Dei'ah veDibur - Information & Insight
  

A Window into the Chareidi World

25 Sivan 5762 - June 5, 2002 | Mordecai Plaut, director Published Weekly
NEWS

OPINION
& COMMENT

OBSERVATIONS

HOME
& FAMILY

IN-DEPTH
FEATURES

VAAD HORABBONIM HAOLAMI LEINYONEI GIYUR

TOPICS IN THE NEWS

HOMEPAGE

 

Produced and housed by
Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Shema Yisrael Torah Network

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Home and Family
More on Weddings

Dear Editor,

You recently wrote about the problem of not having sufficient money to enable a shidduch to be concluded.

About 25 years ago, I had the same problem with the shidduch of one of my children. The total sum from the two sides was not enough. We took our problem to Maran Harav Shach ztvk'l.

He advised us to go ahead and take a mortgage to cover the balance that was lacking, dividing the payments three ways, with the couple being the third partner. Boruch Hashem, we all gladly accepted this very sound advice.

E.W.

More Wedding Jitters

by L. Kohn

After reading Rosally Saltzman's article, "Wedding Jitters" [Parshas Behaaloscha] and the editor's request for other readers' comments, I felt that readers might be interested in a scheme which they have in Gateshead nowadays. Not in the `Old Country,' not in `Jerusalem of yore,' but nowadays, once a week or more.

It all began some twenty years ago when there was one caterer in Gateshead. The local doctor, who was really the epitome of a typical country doctor with old- fashioned ideas on many subjects, spoke to one woman and suggested that with her organizational skills and with another woman's culinary skills, they would make an ideal team to start a chasuna gemach. At that time, there were no more than a dozen girls of marriageable age in the community and the two women decided to give it a try.

The idea was to set up an organization which would not be a gemach as such, because people would be expected to pay for the whole COST of the wedding. But as they were only going to pay for the net costs, and not for labor or profit, it would be a fraction of the price of a normal wedding. As people knew they were not being given charity and were not objects of charity, the idea was greeted with great enthusiasm.

They approached several other women, amongst them the mother of the next girl to get married, to join the committee. A menu was fixed, and cooked by quite a few of the `committee.' With the help of girls from the seminary (and who has not heard of Gateshead Sem.?) to set the tables, and professional waiters to serve the food at night, these women catered their first wedding. It was a far cry from a professional affair, but the ladies nevertheless decided to continue. I do not think that anyone remembers that wedding as the fiasco it was, except perhaps the mother of the bride, and some of the women who helped prepare for it.

As the years went by and the ladies gained experience, the whole service became streamlined. The hosts paid for the food, for the hire of the hall, and for the waiters, and people from out of town did not know that it was being catered by `amateurs.' If by chance they found out, they exclaimed, "But it was like a professionally catered wedding." By this time, the local community had grown and there were many more weddings a year. The committee had shrunk to the original two women, although many women in the community came, and still come, to help with preparation of the food and the strenuous work involved on the actual day. One of the women is in charge of the Sem. girls when they set the tables.

One grateful client paid a lump sum over and above the cost of the food, which enabled the `ladies' (a name given to them by the community) to replace the china and cutlery. The ladies then began to levy a small charge which the hosts paid willingly, to enable them to buy items for the service, as they were needed. Now they were faced with a dilemma and although the two women were good friends and had a great regard for each other, they disagreed.

Should the hosts be entitled to invite as many guests as they wished, or should the number be limited? After all, they now had enough dishes to cater for several hundred guests. If the hosts had taken a caterer, they would have had to pay a certain amount per guest. But in the circumstances, the more guests who were invited, the less was the cost involved per head. On the other hand, the whole thing had been set up to save people money, so why splash out on feeding all and sundry?

Nowadays, when people have large families, the extended family is often quite numerous. One very prominent personality in London, who has many social and family commitments, explained to all those who might have expected an invitation to his oldest girl's wedding, that he could not afford to pay the caterer for more than 100 guests, and please would they share his simcha by coming to the chuppa. In Gateshead, when the host only has to pay for the actual food, why should he not invite 400 guests or more? The dispute was resolved by the sagacious Rov of the community who suggested that the number of guests be limited to 300.

One important point I wish to mention. I cannot imagine that this service would have survived without the constant support of one of the local institutions. The Yeshiva gave permission for their premises to be used to prepare all the food. The Seminary allowed a certain number of girls who wished to help to take the whole afternoon off [to cook in the yeshiva kitchen? we ask]. Without the help of willing girls, the `ladies' would have had to hire outside help which would have raised the expenses considerably.

After the wedding, the food is taken to the house of one of the `ladies' who divides it into bags of ten or twelve portions. Very often, the hosts ask for some of the salads to be taken to one of the local small institutions or they collect the food the next day and share it among relatives. It definitely helps them with sheva brochos and family meals for a while.

A gemach like this is only possible in this day and age in a small town [or a close-knit homogeneous community, like a chassidic circle]. In Jerusalem, where there are so many different `stripes' and accepted hechsherim, it would be almost impossible. Gateshead has one Rov and only one shechita. Other towns in England have adopted the idea to a certain extent. There is a caterer in Manchester, for instance, who provides a basic no- frills service for a minimum fee. The initiators of the Gateshead scheme have been replaced by younger women who run the service with love and dedication. They now cater about forty weddings a year, for every girl who gets married in the community. May they be blessed for their dedication and selfless service to the public.

[More to be said on the subject. Also waiting for readership feedback.]

 

All material on this site is copyrighted and its use is restricted.
Click here for conditions of use.