2-3 hour gap between church ceremony and reception......would you go to both?

Question

It looks like the date I wanted for my wedding will have a start time at about 1:45 and end about 2:45-3:00 or I could choose 3:30-:430 and the reception starts at 6 pm at a diffrent location, how do I fill the time until the reception at 6? And would you be likely to go to both if there is a gap between times? Also there will not be any out of town guest and this is in san antonio. I am looking at about 500 guests. Im having issues with the time gap....is it a big deal? what do u think?

ok let me explain a little, there is only one priest that I want to marry us and the church only has three start times, 12:00 noon...1:45 and 3:30. So its not like I intentionally planned the gap. I hate that theres a gap but not my choice. I like the cocktail hour idea any other ideas?

Answer 1

It would be ATROCIOUSLY RUDE to not attend both the ceremony and the reception, when one is invited to both. That is just NOT acceptable behavior.

Choose the 3:30 ceremony time so that there is less delay. That is just part of good hosting.

In some instances there is nothing Catholic brides can do about the time gap, but here you have 3:30 option, so take it!

Answer 2

I don't think there's anything wrong with having a gap. Lots of weddings I've been have had at least a 2 hour gap. Right after the ceremony, the bridal party goes off to get pictures taken. I mean, that only makes sense, right? Plus, some people who go to the ceremony might want to change for the reception (you know, like church clothes and party clothes)! I don't see a problem with it. However, that being said, cocktails start about an hour before the reception. That way, people can mingle and have drinks and such. So you should try to go for that. All in all, I'd still go to both the ceremony and reception. I think both are equally as important. I think it's tacky how some people skip out the ceremony and only go for the food (unless, of course, they had a good reason, like work or something).

You know, I've been reading some more of the answers, and it seems that a lot of people would not attend the ceremony and only the reception. THAT IS TACKY! The ceremony is the most important part of the whole thing! It's more important than the party afterwards, as it signals the union between two people in the eyes of God. Sheesh people. Showing up for just the food when you don't want to witness the union is plain rude. People who really want to be part of the day wouldn't mind a bit of a gap. Just my thoughts about that.

Answer 3

First of all, it is a bit rude to attend the reception but not the ceremony. If someone has a legit conflict this may be unavoidable.

There are pluses and minuses to having a gap between the ceremony and the reception. If there is an hour or two gap this gives the wedding party time to take pictures. A friend of mine got married at a hotel. We walked out of the ceremony directly to the cocktail lounge for cocktail hour, which was very nice. The downside was that the bride and groom missed more that half of the reception taking formal, posed pictures.

If there will be no gap I might suggest taking the formal pictures before the ceremony. This will break the tradition of not seeing the bride before the wedding, but you will get to enjoy your reception.

Answer 4

I would definitely select having your ceremony at 3:30 pm followed by a cocktail hour (or other activity) at 5:00 pm and reception at 6:00pm.

Depending on the venue you select you can provide an alternative to a cocktail hour to help fill time. Since we were married at a historic estate, instead of having a cocktail hour after the ceremony, we provided a guided tour of the estate house and grounds (tour duration was approximately 45 minutes). This gave us plenty of time to finish taking pictures and join our guests without them having a time lapse with no entertainment or food. I have also heard of some couples renting trolleys or shuttles to take guests on a brief sightseeing tour after the ceremony when there is a long gap in between the ceremony and reception. So there are a lot of options out there to fill the time depending on your budget.

Answer 5

first off , how far apart at the church and the reception? If they are 45 minutes apart, an hour and a half gap (taking the later time for the ceremony) wouldn't be so bad. If they are in the same building or right near one another, that might be tough, especially if you took the earlier ceremony time. Filling three hours while dressed for a wedding could be a deciding factore for some folks. I would take the later time for the ceremony and then see what is on the path between the ceremony and the reception...if there is a gorgeous park, an art gallery or some lovely cafe, you could suggest it in a small insert in the inviation as a way to experience San Antonio while they wait for the reception to start.

Answer 6

I prefer weddings that dont contain the gap of time, but I do attend both parts if the do contain them. Its just annoying to have a big gap because you cant go get changed because theres not that much time, and you cant go eat because you will be eating at the reception, so what are you really supposed to do.
But yes, I would attend both parts.

ETA:Choose the 3:30 ceremony, this will put the end time at 4 or 4:30, if you start the cocktail hour at 5 and the reception at 6 this should be good timing. The bride and groom dont normally go to the cocktail hour anyway, just the guests (you will be taking your pictures), so you wont be missing anything.

Answer 7

If the ceremony/reception sites were relatively close to my home (you said there would be no out of town guests) I suppose it would be OK, since one could go home and relax a bit in between. The real problem lies when there are a ton of out of town guests. Sooo inconvenient to them, especially if they don't have their own transportation. Usually the "fill in time" is used for a cocktail hour...drinks, hor's devours, etc. Gives the guests something to do with that hour/hour and a half between end of ceremony and beginning of reception. Choose the very latest ceremony you can, and the timing should work out well.

Answer 8

Most people will balk at any gap longer than 1 hr and you will have many guests who either come to the ceremony or reception but not both. If you can't move the ceremony to a later time and/or the reception to an earlier time, is it possible to have a cake and coffee reception immediately the ceremony before heading over to the main reception? That way you'll have more guests in attendance at both events and people will be less likely to be upset.

Personally if there was a gap of that length with nothing in between (I don't go back to the hotel to change clothes nor do I sightsee in town during gaps and no one I have ever met does so either) I would pick one event to attend and skip the other unless I was in the bridal party. Most people I know feel the same.

Answer 9

I don't see a problem with that.. I recently attended a wedding that was a 45 drive from my house. Church was at 3:30-4:45 and the reception started at 6pm. A group of us hung out a frineds house in between the gap.

It's your wedding and it shouldn't matter to the invites how long the gap is. Whoever wants to TRULY join you and your fiance on your wedding day will be there!

CONGRATULATIONS

Answer 10

I think 3:30 would be ok the wedding may be a little longer then 4:30 and that will give everyone time to get to the reception and get situated. There shouldn't be too much time inbetween.