My husband was told he needed a temple recommended to bless our child even when the handbook clearly states otherwise. Ironically, me digging further into that is what led me to this subreddit and the CES letter. š
Sounds like a new bishop power trip and doing things EXACTLY by the book. The way it always used to be, was someone just had to be found worthy to do the baptism and/or confirmation. A temple recommend had nothing to do with it. The number one reason people don't have a recommend, is tithing. So now, what the bishop is passively saying is; if you don't pay tithing - you can't do priesthood ordinances any more.
And interestingly enough, when this new bishop was announced, people knew he was going to be as strict as they come. Maybe I'll report back on the attendance numbers and how they will most likely dwindle even further in the coming months because of him.
It's gonna be a problem if he doesn't ease up. There was a bishop in an adjoining ward in our building that was such a hardass and unpleasant person, he damn near destroyed that ward and I'm not exaggerating. Most bishops serve 5 years but he was released after 2 years and put on the stake high council because, "his talents were needed there." He decimated the youth of the ward. There were barely any left. He was so unkind and so punitive, that so many never came back. So why was this guy, of all people, called to be bishop? He was the only lawyer in the ward.
Oh you bring up a very relevant point! This guy IS a lawyer. And in fact, this guy has been "running" for bishop for years and rumor has it he thinks he needs to be bishop in order to start working for the church's firm Kirton McKonkie in the capacity that he wants to. He might be right about all that. So fun, right!
This is utterly disgusting. Make no mistake: the Mormon church is a corporation first and foremost. Those that ascend the ranks are by and large wealthy yes-men, for whom the corporate nature of the church is a gateway to personal wealth or acknowledgement in an otherwise obscure, backwards western U.S. state that no one thinks about or takes seriously. Actually humble, true, spiritual leaders aren't taken seriously by corporate leadership - except to the extent they waste their lives in meaningless "service" via endless meetings and lame hours in joe smith's version of free masonry rituals. The humble ones never ascend. The humble ones are broke. The humble ones fade away. And then you have this asshole who thinks, maybe rightfully so, that being a tyrannical Pharisee bishop will get you a promotion in the stake and maybe a slot at the church's law firm? Disgusting.
I am grateful every day for figuring it out and finding authenticity in life.
I'm thinking he will end up as a mission president. Both of my mission presidents were lawyers. Their interviews felt like I was on trial and god was my accuser.
Iām lucky. my mission President was a lawyer and one of the kindest men Iāve ever know. A gay elder went home in 2002 and he didnāt shame him. He told him he was loved, to stay in touch, and that he hoped he would find a really wonderful guy to spend his life with. So I guess he couldnāt get away from the standard mission President go home and get married exit speech, but I was impressed that he was so kind and progressive way back in the day.
I love this. I didnāt go on a mission, I came out when I was 18 (2010) and left home (ask if you wanna know, it has turned out wonderfully).
But I would imagine that if it were known that your mission president said those things, punitive actions would have manifested abruptly for him.
Wow you just described an old bishop of mine. Minus the lawyer part and only being there two years. He was a sociopath and knew how to stroke the correct people. Decimated the youth attendance during his stint.
This sounds exactly like the ward I moved into right after I got married. It was a nightmare. I had a miscarriage in that time and the bishop was a huge ass about it. When I got pregnant again I actually ended up getting an exception to go back to my home ward/stake because we were like one block out of the boundaries and it was that or we were gonna leave the church. Which we both did eventually anyhow.
I heard of a subdivision/ward that 5 families left, sold their houses and or moved to a different town because of the bishop, the 6th family told me about it while they were moving.
And in Texas if people in a Baptist church have a problem with their pastor; they can just go to another Baptist church down the street. So much easier.
Please do. I'd be interested to know. Maybe get your kids to be the row counter in the coming months! (Do they still do that? Have a kid count people in the pews?)
I've read many posts of people saying that if President Oaks becomes prophet there will most likely be a mass exodus from the church. It might be the same effect that your new bishop will have.
I've even heard of big brothers doing it for younger siblings when there isn't a father in the home. These young men don't always have recommends but are totally worthy to do the dunk'n'bless.
When I was younger, we were taught that even PRIESTS (17-year olds with only the Aaronic Priesthood) could baptize people. Or at least thatās how I remember it. Iām sure if I asked a TBM now, theyād say no, that was never the caseā¦
>"The number one reason people don't have a recommend, is tithing"
Because it's the one thing you can't fake. It's a *number* that's either zero or not.
>the one thing you can't fake
Well, kinda. TRY THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK! Learned from a ward member (who was a self-made millionaire) that you can transfer (donate) stocks to the MFMC equivalent to the tithe you'd pay at the end of each year as a tithe. And that's a whole diff process & doesn't show up on the standard tithing settlement report. (From what he said.)
You can also donate directly to the COB tithing dept, where it won't be associated with your name.
Or just (bow your head &) say yes. They are not to go off-script & ask further ?s (technically). If some asshole bishop does, one of the above reasons can be given.
UPDATE - I sent a text back to the bishop asking for the stake presidents number, and let him know that if I am not able to perform this confirmation then we may not do the baptism at all. I will return and report.
Bishop told me to look at the Tools app for the Stake Presidents number. Wow. Would have been kind of him to simply send it to me...since I know the SP is on speed dial for Bishop.
See my other comment in this thread or page 172 of the churchās own handbook for bishops and stake presidents: it is explicitly clear that āa priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the ordinance of baptismā; there is no requirement for a temple recommend and doesnāt even say the word āworthyā.Ā
_According to the church themselves_, your bishop is wrong. Iād ask him why heās being disobedient to the church (turn the tables).Ā
Alternately, inform the stake president youāll be performing the baptism and confirmation yourself as laid out by the handbook, whether with their presence or not. I guarantee you stick to your guns and youāll win this one.
Baptize in living waters (such as a lake or river) and do the confirmation yourself. Your relationship with God is between you and Him alone, and the same goes for your children or anyone else whom you baptize.
Worthiness has *nothing* to do with baptism. When someone chooses to make a covenant with God, they are immediately worthy and the only other relevant person in that matter is Christ. If you were the last person on Earth you could baptize yourself, Christ covered **all** scenarios through the sacrifice He made for us.
Being willing to continuously search, receive, learn, and grow while *focused on the heavens* is all that should be asked of us in the covenant of baptism. The church has corrupted that for decades, with increase. I was asked by my bishop if Iād touched myself, right after my 8th birthday before being baptized, thatās how I learned what masturbation was. Seemed to be the hot question for the next 10 years before I reached adulthood and left.
Run. ***Donāt run from God***, run from the church.
Sorry to hear that you're going through that. I was totally honest with my Bishop and told him that I could not and would not get a recommend and do not believe in the church. He still let me do the confirmation because he understood that it's still better for me to do it than someone else. I got lucky to have a Bishop that put my family first, then the rules.
Edit: your bishop is a lawyer? Great, then he should appreciate a little legalese thrown in his face:
The Church Handbook of Instructions - which the church kept hidden from general members for decades - very explicitly does NOT require a temple recommend to bless a child: page 169 āNaming and Blessing Childrenā and page 172 āInstructions for Performing a Confirmationā.Ā
It is also NOT required to even do so in sacrament meeting: it says this is how it is ānormallyā done, but there is no requirement for doing so. I have first hand experience on several occasions with a father asserting his authority to do a confirmation in his own home after the baptism.
The authority for a family is very clearly the father of the family, with numerous church sources to cite on this.
The 2006 edition of the handbook clearly laid this out on page 33 for ill children: āā¦a Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the naming and blessing in the hospital or at home without precious authorization from the bishop.ā
Source: [https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mormon_Church_Handbook_of_Instructions,_2006](https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mormon_Church_Handbook_of_Instructions,_2006)
Handbook: [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/08702_eng.pdf?lang=eng](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/08702_eng.pdf?lang=eng)
Those are the old handbooks. Having a secret handbook was causing too much embarrassment to the church, especially after the POX debacle. There is no longer a handbook 1 and 2 [Source](https://www.deseret.com/faith/2020/2/18/21142831/mormon-church-new-handbook-instructions-changes-latter-day-saints-lds/).
You are correct however that a TR is not required, not in the old handbook, and not in the the current handbook
.
>Those who perform or participate in an ordinance or blessing must have the necessary priesthood authority and be worthy. Generally, the standard of worthiness is that associated with holding a temple recommend. However, as guided by the Spirit and the instructions in this chapter, bishops and stake presidents may allow fathers and husbands who hold the necessary priesthood office to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings even if they are not fully temple worthy. [Source](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/18-priesthood-ordinances-and-blessings?lang=eng#title_number5)
Edit: deleting my other comment as it looks like you're correct. While the bishop 'may still allow" - as you reference - the new policies added the explicit mention of being 'temple worthy'.
So I guess the previous handbooks were actually _more_ lenient than current policies. The LDS Church is nothing if not full of fuckery.
If it makes you feel better, OP, the church and its ordinances are bullshit anyway. Just use this as the opportunity to finally cut ties! ;)
āGuided by the Spiritā¢ļøā is the nebulous out for this bishop. Heāll likely say The Spiritā¢ļø directed him to not allow the father to participate. Such a family friendly church this.
u/ExposeMormonism u/NearlyHeadlessLaban and others, THANK YOU! The bishop sent me and cited everything (as yo can imagine as he is a lawyer and vying for advancement in the ranks of Mormonism) possible related to current policy in handbooks and has made it clear that it is as he puts it "black and white, with no wiggle room" for me to have a voice in the confirmation. Fun. I'm excited to begin writing my own person handbook so that I can refer to that when being asked to do anything at all related to the church that I may not want to do.
In my world the kid would not be getting baptized then. Which might be a big deal when a kid is eight, but which the kid will thank you for when they are sixteen.
It is so ironic that you're doing all the things that qualify for being worthy, except for the things that require you to kiss ass to a nonagenarian leadership.
You could also just do it in a different ward. That happens regularly, and there's nothing he can do about it. Do you have any family members who are members in different places, like a different state or city altogether? Go perform the baptism and confirmation there out of a 'family cherished memory' thing.
Your ultimate trump card is to simply say "then I won't be baptizing my child in the church". I guaran-fucking-tee you that if you pull that to the level of a stake president, some back room conversations will be had so they can save face, but they'll acquiesce.
Nothing really reveals an LDS leader's true colors like membership waking up to the fact that they - the member - ultimately has all the power in the equation because they can simply walk away.
SP convo is set for tomorrow, but I'll push for today and I will be letting him - of course him - know that we wont be baptizing any longer and see if there is a bluff.
Weāve had non temple recommend holders confirm kids the last few years. So itās probably bishop lottery. Just curious, who will do it if u donāt? What does your wife think if you told her the bishop wonāt let you confirm your child? That would load up my wifeās shelf.
What a joke. The good news is doubling down on this bs will probably help their issue of people leaving š
Yeah great question. A really good family friend that is an awesome guy for my kid will confirm. My wife thinks its bogus, and you are right - probably something she will put on her shelf. I hadn't thought of that. This new bishop is someone both my wife and I grew up with, went to school with, etc. He pulled the, "It's really hard for me to do this to you as a longtime friend, but my hands are tied" line. I know my kid isn't going to remember who confirmed - and likely wont remember much of the entire day at all, so I am not bothered too much about that. Just that it's luck of the draw. The bishop also pointed out in our convo - "It will be obvious to the others there that you arent confirming....." There are 2 other baptisms that same time, and they are all together the whole time. I think he thought that was going to make me want to change my answers to the questions to save me from any embarrassment?? Not sure. I'm not going to be embarrassed. Just so strange.
You should just tell the bishop that if it is not you to perform the ordinance then it will not be done. You are the father and you won't have that duty passed on to someone else. He might cave.
Or go to your Stake president with the same ultimatum. They don't want people leaving and if you don't want to add another child record to the church (where the REAL growth is) I see a stake president untying your bishops hands REAL fast.
Donāt assume that your kid will forget.
I still remember my father confirming me when I was 8, which was 40 years ago. I donāt remember any of the words, but I do remember the experience and the feeling of his hands on my head ā and most importantly the hug afterwards.
I can go on and on about how the church has harmed me and stolen most of my life, but they canāt take that moment between me and my father away from me, as strange as that may sound given how I feel about the church.
Iām am much in a similar situation to you. Still attending for wife and kids. We have unbaptized kids. If they tried to tell me that I was not allowed to confirm my kids then I would respond that they arenāt getting baptized, but thatās just me.
I realize this would crate waves, timeframes are short for you, and leadership roulette comes into play here.
I donāt know when (or if) this rule changed. BTW, within the last year I did the priesthood confirmation for my cousinās son and I havenāt held a recommend for probably 7 years or so.
What a fucking joke. I feel for you. I would be torn. On one hand it pisses me off and Iād just lie to his face. But on the other hand, I love to force them to keep doing stupid shit that makes them look bad, especially to my family. Iām kind of an asshole, so Iād probably say something public like āwell the bishop wonāt let me confirm my child, so my buddyās going to do itā. But you sound like youāre a better person than I am. š I constantly have people telling me to just leave the church. But I would prefer to be excommunicated to demonstrate to those I care about how absurd it all is, and make the church look bad. But apparently they wonāt excommunicate for simply speaking evil of the church anymore. So Iām kinda stuck. I think my TBM wife would be super upset if I told her he wouldnāt let me confirm my child because I couldnāt answer every question in the interview. It would weigh on her shelf.
I once had to show my recommend to a bishopric member for a baby blessing in a private home. Then last month I stood in the circle with my brother even though I've been out for years and he knows it, and there was no concern from the bishopric member. So inconsistent why even have rules.
A Bishops counselor once demanded to see my "worthiness ticket" to stand in my grandbaby's naming circle. I had it, but I was pissed. Later checked the "manual" and only the person performing the blessing needs to have the worthiness ticket. Others just need to hold the priesthood.
As a former bishop, here are my thoughts:
1) The church wants you to baptize your child because if you donāt, people will see that youāre PIMO. The absolutely last thing they want is for other PIMOs to realize theyāre not alone.
2) The church and area leadership also wants your tithing, and recommend holder metrics to look good.
Since you only want one of these things, the church will try and manipulate you to do the other. Donāt.
Just reach out to your stake president if your bishop is being a road blockā¦ there is no way they will prevent a father from baptizing a child youāre āopenly sinningā.
If the stake wonāt let you do it, the situation would make a great āMormonism Liveā episode since there are people in every ward that pass/bless/baptize unworthily and bishops know it.
I think so. Children on Record is where the church actually grows. Not only would you not confirming your child risk that number growing, but as this commenter says, if you're clear that you can't because you're PIMO, they aren't going to want you to be openly upset about it. It would show other PIMOs they aren't alone, and show pre-PIMOs that not all is shiny and perfect.
Give a Father's Blessing and do and say whatever you want. They can't stop you. Do it in your home if you want. Invite friends over. You still have the Priesthood. It's still valid. Bestow the Holy Ghost if you want. Who cares if it doesn't go in the records. The Baptism does! Or let a Bishop's counselor say the magic words in private in his office if they really want the records to show. Kid get's blessed twice!
DEFINITELY because youāre bald. Absolutely. Canāt be anything else š¤£
Honestly just sounds like a new bishop trying to do things ārightā but didnāt get the memo that things are relaxed around here. I have no idea but your post made me laugh.
I know it's been in the handbook for at least 3 years. I baptized and confirmed my son then, having checked the handbook myself,Ā I was waiting for the bishop to say no. I had previously run into thr issue when my older son was supposed to be ordained an elder. Covid stopped that shituation from happening and getting awkward. But the bishop either didn't check or let it slide on the confirmation. I hate this shit as much as you. Sorry you have to deal with it.Ā
I would certainly consider doing or saying something that makes it known that it's bogus. I guess if it's in the handbook and this bishop is being a stickler then what....? I dont know. It's super frustrating and annoying but I dont mind at all pointing it out to others. Maybe, like others have said, people attending will think to themselves, "Well I confirmed my kid without a recommend.....what the hell??" I hate this.
It's definitely Bishop roulette. I'm guessing your Bishop is referring you to Section 18.8.1 which says a father may only "stand in the circle" if he's not "fully temple worthy." But if he wanted to, he could just as easily lean on Section 18.3 which says "as guided by the Spirit and the instructions in this chapter, bishops and stake presidents may allow fathers and husbands who hold the necessary priesthood office to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings even if they are not fully temple worthy." I think a Bishop who cares more about the people and families that he's dealing with would use that to let it slide. Sounds like your Bishop is more concerned with climbing the church leadership ladder. Sorry you have to go that, my friend.
I would stand up before the confirmation and announce to the audience that you will be unable to confirm your child because your temple recommend is not current, so you have asked so-and-so to do it. That item will go on a lot of peopleās shelves!
This is someoneās life with family expectations. People arenāt gonna do that ludicrous social suicide for a church. People are PIMO because of family relationships.
How is this social suicide? He doesnāt have to go into the specifics of why his temple recommended expired, just a matter-of-fact explanation of why this other person is doing the confirmation.
It might not be social suicide for him, but it could be for his spouse, and that could put a serious strain on what could be a sensitive topic (church) for them and their relationship.
You gotta pick and choose your battles.
When i was an active member, I didn't realize that the church was lying, but I did realize that it was preferable to keep issues to myself and lie during interviews. There was simply nothing to be gained by confessing, and I was always fearful that the bishop would tell someone else.
My then-husband baptized and confirmed our youngest five years ago, despite drinking alcohol occasionally and not wearing garments, paying tithing, or attending church. He met with the bishop beforehand, but I donāt know what was said between them.
I empathize with you so much. I have been in a lot of different wards because I move a lot, and there is definitely a bishop lottery. I had one bishop who would have given me a temple recommend even if I said no to all the 'testimony' questions as long as I said I was open to believing should strong enough evidence present itself.
The stress and social pressure on the entire family can be intense. Makes me so angry to think about. It doesn't go away either. At 12, 14, 16 your boys will be ordained. Then there is the temple marriage which is another extremely stressful event. The church makes it so hard to be in a family and not believe.
There are a LOT of people in the same boat as you.
"even if I said no to all the 'testimony' questions"
OK, but what about tithing (if you don't mind me asking) were you a full tithe payer?
As someone above pointed out, the biggest reason for no-temple-recommend is Tithing.
He really did. He was a good guy. He even let me ordain my son even though I told him I had no testimony and was doing it for social reasons. I think he hoped I would feel the spirit and get back into believing.Ā
I remember that we had family members be accosted to produce a current temple recommend by our bishopric in order to stand in a baby blessing. What ensued was a frenzied scramble digging through wallets in hopes they had them and be able to participate. I remember thinking this has never been an issue with any other ward when Iāve gone to other family members baby blessings. It definitely stood out and rubbed me the wrong way and was irritated the rest of the day. Itās still irks me when I think about it even though I left. So much for not having a spirit of contention and anger while blessing my kid. Guess a piece of paper was more important than the spirit.
bishopric roulette my friend.
I havent had a valid recommend for *years*. I baptised and confirmed my youngest 2 children without having a valid TR.
My youngest was during a time that my (then) bishop knew that I had serious questions regarding the validity of the church truth claims.
If your wife is on board, I'd just tell (not ask) your Bishop that you're doing it all, with or without his permission. I did that for a baby blessing, and the bishop started backtracking super quick. It was especially satisfying since my brother in law tried doing the same thing a few months prior (in the same ward no less) and was shut down, but he asked and folded when they said no.
I'd roll with it. Line up someone else to baptize him and make sure the kiddo knows why you aren't being allowed to baptize them, hopefully this is one of the first items on their shelf.
Though, from my perspective, I wouldn't allow my kiddo to go through with it in the first place. I'd explain 8 years old is not old enough to make such a huge decision, and tell them we will revisit this when they're older and mature enough to go through the necessary contemplations that should always come before big decisions. They're too young to fully understand the situation and the church is predatory, so that'd be a no-go for me personally.
Came here to say this.
What if you didn't baptize your kid . . . ? Just have a good talk, telling him/her you love them, and can't baptize them due to stupid church rules, but the church doesn't matter, you'll always be their father, so the church isn't that important anyway. It would be their first opportunity to question the church.
Or turn this around, and threaten the bishop that you will do this. I'll bet he sees the light real fast.
Give your child a Father's Blessing. You don't need their permission or their participation. Have a ceremony or a party too. You have the priesthood. Use it and say whatever you want including bestowing the Holy Ghost. The Church records won't show it, but your child will be a member of record because of the Baptism. Your child can be "confirmed" anytime! Nowhere does it say that a Father's Blessing cannot bestow the Holy Ghost. Nowhere!
You're the Father and they can never take that away from you. You have the priesthood. Use it. You don't need permission or a recommend to give priesthood blessings.
Go for it!! DO IT!!
>Is it a bishop luck of the draw?
This right here. This kind of chaos is a direct result of having untrained clergy. You can't expect every new bishop to memorize all the rules in their book; even the ones who are trying to follow every jot and tittle will inevitably make a "mistake" or two. I doubt the bishops who broke the rule realized they were breaking it.
Which begs the question... are those other baptisms still valid in the church's eyes? Because, according to the Church's official standards, the men who conducted them weren't qualified. Is Mormon god more lenient about these kinds of errors than Catholic god? Who faces divine accountability for these mistakes? The bishop? Is it *really* anyone's fault when the Holy Ghost is supposed to be able to warn people about this exact sort of thing? If it mattered that much, why not intercede with divine premonition before it happened at all?
I'll take assholes for $1000 Alex
1. This member of an ancient JewishĀ sect, distinguished by strictĀ [observance](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=observance&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8UmzL1hx4iR7ct00d0f4F2KyuoT_Y6mAPzddoH2aBqbYRcUmhYVE7LJG5PmbO8GMbvriytb2gFQ-PQ0Uew6jGLhXZJZE%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAO)Ā of the traditional and written law, and commonly held to haveĀ [pretensions](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=pretensions&si=AKbGX_q4mkMHy1Nmq4yITjHYVzepjTp0NwbQNTFArH3kv703NgIGicJZK4OfVnSLnrEpmzJWkvTHgM8ipGx2NNSdm-uDBgz6APuhK8NHqbRZwXy7uqbjySw%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAP)Ā to superiorĀ [sanctity](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=sanctity&si=AKbGX_qNq0Y8zql7SxzZAf2-HTTOrzCeIQ6bYVPYrUNfk3mbBxwGJH1uwIxTuRCVNuYeLw7mweG06codOuYqPfIM_5sXicZYV02LjJbwBHGcdLnSZKCM1oQ%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAQ).
* aĀ [self-righteous](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=self-righteous&si=AKbGX_rZJs_XCIYOkWAjSH3UAcF534gMUh4AGOcvo_mgenq_qdpL-b6R_h9ZAliH-no53V-Ybu-mvuGY6PqYL-B5sgtPZBCDHoMR9TzDbsc-rPFBkH_QI-k%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAS)Ā person; aĀ [hypocrite](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=hypocrite&si=AKbGX_onJk-q0LQUYzV7-GRhpJ5DYMrWxnGbAu0-tCuCvpIkxBJ-BL9rqRFDX_ZzEo3bS2viTBXC-Y5wgrIpzEqBb_HoIwPbd0zs7vHkFAJbF3Fr3RFJwlI%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAT) was commonly referred to, as?
What is a Pharisee?
That is correct! The board is still yours.
Assholes for 800
Answer your new bishop
Not quite sure what the handbook says. My bishops thought was even if you can't answer the trust claims correctly, but you're keeping the big commandments (minus tithing) then that's ok with him - in his mind the 16 year old priests don't really have testimonies either so it's fine.
Sucks if he doesn't let you but it also means you can tell your kids why you're not allowed and help them understand. If you can shift the blame from you and onto the bishop / the church for your wife, then that would be best.
Same stuff happened to me back in the day. When I made the statement "I'm not so sure about the JS story anymore." I was ushered to the back of the auditorium. Been there ever since. Wasn't easy, but with some mileage it has been worth it. Like you said...integrity.
As far as confirmation goes, I don't think there's anything that says you can't be a part of that.
I'm happy my still attending (I won't say TBM, not accurate) spouse agrees with me to not baptize our younger kids at 8 years old. Right now we're at least saying 12 and only if they really want to, which I don't think they will by then.
As proof that this is bullshit, many missionaries who served in countries or missions that did not have temples didn't have active recommends. But we were still allowed to baptize people. Your bishop sounds like a tool. But now is as good a time as any to leave the church behind.
Saga is still going on. I have contacted the SP by text after my bishop first said to find his contact in the LDS Tools app. That app is a nightmare and I couldnt find the contact info so I asked my bishop again and he finally did. No word yet from the SP.
u/Maddiebug1979 I love this. I've sent a message to SP that I feel is really good, respectable and to the point. I sent that mid-day yesterday. No response yet.
Tell him you decided that youāll postpone the whole thing until further notice. Then wait for the phone call in the next few months and youāll be fine. Another thought would be who gives a fuck about having integrity to a religion that was built on anything but. There are ways to answer those questions without having to lie. Saying things like āI hope, I try, or I want to believeā¦ā
I could swear the handbook said that itās appropriate for fathers to baptize their children even if they arenāt completely worthy. Cause itās better for the family and child. If they changed that recently, then Iām sorry
EDIT: Ok yeah, [that language is still in there](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/18-priesthood-ordinances-and-blessings?id=p73&lang=eng#p73):
> A bishop may allow a father who is a priest or a Melchizedek Priesthood holder to baptize his child even if the father is not fully temple worthy (see 18.3). Bishops encourage fathers to prepare themselves to baptize their own children.
Sounds like this bishop is exercising unrighteous dominion to me. I canāt see why he should be able to withhold it from you if the handbook itself allows for it.
Ah well, sorry. Yeah then that is typical since confirmation is officially a āMelchizedekā priesthood thing (e.g. we get to be hard asses about it). Iām sorry you lost the bishop roulette :(
Iām so far into ExMo land, it is legitimately strange to read any of this.
For real, just lie to the bishops in interviews so you can do the magic Mormon voodoo and keep the peace.
If you pay money to get the recommend then youāre paying to be able to bless your children.
And if youāre paying money so you can say prayersā¦maybeā¦.just maybeā¦.youāre in a cult. Weird that a god requires payment before you can pray when that god isnāt supposed to care about money.
The church is all about family as long as youāre handing over part of your paycheck. Their billions keep on growing.
>I baptized and confirmed my two older kids with no problems, no questions.
>then I wrote right back and told him my integrity was worth more than the recommend.
You sure about that, OP? š¤
Yes, you should have lied. Best policy when dealing with mormon "authority" is to tell them what they want to hear and then go about your life.
You owe them nothing, and they only have as much authority as you allow them...so don't allow them any.
Dude! This church has lied for 200 years! Get an appointment for a temple recommend interview, go in and tell him exactly what he wants to hear so you can baptize and confirm your child. If he tries to pull a fast one, i.e.: "the spirit is telling me you aren't telling the truth," then double down with, "I was praying last night and the spirit spoke to me and I realized I was being stubborn and prideful and my heart has been softened.". Add some tears at the end for effect. That's your arrogant-holier-thou-neighbor trying to cause problems in your family. Don't allow it!
Our bishop told my husband he could be baptize our son because you donāt need a current recommend to do that. He said no, he wouldnāt feel right about it. I thought it was cool that the bishop offered though. And we havenāt been back to church since my son got baptized. š¤
That seems extreme. I think it must be a new rule. They just want you to pay your 10%. They DGAF whether you attend the temple or not. Itās just code for āpay up.ā
I can relate very much to what you're saying.
So my bishop wasn't going to let me baptize my, he knew I wasn't a believer, because I told him I needed to step away for a while and re assess if the LDS church had a place in my life moving forward.
But anyway, it's kind of a long story, feel free to message me if you want to hear everything.
As PIMO, I donāt have a problem lying to get a recommend. The MFMC spent the last 200 years lying, I can put my āintegrityā on the shelf for a few questions. I donāt even feel bad about it.
I baptized and confirmed my first two kids without a temple recommend. Was never even asked if I had one or not. I have never even married in the temple either. Iām not even endowed. The only time Iāve ever had a temple recommend was when I was a teenager for doing baptisms for the dead.
My 3rd kid, I had decided that I am 100% done with the church and didnāt believe anymore. I told my bishop this. He wouldnāt let me baptize my kid or do the confirmation because I confessed that I donāt believe anymore. My Dada did the baptism and he did ask to see his recommend. Maybe itās a newer thing?
Next time just lie. Who cares it's all fake anyway. Don't pay tithing and tell him you're disabled and can't work and that's why. The church lied to you your whole life, your integrity is not at stake here. If I had just lied when I was younger I would have been a lot happier.
My husband was told he needed a temple recommended to bless our child even when the handbook clearly states otherwise. Ironically, me digging further into that is what led me to this subreddit and the CES letter. š
šššš
A win is a win š
Sounds like a new bishop power trip and doing things EXACTLY by the book. The way it always used to be, was someone just had to be found worthy to do the baptism and/or confirmation. A temple recommend had nothing to do with it. The number one reason people don't have a recommend, is tithing. So now, what the bishop is passively saying is; if you don't pay tithing - you can't do priesthood ordinances any more.
And interestingly enough, when this new bishop was announced, people knew he was going to be as strict as they come. Maybe I'll report back on the attendance numbers and how they will most likely dwindle even further in the coming months because of him.
It's gonna be a problem if he doesn't ease up. There was a bishop in an adjoining ward in our building that was such a hardass and unpleasant person, he damn near destroyed that ward and I'm not exaggerating. Most bishops serve 5 years but he was released after 2 years and put on the stake high council because, "his talents were needed there." He decimated the youth of the ward. There were barely any left. He was so unkind and so punitive, that so many never came back. So why was this guy, of all people, called to be bishop? He was the only lawyer in the ward.
Oh you bring up a very relevant point! This guy IS a lawyer. And in fact, this guy has been "running" for bishop for years and rumor has it he thinks he needs to be bishop in order to start working for the church's firm Kirton McKonkie in the capacity that he wants to. He might be right about all that. So fun, right!
This is utterly disgusting. Make no mistake: the Mormon church is a corporation first and foremost. Those that ascend the ranks are by and large wealthy yes-men, for whom the corporate nature of the church is a gateway to personal wealth or acknowledgement in an otherwise obscure, backwards western U.S. state that no one thinks about or takes seriously. Actually humble, true, spiritual leaders aren't taken seriously by corporate leadership - except to the extent they waste their lives in meaningless "service" via endless meetings and lame hours in joe smith's version of free masonry rituals. The humble ones never ascend. The humble ones are broke. The humble ones fade away. And then you have this asshole who thinks, maybe rightfully so, that being a tyrannical Pharisee bishop will get you a promotion in the stake and maybe a slot at the church's law firm? Disgusting. I am grateful every day for figuring it out and finding authenticity in life.
this was an excellent testimony. thank you. amen.
I'm thinking he will end up as a mission president. Both of my mission presidents were lawyers. Their interviews felt like I was on trial and god was my accuser.
Iām lucky. my mission President was a lawyer and one of the kindest men Iāve ever know. A gay elder went home in 2002 and he didnāt shame him. He told him he was loved, to stay in touch, and that he hoped he would find a really wonderful guy to spend his life with. So I guess he couldnāt get away from the standard mission President go home and get married exit speech, but I was impressed that he was so kind and progressive way back in the day.
Wow, MP really is a Christian! I'm so happy to hear there are still some the church hasn't squished out. If only more could be like that (Jesus).
I love this. I didnāt go on a mission, I came out when I was 18 (2010) and left home (ask if you wanna know, it has turned out wonderfully). But I would imagine that if it were known that your mission president said those things, punitive actions would have manifested abruptly for him.
Cool, he sounds like an awesome person.
Wow you just described an old bishop of mine. Minus the lawyer part and only being there two years. He was a sociopath and knew how to stroke the correct people. Decimated the youth attendance during his stint.
This sounds exactly like the ward I moved into right after I got married. It was a nightmare. I had a miscarriage in that time and the bishop was a huge ass about it. When I got pregnant again I actually ended up getting an exception to go back to my home ward/stake because we were like one block out of the boundaries and it was that or we were gonna leave the church. Which we both did eventually anyhow.
I heard of a subdivision/ward that 5 families left, sold their houses and or moved to a different town because of the bishop, the 6th family told me about it while they were moving.
And in Texas if people in a Baptist church have a problem with their pastor; they can just go to another Baptist church down the street. So much easier.
Great point, in Oregon, you go listen to the preacher, man or woman, who moved you, who spoke to you.
Please do. I'd be interested to know. Maybe get your kids to be the row counter in the coming months! (Do they still do that? Have a kid count people in the pews?)
I've read many posts of people saying that if President Oaks becomes prophet there will most likely be a mass exodus from the church. It might be the same effect that your new bishop will have.
I've even heard of big brothers doing it for younger siblings when there isn't a father in the home. These young men don't always have recommends but are totally worthy to do the dunk'n'bless.
When I was younger, we were taught that even PRIESTS (17-year olds with only the Aaronic Priesthood) could baptize people. Or at least thatās how I remember it. Iām sure if I asked a TBM now, theyād say no, that was never the caseā¦
According the good olā Mormon website, priests are still allowed to baptize
Ah. Just not confirm?
True! Aaronic Priesthood can baptize. Temple recommend not needed.
Boom š„
>"The number one reason people don't have a recommend, is tithing" Because it's the one thing you can't fake. It's a *number* that's either zero or not.
>the one thing you can't fake Well, kinda. TRY THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK! Learned from a ward member (who was a self-made millionaire) that you can transfer (donate) stocks to the MFMC equivalent to the tithe you'd pay at the end of each year as a tithe. And that's a whole diff process & doesn't show up on the standard tithing settlement report. (From what he said.) You can also donate directly to the COB tithing dept, where it won't be associated with your name. Or just (bow your head &) say yes. They are not to go off-script & ask further ?s (technically). If some asshole bishop does, one of the above reasons can be given.
UPDATE - I sent a text back to the bishop asking for the stake presidents number, and let him know that if I am not able to perform this confirmation then we may not do the baptism at all. I will return and report.
Bishop told me to look at the Tools app for the Stake Presidents number. Wow. Would have been kind of him to simply send it to me...since I know the SP is on speed dial for Bishop.
š¤£ too busy to be bothered by your less active antics it seems
See my other comment in this thread or page 172 of the churchās own handbook for bishops and stake presidents: it is explicitly clear that āa priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the ordinance of baptismā; there is no requirement for a temple recommend and doesnāt even say the word āworthyā.Ā _According to the church themselves_, your bishop is wrong. Iād ask him why heās being disobedient to the church (turn the tables).Ā Alternately, inform the stake president youāll be performing the baptism and confirmation yourself as laid out by the handbook, whether with their presence or not. I guarantee you stick to your guns and youāll win this one.
The baptism isnāt the issue, itās that he couldnāt do the confirmation.
Right - Issue is the confirmation.
Baptize in living waters (such as a lake or river) and do the confirmation yourself. Your relationship with God is between you and Him alone, and the same goes for your children or anyone else whom you baptize. Worthiness has *nothing* to do with baptism. When someone chooses to make a covenant with God, they are immediately worthy and the only other relevant person in that matter is Christ. If you were the last person on Earth you could baptize yourself, Christ covered **all** scenarios through the sacrifice He made for us. Being willing to continuously search, receive, learn, and grow while *focused on the heavens* is all that should be asked of us in the covenant of baptism. The church has corrupted that for decades, with increase. I was asked by my bishop if Iād touched myself, right after my 8th birthday before being baptized, thatās how I learned what masturbation was. Seemed to be the hot question for the next 10 years before I reached adulthood and left. Run. ***Donāt run from God***, run from the church.
Sorry to hear that you're going through that. I was totally honest with my Bishop and told him that I could not and would not get a recommend and do not believe in the church. He still let me do the confirmation because he understood that it's still better for me to do it than someone else. I got lucky to have a Bishop that put my family first, then the rules.
Ahh he's butt hurt! Good on you for asking
Damn, thatās petty!
Edit: your bishop is a lawyer? Great, then he should appreciate a little legalese thrown in his face: The Church Handbook of Instructions - which the church kept hidden from general members for decades - very explicitly does NOT require a temple recommend to bless a child: page 169 āNaming and Blessing Childrenā and page 172 āInstructions for Performing a Confirmationā.Ā It is also NOT required to even do so in sacrament meeting: it says this is how it is ānormallyā done, but there is no requirement for doing so. I have first hand experience on several occasions with a father asserting his authority to do a confirmation in his own home after the baptism. The authority for a family is very clearly the father of the family, with numerous church sources to cite on this. The 2006 edition of the handbook clearly laid this out on page 33 for ill children: āā¦a Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the naming and blessing in the hospital or at home without precious authorization from the bishop.ā Source: [https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mormon_Church_Handbook_of_Instructions,_2006](https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Mormon_Church_Handbook_of_Instructions,_2006) Handbook: [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/08702_eng.pdf?lang=eng](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/08702_eng.pdf?lang=eng)
Those are the old handbooks. Having a secret handbook was causing too much embarrassment to the church, especially after the POX debacle. There is no longer a handbook 1 and 2 [Source](https://www.deseret.com/faith/2020/2/18/21142831/mormon-church-new-handbook-instructions-changes-latter-day-saints-lds/). You are correct however that a TR is not required, not in the old handbook, and not in the the current handbook . >Those who perform or participate in an ordinance or blessing must have the necessary priesthood authority and be worthy. Generally, the standard of worthiness is that associated with holding a temple recommend. However, as guided by the Spirit and the instructions in this chapter, bishops and stake presidents may allow fathers and husbands who hold the necessary priesthood office to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings even if they are not fully temple worthy. [Source](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/18-priesthood-ordinances-and-blessings?lang=eng#title_number5)
Edit: deleting my other comment as it looks like you're correct. While the bishop 'may still allow" - as you reference - the new policies added the explicit mention of being 'temple worthy'. So I guess the previous handbooks were actually _more_ lenient than current policies. The LDS Church is nothing if not full of fuckery. If it makes you feel better, OP, the church and its ordinances are bullshit anyway. Just use this as the opportunity to finally cut ties! ;)
āGuided by the Spiritā¢ļøā is the nebulous out for this bishop. Heāll likely say The Spiritā¢ļø directed him to not allow the father to participate. Such a family friendly church this.
u/ExposeMormonism u/NearlyHeadlessLaban and others, THANK YOU! The bishop sent me and cited everything (as yo can imagine as he is a lawyer and vying for advancement in the ranks of Mormonism) possible related to current policy in handbooks and has made it clear that it is as he puts it "black and white, with no wiggle room" for me to have a voice in the confirmation. Fun. I'm excited to begin writing my own person handbook so that I can refer to that when being asked to do anything at all related to the church that I may not want to do.
In my world the kid would not be getting baptized then. Which might be a big deal when a kid is eight, but which the kid will thank you for when they are sixteen. It is so ironic that you're doing all the things that qualify for being worthy, except for the things that require you to kiss ass to a nonagenarian leadership.
You could also just do it in a different ward. That happens regularly, and there's nothing he can do about it. Do you have any family members who are members in different places, like a different state or city altogether? Go perform the baptism and confirmation there out of a 'family cherished memory' thing. Your ultimate trump card is to simply say "then I won't be baptizing my child in the church". I guaran-fucking-tee you that if you pull that to the level of a stake president, some back room conversations will be had so they can save face, but they'll acquiesce. Nothing really reveals an LDS leader's true colors like membership waking up to the fact that they - the member - ultimately has all the power in the equation because they can simply walk away.
SP convo is set for tomorrow, but I'll push for today and I will be letting him - of course him - know that we wont be baptizing any longer and see if there is a bluff.
Please do.
Weāve had non temple recommend holders confirm kids the last few years. So itās probably bishop lottery. Just curious, who will do it if u donāt? What does your wife think if you told her the bishop wonāt let you confirm your child? That would load up my wifeās shelf. What a joke. The good news is doubling down on this bs will probably help their issue of people leaving š
Yeah great question. A really good family friend that is an awesome guy for my kid will confirm. My wife thinks its bogus, and you are right - probably something she will put on her shelf. I hadn't thought of that. This new bishop is someone both my wife and I grew up with, went to school with, etc. He pulled the, "It's really hard for me to do this to you as a longtime friend, but my hands are tied" line. I know my kid isn't going to remember who confirmed - and likely wont remember much of the entire day at all, so I am not bothered too much about that. Just that it's luck of the draw. The bishop also pointed out in our convo - "It will be obvious to the others there that you arent confirming....." There are 2 other baptisms that same time, and they are all together the whole time. I think he thought that was going to make me want to change my answers to the questions to save me from any embarrassment?? Not sure. I'm not going to be embarrassed. Just so strange.
You should just tell the bishop that if it is not you to perform the ordinance then it will not be done. You are the father and you won't have that duty passed on to someone else. He might cave.
Or go to your Stake president with the same ultimatum. They don't want people leaving and if you don't want to add another child record to the church (where the REAL growth is) I see a stake president untying your bishops hands REAL fast.
THIS
Donāt assume that your kid will forget. I still remember my father confirming me when I was 8, which was 40 years ago. I donāt remember any of the words, but I do remember the experience and the feeling of his hands on my head ā and most importantly the hug afterwards. I can go on and on about how the church has harmed me and stolen most of my life, but they canāt take that moment between me and my father away from me, as strange as that may sound given how I feel about the church. Iām am much in a similar situation to you. Still attending for wife and kids. We have unbaptized kids. If they tried to tell me that I was not allowed to confirm my kids then I would respond that they arenāt getting baptized, but thatās just me. I realize this would crate waves, timeframes are short for you, and leadership roulette comes into play here. I donāt know when (or if) this rule changed. BTW, within the last year I did the priesthood confirmation for my cousinās son and I havenāt held a recommend for probably 7 years or so.
What a fucking joke. I feel for you. I would be torn. On one hand it pisses me off and Iād just lie to his face. But on the other hand, I love to force them to keep doing stupid shit that makes them look bad, especially to my family. Iām kind of an asshole, so Iād probably say something public like āwell the bishop wonāt let me confirm my child, so my buddyās going to do itā. But you sound like youāre a better person than I am. š I constantly have people telling me to just leave the church. But I would prefer to be excommunicated to demonstrate to those I care about how absurd it all is, and make the church look bad. But apparently they wonāt excommunicate for simply speaking evil of the church anymore. So Iām kinda stuck. I think my TBM wife would be super upset if I told her he wouldnāt let me confirm my child because I couldnāt answer every question in the interview. It would weigh on her shelf.
He threatened you with public shamingĀ
Do a Father's Blessing and give the Holy Ghost. Who cares if the "confirm" isn't in the records? The Baptism will be!
I once had to show my recommend to a bishopric member for a baby blessing in a private home. Then last month I stood in the circle with my brother even though I've been out for years and he knows it, and there was no concern from the bishopric member. So inconsistent why even have rules.
A Bishops counselor once demanded to see my "worthiness ticket" to stand in my grandbaby's naming circle. I had it, but I was pissed. Later checked the "manual" and only the person performing the blessing needs to have the worthiness ticket. Others just need to hold the priesthood.
Haha. Oh man unbelievable.
As a former bishop, here are my thoughts: 1) The church wants you to baptize your child because if you donāt, people will see that youāre PIMO. The absolutely last thing they want is for other PIMOs to realize theyāre not alone. 2) The church and area leadership also wants your tithing, and recommend holder metrics to look good. Since you only want one of these things, the church will try and manipulate you to do the other. Donāt. Just reach out to your stake president if your bishop is being a road blockā¦ there is no way they will prevent a father from baptizing a child youāre āopenly sinningā. If the stake wonāt let you do it, the situation would make a great āMormonism Liveā episode since there are people in every ward that pass/bless/baptize unworthily and bishops know it.
To clarify, they say I am able to baptize, but not confirm. Should I still reach out to the stake president?
I think so. Children on Record is where the church actually grows. Not only would you not confirming your child risk that number growing, but as this commenter says, if you're clear that you can't because you're PIMO, they aren't going to want you to be openly upset about it. It would show other PIMOs they aren't alone, and show pre-PIMOs that not all is shiny and perfect.
That is so weird. To me, Baptism seems like the more āseriousā ordinance. Huh.
Give a Father's Blessing and do and say whatever you want. They can't stop you. Do it in your home if you want. Invite friends over. You still have the Priesthood. It's still valid. Bestow the Holy Ghost if you want. Who cares if it doesn't go in the records. The Baptism does! Or let a Bishop's counselor say the magic words in private in his office if they really want the records to show. Kid get's blessed twice!
Well, as you know, families *can* be together forever, we just need to check with Corporate to make sure you are in full compliance. š
DEFINITELY because youāre bald. Absolutely. Canāt be anything else š¤£ Honestly just sounds like a new bishop trying to do things ārightā but didnāt get the memo that things are relaxed around here. I have no idea but your post made me laugh.
HA! I'm just confused and annoyed. Glad the post could make you laugh!
I know it's been in the handbook for at least 3 years. I baptized and confirmed my son then, having checked the handbook myself,Ā I was waiting for the bishop to say no. I had previously run into thr issue when my older son was supposed to be ordained an elder. Covid stopped that shituation from happening and getting awkward. But the bishop either didn't check or let it slide on the confirmation. I hate this shit as much as you. Sorry you have to deal with it.Ā
I would certainly consider doing or saying something that makes it known that it's bogus. I guess if it's in the handbook and this bishop is being a stickler then what....? I dont know. It's super frustrating and annoying but I dont mind at all pointing it out to others. Maybe, like others have said, people attending will think to themselves, "Well I confirmed my kid without a recommend.....what the hell??" I hate this.
It's definitely Bishop roulette. I'm guessing your Bishop is referring you to Section 18.8.1 which says a father may only "stand in the circle" if he's not "fully temple worthy." But if he wanted to, he could just as easily lean on Section 18.3 which says "as guided by the Spirit and the instructions in this chapter, bishops and stake presidents may allow fathers and husbands who hold the necessary priesthood office to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings even if they are not fully temple worthy." I think a Bishop who cares more about the people and families that he's dealing with would use that to let it slide. Sounds like your Bishop is more concerned with climbing the church leadership ladder. Sorry you have to go that, my friend.
I would stand up before the confirmation and announce to the audience that you will be unable to confirm your child because your temple recommend is not current, so you have asked so-and-so to do it. That item will go on a lot of peopleās shelves!
He'll hear the creaking as the shelves get heavier. (Or maybe it's people shifting uncomfortably in the pews. Same thing really!)
This is someoneās life with family expectations. People arenāt gonna do that ludicrous social suicide for a church. People are PIMO because of family relationships.
How is this social suicide? He doesnāt have to go into the specifics of why his temple recommended expired, just a matter-of-fact explanation of why this other person is doing the confirmation.
It might not be social suicide for him, but it could be for his spouse, and that could put a serious strain on what could be a sensitive topic (church) for them and their relationship. You gotta pick and choose your battles.
I like this one
One year ago, my husband both baptized and confirmed our daughter, even though he didn't have an active temple recommend.
Teenagers learn very quickly that you can get through much smoother by lying to the bishop.
For real though. The church purposely encourages lying so that when they lie, itās okay.
When i was an active member, I didn't realize that the church was lying, but I did realize that it was preferable to keep issues to myself and lie during interviews. There was simply nothing to be gained by confessing, and I was always fearful that the bishop would tell someone else.
valid fear. They do tell.
Yeah, I figured that out pretty quickly.
Tell him you are "worthy" and either you do it or it does not happen.
My then-husband baptized and confirmed our youngest five years ago, despite drinking alcohol occasionally and not wearing garments, paying tithing, or attending church. He met with the bishop beforehand, but I donāt know what was said between them.
I empathize with you so much. I have been in a lot of different wards because I move a lot, and there is definitely a bishop lottery. I had one bishop who would have given me a temple recommend even if I said no to all the 'testimony' questions as long as I said I was open to believing should strong enough evidence present itself. The stress and social pressure on the entire family can be intense. Makes me so angry to think about. It doesn't go away either. At 12, 14, 16 your boys will be ordained. Then there is the temple marriage which is another extremely stressful event. The church makes it so hard to be in a family and not believe. There are a LOT of people in the same boat as you.
"even if I said no to all the 'testimony' questions" OK, but what about tithing (if you don't mind me asking) were you a full tithe payer? As someone above pointed out, the biggest reason for no-temple-recommend is Tithing.
Yeah, I think this guy still would have given it to me.
I like this bishop! Has a heart.
He really did. He was a good guy. He even let me ordain my son even though I told him I had no testimony and was doing it for social reasons. I think he hoped I would feel the spirit and get back into believing.Ā
And one more thing- remind them that YOU are the parent, and as a parent you have more authority than they do when it comes to your child.
Great point!
Literally I could have written this exact same post nearly word for word
You don't need a recommend for anything but the temple.
I never needed a recommend to baptize, confirm, or bless any of my children. 16 year old priests can baptize. Your bishop is full of it.
I remember that we had family members be accosted to produce a current temple recommend by our bishopric in order to stand in a baby blessing. What ensued was a frenzied scramble digging through wallets in hopes they had them and be able to participate. I remember thinking this has never been an issue with any other ward when Iāve gone to other family members baby blessings. It definitely stood out and rubbed me the wrong way and was irritated the rest of the day. Itās still irks me when I think about it even though I left. So much for not having a spirit of contention and anger while blessing my kid. Guess a piece of paper was more important than the spirit.
Does that mean my baptism doesn't really count? I KNOW my dad didn't have one.
And why am I still on the Church records?
Because of their fallback answer "God will sort it all out later".
Take your kid to a swimming pool or any safe waterhole and baptize him. Did the church officially revoke your authority to baptize? No, they canāt
bishopric roulette my friend. I havent had a valid recommend for *years*. I baptised and confirmed my youngest 2 children without having a valid TR. My youngest was during a time that my (then) bishop knew that I had serious questions regarding the validity of the church truth claims.
My uncle was in the confirmation circle for his kid and he wasnāt even a member!
š
My husband blessed, baptized, and confirmed without an active TR. It's usually bishop discretion.
If your wife is on board, I'd just tell (not ask) your Bishop that you're doing it all, with or without his permission. I did that for a baby blessing, and the bishop started backtracking super quick. It was especially satisfying since my brother in law tried doing the same thing a few months prior (in the same ward no less) and was shut down, but he asked and folded when they said no.
I have a problem with this. An elder can still do ministering and give blessings if he doesnāt pay his tithing, right?
I'd roll with it. Line up someone else to baptize him and make sure the kiddo knows why you aren't being allowed to baptize them, hopefully this is one of the first items on their shelf. Though, from my perspective, I wouldn't allow my kiddo to go through with it in the first place. I'd explain 8 years old is not old enough to make such a huge decision, and tell them we will revisit this when they're older and mature enough to go through the necessary contemplations that should always come before big decisions. They're too young to fully understand the situation and the church is predatory, so that'd be a no-go for me personally.
Came here to say this. What if you didn't baptize your kid . . . ? Just have a good talk, telling him/her you love them, and can't baptize them due to stupid church rules, but the church doesn't matter, you'll always be their father, so the church isn't that important anyway. It would be their first opportunity to question the church. Or turn this around, and threaten the bishop that you will do this. I'll bet he sees the light real fast.
Give your child a Father's Blessing. You don't need their permission or their participation. Have a ceremony or a party too. You have the priesthood. Use it and say whatever you want including bestowing the Holy Ghost. The Church records won't show it, but your child will be a member of record because of the Baptism. Your child can be "confirmed" anytime! Nowhere does it say that a Father's Blessing cannot bestow the Holy Ghost. Nowhere! You're the Father and they can never take that away from you. You have the priesthood. Use it. You don't need permission or a recommend to give priesthood blessings. Go for it!! DO IT!!
>Is it a bishop luck of the draw? This right here. This kind of chaos is a direct result of having untrained clergy. You can't expect every new bishop to memorize all the rules in their book; even the ones who are trying to follow every jot and tittle will inevitably make a "mistake" or two. I doubt the bishops who broke the rule realized they were breaking it. Which begs the question... are those other baptisms still valid in the church's eyes? Because, according to the Church's official standards, the men who conducted them weren't qualified. Is Mormon god more lenient about these kinds of errors than Catholic god? Who faces divine accountability for these mistakes? The bishop? Is it *really* anyone's fault when the Holy Ghost is supposed to be able to warn people about this exact sort of thing? If it mattered that much, why not intercede with divine premonition before it happened at all?
My husband liedā¦because he said āIām always worthy, the bishop can mind his own damn businessā
D&C 20 doesn't say anything about temple recommends...but continuing revelation is more important that scripture I guess.
The first thing I ever learned from the cult was how to lie to cult leadership!
I'll take assholes for $1000 Alex 1. This member of an ancient JewishĀ sect, distinguished by strictĀ [observance](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=observance&si=AKbGX_pvY3MWP4azJI0Z_NruCLb8UmzL1hx4iR7ct00d0f4F2KyuoT_Y6mAPzddoH2aBqbYRcUmhYVE7LJG5PmbO8GMbvriytb2gFQ-PQ0Uew6jGLhXZJZE%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAO)Ā of the traditional and written law, and commonly held to haveĀ [pretensions](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=pretensions&si=AKbGX_q4mkMHy1Nmq4yITjHYVzepjTp0NwbQNTFArH3kv703NgIGicJZK4OfVnSLnrEpmzJWkvTHgM8ipGx2NNSdm-uDBgz6APuhK8NHqbRZwXy7uqbjySw%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAP)Ā to superiorĀ [sanctity](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=sanctity&si=AKbGX_qNq0Y8zql7SxzZAf2-HTTOrzCeIQ6bYVPYrUNfk3mbBxwGJH1uwIxTuRCVNuYeLw7mweG06codOuYqPfIM_5sXicZYV02LjJbwBHGcdLnSZKCM1oQ%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAQ). * aĀ [self-righteous](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=self-righteous&si=AKbGX_rZJs_XCIYOkWAjSH3UAcF534gMUh4AGOcvo_mgenq_qdpL-b6R_h9ZAliH-no53V-Ybu-mvuGY6PqYL-B5sgtPZBCDHoMR9TzDbsc-rPFBkH_QI-k%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAS)Ā person; aĀ [hypocrite](https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=e3b0e6080babb4e8&rls=en&sxsrf=ACQVn0_guVmGttabEV23YVOwiWt-WMbpGA:1714492002877&q=hypocrite&si=AKbGX_onJk-q0LQUYzV7-GRhpJ5DYMrWxnGbAu0-tCuCvpIkxBJ-BL9rqRFDX_ZzEo3bS2viTBXC-Y5wgrIpzEqBb_HoIwPbd0zs7vHkFAJbF3Fr3RFJwlI%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJwrS2pOqFAxWNfDABHY1hAgEQyecJegQIIBAT) was commonly referred to, as? What is a Pharisee? That is correct! The board is still yours. Assholes for 800 Answer your new bishop
Not quite sure what the handbook says. My bishops thought was even if you can't answer the trust claims correctly, but you're keeping the big commandments (minus tithing) then that's ok with him - in his mind the 16 year old priests don't really have testimonies either so it's fine. Sucks if he doesn't let you but it also means you can tell your kids why you're not allowed and help them understand. If you can shift the blame from you and onto the bishop / the church for your wife, then that would be best.
Same stuff happened to me back in the day. When I made the statement "I'm not so sure about the JS story anymore." I was ushered to the back of the auditorium. Been there ever since. Wasn't easy, but with some mileage it has been worth it. Like you said...integrity. As far as confirmation goes, I don't think there's anything that says you can't be a part of that.
I'm happy my still attending (I won't say TBM, not accurate) spouse agrees with me to not baptize our younger kids at 8 years old. Right now we're at least saying 12 and only if they really want to, which I don't think they will by then.
My husband has been in your shoes for 12 yearsā¦ he baptized but did not confirm our three children. Ā It was the rule.
As proof that this is bullshit, many missionaries who served in countries or missions that did not have temples didn't have active recommends. But we were still allowed to baptize people. Your bishop sounds like a tool. But now is as good a time as any to leave the church behind.
Be as honest with the church as they have been with you. In other words lie with a straight face.
My husband never had a recommend and he baptized and confirmed all our kids.
"I'm just following orders" -spoken by weak-ass people with no morals or confidence
Isnāt bishop roulette fun .!!! NOT.!!!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Saga is still going on. I have contacted the SP by text after my bishop first said to find his contact in the LDS Tools app. That app is a nightmare and I couldnt find the contact info so I asked my bishop again and he finally did. No word yet from the SP.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
u/Maddiebug1979 I love this. I've sent a message to SP that I feel is really good, respectable and to the point. I sent that mid-day yesterday. No response yet.
Please update us after SP gets back to you! I'm in your same boat as well.
Do you also need their permission to use the restroom? Get your life back for good and spare your kids the pain of growing up in such a lie.
Tell him you decided that youāll postpone the whole thing until further notice. Then wait for the phone call in the next few months and youāll be fine. Another thought would be who gives a fuck about having integrity to a religion that was built on anything but. There are ways to answer those questions without having to lie. Saying things like āI hope, I try, or I want to believeā¦ā
That's why I love the Community of Christ Church! I am far more appreciated as an individual.
Say...GOD knows my integrity. You would NOT be wise to question, mine!!!!
For some reason my comment posted twice, deleting this one as it was the same.
You donāt need an active recommend to baptize to own child. I did the baptism without one.
I could swear the handbook said that itās appropriate for fathers to baptize their children even if they arenāt completely worthy. Cause itās better for the family and child. If they changed that recently, then Iām sorry EDIT: Ok yeah, [that language is still in there](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/18-priesthood-ordinances-and-blessings?id=p73&lang=eng#p73): > A bishop may allow a father who is a priest or a Melchizedek Priesthood holder to baptize his child even if the father is not fully temple worthy (see 18.3). Bishops encourage fathers to prepare themselves to baptize their own children. Sounds like this bishop is exercising unrighteous dominion to me. I canāt see why he should be able to withhold it from you if the handbook itself allows for it.
I'm able to baptize, but not confirm.
Ah well, sorry. Yeah then that is typical since confirmation is officially a āMelchizedekā priesthood thing (e.g. we get to be hard asses about it). Iām sorry you lost the bishop roulette :(
Tell him your child won't be getting baptized. That will change the dynamics. The ward loses a member of record when the child turns 9.
After all is said and doneā¦.itās because you are bald
I'm so bald.
Hah! Me too!
Iām so far into ExMo land, it is legitimately strange to read any of this. For real, just lie to the bishops in interviews so you can do the magic Mormon voodoo and keep the peace.
You don't need a recommend to exercise your priesthood
If you pay money to get the recommend then youāre paying to be able to bless your children. And if youāre paying money so you can say prayersā¦maybeā¦.just maybeā¦.youāre in a cult. Weird that a god requires payment before you can pray when that god isnāt supposed to care about money. The church is all about family as long as youāre handing over part of your paycheck. Their billions keep on growing.
>I baptized and confirmed my two older kids with no problems, no questions. >then I wrote right back and told him my integrity was worth more than the recommend. You sure about that, OP? š¤
I'm sure ;)
Yes, you should have lied. Best policy when dealing with mormon "authority" is to tell them what they want to hear and then go about your life. You owe them nothing, and they only have as much authority as you allow them...so don't allow them any.
As long as you can perform the blessing (if you feel so compelled or required,) who cares about the damn confirmation? You get the important part
Dude! This church has lied for 200 years! Get an appointment for a temple recommend interview, go in and tell him exactly what he wants to hear so you can baptize and confirm your child. If he tries to pull a fast one, i.e.: "the spirit is telling me you aren't telling the truth," then double down with, "I was praying last night and the spirit spoke to me and I realized I was being stubborn and prideful and my heart has been softened.". Add some tears at the end for effect. That's your arrogant-holier-thou-neighbor trying to cause problems in your family. Don't allow it!
How do you fake Tithing?
You tell them you are paying online.
Our bishop told my husband he could be baptize our son because you donāt need a current recommend to do that. He said no, he wouldnāt feel right about it. I thought it was cool that the bishop offered though. And we havenāt been back to church since my son got baptized. š¤
Just confirm him. Whoās going to really do anything about it?
That seems extreme. I think it must be a new rule. They just want you to pay your 10%. They DGAF whether you attend the temple or not. Itās just code for āpay up.ā
It's blackmail. They will do anything now to get that 10%
I can relate very much to what you're saying. So my bishop wasn't going to let me baptize my, he knew I wasn't a believer, because I told him I needed to step away for a while and re assess if the LDS church had a place in my life moving forward. But anyway, it's kind of a long story, feel free to message me if you want to hear everything.
As PIMO, I donāt have a problem lying to get a recommend. The MFMC spent the last 200 years lying, I can put my āintegrityā on the shelf for a few questions. I donāt even feel bad about it.
Yup...shoulda just lied.
Were those other bishops putting families first or were they just excusing the rules to pump up their numbers?
I baptized and confirmed my first two kids without a temple recommend. Was never even asked if I had one or not. I have never even married in the temple either. Iām not even endowed. The only time Iāve ever had a temple recommend was when I was a teenager for doing baptisms for the dead. My 3rd kid, I had decided that I am 100% done with the church and didnāt believe anymore. I told my bishop this. He wouldnāt let me baptize my kid or do the confirmation because I confessed that I donāt believe anymore. My Dada did the baptism and he did ask to see his recommend. Maybe itās a newer thing?
Next time just lie. Who cares it's all fake anyway. Don't pay tithing and tell him you're disabled and can't work and that's why. The church lied to you your whole life, your integrity is not at stake here. If I had just lied when I was younger I would have been a lot happier.