(Closed) Small ceremony for 50 on friday night, and the big reception for 300 saturday?

posted 10 years ago in Beehive
Post # 3
245 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: June 2008

i think your guests will want to party & celebrate with you whether or not there is a ceremony they attend. you can display a big pic or video of the ceremony at some point so anyone interested can see but it wont be as much pressure for you during your actual ceremony.

Post # 4
311 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: October 2008

I think that can work.  You could also consider having the ceremony Saturday morning so people don’t have to drive twice – you could just provide a list of some activities to do in between.  I think the video of the ceremony at the reception would be a great idea.  I know my cousin had a small ceremony followed by a big reception and a few family members were hurt that they were not invited to witness the ceremony.  I think giving them some way to share the experience, even if it isn’t in person, is nice.

Post # 5
296 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: March 2008

From what I’ve read of etiquet, it’s perfectly acceptable to have a small ceremony and a large reception. It’s only considered tacky to do it the other way around (invite people to the ceremony and not the reception). I think it sounds like a wonderful idea for you guys and I don’t think the drive is too much. If people don’t want to do it they can always get a hotel in between. Maybe offering some hotel options as well as things to do in the area would help. I think the video is a great idea! Any one with a mac (I’m not familiar with the PC software but I’m sure there are some) could easily throw together a video in the time given. Good luck!!!

Post # 6
1 posts

I think that it is fine that you are having a small ceremony and then a large reception.

My ceremony will have about 30 people with a reception of about 200 – they will be a week apart, but I think it works out best this way. Personally I’m not a fan of sitting through LONG ceremonies (which is why mine will be short! If I can’t sit through a long one I won’t be able to stand through a long one!) and I’m sure I’m not the only one!

Post # 7
1718 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: June 2008 - Winery in the Gold Country

I think this is done quite often and would be a lovely way to include everyone in the celebration of your marraige, while keeping your ceremony very intimate and to yourselves and your family.  I think very few (if any) people would be offended.  This is often done for many reasons, among the top being religion.  I’ve attended several Mormon receptions, but was not invited to their church ceremony. 

Good luck! 



Post # 8
471 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: September 2008

This is absolutely acceptable; it wouldn’t be, however, (as I have been told) if it were the other way around in which you would invite everyone to the ceremony and not to the reception.

Party hard!

Post # 9
10 posts
  • Wedding: January 2008

I don’t really even think it’s that big of a deal to do it the other way around, honestly.  I think about every wedding I ever attended growing up included a ceremony to which anyone in the church was invited plus cake and punch in the basement.  Then a smaller group of closer friends and family would be invited to a reception after that – maybe because they were going to serve alcohol, who knows.  Maybe Kansas is weird, but that’s how things always went. Or, maybe it’s less unacceptable if it’s done as two receptions.

The topic ‘Small ceremony for 50 on friday night, and the big reception for 300 saturday?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors