Inspired by another thread - 4 hrs between wedding and reception

[Belle0101]

I didn't want to hijack the other thread so I opted to start a new one. It reminded me that we had received an invitation to a wedding that was to take place during our vacation to the Smokies (love the Smoky Mountains!). Obviously we didn't go but I wondered about the delay between wedding and the reception.

I've been told that during the interim there were no appetizers offered and that it was a cash bar. Basically everyone just sat around.

I haven't been to a wedding ages so this may be the norm. I'd have thought there would have been light snacks, or soda was free or maybe a radio playing even.

Like I said, maybe it's the norm so I'm not trying to bash the couple at all. Just curious.

Thanks!!

 

[Bren's Mom]

Around here there is often a long 'lag' time between the church and the reception, and, frankly, it stinks for the guests.

It's perfectly fine to leave an ample amount of travel time from ceremony to reception site, but then the cocktail hour should start. If there's a LONG time then guests are paying through the nose for a sitter for all day AND night, or have to go home, get their good clothes off, then get redressed 3 hours later, or spend their own money on booze. Terrible.

 

[Micca]

You'd lose me from either the wedding or the reception, maybe both. Hmmm...maybe that's the idea?

 

[SC Minnie]

WE are going to a wedding in Sept. The ceremony is at 2pm and reception is at 6pm at different venues. I had never heard of it being that way and assumed it had something to do with when they could get the places. I just figured we would go back to the hotel, chill out for a while, then head over to the reception.

 

[Nennie]

My brother's wedding was like that, and it was annoying. We just went back to the hotel, took off our clothes and sat around eating snacks in our underwear! LOL!!!

I was recently invited to a wedding of my father's girlfriend's daughter (got that? lol!), that had a 3 hour break. I opted to skip the ceremony, and just go to the reception. It was just far enough away from my house to make driving back and forth a pain. I also had a baby at the time, and didn't want to leave him for almost 12 hours, of which 3 hours would have been DH and I chilling at a bar or something waiting for the reception to start!

 

[luvmy3]

4 hours of guests just sitting there and drinking, starving with nothing else to do except wait for the bride and groom? I would have loved to be a fly on the wall at about the 3 hour mark

 

[Belle0101]

Thanks for the replies. It sounds like maybe that for whatever reason it's really kind of normal these days. I can see though where if you had to get a sitter or don't live nearby it maybe a bit of a pain.

I forgot to mention that at the wedding supper was served just after 7PM.

luvmy3 - You're right! That could have been lots of fun!! LOL!!!!!!

 

[jen0610]

The only weddings around here that we have been involved in - attendants or invited to - that have a delay are the Saturday weddings for the Catholics. They are afternoon weddings, with anywhere from a 2-4 hour wait for the reception to start.

Most of the people from DH side, when invited to our wedding were shocked that we were getting married at 5 o'clock with the reception to follow immediately after. Several of the people invited from his side of the family asked my MIL if she was sure that he was getting married in a church. They just couldn't wrap their hands around the fact that there was a church that didn't have service on Saturday evening.

The entire wedding party was put on notice that we wanted to try and knock out as many pictures as we could, that did not include DH and I together, before the wedding. We were at the church ready and taking pictures 2 1/2 hours before the wedding started. We were shooting to have the sancuary cleared of the wedding party by 4:30, so that when the guests started to arrive, we wouldn't be milling around. By knocking a good portion of the pictures outta the way before the wedding, we were done with the rest of the pictures in less than an hour after the wedding service.

 

[NHdisneylover]

The only weddings around here that we have been involved in - attendants or invited to - that have a delay are the Saturday weddings for the Catholics. They are afternoon weddings, with anywhere from a 2-4 hour wait for the reception to start.

Most of the people from DH side, when invited to our wedding were shocked that we were getting married at 5 o'clock with the reception to follow immediately after. Several of the people invited from his side of the family asked my MIL if she was sure that he was getting married in a church. They just couldn't wrap their hands around the fact that there was a church that didn't have service on Saturday evening.

The entire wedding party was put on notice that we wanted to try and knock out as many pictures as we could, that did not include DH and I together, before the wedding. We were at the church ready and taking pictures 2 1/2 hours before the wedding started. We were shooting to have the sancuary cleared of the wedding party by 4:30, so that when the guests started to arrive, we wouldn't be milling around. By knocking a good portion of the pictures outta the way before the wedding, we were done with the rest of the pictures in less than an hour after the wedding service.

We did this too. Then we got the biggest group shots first afterwards and sent people on over to the reception as quickly as possible until it was just DH and I left. We had an early afternoon wedding (2:00) and a "tea" reception so "only" appetizers and cakes (there was more than enough to make a meal out of if one wanted to) served buffet style and that was put out as soon as the weeding ended. Guests were eating and drinking before we ever got there (in fact I had specially requested one keg of locally made rootbeer for the reception and never got any--it was gone before I arrived). I think DH and I were nearly an hour behind the other guests. The only thin not available before we arrived were the cakes. We cut those about a half hour after we got there (after we had time to greet everyone, but before we ate because we did not want to keep everybody waiting forever).

I have never heard of a large gap between the wedding and reception and I doubt I would like it.

 

[FireDancer]

Quite a few weddings I've been at over the last couple of years had a large gap like you described. It is much more common since most of my friends have their pictures between the two and they go out to a couple of local parks or areas to have them. They don't just have pictures at the church or reception.

Depending on where it is and the time of year we've headed to the bar, to a local microbrewery, or even to one of our friend's house with a pool to swim and have some drinks between the two.

 

[golfgal]

We went to a wedding once that was at 10:00 in the morning. There was no mention of a starting time for the reception on the invite so we figured they weren't doing a dance, etc. It was a 2 hour drive from our house so we just got up early and drove up thinking we would easily be able to get home after everything was done. Well....after the ceremony, which was an hour, typical in the Catholic Church, they had a lunch reception in the basement of the church. They had punch and then food was served at about noon. THEN we find out that there is a dance at 7:00 PM . We had NO WHERE to go in between. This was in a town of 200 people. We went over the next town that has a population of 3900 and found a Pizza Ranch so we sat there for several hours. The dance was really fun but what a silly set up.

We had an evening wedding and the "gap" between the ceremony and reception was a big reason why.

 

[CoP Luv]

I'm younger, but most weddings that I have been to have always had a very large gap. We are Catholic like a pp stated, and you have to have your wedding done before the Saturday evening Mass, which can sometimes start as early as 4:30.

Our wedding was 2 years ago and we had the latest ceremony time possible: 3 PM.

The earliest the reception was available was at 6 PM...at every place we looked at.

I live in a very large city and that's just how it works around here, so everyone expects it and doesn't gripe. Out of the 250 that we had at our reception, we only had about 150 at the ceremony. It isn't expected here that everyone will make it to the ceremony and that there are significantly more people who only go to the reception.

 

[NotUrsula]

I'm younger, but most weddings that I have been to have always had a very large gap. We are Catholic like a pp stated, and you have to have your wedding done before the Saturday evening Mass, which can sometimes start as early as 4:30.

Our wedding was 2 years ago and we had the latest ceremony time possible: 3 PM.

The earliest the reception was available was at 6 PM...at every place we looked at.

I live in a very large city and that's just how it works around here, so everyone expects it and doesn't gripe. Out of the 250 that we had at our reception, we only had about 150 at the ceremony. It isn't expected here that everyone will make it to the ceremony and that there are significantly more people who only go to the reception.

And that's why Catholics traditionally marry on Friday night if they want an evening dinner reception. My wedding, like every other one in my large RC family, was at 7 pm on a Friday, with the reception immediately following. It was a 10 minute drive between the church and the reception venue, and the reception ended up starting at 8:15.

If you are Catholic and want to get married on Saturday, the traditional thing to do is to have a mid-afternoon light-food reception. It is unwillingness to go with Friday that is causing these weird gap-in-the-middle situations.

 

[CoP Luv]

And that's why Catholics traditionally marry on Friday night if they want an evening dinner reception. My wedding, like every other one in my large RC family, was at 7 pm on a Friday, with the reception immediately following. It was a 10 minute drive between the church and the reception venue, and the reception ended up starting at 8:15.

If you are Catholic and want to get married on Saturday, the traditional thing to do is to have a mid-afternoon light-food reception. It is unwillingness to go with Friday that is causing these weird gap-in-the-middle situations.

I have only been to one Friday night wedding and it was because the bride and groom wanted to save money on the reception.

Respectfully, Friday night receptions here are very uncommon because it is very difficult to make the wedding from work. Even if there is a Friday night reception, the ceremony still is in the afternoon. I have never heard of a Catholic ceremony being held at night...but I am also not an expert, just stating my experiences.

 

[Pooh Crew]

You'd lose me from either the wedding or the reception, maybe both. Hmmm...maybe that's the idea?

This.

 

[golfgal]

I have only been to one Friday night wedding and it was because the bride and groom wanted to save money on the reception.

Respectfully, Friday night receptions here are very uncommon because it is very difficult to make the wedding from work. Even if there is a Friday night reception, the ceremony still is in the afternoon. I have never heard of a Catholic ceremony being held at night...but I am also not an expert, just stating my experiences.

We are Catholic and got married on a Friday night like I said earlier. They are more common now but still not as popular as Saturday weddings. We had everyone show up for the reception that said was coming and most, but not all, made it to the wedding. We had our receiving line at the reception because we knew not everyone would make the ceremony-and it was good planning as we had a blizzard on the day of our wedding .

 

[sunnyday123]

I've never heard of this, and why can't they just schedule a different date?? So June 19th doesn't have anything available....pick a different day.

No way would I be waiting 4 hours between a ceremony and a reception, and it's rude to make your guests wait that long.

 

[pigletgirl]

We have an hour and a half between ceremony and reception. There will be little kids who will be getting dropped off at my parents house with a hired sitter who will watch them. While all thats going on DF and I will be having pictures taken at the reception site before our guests arrive.

I would never do anything beyond 2 hours. It'll give people enough time to do what they need to do.

 

[petchie]

My wedding was at 12:30 (full Catholic Mass) Reception was 5-11.

From ~1:30 to 4, while we did pictures and such, the guests were invited back to my parents home for food and drink. My family lives all over the USA, and it was the first time in a long time that we were all together. The time at my parents flew quickly.

Children were invited to the church and back to the house, then sitters/older cousins took over so the parents could go to the adult only reception.

Party at my parents house resumed the next morning!

That is how all weddings in our family are done.

 

[golfgal]

My wedding was at 12:30 (full Catholic Mass) Reception was 5-11.

From ~1:30 to 4, while we did pictures and such, the guests were invited back to my parents home for food and drink. My family lives all over the USA, and it was the first time in a long time that we were all together. The time at my parents flew quickly.

Children were invited to the church and back to the house, then sitters/older cousins took over so the parents could go to the adult only reception.

Party at my parents house resumed the next morning!

That is how all weddings in our family are done.

You didn't really have a break in the activities though since everyone was invited to your parents in between. It sounds like a fun way to do a wedding though because people can sit and chat and catch up without all the music in the background from the dance.