1. Brenda

    Several couples have gotten married recently and put a “blanket” invitation to the wedding in the church newsletter. However, they go on to state that the reception is by invitation only. I feel that this is very “tacky”. The reception should not even be mentioned – it is like saying come to the wedding and bring me a gift but you are not important enough to come to the reception. How does everyone else feel? Here is how the announcement is worded. Am I the only one that thinks this is “wrong”?
    Mr. and Mrs. xxxx
    invite you to celebrate the marriage
    of their daughter,
    son of xxxx
    Saturday, July ——
    at 4:00 PM
    (Private reception to follow
    by personal invitation only)

    • Mrs. Czeisel

      You are correct. Invitations should only go to people who are invited to the reception. Although information about the ceremony is the main feature of the invitation, people actually generally don’t need an invitation to a ceremony. It’s considered a public event. If for some reason it isn’t and invitations are a practical necessity, the event people aren’t invited to shouldn’t be mentioned.

  2. Zakafury

    This sounds to me like it’s going to be a wedding at a mass which would be celebrated with or without the couple. It strikes me as a courtesy announcement for anyone who would be there at 4 on Saturday. I don’t think attending a public wedding calls for a gift. I’m loathe to link the gift to the party, but those are the actual invitations in this case.

    I do agree that mentioning the reception is tacky. If I were involved I would have made the newsletter announcement sound like something from the minister or a deacon, etc. “Bridename and Groomname will be married during 4:00 services on July __! Congratulations and blessings to them! They will be holding their reception in the parish hall that evening, so it will not be available for other activities.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *