Etienne could have been a godparent for historical reasons. He certainly lived in a place and time when Europeans and natives intermixed. This moment wouldn’t last long near Quebec. His children moved away from Sillery in the late 1670s. The last natives left the Jesuit reserve by the end of the 1680s.
Still some ancestors, such as the Leodet/Nepveu/Pinel line did not appear in native baptisms even though they lived at the same place during the same time. So Etienne could have been a godparent because of temperament. Maybe he was outgoing.
If so, other ancestors were too. The Hayot family that Etienne Denevers married into served as godparents to native Americans also. In the following 1654 record, both Etienne’s father-in-law, Thomas Hayot, and Etienne’s wife, Anne Hayot, served as godparents to native children.
Thomas’ children/Anne’s siblings, Genevieve and Jean, also served as godparents to native Americans at Sillery in the 1650s.
Did they all have bubbly personalities? My guess is no; that temperament is only part of the answer. Instead, I think ambition united them. The Leodet/Nepveu/Pinel line was wracked with challenges (a marriage dissolved by bigamy, a brother convicted of rape). I think they had their hands full getting by. On the other hand, Thomas Hayot was a community representative (Cap-Rouge’s delegate to the People’s Assembly.) Etienne Denevers held three concessions at Sillery when most only held one. I am thinking that these ties through god parenting — to natives and to the Jesuits — might have been useful networking to people working to get ahead.