Post # 1
Ok, so Ive found the perfect venue, minus one small detail… In order to have the ceremony and reception in the same place, they split the room unevenly and have the ceremony set up and the reception partially set up (with a divider) then switch over the whole thing to the reception during cocktail hour.
this means there will be only room for 75 people for the ceremony, but up to 200 for the reception (we probably wont have that many)… our ceremony will be our close friends and family, the additional people at the reception will probably be only our parents’ guests. I saw a very similar question on another board, and the person got bashed for being rude to their guests and not including them in both. So, I dont want to hear that its tacky, I know its not proper, but I just dont have it in my budget to have 2 separate venues, and I LOVE this one. Any help with wording? Do I send out two separate invites, or can I add an insert saying something along the lines of “There is limited seating at the ceremony, please join us for the reception at _o’clock for dinner and dancing”? Thanks in advance!
Post # 3
@kasmal: I don’t see why it’s tacky at all. It would be considered tacky to invite them to the ceremony and then NOT to the reception so as to save money on food/alcohol. But I think it’s pretty common to have a small ceremony and then a bigger reception. I know that’s what my parents did!
Also as to your question, I kind of like the wording of “limited seating” but also I see no reason to even include that. Why not just send out reception invitations? Again, I know my parents did that. However, they got married in a house and then had a reception after with a lot more people. It may be different considering that it’s all in one place, but I still think you would be okay just sending out reception only invites to those people.
Post # 4
I would send two separate invitations, but I don’t think its tacky
Post # 5
Thank you! Thats what I thought too (my mom was the one who suggested it!) but on the other board I found 2 or 3 topics about it and EVERYONE told them how horrible they were… Phew, I feel better, so, best way to include it?
Post # 6
@kasmal: Are you debating if you should send them the actual wedding invitation or not and add an insert saying they aren’t actually invited? lol? I don’t see what you mean by “include” it. If I were you I would send people invited to both an invitation that says they are invited to a wedding ceremony with a reception to follow. for the reception-only people I would just send an invite that says they are “invited to a reception to celebrate the wedding of ____”…. with dinner/dancing etc.
Post # 7
the second part is what I was asking haha, how would I word it? I guess ‘include’ was bad word choice – see why I need help?
Post # 8
this isn’t rude of you; only the other way around is rude! I agree with PP’s that it can easily be handled by sending out two sets of invitations.
Post # 9
A LOT of people send 2 invitations! I vote for that and it’s not tacky at all!!
Post # 10
- Wedding: August 2012 - Historic Lougheed House
If anyone asks just say that the ceremony was an intimate family and close friends only thing.
ANd just make sure your “reception only” invitation is explicit about it being reception only.
Post # 11
Does the divider have to be set up? I’ve seen reception spaces where the tables are set but pushed against the wall, or where guests that don’t fit in rows take seats at tables for the ceremony.
I’m just thinking ahead to the difficulty of having people arrive right at the end of the ceremony. It might be disruptive.