Not having a temple recommend meant he could not confirm someone in his family. But apparently this doesn't apply to baptizing someone. A temple recommend isn't required for baptizing?

I don't understand the difference between these 'ordinances' as they both need the priesthood authority according to lds doctrine.

Can someone clarify this for me? Thanks.

Any 16 year old priest can baptize.

The bishop was simply being punitive. No matter how tainted your soul, if you have been ordained to an office, you can function in that office. They had to come up with that rule so as not to have to redo ordinances done by a man later found not to have been worthy.

They were simply sticking it to the OP, letting him know that ghawd told them he wasn't worthy. Heck, all us RMs who haven't resigned could make extra money by baptizing people into the church and confirming them!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/09/2015 01:31PM by elderolddog.

With the exceptions of dedicating a grave and blessing a baby outside of a church meeting, all church ordinances are under the direction of and with the permission of the bishop.

He can put any arbitrary rules he decides.

(The handbook says a baby may be blessed at anytime, anywhere, if the parents feel the baby's health is failing and needs a blessing without consulting a bishop)

When it happened to me in 2012, he said it was from the "Handbook", and something that was now being reinforced. I was still "in" at the time enough that I didn't argue, but I HATED being humiliated like that.