When you are the parent of a newborn child, there are a few good reasons to have it baptized.
If you're an observant Christian, for example, you'll want your child to have the advantages of one of the seven Sacraments that will set them on the path to Eternal Life.
Even if you're only a cafeteria Christian - taking what you like and leaving the rest behind - a baptism can be a lovely occasion to celebrate the birth with your family and friends.
But what if you don't care much for the Christian religion, you're at odds with your family, and you've ghosted most of your friends? Why bother with a baptism at all?
The baptism will supposedly be "private", attended by only 25 people, and held in the Queen's private chapel at Windsor Castle.
It's not unusual for a Royal baby to be baptized outside the view of the public; in the case of George and Louis, the babies were only photographed going in and out of church, plus one Press Association photographer providing formal photographs afterwards.
One could argue that baptism is a private, spiritual experience that shouldn't be shared by everyone.
In the Sussexes' case, however, "privacy" is probably more about copyrighting the photos and then charging media outlets to run them, as they have attempted to do with the photo of the Queen and Prince Philip meeting Archie right after his birth.
Charging for photos would seem to conflict with their roles as public figures whose home, travel, and living expenses are provided by the taxpayer.
But that's nothing new for the Sussexes, who seem to frequently use their position to generate income for themselves, money that Meghan spends on PR.
Harry and Meghan will surely be looking for the biggest names they can find.
Of course, they won't be the first parents to choose godparents based on what the godparents can do for the child; having a rich, single uncle as godfather is a common plot point in the novels of Jane Austen and Charles Dickens.
But in a multicultural world, choosing godparents can be tricky.
In the Church of England, godparents need to be baptised Christians themselves. (A priest may ask to see their baptismal certificates.)
This crosses Meghan's longtime friend Lindsay Roth off the list; she is a practicing Jew. So is BFF Jessica Mulroney, whose maiden name is Brownstein - she proudly incorporated Judiasm into her wedding to the Catholic Ben Mulroney. Misha Noonoo is Jewish too. Amal Clooney is Druze, a religion with ties to Islam.
While all of these women may be fine people, they're poorly placed for one of the prime roles of a godmother, which is to help a child grow up in the Christian religion.
For what it's worth, George Clooney has been baptized. He was raised a strict Catholic, although he now calls himself an agnostic.
(Serena Williams is Christian, but she is a practicing Jehovah's Witness. They do not believe in the baptism of babies; they believe that the person being baptised should be old enough to understand the commitment they are making.)
There have, however, been suggestions in the press recently that he is chatting with his old wingman Tom "Skippy" Inskip again.
There's always William - but he's alienated William as well, and William as future king is doing his utmost not to be associated with "Artifichie", who now clearly seems to have been born with the help of a surrogate.
To admit that, however, would mean that the Royal family had been fooled by Meghan, and that's simply too embarrassing and would reflect badly on the Queen.
That's because a British monarch is also the head of the Church of England, and carries the title "Defender of the Faith."
Is Archie eligible for the line of succession?
He has no title, and technically, Royal babies must be born "of the body" of a Royal wife, a rule created long before IVF came into being just forty years ago.
But if nobody's willing to admit that Archie is not "of the body", then one could argue that he is indeed seventh in line to the throne - if he is baptized.
If you're an observant Christian, for example, you'll want your child to have the advantages of one of the seven Sacraments that will set them on the path to Eternal Life.
Even if you're only a cafeteria Christian - taking what you like and leaving the rest behind - a baptism can be a lovely occasion to celebrate the birth with your family and friends.
But what if you don't care much for the Christian religion, you're at odds with your family, and you've ghosted most of your friends? Why bother with a baptism at all?
The private baptism
While nothing has appeared on the court calendar, there have been reports that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will baptise their son Archie on Saturday, July 6.The baptism will supposedly be "private", attended by only 25 people, and held in the Queen's private chapel at Windsor Castle.
It's not unusual for a Royal baby to be baptized outside the view of the public; in the case of George and Louis, the babies were only photographed going in and out of church, plus one Press Association photographer providing formal photographs afterwards.
One could argue that baptism is a private, spiritual experience that shouldn't be shared by everyone.
In the Sussexes' case, however, "privacy" is probably more about copyrighting the photos and then charging media outlets to run them, as they have attempted to do with the photo of the Queen and Prince Philip meeting Archie right after his birth.
Charging for photos would seem to conflict with their roles as public figures whose home, travel, and living expenses are provided by the taxpayer.
But that's nothing new for the Sussexes, who seem to frequently use their position to generate income for themselves, money that Meghan spends on PR.
Godparents must be baptized
There has been a great deal of speculation about who Harry and Meghan will choose for the baby's godparents; according to tradition, there will be two men and one woman for a boy baby.Harry and Meghan will surely be looking for the biggest names they can find.
Of course, they won't be the first parents to choose godparents based on what the godparents can do for the child; having a rich, single uncle as godfather is a common plot point in the novels of Jane Austen and Charles Dickens.
But in a multicultural world, choosing godparents can be tricky.
In the Church of England, godparents need to be baptised Christians themselves. (A priest may ask to see their baptismal certificates.)
This crosses Meghan's longtime friend Lindsay Roth off the list; she is a practicing Jew. So is BFF Jessica Mulroney, whose maiden name is Brownstein - she proudly incorporated Judiasm into her wedding to the Catholic Ben Mulroney. Misha Noonoo is Jewish too. Amal Clooney is Druze, a religion with ties to Islam.
While all of these women may be fine people, they're poorly placed for one of the prime roles of a godmother, which is to help a child grow up in the Christian religion.
For what it's worth, George Clooney has been baptized. He was raised a strict Catholic, although he now calls himself an agnostic.
(Serena Williams is Christian, but she is a practicing Jehovah's Witness. They do not believe in the baptism of babies; they believe that the person being baptised should be old enough to understand the commitment they are making.)
Harry has alienated his friends
Harry, meanwhile, has alienated a lot of the old friends he grew up with since he began his relationship with Meghan, snubbing several by not inviting them to the wedding reception.There have, however, been suggestions in the press recently that he is chatting with his old wingman Tom "Skippy" Inskip again.
There's always William - but he's alienated William as well, and William as future king is doing his utmost not to be associated with "Artifichie", who now clearly seems to have been born with the help of a surrogate.
To admit that, however, would mean that the Royal family had been fooled by Meghan, and that's simply too embarrassing and would reflect badly on the Queen.
The line of succession
There's one more good reason for the Sussexes to baptize Archie: technically, a Royal must be baptised to be part of the line of succession.That's because a British monarch is also the head of the Church of England, and carries the title "Defender of the Faith."
Is Archie eligible for the line of succession?
He has no title, and technically, Royal babies must be born "of the body" of a Royal wife, a rule created long before IVF came into being just forty years ago.
But if nobody's willing to admit that Archie is not "of the body", then one could argue that he is indeed seventh in line to the throne - if he is baptized.
Comments
The entire thing is a sham. Sparkless and Harried (thanks for these . .adding them to my arsenal) really do bring out the worst in each other. Well, in her there is no 'better side'. She is a symbiotic predator that pinpointed with malignant skill (the only skill she has) just which of Harry's buttons to push.
Why hasn't the farce been exposed yet? There could be a few reasons. This is a process. HM is all about the survival and continued secure existence of the monarchy, and she is not about to make sudden moves that will endanger it. I think she and LG will let the press and public opinion bring M down to a level where it will be impossible for her to remain a member of the RF, despite the race/victim/woman cards. Harry will get his divorce and come out a relatively sympathetic figure, especially if it turns out M has substance abuse or mental health issues (which I think are looking much more likely). IMO tomorrow will be a key event in M's downfall, especially if it turns out half as shady as it now appears.
@Elle exactly! Princess Diana would have taken care of herself and remained stylish head to toes.
It's an attitude that unnecessarily puts pressure on women to freeze their aging (with botox, surgeries, procedures) in order to be viewed still viable. Horrible when women tell other women they're frumpy. About as pleasant as the pushy cosmetics person telling you she has something fantastic for the horrible bags under your eyes. Was in store picking mourning for family.
Hmmmm....