Allow me to elaborate. When I was an "active" parochial priest, I would never, ever, just baptize a person or young child because the people came and wanted him/her baptized (especially when I had an Hispanic congregation, or one along with the English). I required more than just being in the church on a few days. In fact, as I did for marriages, I required that the parents of the child and the god parents as well (if possible), come to the church for at least three months before I would even consider baptizing or performing the marriage ceremony.

I further informed the people that if during that time they didn't think that this was the place where they would want to continue coming and make their Christian journey, then they were free to just go, without any explanation to me. On the other hand, if they decided that they found that what was being taught by me in the parish, and how we conducted our orthodox and traditional liturgy/Mass, was what they desired, and they were willing to commit themselves to remaining in the parish, then we would begin the matter of the required instructions for the parents/god parents, and/or the couple, depending on the case. I explained to them that this was done because I wanted to know how the child was being brought up and if he/she was going to learn the essentials of the full Christian Catholic Faith, and how they were raising the child. With the couple, I wanted to know how they were treating each other and how they were practicing the Faith. Consequently, I did not just perform any of these Sacraments on whim.

When I started the priestly office, in the Missionary Diocese of Panama and the Canal Zone, back in early 1965, I did the very same thing in the new mission church that I started in the country. Except that I demanded that if the child was going to be baptized, both parents had to be present for the instruction and baptism. This, because it was the habit of the people to just send the child with the god parents.

Again, people accepted this. As a result, I didn't have droves of people coming in for baptism. They understood that I had very stringent requirements for bringing the child into the Christian life. On the other hand, after I was transferred to another church in the Canal Zone, and another priest was sent there, I read where that mission had over 300 people on the records. That just blew my mind and I proceeded to find out.

When I asked the priest about it, he casually informed me that the mission needed funds so he was just baptizing anyone who wanted their child baptized. He said that there were specific times on Saturdays for these baptisms, and all anyone had to do was come, pay the money and the child would be baptized. I was dumfounded and explained to him that this had never been done before and that the people were always willing to contribute, with their small pledges, and more when needed. Well, this was not good enough for him.

So, now you know how many of these Latin American dioceses, especially Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and possibly Puerto Rico, may be able to increase their so called "growth in membership". . . baptisms can be performed just to obtain funds. I have seen this happen, and the Annual Parochial Reports support this by considering their membership in the category of baptized members, rather than the former communicant members.

The Episcopal Church may be "growing" by presenting revisionist, heretical teaching, or just telling people that "sin doesn't exist" anymore, but those attending Episcopal churches in these countries are certainly not fulfilling the basic Christian way of life or the demands of baptism.

---Fr. Fred L. Raybourn, Jr. SSC is an orthodox and traditional Anglo-Catholic priest living in Nebraska where he served St. Martin of Tours Church, from 1993 to 2003 (Catholic parish, English, with a Spanish congregation which he began in 1996). He retired from the parish in 2003, but remained there as they could not obtain a priest that met their parochial requirements. In July 2007 the TEC powers wanted to establish a "strong Episcopal presence in South Omaha", and he was told to move on saying that he was too old, but "my orthodoxy was the real reason."