Reception Only?

KCBride18 · February 2010

Hi Ladies,

I've tried searching the site for information regarding my topic as to not annoy people with a repeat post, but I'm not finding much.

Here's the deal:

While our venue has more than enough room for the people we are planning to invite to the reception (190), the option we'd like for the ceremony would me cutting the list by quite a bit (120). Is it bad form to invite some guests to the "reception only" and leave them off the ceremony list? I'm guessing that the pit in my stomach about this should tell me the answer is "yes, it's bad form," but I'm looking for suggestions!

Thanks.

jkara525 · February 2010

You are correct, it's bad form.
I would do whatever you can to ensure all your guests can be accomodated for the ceremony. Good luck.

tannymcgee · February 2010

It's not a good idea. You should either cut your guest list to 120, or figure out another ceremony site.

starrbuk13 · February 2010

well call me rude, but i did it. and no one had a problem with it. *let the bashing begin, i suppose! i'm lucky i'm not on P&E!*

we invited about 60 people to our reception, but had our ceremony in my parents' back yard, and they limited us to 30 people, including us & the BP. so i had no choice but to send out "reception only" invites. the way i got around putting "reception only" on the card was to send the main invite with the reception information, and to include a separate card with the ceremony information to those guests invited.

i did have a few people ask me about it, and when i explained that we were having a family-only ceremony due to space constraints, they understood (or at least acted like they did).

if i were you, i'd cut your ceremony list to less than 120. keep it small and it seems less like "you weren't important enough to be included" and more like "private ceremony for family." (and honestly, if anyone is THAT insulted, they need to just get over it!)

ZoeTheDog · February 2010

It's not a bad idea at all! Ever been invited to a reception in NYC but the wedding was actually in Cancun like a month ago? You'd receive a reception-only invite. I know some people are going to yell at me and say, "It's not the same thing." Then think about it this way - what if you were having a very cultural, very ethnic, very LONG ceremony and you didn't want the non-family guests to be forced to sit through it? You'd again send out a reception-only invite. I have even seen some brides who simply wanted their ceremony to be a private affair. Here are some ideas for the reception-only invite...

The pleasure of your company is requested at the wedding reception of
Charlotte Rose and Anthony William
February 13, 2010 at 7pm
Westport, CT

Come join us in an evening of fun to celebrate the marriage of
Charlotte and Anthony
etc…

Mr. and Mrs. Johnson invite you to join in an evening of fun
to celebrate the marriage of Charlotte and Anthony

etc…

Vanessa630 · February 2010

I agree with starbuk- It would seem like bad form if 120 out of 190 people were invited to the ceremony. But, if you can cut it down a lot more so that it's more of an intimate ceremony, I'm sure people will understand.

ZoeTheDog · February 2010

Ok i just googled some more...slow day at work LOL...

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Weddings-1546/Reception-only-invitation-wording.htm

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080310231740AAdCmLS

http://boards.weddingbee.com/topic/reception-only-invitation-wording

http://weddings.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Post_Wedding_Reception_Wording

That last link is ridiculously thorough...good luck!!1

akulaji · February 2010

I don't know what the 'proper' etiquette is, but I think if things are worded well, people shouldn't take offense. I think a quick conversation can also explain the situation easily. You also know your guests and probably can gauge who would be cool with it, and who wouldn't.

If anything, I'd probably create an A and B list, with the first 120 getting sent out invites first. The likelihood with that many people is that you're going to get some people that respond they will not be attending. When you get 'no' responses you can then start sending out full invites to people on the B list. Eventually you'll need a cut off point for doing this and you'll need to send the rest reception only invites, but you may be able to minimize the number of people that get those.

I think the number one thing is being conscious and considerate of your guests and really take into consideration who would be okay with a reception only invite and then take the time to explain to them why it's happening that way. If you're purposefully excluding people from your ceremony yet inviting them to the reception (where they'll most likely bring you a gift) there's no reason why you can't take 5 minutes and explain the situation to them to make sure there's no misunderstanding or hard feelings.

christikao · February 2010

From all the weddings I've been to usually not everyone shows up to the ceremony especially if you are having ceremony off site from reception. It is definitely the best to invites all your guests to the ceremony and reception but I'm sure people will understand if you explain the situation and let them know due to limited space you are only inviting close family and friends to the ceremony.

SillyLGoose · February 2010

What is the situation with the ceremony site? Where and why only 120? Maybe give us some more background about that and we can give you some suggestions so everyone can go if they wanted to.

As a guest, I would feel insulted if I wasn't invited to your ceremony. I think it's gift -grabby to invite me to your reception only. It's a time you want your nearest and dearest with you. If I'm not considered in your top 120 that's fine, but don't make it all better by putting me in your top 190. The ceremony is the reason for the flowers, the music, and the white dress; I feel like this is sometimes forgotten in the hoopla.

tannymcgee · February 2010

i totally agree with Silly -- the ceremony IS THE WEDDING. this is what everyone is (supposedly) there for. the reception i is just a party. i definitely would be a bit insulted if i weren't invited to the ceremony -- i love seeing people exchange vows! that's the whole point!

banana468 · February 2010

You can't compare a post DW reception to the reception that immediately follows the ceremony. They are two totally separate things.

The only way you could compare it is if you had a DW, some people down in Cancun for the reception, but even some of THOSE guests weren't invited to the ceremony.

And FWIW, I'm pretty anti large receptions after a DW. It sort of screams "I wanted to have my cake and eat it too," when you're picking a remote destination that isn't close to ANY of your families.

IF you are going to invite people to just the reception, keep the ceremony VERY intimate - like don't even have a BP or keep the ceremony to under 20 people.

Remember, the ceremony is the REASON for the reception.

And if people don't show to the ceremony, that's also really rude on their part.

starshollow · February 2010

I am going to agree with the people who say this is bad form.

The wedding is the ceremony! The reception is just a fun celebration after. If you just invite people to the reception, you really are not inviting them to the wedding.

I would be insulted if I was not invited to a ceremony and just the reception. Especially if it was in the area and right before the reception, and 120 people were invited to it. I would feel a little different if you did a private ceremony with just immediate family, but I still would be feel weird about that.

To me, this screams of "You are not in our top 120 guests, but come party and give us a gift anyway!"

Reception Only?

Re: Reception Only?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards