How to feel about a small ceremony but larger reception?

Knottie49671531 · January 2015

My fiance and I have agreed that it'd be nice to have an intimate ceremony with just how immediate family and our best friends there. But we do want to have a reception with the rest of our family and friends there. Has anyone ever done this before? Do you think that people would still come? Our wedding is on Halloween by the way.

Maggie0829 · January 2015

Although etiquette correct, I really do not like this idea. The whole point of the reception is to thank your guests for coming to your ceremony. I also feel like these guests are good enough to come to your reception and possibly bring you a gift, but not good enough to witness the actual thing that they are congratulating you for/celebrating? It just doesn't make sense to me. It also doesn't make sense as to why you want an intimate ceremony but then are okay celebrating it with a ton of other people? I guess it just doesn't compute in my brain.

But like I said, this plan is okay according to etiquette but it just doesn't sit right with me.

Jen4948 · January 2015

I don't care for the idea. Why do you want to celebrate with all these people you don't want to invite to the ceremony?

levioosa · January 2015

I would just invite everyone to the ceremony. You are asking people to celebrate with you, and the reception is a thank you to your guests for witnessing the ceremony. Therefore having a small ceremony and big reception doesn't really make sense, although it is technically within etiquette to do so.

fwtx5815 · January 2015

Also, the reception is the most expensive part of the wedding planning for most couples. It isn't really going to save you money, if that's playing any part in your desire for small ceremony/big reception.

I agree with PPs, it just doesn't really make much sense. And if you were to go this route, Only about 10-20% of your reception guests should be at the ceremony for it to be considered "intimate" or "private." If you have 50 ceremony guests and 100 reception guests, that would be a bit rude. People that attended the ceremony would likely be gushing about it at the reception, and those who weren't invited would be put off.

runsonveggies · January 2015

I think a lot of people wouldn't bother showing up to the reception if they weren't invited to the ceremony, personally I wouldn't. My fiance was invited to the wedding reception of own of his best friends and didn't go because it was a mormon wedding so he couldn't go to the ceremony.

ShesSoCold · January 2015

I agree with PPs. Technically it's okay, but I don't like it. I honestly don't understand why it's etiquette-approved - it's essentially tiered. I'd think it's very probable that a close friend or cousin or someone would learn another friend was invited to the ceremony and feel slighted that they weren't. It might be etiquette-approved, but I think it's rude. I also think Halloween is a bad idea, bit I'll leave that one alone.

MGP · January 2015

It comes across as trashy and trying to be exclusive to me. Like you start "your special day" with your "inner circle" and share your "intimate ceremony" with your nearest and dearest. And then everyone else who should feel "lucky and honored" to be invited to something gets to come to the reception which is probably not well hosted so you can end your night being "surrounded by a bunch of people reveling in your wedded bliss". It just sounds cliche and something you would see on TV.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Saying your wedding vows is not an intimate act. You are not having sex, giving birth, or going to the bathroom in front of an audience. Unless you have an actual diagnosed social anxiety disorder (which I would then respect your decision) it is a really, really bad idea. Someone is bound to get hurt or offended.

lovegood90 · January 2015

MGP said:
It comes across as trashy and trying to be exclusive to me. Like you start "your special day" with your "inner circle" and share your "intimate ceremony" with your nearest and dearest. And then everyone else who should feel "lucky and honored" to be invited to something gets to come to the reception which is probably not well hosted so you can end your night being "surrounded by a bunch of people reveling in your wedded bliss". It just sounds cliche and something you would see on TV.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Saying your wedding vows is not an intimate act. You are not having sex, giving birth, or going to the bathroom in front of an audience. Unless you have an actual diagnosed social anxiety disorder (which I would then respect your decision) it is a really, really bad idea. Someone is bound to get hurt or offended.

Agree with all this. If someone is that concerned about havinh vows being "oh so intimate," just elope.

MGP · January 2015

lovegood90 said:

It comes across as trashy and trying to be exclusive to me. Like you start "your special day" with your "inner circle" and share your "intimate ceremony" with your nearest and dearest. And then everyone else who should feel "lucky and honored" to be invited to something gets to come to the reception which is probably not well hosted so you can end your night being "surrounded by a bunch of people reveling in your wedded bliss". It just sounds cliche and something you would see on TV.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Saying your wedding vows is not an intimate act. You are not having sex, giving birth, or going to the bathroom in front of an audience. Unless you have an actual diagnosed social anxiety disorder (which I would then respect your decision) it is a really, really bad idea. Someone is bound to get hurt or offended.
Agree with all this. If someone is that concerned about havinh vows being "oh so intimate," just elope.

Yeah but then you don't get your other opportunities for attention like engagement parties, bridal showers, bachelorette parties, or rehearsal dinners. Seriously that is the litmus test in all of this. If someone is ok with foregoing those things I wouldn't have a problem with their decision. But If they still want those things - that is the ultimate indication of an attention whore.

Viczaesar · January 2015

I actually disagree with a lot of the PPs in that I don't think it's etiquette approved. What is etiquette approved (but still not a very popular idea) is having a truly private wedding with only immediate family members. When you start adding extended family and friends it becomes a problem. It's also a bizarre trend and you're likely to offend some of your guests.

MobKaz · January 2015

Knottie49671531 said:

My fiance and I have agreed that it'd be nice to have an intimate ceremony with just how immediate family and our best friends there. But we do want to have a reception with the rest of our family and friends there. Has anyone ever done this before? Do you think that people would still come? Our wedding is on Halloween by the way.

I agree with @Viczaesar. Including a FEW immediate family members I might be able to understand. But once you include friends into that intimate ceremony, it smacks more of a tiered reception. I do not understand this trend, nor do I find it very etiquette appropriate or even nice.

MandyMost · January 2015

I really valued the intimate time with my immediate family and closest friends, so we made sure to put some effort into the rehearsal dinner. It was a really nice event. Everyone got to talk, lots of toasts. I felt warm and fuzzy. :-) I also spent a lot of effort planning the pre-wedding stuff that day. I had breakfast with just my mom an aunt, then got ready with all my girls over plenty of time with food (i.e. it wasn't rushed). I took a limo to a first-look location that included just my immediate family/friends (8 people plus photographer in a 10-person limo). I really valued the time.

But then I had the ceremony in front of everyone (150 people) and reception. It was great. There are lots of ways to spend intimate time with your closest people while still not snubbing anyone for the actual wedding!

PrettyGirlLost · January 2015

MandyMost said:

I really valued the intimate time with my immediate family and closest friends, so we made sure to put some effort into the rehearsal dinner. It was a really nice event. Everyone got to talk, lots of toasts. I felt warm and fuzzy. :-) I also spent a lot of effort planning the pre-wedding stuff that day. I had breakfast with just my mom an aunt, then got ready with all my girls over plenty of time with food (i.e. it wasn't rushed). I took a limo to a first-look location that included just my immediate family/friends (8 people plus photographer in a 10-person limo). I really valued the time.

But then I had the ceremony in front of everyone (150 people) and reception. It was great. There are lots of ways to spend intimate time with your closest people while still not snubbing anyone for the actual wedding!

This is a great post.

I agree with PP's. I think this trend of having tiered weddings- because that's what they are- sucks, frankly. Either have a truly small and intimate wedding AND reception- immediate family and grandparents only, no wedding party- or invite everyone to the ceremony and reception.

I can empathize with people who have legit social anxiety issues, but I still don't think having a small wedding followed by a larger reception will would help those people. The Bride and Groom are still very much the center of attention at the reception, and you will be pulled in 500 different directions at all times. It's not like you can sneak off and be alone at the reception, and that would actually be rude as you are the hosts.

mrssursely · January 2015

I had a friend who did this. They had an intimate ceremony with just immediate family and then had maybe 30-40 people for a reception. The reception was simply dinner at a restaurant in a banquet room, cake, and toasts. I didn't feel snubbed at all that I was only invited to the reception as none of their other friends were.

JennyColada · January 2015

We had a very intimate ceremony (4 guests) and a very intimate reception (5 guests, since our photog became a "guest" at our reception).

We would have never budged for a larger ceremony. The idea of saying vows to my husband is super intimate to me, and doing that in front a large group of people just makes me feel...naked.

Part of me would have liked to have had a larger reception (how often do you get to party and celebrate your relationship with people?!), but it was simply too cost-prohibitive to have done this with the style of reception that we wanted.

So, I can understand why people would want to have an intimate ceremony and why people would want to have a larger reception. But "intimate" is the key word here. That's not 100 people at ceremony and 150 at reception.

JoanE2012 · January 2015

Knottie49671531 said:

My fiance and I have agreed that it'd be nice to have an intimate ceremony with just how immediate family and our best friends there. But we do want to have a reception with the rest of our family and friends there. Has anyone ever done this before? Do you think that people would still come? Our wedding is on Halloween by the way.

Yeah, I agree w/ PPs, I just don't get it. If I'm going to a wedding, I want to witness the ceremony. So no, I probably wouldn't come.

[Deleted User] · January 2015

I do know a couple that did that. The venue they had their hearts set on what an old castle in area. Even though it's a castle, it's very very small and in a public park. You can't set up chairs or anything. And because the building has no roof, had they need to relocate the cermony due to the weather, it was easier with a small group. So they had a private ceremony with just parents, siblings & I think grandparents, it was less then 12 people. Then everyone else was invited to the reception. There is no way that they could have properly hosted their 80+ guests at the ceremony location. The guests that I knew who went were fine with it because they all work jobs that require them to work on the weekends so they would have missed the ceremony anyways.

AnnoymouseBride124 · March 2015

I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

JCbride2015 · March 2015

EcktoberWedding said:I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

This is horrifically rude. What you're doing is much worse than what OP wants to do. You are only feeding your "close friends and family" and then the other less speshul people can show up later after everyone is done eating? How do you think they will feel when they realize they weren't close enough to be invited to dinner? But still close enough to show up and dance (at much lower cost to you) and presumably buy you a gift and lavish attention on you?

Ugh. I'm actually gagging as I read this.

Maggie0829 · March 2015

EcktoberWedding said:
I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

PrettyGirlLost · March 2015

JCbride2015 said:
EcktoberWedding said:
I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

This is horrifically rude. What you're doing is much worse than what OP wants to do. You are only feeding your "close friends and family" and then the other less speshul people can show up later after everyone is done eating? How do you think they will feel when they realize they weren't close enough to be invited to dinner? But still close enough to show up and dance (at much lower cost to you) and presumably buy you a gift and lavish attention on you?

Ugh. I'm actually gagging as I read this.

Oh hell, no. I'd never buy a couple a gift if I wasn't invited to their actual ceremony yet was invited to a tiered reception as a general admission guest.

Lemme guess, EcktoberWedding- you aren't hosting a bar or any type of food beyong cake for these 300 people, are you?

levioosa · March 2015

EcktoberWedding said:
I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

Nope nope nope. You host everyone, or no one. There is no in between where you get to have your cake and eat it too. Out of curiosity, are you inviting everyone to the ceremony? What are they supposed to do while you take the special people out to eat? Wander around aimlessly knowing they weren't important enough to host, but important enough to attempt a gift grab from? So so sooo rude.

KatWAG · March 2015

@ecktoberwedding this is a horribly rude idea. Please reconsider.

What happens when guests start to show up but you aren't done with dinner? Do you make them wait in the hall? And then once they do arrive, they have to sit through all the boring stuff. Will there even be chairs for everyone?

KatWAG · March 2015

And this just screams gift grab!

Dreamergirl8812 · March 2015

EcktoberWedding said:
I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

So you're saving all the AW stuff so your second tiered guests can watch? Tacky as shit.

ETA: So, your "intimate" ceremony includes a 22-person wedding party? And, are your second tiered guests going to watch just one "first dance?" Or both?

artbyallie · March 2015

Erikan73 said:
I do know a couple that did that. The venue they had their hearts set on what an old castle in area. Even though it's a castle, it's very very small and in a public park. You can't set up chairs or anything. And because the building has no roof, had they need to relocate the cermony due to the weather, it was easier with a small group. So they had a private ceremony with just parents, siblings & I think grandparents, it was less then 12 people. Then everyone else was invited to the reception. There is no way that they could have properly hosted their 80+ guests at the ceremony location. The guests that I knew who went were fine with it because they all work jobs that require them to work on the weekends so they would have missed the ceremony anyways.

Wait, so they had no chairs at the ceremony? Even with only 12 people or less, that's extremely rude. Don't fucking have a wedding somewhere you can't provide chairs!!! If that was what their 'heart was set on' they needed to elope there with a photographer and officiant and not invite any guests to be inconvenienced and possibly pained by standing.

redoryx · March 2015

Dreamergirl8812 said:

I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

So you're saving all the AW stuff so your second tiered guests can watch? Tacky as shit.

ETA: So, your "intimate" ceremony includes a 22-person wedding party? And, are your second tiered guests going to watch just one "first dance?" Or both?

Oh god, I thought you were exaggerating but I looked and nope, you weren't.

ohannabelle · March 2015

I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

Well, this probably answers the question I just asked on Budget Weddings, about why the wedding party was leaving at 3:30 for the reception, but the guests weren't leaving till 4:30. I hope I'm wrong.

You think it's fine?

You think it's fine to separate your guests into two groups- People we really like, and Those who don't matter as much?

Wow. So your B list guests are just left standing around embarrassed and watching the "in crowd" go off to dinner, knowing they didn't make the cut?

And then what? Do they stand outside the reception venue and watch through the windows to make sure the people you really like have finished their dinner?

It isn't just rude, it's heinously rude to divide your guests like this. Incredibly insensitive and unkind.

And you think it's fine? You're wrong. If you want to have a private dinner for really close friends and family, do it another time. Not under the noses of your other guests. I can't even wrap my brain around this kind of rudeness.

flbride2015 · March 2015

ohannabelle said:
I think it is fine! We are having a dinner for close friends and family then having a huge (300+ person) party for the reception. We wanted to have everyone be a part of the party. We are saving the announcements, first dances, cake cutting, etc for when everyone gets there.

Well, this probably answers the question I just asked on Budget Weddings, about why the wedding party was leaving at 3:30 for the reception, but the guests weren't leaving till 4:30. I hope I'm wrong.

You think it's fine?

You think it's fine to separate your guests into two groups- People we really like, and Those who don't matter as much?

Wow. So your B list guests are just left standing around embarrassed and watching the "in crowd" go off to dinner, knowing they didn't make the cut?

And then what? Do they stand outside the reception venue and watch through the windows to make sure the people you really like have finished their dinner?

It isn't just rude, it's heinously rude to divide your guests like this. Incredibly insensitive and unkind.

And you think it's fine? You're wrong. If you want to have a private dinner for really close friends and family, do it another time. Not under the noses of your other guests. I can't even wrap my brain around this kind of rudeness.

I'm confused about the entire thing. She's posted about buffet stations and hot dogs and cracker jacks for 200 people, but the party is 300 people, but only some people are being fed dinner? Huh?

AddieCake · March 2015

That is very fucked up, Ecktober. I don't like you.

How to feel about a small ceremony but larger reception?

Re: How to feel about a small ceremony but larger reception?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards