How long can a baby blessing be postponed?

[Bini]

Hubby and I are not active LDS but my father has expressed his desire to bless our baby. We have no problems with this and actually appreciate the gesture. The thing is my parents would like to bless baby in December which would make baby only a couple months old (she's due towards the end of September). We're not sure we want to travel with baby that early and expose her to a lot of people during the cold and flu season. So my question is how long can we postpone a baby blessing? Is it only done for newborns or can a child be older and receive a baby blessing?

[Jennarator]

I have seen babies bless a year or older. Tho I don't know the policy. My sister waited until I got home from my mission to bless hers and that made her baby 3 months....I think....

[skippy740]

You can postpone a baby blessing indefinitely... not that I would recommend it.

Remember that a baby blessing is not a 'saving' ordinance. It is an ordinance to pronouce the blessing, give the baby a name and to enter the child's name into the records of the church.

Edited September 13, 2011 by skippy740

[Gwen]

I've seen babies over a yr being blessed. Sometimes it was due to family not being able to get together and others because the baby was premature and they didn't take them out until they had to.

Do what is best for your baby.

[Bini]

You can postpone a baby blessing indefinitely... not that I would recommend it.

Remember that a baby blessing is not a 'saving' ordinance. It is an ordinance to pronouce the blessing, give the baby a name and to enter the child's name into the records of the church.

I'm confused. Is a baby blessing beneficial to a child that comes from a family that is inactive? I should add that Hubby and I were not married in the temple.

[applepansy]

My husband's cousins child was blessed at age 6 or 7. It was his request. He hadn't been blessed as a baby and really wanted it done. So it was done. :)

Addition: We didn't bless our children until they were over 3 months old. I do not believe in exposing newborns the world before that. I took a lot of criticism from my inlaws but in the end it was my decision and my husband understood my reasons.

Edited September 13, 2011 by applepansy

[Jennarator]

Baby blessing are certianly benificial. They are preisthood blessings. They are not, however "saving" like baptism. I know that in some places they are even done at home, now-a-days, just as a fathers blessing is given to children at the beginning of a school year.

[pam]

My boys weren't blessed until they were 6 months old. We were living in Hawaii at the time and my parents were coming to visit us at Christmas that year. I wanted my dad to bless them so we waited for their visit.

[Blocky]

My children were blessed at 3 and 5 years old. My bishop said it needed to be done before 8 years of age if it was going to be done. We waited because my husband was inactive. We had it done in our home so that my husband could be there for it.

[MarginOfError]

When using the baby blessing as an impetus for creating a membership record, it must be done before the child turns 8. It isn't necessary to have the child blessed to create a membership record, however. This only requires parental consent.

Theoretically, if you weren't expecting the blessing to be used to create a membership record, you could perform the blessing any time you wanted to. However, if the child doesn't have a membership record by the time he/she turns 8, his/her baptism will be considered a convert baptism.

[Bini]

OK my question has been answered. Thanks everyone.

[applepansy]

When using the baby blessing as an impetus for creating a membership record, it must be done before the child turns 8. It isn't necessary to have the child blessed to create a membership record, however. This only requires parental consent.

Theoretically, if you weren't expecting the blessing to be used to create a membership record, you could perform the blessing any time you wanted to. However, if the child doesn't have a membership record by the time he/she turns 8, his/her baptism will be considered a convert baptism.

I would like to correct something here. Regardless if the child is a member or record or not, if they aren't baptized before age 8 then they become a convert. My husband was involved in a situation like this while in the bishopric and then we were involved again when he was Ward Mission Leader.

We had a family who didn't want to baptism their child until that child truly understood what obedience and repentance was all about. The child had some learning issues. The bishop explained to the parents the difference and that if they waited until after the child was 8 then then missionaries would have to give all the lessons and it would be a convert baptism. It was a hard decision for the family but they made the right one. The child is thriving and having to wait for something that everybody just does made it more meaningful to her.

"Member of record" is the term used when a child is blessed or a membership record is created with permission from the parent. Its a clerical distinction. "Member" is the term used after baptism. None of us get to be "members" just because we're born into an LDS family. In that respect we are all converts.

[MarginOfError]

I chose the wording I did for a specific reason, but I wasn't entirely correct.

A child of record that is baptized at age 8 is not considered a convert baptism. If the child turns 9, he or she will be considered a convert baptism.

A child who does not have a membership record when he or she turns 8 is:

i) a convert baptism if the child is baptized within 30 days of his or her parents

ii) a non-convert baptism if the child is baptized after 30 days of his or her parents AND still 8 years old

iii) a convert baptism if the child is baptized after his or her 9th birthday.

But again, these are boring administrative details that only affect statistical reports. I think it was silly of your bishop to "explain" the difference between a child-of-record baptism and a convert baptism--there is not difference, spiritually speaking. The correct thing to do is make the decision that is of most benefit to the child and go with it.

And by the way, the missionaries wouldn't necessarily have to teach all of the discussions to the child. The child just needs to be interviewed under the direction of the mission president, who could authorize either a missionary or the bishop to conduct the interview. It's the mission president's authority--not the full-time missionary's--that authorizes a baptism.

Recording ordinances - LDSTech