Thank you for the edits. &nbsp;<br /><br />I just finsihed reading the first one<br /><br />I had a few questions- throughout the paper should I use "cultural loss" instead of identity loss - &nbsp;I think this may deal wiht the issues more directly, identity seems somewhat vague<br /><br />Body paragraph one- yes the qoutation was a note to myself ...as i wanted to draw out this implication that the fact the synagouges were ornately built implies succes and or wealth ( the textbook does not mention wealth but it is a reasonable inference)<br /><br />Body paragraph 3- Should the word "cantors' be placed in commas surrounding it instead of the parentheses I placed.....also does "learned rabbis' sound like a better word choice than "traditional rabbis" to drive home the point about religous education being an issue<br /><br />Body paragraph 4- &nbsp;Are who the opponents are clear enough to the reader, &nbsp;These opponenets were Jews and I think it is implied by the use of "internal challenege". &nbsp;Theer were bascially two sides Jews for and Jews against Sunday school<br /><br />Body paragraph 5- I confused the issue after reading the text again- Mark Levy actually granted a religous divorce here NOT a legal one....all he did was grant a divorce on religous grounds and left it to the legal system to grant the legal divorce...( It is unclear as to the exact position of Mark Levy.....he is referred to as Mr. Levy in the text, not "rabbi' or "reverend". ....although it does seem as though Levy did teach "when called upon"...and "lectures in the good old fashion perhaps every Sunday" which implies some teaching position in the synagouge....I can upload a picture of the relevant text if that helps)<br /><br />Can you take another look a Para 5 &nbsp;in light of this....maybe i shoiuld subsitiute "religious authority" isntead of &nbsp;"legal authority" since that seems to be the issue here<br /><br />Thanks so much!