"Immediate family" only at wedding with large reception...?

[ktgrok]

Personally I'd rather witness the exchange of vows than attend a party, so I understand your view.

 

Do you know the other side of the family? The spouse's side? Are there issues there? I ask because a lot of how our wedding was arranged had to do with family issues. I did not want my father walking me down the aisle so we skipped an aisle. I did not want my mother to have to sit at a table with my father so we skipped tables (buffet style finger snacks). For the couple there may be a logic to the arrangements which outweighs the extended family's disappointment in not attending the ceremony.

 

I was thinking this as well. That there is some aunt or someone they don't want there, due to tension, and so are not inviting anyone other than parents siblings to avoid hurt feelings. 

[AimeeM]

The outdoor venue is in Lincoln Park, by Lake Michigan.  I can't imagine why she, a native of Northern Illinois, would pick 6pm in late October for an outdoor wedding by the lake...could be lovely, but probably will be rather chilly.  Caldwell Lily Pool.  Ok, her middle name is Lily, but still. Brrrrrrr.

Honestly, it sounds great. I hate warm weather and much prefer a chill. 

[ktgrok]

Honestly, it sounds great. I hate warm weather and much prefer a chill. 

 

but chilly can be hard in formalwear!

 I got married in Scotland in october and although we were married inside the pictures were outside and my feet were FROZEN! I should NOT have worn open toed shoes, lol!

[happi duck]

I wish dh and I had picked a spot that was special to us instead of just getting married at my church.

 

The lily pond is so beautiful! They'll have such a wonderful spot to visit throughout the years!

[Garga]

It's their wedding. They get to do it their way. Period.

 

Don't be too busy thinking about what you want. Think about what they want.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Garga

[Ellie]

Niece getting married in a year, and planning a small "Immediate family" only ceremony 6pm on a Sunday at a small outdoor pavilion by a pool.  Location is lovely but literally can not hold more than a handful of people.

 

Larger reception to be held immediately afterwards at a local museum, that is where folks not allowed at ceremony can come.

 

Since niece has five aunts and uncles and almost a dozen cousins I suspect her immediate family be be only her sister, mom and dad.  Groom needs space for his folks, too.He has one brother and a handful of cousins, too.  My dds are already bummed that they probably will not be allowed to attend the ceremony.

 

Why do folks do that, knowing family and friends will want to see them wed they still pick a super small venue.  It is like having a destination wedding but right under folk's noses (so folks could come IF you'd get married in a church or similar place).  

 

BTW she and groom live out of state, and are flying back here to be married.   We assumed that meant flying back here to be married with all their Chicago-area family and friends.  Nope.

 

Cranky aunt (and godmother btw) here.

 

It is not uncommon. Miss Manners and other etiquette experts discuss this at length.

 

I don't know why y'all would be cranky. You're going to be at the reception, where you'll get to hug everyone's neck and spend time chatting and eating with everyone.

 

[poppy]

It's their wedding. They get to do it their way. Period.

 

Don't be too busy thinking about what you want. Think about what they want.

 

I said I will shut up but I failed :)

 

I don't really get why anything other than unconditional approval of any decision of a couple getting married is unacceptable here. That wasn't as universally true in the 'wedding for 200 people where food it brought by potluck' thread. Is it because the choices made by the couple here are within the current realm of socially acceptability , and the potluck wedding was not? Is it because we are assuming this is the couples exact wish, but the potluck wedding idea developed due to family pressure? Or something else I'm not seeing?

 

That was worded weirdly -- like a robot asking how humans make decisions - sorry. It is late. Truly. forum dynamics just interest me.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I said I will shut up but I failed :)

 

I don't really get why anything other than unconditional approval of any decision of a couple getting married is unacceptable here. That wasn't as universally true in the 'wedding for 200 people where food it brought by potluck' thread. Is it because the choices made by the couple here are within the current realm of socially acceptability , and the potluck wedding was not? Is it because we are assuming this is the couples exact wish, but the potluck wedding idea developed due to family pressure? Or something else I'm not seeing?

 

That was worded weirdly -- like a robot asking how humans make decisions - sorry. It is late. Truly. forum dynamics just interest me.

 

I didn't read the potluck thread but I am guessing part of it is because this decision doesn't impose a burden upon anyone else.

[Laura Corin]

but chilly can be hard in formalwear!

I got married in Scotland in october and although we were married inside the pictures were outside and my feet were FROZEN! I should NOT have worn open toed shoes, lol!

I wouldn't plan on open toe shoes in any month in Scotland.

[Audrey]

When two people get married, it isn't about you. It's about them. No one else gets to have a complaint or an opinion on what they choose to do for their wedding or the reception, either. I'm sure there are reasons why they chose what they chose. I don't get why people get so bitchy about other people's wedding choices. :rolleyes:

[Hammfried]

When two people get married, it isn't about you. It's about them. No one else gets to have a complaint or an opinion on what they choose to do for their wedding or the reception, either. I'm sure there are reasons why they chose what they chose. I don't get why people get so bitchy about other people's wedding choices. :rolleyes:

DH and I were planning a large wedding and reception, the full works but a year in advance so no invitations were even established yet. Then we decided to just scrap the plans to go to the courthouse and have a very small dinner with immediate family afterwards. Part of the reason was because DH did not want to be the center of attention, especially in showing such an emotionally intimate part of himself in front of others. Another reason was my mother's unexpected cancer diagnosis and subsequent medical treatments. It felt...somewhat wrong to throw a lavish party when our priorities (financially too) shifted into being a caretaker for my mother. We just wanted to focus spending quality time with her and have her be present at the courthouse, which was physically easier for her. We got a lot of harshness, mostly from DH's side of the family for not having a large wedding for relatives and friends. SIL was even upset because we did not have the "big church wedding so that her children could walk down the aisle." MIL and all of her friends were very upset with us but DH pointed out that she had agreed early on to stay out of the planning and let us have our own wedding, whatever that may be. We apparently have failed at throwing everyone's dream wedding by having our own dream wedding.

 

ETA: DH's immediate family was also present at the courthouse ceremony so they did witness the wedding. They were upset that there was no big celebration to honor them in front of friends and relatives.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Hammfried

[Garga]

I said I will shut up but I failed :)

 

I don't really get why anything other than unconditional approval of any decision of a couple getting married is unacceptable here. That wasn't as universally true in the 'wedding for 200 people where food it brought by potluck' thread. Is it because the choices made by the couple here are within the current realm of socially acceptability , and the potluck wedding was not? Is it because we are assuming this is the couples exact wish, but the potluck wedding idea developed due to family pressure? Or something else I'm not seeing?

 

That was worded weirdly -- like a robot asking how humans make decisions - sorry. It is late. Truly. forum dynamics just interest me.

It's because the exchange of vows can be an intensely personal experience. It's an experience where you are pledging your entire life to someone else. It can make the bride and groom cry and feel intense emotions.

 

Some people are ok with a roomful of people watching. Others are not. To some people, the exchange of vows may be one of the most intense moments of their lives. Some people are deeply uncomfortable having an audience. I certainly was.

 

A lot of people exchange vows in a wooden sing-songy way. It's because they are on the spot with hundreds of people watching. Maybe this couple wanted to be able to exchange the vows and have it be an intimate experience where they didn't feel that they were actors in a show. They wanted to feel that what they were doing was private and intimate and didn't want to have to worry, "Am I talking loudly enough for the people in the back to hear me?"

 

Well, that's how I felt about it anyway. I had about 30 people at my wedding, but if I were to do it over again, I'd have had the absolute minimum I could legally get away with. I felt that the gravity of the exchange was lost because I was too conscious of the other people in the room. I rarely show anyone my deepest emotions. Exchanging vows in front of a roomful of people was deeply uncomfortable and I absolutely hated having an audience.

 

Perhaps they have a different set of values than you do. Maybe they feel the way I felt, above. And it's ok if they have a different set of values surrounding the exchanging of vows. That's what I mean when I say, it's their day and it's not about you.

 

So...it's their wedding. They can do what they want.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Garga

[poppy]

It's because the exchange of vows can be an intensely personal experience. It's an experience where you are pledging your entire life to someone else. It can make the bride and groom cry and feel intense emotions.

 

Some people are ok with a roomful of people watching. Others are not. To some people, the exchange of vows may be one of the most intense moments of their lives. Some people are deeply uncomfortable having an audience. I certainly was.

 

A lot of people exchange vows in a wooden sing-songy way. It's because they are on the spot with hundreds of people watching. Maybe this couple wanted to be able to exchange the vows and have it be an intimate experience where they didn't feel that they were actors in a show. They wanted to feel that what they were doing was private and intimate and didn't want to have to worry, "Am I talking loudly enough for the people in the back to hear me?"

 

Well, that's how I felt about it anyway. I had about 30 people at my wedding, but if I were to do it over again, I'd have had the absolute minimum I could legally get away with. I felt that the gravity of the exchange was lost because I was too conscious of the other people in the room. I rarely show anyone my deepest emotions. Exchanging vows in front of a roomful of people was deeply uncomfortable and I absolutely hated having an audience.

 

Perhaps they have a different set of values than you do. Maybe they feel the way I felt, above. And it's ok if they have a different set of values surrounding the exchanging of vows. That's what I mean when I say, it's their day and it's not about you.

 

So...it's their wedding. They can do what they want.

 

As I said earlier: I had a private, small wedding. I completely understand the private wedding.  

As with the potluck thing- it's the reception I find a little crass.

 

[ktgrok]

I wouldn't plan on open toe shoes in any month in Scotland.

 

LOL, well where were you 8 years ago, lol?

 

Dress was sleeveless too. Oh well. After we were done we went back to our hotel (a renovated castle) and sat in front of a roaring peat fire to warm up, then ate a lovely dinner in the little restaurant they had. The waitress brought us a free glass of wine, and I had an amazing goat cheese tart. Then we went upstairs and shared our small wedding fruit cake. 

 

Only real mishap was that the room had two single beds, which seemed a bit odd for a wedding night but we made do. We did just adore Scotland. I think my two complaints were drafty bathrooms (in that hotel) and the lack of radio stations,which in this day and age isn't a big deal. But here, there are 3 country music stations I can get, a news station, multiple christian music stations, a gospel station, various rock/alternative stations, R&B stations, rap stations, etc. There, we found 3 stations. Period. All of which played a variety of all of the above. It was fascinating. 

[ktgrok]

When two people get married, it isn't about you. It's about them. No one else gets to have a complaint or an opinion on what they choose to do for their wedding or the reception, either. I'm sure there are reasons why they chose what they chose. I don't get why people get so bitchy about other people's wedding choices. :rolleyes:

 

I don't think she's being bitchy. She said she won't say a thing to the couple. She's just sad to miss out on an important life moment in the life of her close family member and goddaughter. For some that moment is a big huge fantastic thing, and it's sad to miss out on it. I Think she can be sad without being bitchy. 

SaveSave

[poppy]

I didn't read the potluck thread but I am guessing part of it is because this decision doesn't impose a burden upon anyone else.

 

Ah, OK. I can see that. 

[marbel]

I didn't read the potluck thread but I am guessing part of it is because this decision doesn't impose a burden upon anyone else.

 

I think this is a big part of it.  

 

In general,  hosts are not supposed to impose undue demands upon  guests.   Potlucks, specific dress codes (black and white only, for example), travel (I want to get married in Las Vegas and I want all my Pennsylvania relatives to be there) all could be considered undue burdens.  

 

There is no burden being imposed in the OP.  

 

But then there's the part about the intimacy of the wedding ceremony.  I hadn't thought about that before reading this thread.  Now that I'm thinking of it, it really sounds nice.  I enjoyed my wedding reception but I might have enjoyed the ceremony more if there hadn't been spectators. 

 

I don't know, I just can't get behind being mad about missing the ceremony but getting to go to the party afterward.   The party is the fun part.  

[marbel]

As I said earlier: I had a private, small wedding. I completely understand the private wedding.  

As with the potluck thing- it's the reception I find a little crass.

 

 

Why is the reception crass?  I honestly don't get what's crass about "Hey, we just got married, come celebrate with us!"

 

Do you think it's a gift grab?    Would it not be a gift grab if people were invited to the ceremony as well?    What's the difference?

[SparklyUnicorn]

Could be various reasons, but it is rather a pain to have a bunch of people go from one venue to another.  This is especially true if the ceremony will be very short.  Ours lasted about 5 minutes.  I can't imagine having a bunch of people stop at one place for the 5 minutes and then have to go to the next place.  We did our ceremony at the place we had our reception, but it was still probably not all that interesting for the guests.  We stood in a gazebo with a few close people who blocked the view of everyone.  Everyone else stood somewhere in the vicinity which was a grassy lawn.  Nothing special and I would have personally been rather annoyed if I was a guest and then after that had to get back into my car to go somewhere else.

 

 

[Χά�ων]

Why is the reception crass? I honestly don't get what's crass about "Hey, we just got married, come celebrate with us!"

 

Do you think it's a gift grab? Would it not be a gift grab if people were invited to the ceremony as well? What's the difference?

This. I really do not understand the opposition or why it matters. The recrption is generally more expensive (IME, YMMV) so it is not like they are saving a boatload of money to get more gifts.

 

What if it was a destination wedding where most friends and family could not reasonably afford to go, would you still view a reception the same way?

 

I am shy and view the idea of a large wedding where I am the center of attention as an inner circle of hell. Maybe it is a personality difference. But yeah, inner circle of hell is an accurate description of my views of being the bride in a large wedding. (((Shudder)))

[SparklyUnicorn]

Why is the reception crass?  I honestly don't get what's crass about "Hey, we just got married, come celebrate with us!"

 

Do you think it's a gift grab?    Would it not be a gift grab if people were invited to the ceremony as well?    What's the difference?

 

Yeah, this is the way these things are typically done.  Whether that is crass or not, I don't know.  I went to a zillion weddings before I had my turn.  I enjoyed all of them really.  The fancy ones and the not so fancy ones. 

[Guest]

I guess the surprise is that a godparent isnt close family.

 

I had two surprises at a recent nephew wedding...my children were the only adult cousins not to be invited. Not too surprising since the groom always felt slighted as he lost his role as the gp's youngest gc when my older was born. And my husband arrived to be given the job of escorting his mother, leaving me alone. There were no ushers and the males in the wedding party did nothing other than stand with the groom. It felt so strange not to have a receiving line at the church door. We reminded ourselves that this is the New Age of anything goes. I walked away thinking it was bizarrely impersonal to have no interaction with the

priest. I could have sat in the car, or watched thru a window, the experience would have been the same.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Heigh Ho

[SparklyUnicorn]

I guess the surprise is that a godparent isnt close family.

 

 

 

That's not a surprise to me.  I have god parents.  I didn't choose them, they didn't fulfill their role as god parents, and as an adult I was not religious.  In some families it's kind of a tradition that people go through the motions of only and don't really take all that seriously.  I'm not saying that is how it is supposed to be, but that is sometimes how it is.

[Χά�ων]

I guess the surprise is that a godparent isnt close family.

 

 

Family culture differences are probably reflected in my reply. In my family a godparent is little more than a person who agrees to raise the child in the case of the death of both parents. There are no extra relationship dynamics added in. An aunt who is also a godparent is still just an aunt.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

That's not a surprise to me. I have god parents. I didn't choose them, they didn't fulfill their role as god parents, and as an adult I was not religious. In some families it's kind of a tradition that people go through the motions of only and don't really take all that seriously. I'm not saying that is how it is supposed to be, but that is sometimes how it is.

I would say a godparent/aunt would usually qualify as close. The OP said the ceremony was as for immediate family only, which is different.

[poppy]

This. I really do not understand the opposition or why it matters. The recrption is generally more expensive (IME, YMMV) so it is not like they are saving a boatload of money to get more gifts.

 

What if it was a destination wedding where most friends and family could not reasonably afford to go, would you still view a reception the same way?

 

I am shy and view the idea of a large wedding where I am the center of attention as an inner circle of hell. Maybe it is a personality difference. But yeah, inner circle of hell is an accurate description of my views of being the bride in a large wedding. (((Shudder)))

 

If you have a wedding somewhere else and a party a week later,  the PARTY is the point of that day-- it is special and a big deal.

If you have a wedding, and then  a party, the party is definitely not the focus (unless they are extremely shallow people).  The wedding is the point of that day.

So to me this reads as "we want an intimate wedding, and we want lotsa gifts, and we want to get the family obligation over ASAP." and that's why it's crammed all in one day.

 

Again, I feel comfortable saying all this online, wouldn't breathe a word in real life because naturally they can do whatever they want.

[Χά�ων]

If you have a wedding somewhere else and a party a week later, the PARTY is the point of that day-- it is special and a big deal.

If you have a wedding, and then a party, the party is definitely not the focus (unless they are extremely shallow people). The wedding is the point of that day.

So to me this reads as "we want an intimate wedding, and we want lotsa gifts, and we want to get the family obligation over ASAP." and that's why it's crammed all in one day.

 

Again, I feel comfortable saying all this online, wouldn't breathe a word in real life because naturally they can do whatever they want.

Interesting. So your issue is that it is the same day, got it. I have been googling this and per wedding wire (I think is the sight) having a reception a different day is viewed as most definatly not a wedding reception but something they call a pretty princess party.

 

 

What if they did not register? Or registered but did not include the information and someone has to ask for it? Does that change your view that it is a gift grab?

 

I could not even do them the same day, mostly because it would be too much for me to handle. But if I was getting pressure to have both because of obligations I would probably do this just to get it over with in one days vs spreading out the dread over days or weeks. It would not be what I wanted in a say, more of a what I needed to do to placate and shut up the most vocal family members, in my family that is my mother (and mil).

[gardenmom5]

As I said earlier: I had a private, small wedding. I completely understand the private wedding.  

As with the potluck thing- it's the reception I find a little crass.

 

the potluck thing was another thread and a different wedding reception. 

 

[poppy]

Interesting. So your issue is that it is the same day, got it. I have been googling this and per wedding wire (I think is the sight) having a reception a different day is viewed as most definatly not a wedding reception but something they call a pretty princess party.

 

 

What if they did not register? Or registered but did not include the information and someone has to ask for it? Does that change your view that it is a gift grab?

 

I could not even do them the same day, mostly because it would be too much for me to handle. But if I was getting pressure to have both because of obligations I would probably do this just to get it over with in one days vs spreading out the dread over days or weeks. It would not be what I wanted in a say, more of a what I needed to do to placate and shut up the most vocal family members, in my family that is my mother (and mil).

 

Yes, the implication to me like they are getting it over with.

 

Lots of couples don't register because they assume / want cash gifts only. If this had been a "no gifts" party I assume the OP would have mentioned that. Using the world "reception" definitely implies all the usual wedding trappings.

[JFSinIL]

The reception starts immediately following the tiny outdoor wedding.  Now, when we got married, I was living in Illinois (grad school) but all my folks and friends in California, so we had out wedding/reception there.  A few weeks later my in-laws held another reception (and I got to wear my dress again!) in Illinois for all the extended family and friends there who had not been able to fly to California to see the actual wedding.  Made sense.

 

When we heard niece and long term boyfriend were engaged, we got excited, and started to think how to get to Santa Fe, NM (where they and my SIL now live).  Then we heard that they would come to Chicago to get married!  Oh boy!  Another big Catholic blow-out event with all the extended family and friends!

 

THEN we find out that, tough beans, we can come to the rehearsal dinner and the reception (held at Museum of Surgical Science - sounds yucky but venue is actually very nice), but not the actual wedding.  So I came here to vent - and ya'all were supposed to agree with me, commiserate, etc. etc.  ;-)    The wedding is the most important part!  We'd have flown or driven to New Mexico to see it!  Now it is going to be so close to us - and we can't go.  C'mon, let me mope a bit here (I want some "there there, what a silly niece you have" responses)   :-)

[gardenmom5]

 

 

THEN we find out that, tough beans, we can come to the rehearsal dinner and the reception (held at Museum of Surgical Science - sounds yucky but venue is actually very nice), but not the actual wedding.  So I came here to vent - and ya'all were supposed to agree with me, commiserate, etc. etc.  ;-)    The wedding is the most important part!  We'd have flown or driven to New Mexico to see it!  Now it is going to be so close to us - and we can't go.  C'mon, let me mope a bit here (I want some "there there, what a silly niece you have" responses)   :-)

 

the only people who are supposed to be invited to the rehearsal dinner are the bridal party. (after all, they're supposed to be "rehearsing" the movement during the ceremony.)  to invite someone to the rehearsal dinner, but NOT the actual  wedding - is tacky.

[regentrude]

I guess the surprise is that a godparent isnt close family.

 

Several of my kids' godparents aren't close family.

Edited October 30, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

If you have a wedding somewhere else and a party a week later,  the PARTY is the point of that day-- it is special and a big deal.

If you have a wedding, and then  a party, the party is definitely not the focus (unless they are extremely shallow people).  The wedding is the point of that day.

So to me this reads as "we want an intimate wedding, and we want lotsa gifts, and we want to get the family obligation over ASAP." and that's why it's crammed all in one day.

 

I don't read it like this at all. Throwing a big party does not have to equal gift grab - but maybe our family culture is different in that respect. Some of my friends came to our wedding celebration with a bunch of flowers.

 

It may also be very difficult to get the family members who attend the wedding together again at a later day, if some have to travel long distances. So it would be quite an imposition to have them come back for a reception at a later date.

Edited October 30, 2016 by regentrude

[Code Lyoko]

The reception starts immediately following the tiny outdoor wedding.  Now, when we got married, I was living in Illinois (grad school) but all my folks and friends in California, so we had out wedding/reception there.  A few weeks later my in-laws held another reception (and I got to wear my dress again!) in Illinois for all the extended family and friends there who had not been able to fly to California to see the actual wedding.  Made sense.

 

When we heard niece and long term boyfriend were engaged, we got excited, and started to think how to get to Santa Fe, NM (where they and my SIL now live).  Then we heard that they would come to Chicago to get married!  Oh boy!  Another big Catholic blow-out event with all the extended family and friends!

 

THEN we find out that, tough beans, we can come to the rehearsal dinner and the reception (held at Museum of Surgical Science - sounds yucky but venue is actually very nice), but not the actual wedding.  So I came here to vent - and ya'all were supposed to agree with me, commiserate, etc. etc.  ;-)    The wedding is the most important part!  We'd have flown or driven to New Mexico to see it!  Now it is going to be so close to us - and we can't go.  C'mon, let me mope a bit here (I want some "there there, what a silly niece you have" responses)   :-)

:grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:

 

Regardless of my personal feelings on tiny weddings and big receptions (I honestly don't have an issue with that at all), I absolutely understand your disappointment and your need to vent and get some commiseration.  So "there, there, what a silly niece you have".  :)

 

 And frankly, I do agree with up thread that it is a bit strange to be invited to the rehearsal dinner and the reception but not the wedding.  I've never heard of that.

 

(Just keep in mind they may have some very specific reasons for why they are doing what they are doing that they are not at liberty to share with their extended family and have nothing to do with you and your family specifically. :) ).

[regentrude]

THEN we find out that, tough beans, we can come to the rehearsal dinner and the reception (held at Museum of Surgical Science - sounds yucky but venue is actually very nice), but not the actual wedding.  

 

That is really strange. I thought the rehearsal dinner is for rehearsing the wedding? (Another odd custom IMO, but whatever). So if you're not in the wedding, what's the point of the rehearsal dinner?

[FaithManor]

That's not a surprise to me.  I have god parents.  I didn't choose them, they didn't fulfill their role as god parents, and as an adult I was not religious.  In some families it's kind of a tradition that people go through the motions of only and don't really take all that seriously.  I'm not saying that is how it is supposed to be, but that is sometimes how it is.

My godparents divorced when I was about 13, and then apart from an occasional Christmas card, did not hear from them again. They lived out of state, and I hadn't heard from them for three years when I got married. Well guess what, they sent nasty letters to me parents when they heard through the grapevine that I had married and not sent them an invite! These were two people who also couldn't play nice in a room together for an hour after their divorce so why they thought I would ever invite them, I will never know.

 

That said, I think when the godparent/child relationship is strong, it would be nice if they were considered along the lines of an aunt or a grandparent at such occasions if not already related.

[FaithManor]

Invited to the rehearsal dinner but not in the bridal party, nor a parent? Okay, that's got me stumped!

[FaithManor]

Just looked it up. Caldwell Lily Pond weddings have a maximum capacity of 30 participants including bride, groom, attendants, and officiant. My guess is that if they have very many friends as witnesses and then have parents and siblings, they've used up the capacity.

[maize]

OP, I do understand your disappointment. I am sorry  :grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:  it is always hard when we have expectations that do not materialize.

[Hammfried]

JFSinIL, I am truly sorry that you are disappointed. It is very sweet that you would have flown out for the wedding regardless. And while it may seem strange to be invited to the rehearsal dinner and not the actual ceremony, perhaps think of it as a way that niece is trying to include you in as many activities/celebrations. If the wedding venue is limited in capacity, then it is understandable that the amount of guests would have to be sacrificed there.

[Janeway]

I think it is rude and stupid. She should have had the wedding at the museum. She can go the pool anytime, or even do pictures there. But put the ceremony at the museum.

 

The only time I do not think this is rude is when there is a financial thing where they do not want to or cannot spend the money for the special dress and tuxedos and all that. Weddings cost a lot. So, if they are not paying for a wedding and are just having a small ceremony with no pomp, then I could understand. Also, My uncle (I mentioned him before) has tons of anxiety so he had his ceremony like that. He absolutely did not want to stand up in front of everyone and say vows and all that.

[gardenmom5]

I don't read it like this at all. Throwing a big party does not have to equal gift grab - but maybe our family culture is different in that respect. Some of my friends came to our wedding celebration with a bunch of flowers.

 

It may also be very difficult to get the family members who attend the wedding together again at a later day, if some have to travel long distances. So it would be quite an imposition to have them come back for a reception at a later date.

 

 

my grandmother always saw announcements/ wedding invites as gift grabs.  but - she sent out (or encouraged us to send out) announcements with the sole purpose of getting more gifts.  (she said so).  so I was uncomfortable sending out announcements becasue I didn't want to be seen as soliciting gifts.  I worked hard to put that attitude behind me.  life is much more pleasant.  I know a few others like that too -  announcements = gifts.  a real quid pro quo there.

 

some people do see it as a gift grab - but some people really are sincere in just wanting to share their joy.  it's easier to have good feelings for the couple/person to treat announcements as 'we want to share our joy'.  (even if you know for certain it's the contrary.)

 

for dd's wedding (lds do small weddings), we had a reception here (wedding in the morning, pictures - reception in the evening), and an open house in the state where dsil grew up a week later.  his brother came here for the wedding - but didn't go to his parents home a week later.  (he lives in a third state)

[City Mouse]

The reception starts immediately following the tiny outdoor wedding. Now, when we got married, I was living in Illinois (grad school) but all my folks and friends in California, so we had out wedding/reception there. A few weeks later my in-laws held another reception (and I got to wear my dress again!) in Illinois for all the extended family and friends there who had not been able to fly to California to see the actual wedding. Made sense.

 

When we heard niece and long term boyfriend were engaged, we got excited, and started to think how to get to Santa Fe, NM (where they and my SIL now live). Then we heard that they would come to Chicago to get married! Oh boy! Another big Catholic blow-out event with all the extended family and friends!

 

THEN we find out that, tough beans, we can come to the rehearsal dinner and the reception (held at Museum of Surgical Science - sounds yucky but venue is actually very nice), but not the actual wedding. So I came here to vent - and ya'all were supposed to agree with me, commiserate, etc. etc. ;-) The wedding is the most important part! We'd have flown or driven to New Mexico to see it! Now it is going to be so close to us - and we can't go. C'mon, let me mope a bit here (I want some "there there, what a silly niece you have" responses) :-)

Ok, I'll give you some sympathy. I can't imagine why anyone who wants a small, intimate wedding would leave Santa Fe to have the ceremony in Chicago. I am going to guess that there is some family pressure (not from the OP) to have the big reception in Chicago.

 

It is soooo hard to be a young person getting married and trying to manage what you want vs family expectations.

[rjand6more]

We are going to our 1st family wedding(siblings' kids) in a year.  So, I have been giving weddings a lot of thought. lol

 

I am realizing this is all just a matter of perspective.  And I don't really think either is wrong!

 

Either you are throwing an event  and focusing solely on the wants and whims of the couple or you are having a celebration focusing on your guests as GUESTS and you are the gracious hosts. I've been to both and I don't get upset at either.  I enjoy the latter more and I am probably more generous with gifts and offering my time in helping.

 

Op:  I do feel sad for you.  I love to see a wedding ceremony!  If I had to choose, I would choose the ceremony over the reception every time.

 

 

[katilac]

That is really strange. I thought the rehearsal dinner is for rehearsing the wedding? (Another odd custom IMO, but whatever). So if you're not in the wedding, what's the point of the rehearsal dinner?

 

The dinner is just a dinner that follows the rehearsal, which is held wherever the wedding will be held. The dinner can be held anywhere, and is not tied to the rehearsal in any way other than custom.  

 

Many people invite extra people to the rehearsal dinner (pre-wedding dinner?) for a variety of reasons. One common one is so that they (and the other dinner guests) have time to visit with them in a smaller venue, rather than just at the more crowded and very busy reception.  

 

Basically, it is the same idea as the post-wedding brunch, which doesn't include everyone invited to the reception, but rather close family/friends and often those who have travelled from out of town. It's just held the day before the wedding instead of the day after the wedding. 

[regentrude]

The dinner is just a dinner that follows the rehearsal, which is held wherever the wedding will be held. The dinner can be held anywhere, and is not tied to the rehearsal in any way other than custom.  

 

Many people invite extra people to the rehearsal dinner (pre-wedding dinner?) for a variety of reasons. One common one is so that they (and the other dinner guests) have time to visit with them in a smaller venue, rather than just at the more crowded and very busy reception.  

 

Basically, it is the same idea as the post-wedding brunch, which doesn't include everyone invited to the reception, but rather close family/friends and often those who have travelled from out of town. It's just held the day before the wedding instead of the day after the wedding. 

 

Thanks for the explanation. I have never been to a wedding that involved a rehearsal. (But then, I've only been to a grand total of maybe five weddings in my life. )

Edited October 30, 2016 by regentrude

[TranquilMind]

All of those things are also part of the artificial hoopla. A wedding reception can be just a party to celebrate two people getting married. It can easily happen without a cake and band and centerpieces and menu planning and invites. There are many people who actually prefer to skip all the trappings that our society tells us are necessary in order to have a "dream wedding".

 

Really everything the Grinch learned about Christmas can equally be applied to marriage. At its core it is two people making a commitment to each other, and then perhaps wanting to celebrate with their loved ones. None of the stuff matters.

 

"It came without ribbons! It came without tags!

It came without packages, boxes, or bags!

 

He puzzled and puzzed till his puzzler was sore.

Then the Grinch thought of something he hadn't before.

 

Maybe Christmas, he thought, doesn't come from a store.

Maybe Christmas, perhaps, means a little bit more!"

 

Wendy

What an excellent analogy, Wendy. 

 

 

[TranquilMind]

the only people who are supposed to be invited to the rehearsal dinner are the bridal party. (after all, they're supposed to be "rehearsing" the movement during the ceremony.)  to invite someone to the rehearsal dinner, but NOT the actual  wedding - is tacky.

I agree.  It can almost be interpreted as a taunt. "Hey, we are really, really excited about the wedding tomorrow, so come to our rehearsal so you can hear all about it, but you aren't invited."

That's just weird. 

 

I don't think anyone should not be invited to a wedding who is then invited to a reception.  I can think of rare exceptions...but they are rare. 

[KungFuPanda]

Can they get someone to live-stream it? It stays small, everyone sees it, you can visit at the reception, and nobody will hear babies crying or aunt Betty's smoker's cough throughout the service.

[zoobie]

Invited to the rehearsal dinner but not in the bridal party, nor a parent? Okay, that's got me stumped!

 

Some people invite out of town guests to the rehearsal dinner.