Actually, almost every single wedding I have been to is like this. When my cousin got married, my aunt and uncle hosted a small cocktail party at their house for guests while they were waiting. One time we went to a bar with some other guests while we were waiting. And yet another about 15 of us went to a friend's house and had a few beers while we were waiting.
Personally, I like the cocktail party idea, especially if you know someone who is willing to host it in a place near the reception place.
I don't know why people get mad about the gap of time...go home, relax, change and then be refreshed for the reception. Do what you need to do and enjoy your day.
2007-09-09 15:26:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Melissa L 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I am having the same problem. It looks as if have of these people have never planned a wedding. I called every church the latest they can do is 1:00 because of Sat mass. You could have a afternoon reception but that would suck what would you do with your guest after 5 p.m? My ceremony at 1 and reception at 6. First a lot of people will only come to the reception. Also I am having it at a hotel so the out-of-towners could have somewhere to go. But the hotel said we could set up a hosptality room and stock it with whatever we want. Plus by the time you get pictures done it will be time for the reception. Whoever bitches, oh well it is your day.
2007-09-10 03:00:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Kelsy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi. Well, I don't like it......BUT......that is how ALL the weddings are here where I live (Michigan). This was done at my own wedding 30 years ago! I have to say that it was Catholic (my wedding), but I have gone to MANY others (non-Catholic ones) and they are still the same.
The problem is the young people. First it's the ceremony, then time for pictures (usually at another location other than the church), then they want the dinner and dancing. To be honest, I tried to talk my son out of what I call "the 2 o'clock/6 o'clock routine" but to no avail. ALL the weddings I go to are 2 p.m. ceremony and 6 p.m. reception. It's just accepted here (again, Catholic AND non-Catholic).
But you asked my opinion.......IT'S A PAIN! I can understand the bride and groom wanting a "wedding day", but it turns into a whole day affair for the guest also! First you need to get ready for the ceremony.....then, after the ceremony, go home (or back to the hotel if you are from out-of-town).....sit around for a few hours....then get ready AGAIN to go to the reception!!!
If you can....please.....have your reception right after the ceremony OR have a Friday night wedding and you won't have to worry!! Good luck!
2007-09-09 16:21:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by iloveweddings 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
A few years ago my husband and I attended a wedding, not Catholic, that had the wedding in the early afternoon with an evening reception. They had a 4 hour delay between. I will say it was awkward at best, especially for us since we flew in. It just made it difficult. Because after the wedding, we were dressed and by the time we went back to the hotel, change, head out, it left little time to do anything before we had to go back, change and leave for the reception. I felt the day didn't flow well. There wasn't an in-between activity for guests, it was at an odd time of day, dinner was being served, and by the time with wedding was over it was too late for lunch. It just didn't flow well.
2007-09-09 15:28:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Erin 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
For me the problem really boils down to a clothing issue. You obviously already know that there has to be something for guests to do in between the wedding and the reception. But what do they wear? I mean, if it's putt-putt in between, then guests are going back to their hotel room to change twice. And it makes for a REALLY long day of dressed-up-ness. I think, if it's at all avoidable, you should try to keep your ceremony and reception close together. That being said, there's no reason why you can't have an afternoon reception. If it's at lunchtime, you can even have a lunch instead of dinner. Or find another location for the ceremony so you can do it all later in the day.
2007-09-10 02:25:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by corinne1029 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sounds like you need to think about a Friday evening wedding with the reception following that. You could start at 5 pm or 6 pm without that being too late. I have attended a few, and that is a great way to have your wedding and reception together at a Catholic Church.
2007-09-09 19:09:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by the Goddess Angel 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
i've gone to several weddings in the 90s where the wedding was in the day and reception was later. To me it wasn't a big deal but today everyone feels the need that they HAVE to be constantly entertained. Is there something local in the area that you could all do a group and people who want to can choose to go and those who don't can arrive at the reception later?
also, i liked it because while the wedding was more dressy because it was in a church, we got a chance to go back home and change into still dressy but much more comfortable clothes for a reception. And not alot of of people were traveling in for it either so it wasn't a huge deal.
2007-09-09 15:16:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Courtney 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Usually the ceremony is at 1:30 or 2:30 p.m., it's done within an hour, then you go for photos, and maybe have a chance to relax a bit.
If you plan cocktails for 5:30, dinner at 6:30, it works out well because your guests also have a chance for a nap, do some shopping, tour the city, etc. You don't need to keep them occupied during this time, guests are totally used to having the time between the ceremony and the reception.
2007-09-10 01:57:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lydia 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
We got married at 11 am and had the reception at 6:30 pm because my brother was both a groomsman and our caterer. He needed the time between to get everything ready.
Regarding morning weddings, my mom told me during our planning stages that everyone used to do it that way and she was raised Catholic. I actually attended a Catholic wedding last year on a Friday evening with the reception immediately following. It went well b/c they'd already taken pictures during the day before the wedding.
Looking back at how we did it, though, I wish I'd just gotten married later in the day (not Catholic, no pm mass issues) and had the reception immediately following b/c my brother missed all the pictures (taken after ceremony and before reception) and I didn't get to spend any time with him or my sister in law (bridesmaid) who was helping him, on the trolley we rode around in.
Bottom line, don't let anyone talk you into something you don't really want. It's your one and only day and you should be able to look back on it and be completely satisfied with all your choices. Good luck and I'm sure you'll work it out!
2007-09-09 15:07:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by KatB 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
It is completely possible toprovide a buffet lunch for 50 or so guests on your budget, but coffee and cake would be suitable as well. A church wedding can last from 10 mins upwards it depends what religion you are and how traditional you want it to be. I would suggest a 10.30am wedding with photos for half an hour beginning at 11.00 and you leave your guests to get to know each other and have coffee or breakfast cocktails followed by a buffet lunch or a cocktail hour. It is completely reasonable to expect about $15.00 per guests for a standard buffet lunch that does not include anything too posh.
2016-05-20 23:05:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋