I cannot tell you how comforting it is to have all your support and advice! Lowspark, I am going to commit your suggested script to memory. It's perfect. However, I have reason to think that I may catch a lucky break and not have to do anything. My closest friend, "Fifi," who, as it goes around here, is sort of organizing all the people who want to help, is working on the Friday night dinner for the out of towners, along with "Kiki," who is hosting it at her house (I know!), and several others. Fifi just told me that AFTER (I checked) I had that conversation with Lulu and Cathy, Cathy sent Fifi an email saying something like "be sure to include us in whatever you're planning for the wedding." The wording wasn't crystal clear, but both Fifi and I got the sense she was speaking for Lulu, too. So that would mean that Fifi and Kiki, who already have 4 others on their "team," would get another 2 pairs of hands and financial contributions for what is really a big job, which I know Fifi appreciates (I hope Kiki does -- Fifi will handle that, bless her). Now, how did I not give "Cathy" a silly name, too? It also means no shower here. I doubt Thing One will care, and they certainly don't need another set of gifts, but FMTO may be disappointed. I doubt she'll be destroyed, though, and in the end she may be glad not to have to plan another trip (I am sure her relatives won't be disappointed not to have to come here twice). If she really, really wants another shower, well -- Thing Two and FMTO's sister both live in Boston, as, I believe, do some of FMTO's friends; maybe they will give her a shower -- I can slip Thing Two some $$ to help. (Yes, they are immediate family, but they are also bridesmaid and MOH, so I suppose that would be okay.) But I am going to keep my big mouth shut about that for now! This certainly is an example of not doing or saying anything until you must -- sometimes the problem changes or even goes away entirely. Glad I didn't say anything to Lulu yet.

Polly, I'm so glad this worked out so well! I bet you'll notice that others in your family and friends will follow your lead and do this too. What you avoided: My four-year-old neice just received 9 (yes, that's nine) new American Girl Dolls including all accessories and furniture bits for her birthday. Of course, that was only part of the gift haul. She's got an older sister and an entire toy room of dolls and furniture and costumes already. My SIL is from a big family and they celebrate all holidays and birthdays with big get-togethers and I think there's a lot of competition as to who buys the most/best. These are NOT families with a ton of money, either. Holy cow. Thank you thank you for being so strong and forging ahead with your idea! You're happy, your son is happy, the charity is happy, and your guests are happy. That's what a party is all about! Good job!

Talley Sue, thank you (and Emily) for that last paragraph. I just sent out an invitation like that -- i.e., to a friend and her permanent SO, at her address (they don't live together). I felt a little funny not sending him his own invitation, as I do know him, but as you said, the only reason I'm inviting him is because he is her SO. Thanks for making me feel "correct"! It felt right, not because I wanted them to know he wouldn't be welcome otherwise, but because I thought it sort of respected their "couple" status more to send them a single invitation. I don't think Miss Manners likes "and guest." She doesn't think it's "incorrect" -- just unwise -- where you really are just asking the invitee to bring a date. But where you know there is a SO, she says you have to find out and using the person's name, not just write "and guest." You know, judging from my recent experiences described above, I think that people seem to think that "and guest" is what you are SUPPOSED to write for a SO who is not a fiance or spouse even if you DO know the person's name. Isn't that scary? I think that would be so rude -- if I were the SO of someone who got such an invitation, I'd think it looked like the hosts didn't care whether he brought someone else instead of me, and maybe even that they were hinting that he should!

>Hebrew lessons are also part of your religious instruction as children, aren't they? So the effort is made to educate the children to understand the worship, rather than adapting the liturgy because the congregation is not as educated as it once was. cc, I hadn't thought about that! Yes, from our youngest days we go to Sunday School to learn traditions and celebrations and Hebrew. At 8 or so, we start attending Hebrew School twice a week to really learn the prayers to be ready for our Bnai Mitzvahs. So yes, we learn it as a living language, and for those kids who were paying attention, there is meaning in those prayers However your second point made me laugh. Believe me, we see the same dumbing down trend in this religion. Even the Conservative synagogue I grew up in is changing the service to make it more understandable. And I guess they have to - esp with the number of interfaith marriages that are in the congregation. Many folks just don't know the religion. But it rankles me (and I'm not even an observant Jew!) Oh that reminds me - there is a new (relatively) type of Jewish service called Humanitarian Judaism. Sounds great - think of the Unitarian principles combined with the traditions of Judaism. Went to a few services, but was disturbed by their total lack of, well, tradition. Lots of changes are made to the prayers. Then we went to one of their monthly Shabbat dinners. As a newbie, I was invited to light the candles. I did so - in the age old way of waving my hands over the flame, and said the prayer in hebrew. Silence. They looked at me like I told them I had just converted. Ok. Last time I went there. Pity, because I really do like the prinicipals they believe in. Translations are a real bugaboo. I remember trying to read Beowulf in HS - the translation was horrible. Then a group was reading it a few years back, with the new translation, and what a difference! Same for the Testaments. If you think about it - first written in Aramaic, translated to Greek, then Latin, then English. Gack, no wonder there's going to be more than a few errors. Then when they try to dumb it all down, it loses its meaning, its poetry, its worth. BTW - did you ever play a translating game? Go to the Google translator, and put in a famous quote from a book (To be or not to be, It was the best of times, the worst of times etc) and chose any language. Then take that translation, put it in again and chose another language. Finaly, take that last translation and choose English again. Oh my. The results are hilarious, and have taught me to be extremely cautious of online translations as well as translations of books in general. It does matter which ones you choose.