Post # 1
Hi, bees! I am torn. I want to have a more private wedding, say 50 people and under. To me the wedding is an intimate thing, and I don’t want it to be a big gawk fest for me to show off (that’s the reception 😉 ). So tell me, am I wrong to invite only family and close friends to the ceremony and then invite the others to the reception? Or is that too rude?
Post # 3
It is not rude to have a small intimate ceremony then a larger reception. You can just explain that the ceremony venue is small and intimate and you are not able to accomodate everyone you would like to witness your vows.
Post # 4
@MariahLynn: that’s what we did. We had 37 people total at our ceremony including ourselves and our pastor. Our reception had 76 people. We just let the people only invited to the reception know that the ceremony was private -only family.
Post # 5
It’s exactly what we are doing. We even addressed it on the invitations. The invitations are technically invites to the reception and where the reception info would be it reads, “A private ceremony immediately precedes reception”. Those noted to the ceremony receive a separate enclosure card with the ceremony information.
Post # 6
I’ve seen that a LOT, especially around here! But I think there are some UK Bees that tell us that’s the norm there!
Post # 7
- Wedding: October 2011 - Bed & Breakfast
I don’t think that it is inherently rude, but I do think that it takes extra delicate diplomacy in order to implement. I think this works best if the ceremony is for immediate family only. Once you start getting into extended family, or choosing some friends, but not others, you run the high risk of slighting people.
Post # 8
I don’t think its rude at all! The other way around is rude (ceremony invite but no reception invite). I would just say we’re having a small family only ceremony.
Post # 9
Honestly, I have a friend that is doing this and I feel rather slighted. If she wants me to come celebrate the wedding, I am a little put out that I am not welcome there to actually witness the wedding. I know it gets done, but for me, I’d rather be invited to all or nothing.
Post # 10
@lovekiss: That makes sense. And the only people there are immediate family and my best friend is my maid of honor. Another thing is, it may end up being a destination wedding. I’m not sure if that helps people not feel as slighted or if it just feels weird to hold a reception at all now.
Post # 11
@MariahLynn: Many people choose to have a destination wedding and then host a local reception when they get home. That would not be weird at all.
Post # 12
The general “rule” about this is that a smaller ceremony is fine as long as it’s MUCH smaller, say 10%-ish. So if you have 100 people at the reception, have 10 people at the ceremony. That’s private. Don’t have 35 people at the ceremony and 70 at the reception – that’s rude. It’s not private at all to have HALF the guests at the ceremony and not the other half. It would make me wonder why if I was a guest who didn’t get invited to the ceremony.
Post # 13
We are doing this as well. I dont think it is rude and i think most people understand!