Invite to reception, but not ceremony?

jessidinorawr · June 2013

I was wondering what everyone's opinions were on this. My FI and I were talking about doing a very small ceremony, close friends and family only, and then hosting a larger reception afterward that more people were invited to.

I know that it's extremely rude to invite to the ceremony and not the reception and is gift-grabby and all that, but I wasn't sure what the etiquette was when turned around. We're talking like 50 people at our ceremony in a park, then about 150 at the reception in a separate location afterward. We were hoping that it would be like a celebration of our marriage, but not being required to have a huge wedding when I only want an intimate one. However, I'm concerned that it may come across as "oh, you're not good enough to come to our wedding, but you can come after we're already married to celebrate". I'm also concerned it could come across as "gift-grabby" in this sense, too....so any help would be appreciated ladies.

Kate61487 · June 2013

The concept you're describing is okay, but your numbers are not. A "private, intimate ceremony" would be 15, maybe 20, tops. Inviting a third of the guest list but not the rest is kind of insulting.

manateehugger · June 2013

Yeah, I agree with PP. You really need to draw a line somewhere if you're going to do a "private ceremony" - like immediately family only. 50/150 people off the guest list is totally not ok.

Honestly though, the concept of a private ceremony immediately followed by a large reception kind of annoys me even though it is considered acceptable. The ceremony is my favorite part of the whole day - it's the reason we are all there.

tiny speck · June 2013

50 is not a small ceremony. Our ceremony (and reception) had 27 guests, and I still wouldn't really call that a "private ceremony."

Your ceremony needs to be truly private for this to work. No more than about 15 people, and they should really just be immediate family: parents, siblings, grandparents. Otherwise how would you explain to people that they didn't make the cut as a "close friend"?

STARMOON44 · June 2013

You can have a very small ceremony followed by a big reception, but I don't think 50 counts as small. And you're right to be worried. There's no etiquette rule that prohibits it, but plenty of your guests will be insulted you want them to celebrate you but didn't want them there for the ceremony and will find it gift grabby.

AddieCake · June 2013

50 definitely does not count as small.

crunchymamaof2 · June 2013

50 people is small, but it's def. not intimate or private. If you feel you must do this you need to cut that list down at 20-25 people max.

Can someone explain to me why people choose to do this? I just don't understand inviting people to celebrate the marriage that just happened when they weren't there to witness it. I mean, a reception is a thank you to your guests for attending the ceremony. It just doesn't make sense to me I guess (the only thing I can think of is Mormons who get married in the temple since only certain people can go in the temple. But this doesn't sound like that)

KDM323 · June 2013

As the others have said...in theory this is ok. But 50 people doesn't constitute a small ceremony...if you want to do this, you really need to do a SMALL ceremony and then a larger reception.

Why not just invite all guests to come to the park? Is there a reason behind that?

Maggie0829 · June 2013

drexelkathy said:

As the others have said...in theory this is ok. But 50 people doesn't constitute a small ceremony...if you want to do this, you really need to do a SMALL ceremony and then a larger reception.

Why not just invite all guests to come to the park? Is there a reason behind that?

This. I just don't understand the point of a small ceremony and large reception. Even if it is because you don't like a lot of people looking at you or being the center of attention that is still going to happen at the large reception, so yeah, I just don't get it.

NYCBruin · June 2013

I would be sad to not be invited to the ceremony since it is my favorite part of a wedding. But if less than 20 people were invited, I would understand and respect the couple's decision.

However, I would be really hurt to not make the "top 50" cut.

jessidinorawr · June 2013

My thought there was that FI has a LARGE family, we have 8 total in our WP, he has close to 20 in his immediate family and I have about 10 in mine. Then we were thinking my MOHs family because they've been very close and my second family for forever and then by the time we get in their plus ones where appropriate, it's a zoo! Thanks for the advice, I might expand the ceremony list a bit.

jessidinorawr · June 2013

Oh, and by immediate family, we are including aunts and uncles because I'm very close to mine, my uncle originally was going to walk me down the aisle until my mom threw a fit about it, so yes I want them there.

NYCBruin · June 2013

jessidinorawr said:

My thought there was that FI has a LARGE family, we have 8 total in our WP, he has close to 20 in his immediate family and I have about 10 in mine. Then we were thinking my MOHs family because they've been very close and my second family for forever and then by the time we get in their plus ones where appropriate, it's a zoo! Thanks for the advice, I might expand the ceremony list a bit.

The more you expand your list, the ruder this idea becomes. As I said above, if I wasn't invited to the ceremony with only 15 in attendance, I'd be sad. If I didn't make the cut and there were 50 invited, I'd be really hurt. If I didn't make the cut for an even larger group, I'd be crushed. I would decline the invitation to the reception.

I'm curious, what is your reason for wanting to have the "small" ceremony? Your list for the ceremony is already far larger than what I think most people would consider small/intimate.

bananapants628 · June 2013

NYCBruin said:

jessidinorawr said:

My thought there was that FI has a LARGE family, we have 8 total in our WP, he has close to 20 in his immediate family and I have about 10 in mine. Then we were thinking my MOHs family because they've been very close and my second family for forever and then by the time we get in their plus ones where appropriate, it's a zoo! Thanks for the advice, I might expand the ceremony list a bit.

The more you expand your list, the ruder this idea becomes. As I said above, if I wasn't invited to the ceremony with only 15 in attendance, I'd be sad. If I didn't make the cut and there were 50 invited, I'd be really hurt. If I didn't make the cut for an even larger group, I'd be crushed. I would decline the invitation to the reception.

I'm curious, what is your reason for wanting to have the "small" ceremony? Your list for the ceremony is already far larger than what I think most people would consider small/intimate.

This. The more people you invite to the ceremony, the more not being invited hurts.

radleyboo · June 2013

We had 50 guests at our wedding and reception, total. We called it a 'small' wedding, but it was not private or intimate. To me, 'private' would be bride, groom, JOP/minister, and a couple of witnesses.

On another note, we were 'tiered' this summer to another wedding, and I was pretty insulted. Invite everyone to see you take your vows. You won't incur a lot of extra expense to have them there and they will be excited to witness your moment. At a park, space shouldn't be an issue, just make sure there are enough chairs/seating for each guest.

SewInLoveWithDMB · June 2013

I don't think this is a great idea. Invite everyone to the ceremony who is invited to the reception.

And, I have seen the flip of what you have said, if the ceremony is held in a church. The church is a public place, and I have seen members of the congregation come to the ceremony who are not invited to the reception (especially if the know of the bride and groom from attending church together). Or, for example, a teacher can include students/their parents to see the ceremony, but they aren't expected to host them for the reception. (And I believe this is why the reception card is a separate piece of paper, rather than on the actual invite)

http://www.bridalguide.com/blogs/from-dianes-desk/invite-guests-to-ceremony-only

I found this link - it isn't 100% etiquette legit, but it explains what I'm trying to say. And like the article states, it isn't as if you are sending them a paper invite, just spreading the word.

But, if they get an invite to the reception, they should be invited to the ceremony. The ceremony is the most important part of the entire day.

Jen4948 · June 2013

50 guests is not small enough for your "private ceremony" to be acceptable.

jessidinorawr · June 2013

That was my point in my previous post, that I need to expand my ceremony list to include more people and reduce my reception list so everyone is invited to both. Sorry that wasn't clear, no need to jump down my throat. I also never implied that I thought 50 was private, I don't. Only that several people we are inviting are more out of an obligation to my family and I'd prefer something more personal for my ceremony. It isn't a cost issue as its more expensive to host them at a reception, but I see where you're all coming from.

michellemayawheeler · June 2013

In tradional etiquete, book, you would have seperate lists. So this is not new thing. You can always have someone to record it and show it on fast youtube at have a reception card that you can watch it on youtube.

So you just explain you have limited space.

Viczaesar · June 2013

michellemayawheeler said:

In tradional etiquete, book, you would have seperate lists. So this is not new thing. You can always have someone to record it and show it on fast youtube at have a reception card that you can watch it on youtube.
So you just explain you have limited space.

WTH are you talking about? And the rest of it is terrible advice.

NYCBruin · June 2013

StageManager14 said:

In tradional etiquete, book, you would have seperate lists. So this is not new thing. You can always have someone to record it and show it on fast youtube at have a reception card that you can watch it on youtube.
So you just explain you have limited space.
This middle part appears to use a sentence structure with which I am unfamiliar. What are you suggesting exactly?

I think she's suggesting that they lie to their guests about not having enough space, tape the ceremony on a phone or camera with internet capabilities, immediately post it to youtube, and then show it at the reception. And let the guests who only get invited to the reception know that they'll be able to watch the ceremony they weren't invited to on youtube.

The part that confused me more was the reference to traditional etiquette books saying this is ok and then referencing youtube in the next sentence. I'm fairly certain youtube didn't exist when "traditional" etiquette books were written.

Anyways, thanks for clarifying, OP. Definitely invite people to both. As for the "family obligation" invitations, if you and FI are paying for the wedding yourselves, you can invite or not invite who you chose. Of course that changes if other people are paying.

wittykitty14 · June 2013

I wasn't part of the 33% allowed to attend the ceremony, I would be hurt too. The ceremony is my favorite part.

PPs have already said it, 50 is too large of a number for a smaller ceremony. Since you have 8 people in the WP, I feel like you may have missed the boat on this.

It seems that the main reason you're considering this is because you want your ceremony to be more intimate and personal. Your wedding will be personal to YOU, and that's what matters most. If you're focused on your FI during the ceremony and not the guests, I think it will still feel intimate enough

Invite to reception, but not ceremony?

Re: Invite to reception, but not ceremony?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards