closure of church, she was confirmed immediately following her baptism.

[Juli]

4 hours ago, Anddenex said:

It appears the family has choices they will need to take into consideration through prayer to their Father in heaven. The policies that are placed in Church are done so through much prayer and fasting from those who have keys of the priesthood. I honestly don't understand why some members will accept policy when it suits them, but will reject policy when it doesn't. It is the Lord directing this Church, and the policies we have are directed by those who petition the Lord for his direction. 

The policy is "Converts are not confirmed at the baptismal service," and a convert is anyone older than 9 years of age. If a convert was confirmed after baptism a month ago, they may have done this in error and the mission president corrected this course and specifically said we follow the brethren. The argument/question you provide is a very similar argument/question people (in and out of the Church) are asking with regards to children being raised in alternative lifestyles. Why is policy more important than a child or family. The answer is simple. The policy is not more important than a family or a child. Obedience is the first law of heaven, and obedience should be our first thought.

The Church works through priesthood keys. The bishop and stake president of your grandson's stake do not hold the keys for confirming a member. These keys are held by the mission president. The bishop though is to ensure that a confirmation happens, in sacrament, as soon as possible after the baptism.

Here are the choices I can see you have:

1) Willingly accept the policy, and allow your grandson to see your obedience not your frustration, anger, or being upset because a person is obedient.

2) Talk with your bishop and stake president who can speak with the mission president who holds the keys of confirming a convert to the Church. There is nothing wrong with this, but everything good. After speaking with them they can take matters to the Lord in prayer; although, his will has already been made with the policy given. The Lord can still direct his servants otherwise.

What you and your family are now doing to the bishop, stake president, missionaries, and mission president should they feel strongly to keep with policy as given by the Lord's servants -- prophets and apostles:

1) It is better to obey than to sacrifice.

2) The first law of heaven is love of God, while the second is love of our neighbor. The following was given in general conference, "Which Way do you Face," which highlights these types of experiences that happen in the Church:

3) The mission president, who holds the keys to confirmation, after discussion with missionaries and the bishop can then determine through prayer if they should go ahead in light of policy.

The most important aspect for your grandson is that he is baptized and that he is confirmed, not who is present at his baptism and not who is present at his confirmation; however, I have noticed with children and families, families who place their will above the Lord's servants in doing their best to do as the Lord has given in his handbook of instructions it rarely is good for the families who kick against the pricks.

Again, the most important aspect is that your grandson is baptized, and that your grandson is confirmed. It matters very little if family who is not within the state can't be there, what will matter though is how we responded to the Lord's servants.

This policy doesn't bother me though, when any of my children are baptized, I set a date and invite family members. If they can be there, then they can be there. If not, no big deal. This though is more evidence of why proper expectations need to be clear, and active members need to be more understanding. When the bishop, stake president, and mission president are following policy, until the Lord directs otherwise -- they know which way they face -- and that is a good thing.

You misunderstood my words and made some inaccurate assumptions. My grandson has already made the choice to get baptized. No one is acting upset in front of him. We are being obedient and following the direction given. And finally, it matters VERY MUCH to this child who is there for him and who confirms him, just as it matters VERY MUCH to the family who are there for him. No one is going against or speaking against our leaders. The question is, why? Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts? Simply trying to understand. Your response still didn’t answer the question.

[Anddenex]

39 minutes ago, Grunt said:

My wife was baptized a few weeks ago. 

Congrats, how soon are you and your wife planning on going to the temple?

[Grunt]

Just now, Anddenex said:

Congrats, how soon are you and your wife planning on going to the temple?

To be sealed?  I went a week or so ago for my endowments.  She has to wait at least a year.

[MarginOfError]

If the mission president can't be brought to see reason, then you may consider following the very letter of the law (or the church handbook of instructions)

Quote

Converts are confirmed in any sacrament meeting in the ward where they live, preferably on the Sunday following their baptism. Converts are not confirmed at the baptismal service. (CHI 20.3.9)

So your bishop may convene a sacrament meeting immediately following the baptism. A short sacrament meeting on such a special occasion sounds lovely

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, MarginOfError said:

If the mission president can't be brought to see reason, then you may consider following the very letter of the law (or the church handbook of instructions)

So your bishop may convene a sacrament meeting immediately following the baptism. A short sacrament meeting on such a special occasion sounds lovely

Oh, MoE, you did my lawyer heart good today . . .

[Anddenex]

4 hours ago, Juli said:

You misunderstood my words and made some inaccurate assumptions. My grandson has already made the choice to get baptized. No one is acting upset in front of him. We are being obedient and following the direction given. And finally, it matters VERY MUCH to this child who is there for him and who confirms him, just as it matters VERY MUCH to the family who are there for him. No one is going against or speaking against our leaders. The question is, why? Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts? Simply trying to understand. Your response still didn’t answer the question.

I made no assumptions with regards to you, I was speaking generally (although from my second darker weighted statement I can see why you felt so, my apologies). My response did answer the question, now you are asking a different question.

Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts?

When I served a mission the policy for converts and members (8 years old) were the same. At some point the First Presidency made an update (I don't remember how long ago this was) with regards to converts, but I remember the announcement in ward council and over the pulpit. When the change was made, although my recall is not perfect, they were seeking to make sure converts were seen by the ward, especially if they were less active homes or converts who are adults.

The only option you have is to discuss with the missionaries, bishop, stake president, and mission president to see if he will make an exception. In trainings I am often hearing the following statement that the more information we have the better we can go before the Lord and receive accurate revelation.

Are you aware or sure that the mission president has received everything you have shared that he would be willing to make an exception?

[Anddenex]

3 hours ago, MarginOfError said:

If the mission president can't be brought to see reason, then you may consider following the very letter of the law (or the church handbook of instructions)

So your bishop may convene a sacrament meeting immediately following the baptism. A short sacrament meeting on such a special occasion sounds lovely

It appears you are missing a few words for what you specified to be part of the letter of the law.

In short, "in any sacrament meeting in the ward where they live." So to keep with the letter a convened sacrament meeting after the baptism doesn't follow the letter.

Yep, and he is probably just a dumb mission president who can't see reason.

[pam]

7 hours ago, Grunt said:

My wife was baptized a few weeks ago.  Due to an expected storm the following day and the closure of church, she was confirmed immediately following her baptism.

Wait what?  Did I miss this announcement?   That is so totally awesome. 

[Fether]

7 hours ago, Juli said:

The question is, why? Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts? Simply trying to understand. Your response still didn’t answer the question.

 *shrug*

Perhaps, as you mentioned they didn’t obey that policy recently with a 10 year old, they have been going against the policy for a while now and are now deciding to make things right and you just happened to be the person caught in the repentance process.

[Jane_Doe]

10 hours ago, Juli said:

The question is, why? Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts? Simply trying to understand. Your response still didn’t answer the question.

The reasoning behind it was simply for fellowship: a convert getting confirmed and welcomed in sacrament meeting for the entire ward to support them.  A lot of the times a ward member may have not even known that there was a baptism for a new member, but having the confirmation in Sacrament Meeting makes this clear to everyone so they can be supported.

A child who's grown up in the ward likely is already known well by the ward, along with their family.

 

I've seen many exception made to this policy before, such as with @Grunt's wife.  It's a guideline meant to be helpful, nothing more, 

[Grunt]

7 hours ago, pam said:

Wait what?  Did I miss this announcement?   That is so totally awesome. 

Yep.  My Missionary thread is so long and I'm the only one who ever reads it.  I only update it for my own use.

[MarginOfError]

12 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts?

When I served a mission the policy for converts and members (8 years old) were the same. At some point the First Presidency made an update (I don't remember how long ago this was) with regards to converts, but I remember the announcement in ward council and over the pulpit. When the change was made, although my recall is not perfect, they were seeking to make sure converts were seen by the ward, especially if they were less active homes or converts who are adults.

I was an active missionary when this changed, probably in 2001 or 2002. While visibility was a part of it, the visibility was described as a side benefit. The motivation for the policy, we were told, was to better conform to D&C 20:68. "The duty of the members after they are received by baptism--the elders or priests are to have sufficient time to expound all things concerning the church of Christ to their understanding, previous to their partaking of the sacrament and being confirmed"

At the time, we were also told that there needed to be at least one week between the baptism and the confirmation. That policy has long since perished, and now we are content to call as few as 15 hours between a baptism at 6:15 PM and a confirmation at 9:15 AM to be sufficient time. So, we've clearly given up on that particular interpretation of the D&C.

So if visibility is all that is left, in a pinch, recognizing the new member in sacrament meeting and asking them to stand and be seen is every bit as effective as bringing them to the front for the ordinance. (In reality, at least half of the congregation won't be paying attention either way)

12 hours ago, Anddenex said:

It appears you are missing a few words for what you specified to be part of the letter of the law.

In short, "in any sacrament meeting in the ward where they live." So to keep with the letter a convened sacrament meeting after the baptism doesn't follow the letter.

Yep, and he is probably just a dumb mission president who can't see reason.

This may be location specific. I've never lived in an area where a baptism occurs in a building that isn't the ward's building. Being in the boonies means we get to have baptisms whenever we want. And this would certainly work for us.

I'll also say that I would not attempt this for an adult convert. But for a nine years old, with apparently a fair support network, this kind of inflexibility is silly.

And I didn't say he was dumb. Just unreasonable. If I were either the bishop or stake president, I've had said it to his face already (and have, in fact, said worse to my Bishop and stake president)

[Juli]

On 1/26/2019 at 7:27 PM, Anddenex said:

I made no assumptions with regards to you, I was speaking generally (although from my second darker weighted statement I can see why you felt so, my apologies). My response did answer the question, now you are asking a different question.

Why is the policy on confirmation different for converts?

When I served a mission the policy for converts and members (8 years old) were the same. At some point the First Presidency made an update (I don't remember how long ago this was) with regards to converts, but I remember the announcement in ward council and over the pulpit. When the change was made, although my recall is not perfect, they were seeking to make sure converts were seen by the ward, especially if they were less active homes or converts who are adults.

The only option you have is to discuss with the missionaries, bishop, stake president, and mission president to see if he will make an exception. In trainings I am often hearing the following statement that the more information we have the better we can go before the Lord and receive accurate revelation.

Are you aware or sure that the mission president has received everything you have shared that he would be willing to make an exception?

Yes, all received the information, the missionaries, the ward mission leader, the bishop, the stake president, and the mission president. I spoke (respectfully) with all of them except the mission president. I asked for clarification and was told over and over simply that it’s policy. I accept that part, but wonder why it exists. I am an active member of the ward and have been for 30 years since I moved in. My grandson came to live with me a year and a half ago and has attended church regularly since then. He is well known by ward members. We have now had the baptism and the spirit was so strong, all were moved to tears. The grandfather baptizing him actually had to pause to regain his composure. It would have felt right (to me) to confirm with such an incredible spirit in the room filled with loving family who had traveled hundreds of miles to be there.  It actually felt very unfinished and awkward  to stop the service after the baptism. We sang a song and said a prayer, but it was unfinished.  But we obey and follow and stay quiet. And my daughter, who has made such great strides forward with her own reactivation, keeps her hurt and disappointment to herself. We will wait now for two weeks. Family members from his deceased dad’s side will be home and out of state again, but the ward members can witness it. Our assigned ministering neighbor will confirm.

[Juli]

6 minutes ago, Juli said:

Yes, all received the information, the missionaries, the ward mission leader, the bishop, the stake president, and the mission president. I spoke (respectfully) with all of them except the mission president. I asked for clarification and was told over and over simply that it’s policy. I accept that part, but wonder why it exists. I am an active member of the ward and have been for 30 years since I moved in. My grandson came to live with me a year and a half ago and has attended church regularly since then. He is well known by ward members. We have now had the baptism and the spirit was so strong, all were moved to tears. The grandfather baptizing him actually had to pause to regain his composure. It would have felt right (to me) to confirm with such an incredible spirit in the room filled with loving family who had traveled hundreds of miles to be there.  It actually felt very unfinished and awkward  to stop the service after the baptism. We sang a song and said a prayer, but it was unfinished.  But we obey and follow and stay quiet. And my daughter, who has made such great strides forward with her own reactivation, keeps her hurt and disappointment to herself. We will wait now for two weeks. Family members from his deceased dad’s side will be home and out of state again, but the ward members can witness it. Our assigned ministering neighbor will confirm.

I am glad the policy doesn’t bother you and that it’s not a big deal when your family members can’t be there. Does that mean that everyone should feel the way you do?  It might be good to keep in mind that everyone has their own stories and circumstances. This doesn’t mean we should ignore or go against policy, but the disappointment and hurt can be very real and an honest question seems appropriate. You may be right about your textbook explanation of doctrine, but your initial words and personal examples condemn, accuse and felt, to me, very self-righteous and more than a little flippant. A tiny bit of compassion and empathy would have been a much better side dish to your main course.

[Vort]

Juli, I'm sorry this is such a hard thing for you. Sitting here reading your anonymous (to me) story, with no other context, my heart goes out to you, and I tend to feel like the policy in this case should have been modified for your grandson and family.

But those Priesthood keys of leadership do not rest with me. They with whom the keys do rest have decided on their course, so effectively that's the voice of the Lord to you. At this point, that's how it is, and you must make the best of it. Given this, I urge you not to let the hurt feelings fester in your heart. Walk these things beneath your feet (as the Prophet Joseph once said to Parley P. Pratt) and let your grandson see your pride in him and excitement for the path he's choosing. Please do not let anger or grudges interfere.

And congratulations! This is wonderful news that your grandson has been baptized! I'm happy for him and for your entire family.

[Starwatcher]

The problem with allowing an exception in this case is illustrated quite nicely with the situation that your grandson has observed: the 10 year old who was confirmed at the water's edge in contravention to the policy.  Exceptions should be rare and for clearly exceptional circumstances, because if they are observed to occur frequently then exceptions become more the rule than the exception, and then expected.

An experience I had on my mission can help demonstrating the importance of following rules, even when it might seem unreasonable to do so.  I had sought an answer in prayer to something important to me while at the MTC (it was before the MTC, actually, but in an equivalent facility), even though I sensed that the Lord had the answer and was willing to give it, He wasn't giving it.  After attempting several times, I took the matter to one of the advisors at the MTC.  The circumstances were that I was getting up after "lights out" and everyone else was asleep and going into a classroom on the same floor level in order to pray.  The advisor told me that by doing what I was doing I was violating mission rules, because we were to remain in our beds (except for calls of nature or other emergency) upon "lights out".  He said that if the Lord were to answer me in that circumstance He would be in effect be teaching me that the rules may be freely broken.  I objected that there was no other time to be alone to pray, but he told me that this was not so, since while we were in the building it wasn't required that I be with my companion at all times, and all I needed to do was to find a free period and an unoccupied room to pray in during the day.  I took his advice to heart, and in following this advice a couple of days later I got my answer.  All while obeying mission rules (for the MTC).  If it had been the advisor forbidding me to pray in that circumstance it might have seemed like a petty thing to require, but he didn't, it was the Lord requiring it.  I learned something important by this experience.

It might be a bit more complex trying to explain the need to hew to the rules to a 9 year old, under the circumstances.  But perhaps you could take the opportunity to pray with him over the matter, in order to obtain assurance from the Lord that the indicated course of action is what the Lord wants.  This might be a good teaching experience for him.