Moms Holding Baby During Blessing

[Five Solas]

On 8/10/2016 at 2:27 PM, juliann said:

Indeed. And my forward thinking Bishop who knows my leanings, walked by after the meeting and whispered, "There should be no reason mothers can't hold babies, either."  My view is that if they could put the baby in a basket without anyone blinking, then surely they can put the baby in the mother's lap. It is particularly silly when this isn't even an ordinance. The problem seems to be with bishops who feel a need to go get permission. Although, I'm sure there will always be the gate keepers who will rat them out anyway. 

However gratifying his words might have been for you in the moment, juliann--I have to ask: Doesn't having a people-pleaser bishop who undermines instructions from LDS apostles bother you, at least a little bit? 

I'm not judging and I'm completely fine if you say you don't give the proverbial rat's arse.  But I am curious.  No doubt other readers are too.

:0)

--Erik

[rockpond]

1 hour ago, Five Solas said:

However gratifying his words might have been for you in the moment, juliann--I have to ask: Doesn't having a people-pleaser bishop who undermines instructions from LDS apostles bother you, at least a little bit? 

I'm not judging and I'm completely fine if you say you don't give the proverbial rat's arse.  But I am curious.  No doubt other readers are too.

:0)

--Erik

What instruction from an apostle did her bishop undermine?

[Yirgacheffe]

On 8/10/2016 at 4:24 PM, Storm Rider said:

I suppose that one of the few times a father actually has a role that it should be diminished even more because gosh, a mother is not already involved in enough things.  Besides, he is only the twit father and is not capable of doing it by himself.  Got it.

How is a blessing "one of the few times a father actually has a role"?  The mother will have no role in any religious milestone in her children's life and yet the father who will participate and administer all of his children's religious progression is being denied something if the mother acts a a cradle.   And how is the mother playing a role that could easily be filled by a chair, a pew, a car seat or the ground, in anyway put forth that the father can't bless the child himself?

[Storm Rider]

12 minutes ago, Yirgacheffe said:

How is a blessing "one of the few times a father actually has a role"?  The mother will have no role in any religious milestone in her children's life and yet the father who will participate and administer all of his children's religious progression is being denied something if the mother acts a a cradle.   And how is the mother playing a role that could easily be filled by a chair, a pew, a car seat or the ground, in anyway put forth that the father can't bless the child himself?

I have never seen a baby being blessed while sitting in a pew, a car seat, or the ground.  Where did you see this?

Well, let's look at this baby thing again - who bears the child?  Who brings the child into the world? Who nurses the child?  Who does the majority of the interaction with the child?  Hmm, I know these are really hard and most people are stumped by them, but if anyone thinks long enough they will find the answer - Yes!  It is Mom.  

I am not speaking in absolutes and critics seem compelled to jump to extremes - Yes, daddy is still involved in a child's life; he feeds the baby when they are older, he changes her clothes, he reads books, he helps with homework.  However, a mother has a very definite role in the lives of most children; particularly those raised in a traditional manner.

We feel differently about things - you would like to see things one way and I prefer to see them another.  I tend to think that it is not all that bad that a father stands with his father and the mother's father and a few others to give a blessing to a newborn.  I don't see a problem with the father actually playing a role without the mother involved.  Strike me dead for thinking it, but I just don't see the need to have a mother involved in everything at all times.  

[Rain]

On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 9:45 PM, mfbukowski said:

Which usually just wakes them up and start to cry anyway.

The baby can be perfectly asleep and then they start the bouncing.  Everytime.

It's like it starts all by itself!   A miracle!!

My husband tries to position his hand to stop the bouncing,  but has been unsuccessful in stoping it.  Lol

[Rain]

On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 6:55 AM, salgare said:

I understand, it's just part of motherhood and being a good wife.

Unfortunately, per the linked blog, you violated Apostolic instruction.

No she didn't.  She had no such instruction. 

[salgare]

5 minutes ago, Rain said:

No she didn't.  She had no such instruction. 

so in Mormonism ignorance of the law is and excuse eh?  And what is she, and others to do with future babies?

Edited August 14, 2016 by salgare

[Rain]

8 hours ago, salgare said:

so in Mormonism ignorance of the law is and excuse eh?  And what is she, and others to do with future babies?

1. Mormon doctrine 101: "To commit sin is to willfully disobey God's commandments or to fail to act righteously despite a  knowledge of the truth. " Sin

2. Bluebell had no instuction from an apostle. The only person who did was, maybe, the writer of the blog.  

ETA: "Mormon doctrine 101" is just a term I used,  not the source".

 

Edited August 14, 2016 by Rain

[salgare]

9 minutes ago, Rain said:

1. Mormon doctrine 101: "To commit sin is to willfully disobey God's commandments or to fail to act righteously despite a  knowledge of the truth. " Sin

2. Bluebell had no instuction from an apostle. The only person who did was, maybe, the writer of the blog.  

 

I would assume bluebell has been around this topic long enough to know it was controversial.  Being such I wonder if she asked her Bishop for permission to do the blessing at home and hold the baby?  If she did not was she wrong in not doing so?

[mfbukowski]

46 minutes ago, Rain said:

My husband tries to position his hand to stop the bouncing,  but has been unsuccessful in stoping it.  Lol

I am convinced it is caused by momentary gravity waves turning on and off. No one does it, yet it miraculously happens.

It is actually pretty weird, and an inevitable law of nature

[Rain]

23 minutes ago, salgare said:

I would assume bluebell has been around this topic long enough to know it was controversial.  Being such I wonder if she asked her Bishop for permission to do the blessing at home and hold the baby?  If she did not was she wrong in not doing so?

I honor her as a righteous woman with a keen mind and an obedient heart. To say more of what I would like to say would break board rules so I will stop here.

Edited August 14, 2016 by Rain

[salgare]

1 minute ago, Rain said:

I honor her as a righteous woman with a keen mind and an obedient heart.

fully agree

[MorningStar]

Personally I love the symbolism of priesthood holders all supporting the baby. Do we ask for mothers to stand in the water when our kids are baptized or to help submerge them?  Like I've said before, I get most of the glory for the birth of the child (and the child's good looks, of course), the baby shower, the attention, sympathy, etc., and then I alone have the power to keep the child alive, which I do all night and all day for hour upon hour until my back hurts and my shoulders are hunched up and I would give anything just to sleep for an hour without anyone touching me. 

I'm happy for my husband to have his Lion King moment.  A special thing that only he can do for our baby.  Then three minutes later I get to resume holding/nursing/burping the baby all the live long day some more until what feels like will be until they're 18.

Love,

MorningStar (Whose 21-month-old is still in my bed and throws her sippy cup violently because she would prefer to nurse)

[Rain]

9 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I am convinced it is caused by momentary gravity waves turning on and off. No one does it, yet it miraculously happens.

It is actually pretty weird, and an inevitable law of nature

Oh oh! I was wrong.  I told him what you said and he said he HAS managed to stop it sometimes.  He also tries to position himself when giving blessings or ordaining people so their heads are not pushed through their shoulders and onto the floor. That one is harder,  but can be done as well.  He is an engineer though so maybe he just had enough knowledge of those gravity waves. Lol

[Rain]

So we don't have CHI 1. DH thought he could recall, but wasn't sure, it saying that an aaronic priesthood holder could hold the baby and then something about an exception for a man who didn't hold it at all.  Anyone know? 

[salgare]

32 minutes ago, Rain said:

So we don't have CHI 1. DH thought he could recall, but wasn't sure, it saying that an aaronic priesthood holder could hold the baby and then something about an exception for a man who didn't hold it at all.  Anyone know? 

I thought they were only allowing TR holding elders in all ordinances requiring the Melchizedek Priesthood.

[Bernard Gui]

Melchizedek only. 

Laying on of hands is the MO of Priesthood ordinances as commanded by God in scripture and defined by the Church in official handbooks. The mother does not touch, hold, embrace, rub, bounce, caress, or put the child on her lap, etc., in other ordinances when the child is baptised or receives the Holy Ghost, anointings, or in Priesthood ordinations and settings apart. It would impossible for the mother to hold the baby in the circle without using her hands which, considering the inverse hand position of the men, is the way the elders follow the correct procedure in this ordinance. She would simply be sitting in a chair with the child suspended above her by the men in the circle. Or laying the baby on her lap with the men bending over and putting all those hands on her lap under the baby while her hands hang down at her side would be really weird. I see no point in that, but some here probably would think it was a great idea.

This raises the problem of creeping innovation in the Church. A nice thing here, a sweet touch there, a special consideration for grandma or grandpa, someone would like it done this or that way because it would be more special, some ward does this and some ward does that, and soon the ordinance morphs something it was not intended to be. It's why we have simple ceremonies and general handbooks that keep them simple.

 

Plus, I think it's awesome to see all those men surrounding a little baby giving it a name and blessing with great tenderness and love. That's really something! Tradition and ceremony even as simple as this has immense value. There's nothing insidious, evil, demeaning, oppressive about it. In fact, I wish the congregation would applaud and cheer when the dad holds up his child for the congregation to behold. Oops...creeping innovation. My bad.

Edited August 14, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Rain]

I assumed all this was in CHI 1 for some reason. This is from CHI 2. I'll add the other sources mentored in a moment. 

"

20. Priesthood Ordinances and Blessings This chapter outlines instructions for performing priesthood ordinances and blessings. Stake presidents and bishops should also be aware of the ordinance policies that are outlined inHandbook 1, chapter 16.
20.1 General Instructions An ordinance is a sacred act, such as baptism, that is performed by the authority of the priesthood. The ordinances of baptism, confirmation, Melchizedek Priesthood ordination (for men), the temple endowment, and temple sealing are required for exaltation for all accountable persons. These are called the saving ordinances. As part of each saving ordinance, the recipient makes covenants with God. Performance of a saving ordinance requires authorization from a priesthood leader who holds the appropriate keys or who functions under the direction of a person who holds those keys. Such authorization is also required for naming and blessing a child, dedicating a grave, giving a patriarchal blessing, and preparing, blessing, and passing the sacrament. Melchizedek Priesthood holders may consecrate oil, administer to the sick, give father’s blessings, and give other blessings of comfort and counsel without first seeking authorization from a priesthood leader. Brethren who perform ordinances and blessings should prepare themselves by living worthily and striving to be guided by the Holy Spirit. They should perform each ordinance or blessing in a dignified manner, making sure it meets the following requirements: 1.  It should be performed in the name of Jesus Christ. 2.  It should be performed by the authority of the priesthood. 3.  It should be performed with any necessary procedures, such as using specified words or using consecrated oil. 4.  It should be authorized by the presiding authority who holds the proper keys (normally the bishop or stake president), if necessary according to the instructions in this chapter. A priesthood leader who oversees an ordinance or blessing ensures that the person who performs it has the necessary priesthood authority, is worthy, and knows and follows the proper procedures. Leaders also seek to make the ordinance or blessing a reverent and spiritual experience. When ordinances or blessings are performed in sacrament meeting, the bishop ensures that they are performed properly. To avoid embarrassing a priesthood holder, the bishop quietly corrects errors only if essential elements of the ordinance or blessing are incorrect. Those who give priesthood blessings speak words of blessing (“I [or we] bless you that …”) rather than saying a prayer (“Heavenly Father, please bless this person that …”).
20.1.1	Participation in Ordinances and Blessings Only brethren who hold the necessary priesthood and are worthy may perform an ordinance or blessing or stand in the circle. Those who participate are usually limited to a few, including priesthood leaders, close family members, and close associates such as home teachers. Inviting large numbers of family, friends, and leaders to assist in an ordinance or blessing is discouraged. When too many participate, it can become cumbersome and detract from the spirit of the ordinance. Those who perform an ordinance and those who preside are the only ones required. Others provide support and sustain the spokesman. When several brethren participate in an ordinance or blessing, each one places his right hand lightly on the person’s head (or under the baby being blessed) and his left hand on the shoulder of the brother to his left. Even though only a limited number of brethren stand in the circle when a person receives an ordinance or blessing, family members are usually invited to attend. Leaders encourage worthy brethren who hold the necessary priesthood to perform or participate in ordinances and blessings for their family members.
20.1.2	Worthiness to Participate in an Ordinance or Blessing Only a Melchizedek Priesthood holder who is worthy to hold a temple recommend may act as voice in confirming a person a member of the Church, conferring the Melchizedek Priesthood, ordaining a person to an office in that priesthood,or setting apart a person to serve in a Church calling. As guided by the Spirit and the instructions in the next paragraph, bishops and stake presidents have discretion to allow priesthood holders who are not fully temple worthy to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings. However, presiding officers should not allow such participation if a priesthood holder has unresolved serious sins. A bishop may allow a father who holds the Melchizedek Priesthood to name and bless his children even if the father is not fully temple worthy. Likewise, a bishop may allow a father who is a priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder to baptize his children or to ordain his sons to offices in the Aaronic Priesthood. A Melchizedek Priesthood holder in similar circumstances may be allowed to stand in the circle for the confirmation of his children, for the conferral of the Melchizedek Priesthood on his sons, or for the setting apart of his wife or children. However, he may not act as voice.
20.1.3	Performing an Ordinance or Blessing in Another Ward To act as voice when naming and blessing a child, baptizing or confirming a person, ordaining a person to a priesthood office, or dedicating a grave, a priesthood holder who is outside his own ward should show the presiding officer a current temple recommend or a Recommend to Perform an Ordinance form that is signed by a member of his bishopric.
20.1.4	Performing Ordinances by and for Persons Who Have Disabilities Guidelines for performing ordinances by and for persons who have disabilities are provided in Handbook 1, 16.1.8and 16.1.9. For guidelines on interpreting ordinances for those who are deaf or hearing impaired, see21.1.26 in this handbook.
20.1.5	Translating Ordinances and Blessings Guidelines for translating ordinances and blessings are provided in Handbook 1, 16.1.2.
20.1.6	Instructions on Performing Ordinances and Blessings The following publications provide instructions on performing ordinances and blessings: 1.  This chapter of the handbook 2.  Family Guidebook, pages 18–25 3.  Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood, Part B, pages 42–47 Using these publications, priesthood leaders teach brethren how to perform ordinances and blessings. Leaders ensure that each priesthood holder has theFamily Guidebook or Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood, Part B, so he can have his own copy of these instructions. Leaders should not produce or use other publications that give instructions for ordinances, blessings, or prayers unless the First Presidency has authorized such publications."  CHI 2

Edited August 14, 2016 by Rain

[Rain]

Family Guidebook

"Naming and Blessing ChildreN

“Every member of the church of Christ having children is to bring them unto the elders before the church, who are to lay their hands upon them in the name of Jesus Christ, and bless them in his name” (D&C 20:70). In conformity with this revelation, only worthy men who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood may participate in naming and blessing children. The ordinance of naming and blessing children requires authorization from the presiding authority.

When blessing a baby, men who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood gather in a circle and hold the baby in their hands. When blessing an older child, brethren place their hands lightly on the child’s head."

[Rain]

Duties and Blessings of the Priesthood part B

"

Naming and Blessing of Children

Under the direction of the presiding authority, only brethren who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood may participate in the ordinance of naming and blessing children (see D&C 20:70). Worthy fathers who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood should be encouraged to bless their own children.

When blessing a baby, brethren gather in a circle and place their hands under the baby. When blessing an older child, brethren place their hands lightly on the child’s head. "

-------------------

There is more that could apply in this source.  I'm just getting impatient copying and passing on my phone. 

[Rain]

46 minutes ago, Rain said:

 

	As guided by the Spirit and the instructions in the next paragraph, bishops and stake presidents have discretion to allow priesthood holders who are not fully temple worthy to perform or participate in some ordinances and blessings. However, presiding officers should not allow such participation if a priesthood holder has unresolved serious sins. A bishop may allow a father who holds the Melchizedek Priesthood to name and bless his children even if the father is not fully temple worthy. Likewise, a bishop may allow a father who is a priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder to baptize his children or to ordain his sons to offices in the Aaronic Priesthood. A Melchizedek Priesthood holder in similar circumstances may be allowed to stand in the circle for the confirmation of his children, for the conferral of the Melchizedek Priesthood on his sons, or for the setting apart of his wife or children. However, he may not act as voice.

Here is the part my husband was thinking of. It doesn't say quite what he was thinking though.  

It is a little confusing when the whole section is taken together. May explain that later on my computer. 

[mfbukowski]

15 hours ago, Rain said:

Oh oh! I was wrong.  I told him what you said and he said he HAS managed to stop it sometimes.  He also tries to position himself when giving blessings or ordaining people so their heads are not pushed through their shoulders and onto the floor. That one is harder,  but can be done as well.  He is an engineer though so maybe he just had enough knowledge of those gravity waves. Lol

In the temple they teach us to just touch the person's hair so as not to cause any injury or even for sanitary reasons since we bless so many, one after another.

Then when I come out and give a blessing in a ward, I whisper "Keep it light brethren!" but it never works.  Blessing?  Get 911 on the line for a broken neck....   (just kidding of course)

[rodheadlee]

You people should just be glad you are able to have children.

[bluebell]

19 hours ago, salgare said:

I would assume bluebell has been around this topic long enough to know it was controversial.  Being such I wonder if she asked her Bishop for permission to do the blessing at home and hold the baby?  If she did not was she wrong in not doing so?

No, it never occurred to me it was controversial. 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

You people should just be glad you are able to have children.

I suspect that many childless couples and individuals just shake their heads when seeing how upset some are over who is involved with what in their children's lives.