My sister recently had her child baptized in a private ceremony by a priest who is a family friend. (I understand that it’s no longer customary to have baptisms this way, but during the mass).
A bit of background: my sister is a non-practicing catholic who recently married a non-believer in a civil ceremony. I believe that she wanted the baptism performed more out of a sense of tradition than a true spriitual need. What I found appalling is that one of the Godparents is a practicing homosexual, who is also a non-practicing catholic.
I am very disappointed that the priest did not delay the baptism in order to thoroughly discuss my sister’s spiritual state and marital lack of form. To the best of my knowledge, the priest did not seek to ascertain the spiritual states of the parents and godparents during the brief 10 minute meeting he had with them a few weeks prior to the baptism…during the baptism, the priest allowed the non-believing spouse to participate in the baptism by allowing him on the altar, and by asking him the basic question about whether the child would be raised catholic.
Am I wrong here? I firmly believe that the child has every right to be baptized (and Im happy she was), but I also feel that the priest did not follow procedures adequately. I feel that the baptism should have been delayed so that my sister could be made to examine her faith and come to some understanding that her marriage is invalid. Maybe the priest didnt want to cause anyone to be uncomfortable, but then again I feel it was his duty to point out to my sister that she should return to the Church.