The conventional wording seems to cover it all. If it ain’t broke, why try to fix it?
Bride and Groom
request the honor of your presence
at the Nuptial Mass uniting them
in the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony
I especially like the emphasis on the unitive aspect of the wedding ceremony.
At a stretch you can add “participation, and witness” after “presence,” but—as Catholic1954 pointed out—if the overwhelming majority of your guests are practicing Catholics this is likely redundant.
Yes. Be correct, but don’t bluntly use an invitation as catechesis. It is more gracious to assume that Catholics know these rudimentary facts about marriage.
Host(s) Full Name(s)
request the honour of your presence
at the Nuptial Mass uniting (their daughter, their children, them–name relationship between hosts and the bride and/or groom)
Jennifer Ann (Lastname, if not the same as the hosts and not known to everyone getting an invitation)
and
Nick Allen (Lastname, also if remotely possible it isn’t known to every person getting an invitation)
In the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony
Saturday, the twenty-second of August
Two thousand and fifteen
at nine o’clock in the morning
St. Peter Catholic Church
Weddingtown, State
You can be as formal or as informal as you like with the names, but just remember before jumping to the conclusion that everybody knows everyone else how many people from your own church you can picture without knowing their legal first and last names. Err on the side of more specific naming. How many of the people who know you can’t spell your name correctly?
Remember: People use the invitation to look up the wedding registry of the bridal couple online. Make certain the first and last names of the bride and groom are listed, if those are not the same as the hosts.
(PS Do we even need to say it is still tacky to list the sites at which the couple has registered? I didn’t think so. That is a question that must be asked before the gift recipients presume to answer it!!!)
