Big ceremony Small reception

You can’t. It’s incredibly rude to invite people to the ceremony but not the reception - the reception is a thankyou to your guests for attending the ceremony. If you can’t afford a big reception, don’t have a big ceremony. One option would be to have a cake and punch reception - these are shorter, not over a mealtime (eg 2pm ceremony, 2:30-5pm reception) and much less expensive.

You don't. Everyone invited to the ceremony must also be invited to the reception and vice versa.

You really can't do this while maintaining etiquette. If someone is invited to the ceremony, you have to invite them to the reception. It would be very clear in the moment if you didn't make the "cut" to go to the party and it would be insulting.

You can't. The reception is a way of thanking your guests for attending your wedding. It would be extremely rude to invite everyone to the ceremony, but not to the reception. You need to have a ceremony and reception that you can afford so I would recommend cutting your guest list.

View Quoted Comment Thank you for the idea kiwiderbybride

Ironically, the guidelines in my state right now are that you can have up to 50 people (I think) for a wedding ceremony, but only 5 for a reception. Not sure how that works especially since groups are moving to 50 on 6/17, but it is what it is. I only say this to say that if you're getting married soon, maaaaaaybe you can do this and blame Covid if you have something in your state.

Other than that, no, you can't do this. It's very rude.

As pp said if you do a cake and punch reception attending the ceremony then that's really not much and then maybe after that you can invite specific people out to dinner together with you or something

Agree with the PPs, you can't invite people to the ceremony but not the reception. I can't think of anything ruder

There are situations in which people are invited to the wedding and not the reception, but those tend to be specific and uncommon. For example, I know of teachers who invited their students to the wedding ceremony, but obviously all those kids and their parents didn't go to the reception. Or there may be situations in which a couple belongs to a church and the entire congregation attends the religious wedding ceremony but only invited guests go to a smaller reception after.

I come from a small family, so it is really difficult for me to imagine having 20, 40, 50, 100 relatives that I am super close to and would feel I want or need to have at my wedding. I personally don't understand the need to invite every living soul you share a bloodline with. I would say just invite those people important to you to both the wedding AND reception.

If your wedding is fairly soon, Covid-19 restrictions may even work in your favor. "Zoom" weddings are becoming the norm now as a way to include people who cannot attend in person due to gathering size limits, travel restrictions, and safety concerns. So you may be able to limit your wedding and reception to a smaller group and then have your other family members attend via Zoom without them feeling left out.

I don’t think it is rude at all. If you’re happy and it what you want to do you should do it! I have gone to a 500 person wedding ceremony that had a 50 person wedding reception! The bride and groom had desserts after the ceremony and mingled with guests before heading off. Currently thinking about doing the same for my wedding

Everyone invited to the ceremony must also be invited to the reception. There is no way around that. Don’t invite more people than you are willing to host at both ceremony and reception. It is a major faux pas to do what you are planning, and even if your guests don’t say anything to you (polite guests never do) they will be offended and angry.

View Quoted Comment

This isn't an opinion thing. It's factually rude to invite people to a ceremony but not the reception.

View Quoted Comment You made me feel better thanks. I mean it’s my wedding. I can do what I want