No reception, but want a cocktail Party

Giselle, you're wrong. Anyone invited to the ceremony should also be invited to the dinner afterwards. A "ceremony only" invite is rude. If you only want to take 20 people to dinner, then only 20 people should be invited to the ceremony. That's how it works.

You're talking about a tiered event, which... just no.

I second MrsRushin2008 that hors d'oeuvres cost more. I am having a cocktail style reception with 6 stations of small bites, which is enough food for a full meal, and it is over double what a plated meal would cost.

I surmised from your OP that you wanted to be told that people could meet you out for a few hours of cocktails and pay for themselves. No one will tell you to do that here because it's a terrible idea. You should go with your second idea and have an intimate dinner with your nearest and dearest. BTW you will most certainly have to pay for that including alcohol.

ETA: Holy crap! This takes the cake as the most selfish thing I have read posted here! You can't invite people only to your ceremony and exclude them from the reception. Why would you care about these people attending your wedding since you obviously think so little of them to not even provide cake and punch?

The only time a ceremony-only invite is acceptable is when you literally only have a ceremony and no dinner, party, or any type of reception afterwards. You cannot invite people to the ceremony only and not the dinner/reception/etc. afterwards. Anyone at the ceremony goes to the dinner or reception, even if it's "non-traditional." There's no way around this.

It is extremely rude to invite people to your ceremony and not your reception. It's like saying "hey I want you to watch me get married and give me a gift but I don't want to pay to feed you".

Do you really expect people to get all dressed up & drive out there with a gift & watch a 15 min ceremony then go right home? If you don't want to pay to host people don't invite them at all.

Yeah.. If they're attending your ceremony, they better be invited to your cocktail recepton or dinner, that you are paying for.

I can't imagine saying, "Please come sit through this boring ceremony that 90 percent of people don't care about, bring a gift, and then leave because you aren't important enough to be VIP." That's what you're doing.

So what do you think the difference between a cocktail party and reception would be? What are you trying to avoid having to do?

Most venues now offer a cocktail hour package. No sir down dinner. Just 4 hours of on going cocktails and speciality stations. Sometimes it's a little more money then a sit down......and 100% you pay for this.

Honestly I think a lot of you are being pretty harsh. I asked for tips not bashing.

I do care about my guest. And I never said I wouldn't pay, I just asked how it works since I never have planned an event let alone a wedding. Maybe not everyone has experience in this.

I came here to ask for help and for suggestions, not for attitude. I am trying to see what options are available without having to do the traditional reception. That was all.

I didn't want to deal with flowers and decoration and all that. Not for cost wise but because i don't want the traditional wedding venue idea. But it seems like what I have in mind sounds like a sin.

You're more than welcome to have whatever wedding you want, as long as your guests are taken care of. It's so rude to invite people to a ceremony but not the reception, and it's baffling to me that you don't understand that.

I think everyone is just saying that if you are hosting, you need to pay. And also, if you invite them to the ceremony, you need to also invite them to the after dinner or whatever you decide to do. How would you feel if someone invited to the dinner talks to someone who wasn't invited to the dinner? Eeeek. I'd be upset.

The way it works is that whoever you invite to the ceremony you invite to the reception.... it's called hosting your wedding properly. What ure saying isn't a sin, what you wanna do isn't right and ppl will get mad. You don't want to be remembered as THAT bride. Why don't you just host a cake and punch reception so that it's something you can afford without hurting people's feelings??

It kind of IS a sin, in terms of etiquette. Not skipping flowers or whatever; that's fine. But the point of a reception is to thank your guests for coming to the wedding. If you only offer the thank you to some people, it's rude to others and their feelings will be hurt. It's akin to only speaking to every third person in your receiving line.

There's nothing wrong with an intimate ceremony. We are having 28 people invited to our wedding ceremony, and all of those people will be equally invited to join us for dinner at a restaurant afterwards.

If you want a larger ceremony, then you need to offer hospitality to all those who attend. If you want to keep things small and simple, you could just do cake and punch for everyone in the church hall or a rented room of a VFW or whatever. That's very cost effective and will be over in a couple of hours. Then you can have a dinner party with your nearest and dearest after you get back from honeymoon or something, so you still get that intimate meal and you'll have honeymoon pictures to share as well.

You were given multiple suggestions though. It sounds like an intimate ceremony would be best since you are wanting an intimate dinner afterwards. You could also have a cake and punch reception, that way you don't need a full meal. Just make sure it's not at dinnertime.

A way to add this to your budget would be to serve a meal, buffet style, with a casual feel. Kind of like a BBQ or picnic feel. You certainly must feed them at the very least, cake. If you still want gifts but care none about who shows up, have a destination wedding. Some will still send a gift and you can roll your wedding up with your honeymoon plus places like Sandals give you the wedding free with a certain # of nights. I think it would be extremely selfish not to have something for the guests though. And the other posts telling you that horderves are more expensive are spot on. You pay for the caterers time. It takes a lot more time to make individual pieces than it does to make lots of food to dish out. Congratulations on your day.

You seem to be missing the point. It's not about having to have flowers & other wedding traditions it is about providing food and alcohol for everyone after the ceremony. You said you wanted a cocktail reception then when everyone said you had to pay for it you switched to only wanting your immediate family for a dinner.

You can't have it both ways with a large ceremony & small reception. It's just rude.

What you want: To have a lot of people at the ceremony but not host them afterward.

What you can't have: To have a lot of people at the ceremony but not host them afterward.

A reception doesn't have to have decorations or flowers so don't get hung up on the wrong things. It's rude to invite people to your ceremony and only some to the reception. Justifying it with, well if they want to share in our special day it won't matter. It makes you look gift grabby and selfish.

Giselle you don't have to have a reception or an intimate dinner if you don't like planning it. People elope and don't have receptions. People get married with a few people and go to a restaurant and eat and go home. If you don't want to plan a reception don't do it. Just don't invite a lot of people and you'll be ok.