To include siblings or not??

It really depends on what you prefer. There are also ways to include people a side from the bridal party such as having them be ushers or having them do a reading during the ceremony or something.

It's not rude.

FH and I have a large amount of siblings. Not all of our brothers and sisters will be in the wedding party.

Instead, we will have them begin the processional, or something like that, since we won't be having a ring bearer or flower girl. Then, the grandparents, the parents, and then the wedding party.

Sometimes, it's hard to include everyone. I think everyone gets this, though, and won't feel slighted.

ETA: I also second the readings and ushers!

Include whomever you are closest to. And don't ask anyone until next February at the earliest.

Personally, I think 5 is already too many.

We are including siblings, even though it put our numbers at more than I would have liked. I think feelings would be hurt if we didn't include them (and I'd feel the same way if they were getting married. I don't think going from 5 to 7 is a huge enough difference to risk hurt feelings and I would honestly just include them.

Double post

It's mot rude and it's not small. Five on each side is already big.

There are plenty of ways to include your siblings, but if you're close to them, I would consider doing ONLY siblings. Your friends won't get bent out of shape if your choice is that logical.

I have six brothers and sisters but am only having one sister in the BP.

Agree with Celia about making the bridal party siblings-only.

@MrsD, I would reconsider that . . . It would create big problems in my family.

How did you decide on just the one? And how do the others feel not being included?

If you don't want family drama I suggest you do siblings only in the wedding party.

Do siblings only, and don't ask your bridal party until January. You have plenty of time to ask your honor attendants and dresses don't have to be ordered for a while.