Jenamarie

Nope, not a regional custom/tradition as far as I'm aware. I'd just thought it was always kind of unfair that the woman had to make it obvious that she was "taken" while the guy didn't. Before I'd even met my DH I'd decided that I would ask my future husband to wear an engagement ring just like I did. And it wasn't anything fancy. His ring is a plain titanium band that cost $98 (got it on clearance, it was originally $200. He picked it out, just like I picked out mine - which was another thing I'd long decided I would ask my future husband to let me do. I'm picky about the jewelry I wear. )

Something that popped into my head while reading the "not changing maiden name" thread: did any guys here wear an engagement ring? My DH did, at my request, although he didn't bat an eyelash when I suggested it to him. He saw nothing odd about it, since he was just as much "off the market" as I was. We were living in Utah at the time, so he got a lot of "I didn't know you'd gotten married!" comments, and a few wierd looks when he explained why he was wearing the ring while not married, but he was happy to keep doing it. I love the fact that we've been wearing our rings since just a few days after we got engaged (we bought them at the same time). We didn't do a ring exchange during our Sealing, so our e-rings just magically became our wedding bands after the ceremony. Saved a lot of money.

THAT I can agree with!!!

I think this is so cool!! Pres.-elect Obama has started a new website that allows people to submit ideas to him on what they'd like to see him do while in office: Change.gov | Of the People, By the People Let your voice be heard.

Thankfully I haven't seen this happen in any ward I've been in. The Bishop's wives have just been regular members of the congregation, focused on their own callings. I *have* been in a ward that had a woman called to assign talks (Bishopric picked the topic though, of course). She gave you a call two weeks ahead of time, then sent you a form letter in the mail with the date, topic, and time-limit of your talk. It was awesome! I was *shocked* when I left that ward (I grew up in it) and realized that this isn't how it's always done.

That is too cute!!

Being a mom to toddlers, I LOVE trunk-or-treat! It's so much easier for my four and two year old to handle walking car to car than house to house. We live in an older neighborhood were street lamps are few and far between, so going around our own neighborhood after dark isn't very safe, even for adults. Our ward combines with the other ward that meets in our building, and we have little carnival games set up in the cultural hall, and then to the trunk-or-treating afterwards. It's fun seeing how people decorate their trunks. Our Bishop always puts black ice in his, and it's really cool! Some people use adaptors to plug in their inflatable lawn decorations, and there are jack-o-lanterns galore. It's probably my FAVORITE ward activity, and it also is a great activity to invite non-members to. The adults dress up too, and it's fun seeing everyone in their costumes. Last night our Elder's Quorum presidency was dressed up as Snap Crackle and Pop! So obviously I LOVE trunk-or-treat.

Eyes cannot possibly roll farther out of my head.

Well apparently I'm surrounded in real-life by the "faith only" Christians then, because listening to them explain their belief in what being Saved means is what largely lead me to making this post, after I tried to compare our thinking on the subject to theirs. I've never met, personally, a Christian who wasn't of the "faith only" variety.

That would be fair.

And I'm refering to Grace as traditional Christianity defines it, NOT how the LDS church defines it. If you say to a traditional Christian that you believe works are a part of Salvation, they'll like look at you like you sprouted a second head and wonder what the heck kind of "Christian" are you to be putting conditions on Christ's FREE GIFT of Grace. LDS and traditional Christians see being Saved differently. I know that. Which is why we need to sometimes speak to them in *there* terms first, before expounding on what additional teachings we have in regards to being Saved, because otherwise they would probably quickly dismiss us as being heretical for believing that works has ANY roll in being Saved from Hell.

No. It is a "laying on of hands" type prayer where the father (or some other Priesthood holder chosen by the parents) pronounces a Blessing on the child. At the end the baby is usually held up for the congregation to see, and then that's it.

I thought the reason for so many men in the circle was so that you could safely bounce the baby.

This was how my Stake President explained it, and it makes me cringe every time a father starts talking to the baby during a Blessing, like "I bless you [baby] that you will be blessed with..." Uh, no. DAD isn't blessing the baby, it's Heavenly Father who is Blessing the baby through the dad. I made sure to remind my husband of this before each of our babies was blessed, and so far he's remembered to do it the "right" way. Even though we're the only ones in our ward who do it.

THANK YOU! I was really starting to think there was something I'd missed in my 26 years in the church. This is exactly what I'm talking about. EVERYONE, UNIVERSALLY, is "Saved" from Outter Darkness unless they deny the Holy Spirit. No amount of works, or non-works, will change that. We are ALL SAVED. Not by Works, but by the Grace of Christ. We need to shout this from the roof tops to our Christian friends so that the erronious belief that Mormons believe we're "Saved by Works" (meaning Saved from Hell by works) can be disspelled. It is Christ and Christ alone who Saves us from that awful awful fate. Works play a different roll. Once Saved from Hell, our Works make us better people, and qualify us for Exaltation. They are the evidence of our conversion and grattitude for Christ and His Atonement. But even if we failed to be converted and didn't care two wits about Christ, we'd still qualify for the bare minimum "glory" of the Tellestial Kingdom, because His Grace is sufficient and mighty to Save.

But other than Denying the Holy Spirit, what minimum number of works do I have to fail to achieve to qualify myself for a place in Outter Darkness? There isn't, is there? I'll at the very least end up in the Tellestial Kingdom, right? Not Hell? Am I missing something????

Aaaahhhhhgggggg! I really didn't think my post was going to be so hard to "get"! I'm talking about Salvation from Hell, from Outer Darkness. Without the Atonement of Christ, without His GRACE, we would all be destined for that horrible, awful place. His Atonement has SAVED us from that, and now it is up to us to follow HIM and keep his Commandments, and do work to achieve EXALTATION. Perhaps Salvation has a dual meaning in LDS Doctrine: one meaning Saved from Hell/Outter Darkness/Endless Death, the other meaning being Exaltation. I am talking about the Salvation from physical and Spiritual Death in my OP. And I take that Nephi scripture differently. I see it as saying that, after all we can do, it is still Grace that saves us, not our "doing". We can do good works until our fingers are worn down to the bone, but without Christ's Grace it would count for nothing. We cannot Save ourselves.

Heavenly brownies. Mmmmmmm.

ITA. And lessons like that are too important to leave solely in the hands of parents because, unfortunately, it's sometimes the parents who are doing the abuse.

I prefer walking along the Pacific NW rocky beaches myself. :) Welcome!

Maybe I live in Utopia, but the most "vandallism" I've ever see done in my neighborhoods on Halloween was pumpkin smashing. And the pumpkins were usually in the middle of the road where it was up to the city, and not the owner of the pumpkin, to clean it up.

Uh. I don't think most children are even thinking about Satan when they celebrate Halloween. Christmas has a lot of Pagan elements to it as well (bringing a tree into the house, celebrating it around the time of the Winter Solstace, Yule Logs, etc) but I doubt if most Christiatns see anything other than a pretty tree in their living room, a crackling fire in their fireplace, and snow falling out their window when they celebrate Christmas. Whatever their original origins are are lost on most people. I don't think I'm falling further into Satan's grasp by celebrating a holiday with pagan origins. All I'm celebrating is a fun night out with my kids, all dressed up in cute costumes, and doing fun things with pumpkins.

LDS and mainstream Christians see "Salvation" differently. To most non-LDS Christians, Salvation simply means "Saved from Hell" or saved from the grasp of the devil. There's no mention of Eternal Families, or Exaltation, or Everlasting Priesthood in the non-LDS Christian view of Salvation. It's much more black and white. Either Eternity with the Devil (damned), or Eternity with God (saved). It is *that* definition of Salvation that I am addressing, and I think it would make our communications with non-LDS Christians more accurate if we went into the convesation with that difference in mind. If we start saying that our "works" (Temple Ordinances, etc.) play a roll in Salvation, then, in the minds of the non-LDS Christians I've encountered, we come across as being a "saved by works" church, which undermines the free gift of Grace. If we were saved by works, then we'd be living in a constant state of fear of damnation, which I don't believe any LDS person is. We know we're going to Heaven, it's just a matter of which one. His Grace has saved us from the Devil's grasp, and therefore we are Saved. Now of course, Grace doesn't end there, and hopefully we don't accept "saved from Hell" as being all we need to have a hunky-dory after-life. We're hopefully tapping into that Grace to start building up our Treasures in Heaven. But that first step is accepting it, and being "Saved".

Do you mean this one Naomi? I think you're being thrown off by the list of names appearing undernieth that post? Those are just users "thanking" you for the post. There's a "Thanks" button in the bottom corner you can click if you liked someone's post especially, and your name will then appear under that post. It's not an actual reply. Hope that helps. :)

That reminds me of when I was in HS and had to do costumes "on the cheap" (i.e. I was broke, and my parents refused to buy me anything) and I went as "Super Store" I wore plastic grocery bags over my shoes, and one around my head as a headband, then I cut a paper grocery bag into a vest, and taped a large sheet of Sunday ads to the back as a "cape". I was sooooooo rockin' that year.