Proof of Invalid Baptism from Novus Ordo
No Protestant Infant Baptism
Clear the Reasonable Doubt
April 1, 1998
on Lent, Self Denial, Penance &
by Fr. Lucian Pulvermacher, OFM Cap.
Lent, A Sacred Season
We see that the world has gone mad over self-gratification which spills
over in sin and misery even in this life. It also points to a future
existence in hell for that general public. We want neither hell nor
misery in this life.
The world is bogged down in the sins of the flesh, leading to promiscuity,
unwise marriages, divorce, homosexuality and the like. Stealing becomes
a way of life for those who must have a fix with dope when they are out
of money. Single parent families become the order of the day.
Irresponsibility from generation to generation brings on the ugly welfare
state. I learned from a mathematics professor in Los Angeles that
sixty percent of his students flunked the course in the state school.
When he taught in a Christian school, only one out of a whole class would
The loving discipline of the Church makes good citizens on earth and
saints for heaven. Here is how Our Lord expressed the discipline
He imposes upon us. In Matthew 11, 30 He says:
?For my yoke is sweet and my burden light.?
A yoke is log with neck grooves that is placed upon the necks of two oxen,
so they can pull equipment with a load attached to it. It is to be
noted, as spiritual writers point out, that we are not alone with the yoke
on our neck. Our Lord is beside us under the same yoke helping us carry
it, if we invite Him to do so.
The Christian life entails self-denial, and yet that self-denial performed
with the help of God, keeps us in the order of right reason. In that
there is holy purity, marriage without divorce, sensible drinking without
getting drunk, absolutely no use of dope and so forth. There we see
the truth of Our Lord?s words; ?For my yoke is sweet and my burden light.?
Works of Penance
The works of penance are
Let us increase our prayers during Lent. If they cannot be increased then
we should make our prayers ever more devout. Fasting has to do with
any mortification, all the way from giving up sin to giving up many lawful
things for the love of God. In order that Catholics perform works
of self-denial, the Church imposes upon the faithful certain acts of self-denial
such as we see in the laws of fast and abstinence. Non-Catholics
who have no such laws find themselves weighed down with laziness and sin.
Their yoke is heavy and their burden is bitter.
What we note in scripture is that holy men of old were persons who gave
alms. They helped the poor, for the poor are wards of God, and helping
them is as helping God Himself in those poor. Any time we help our
fellowmen in any way for the love of God, while in the state of sanctifying
grace, we set ourselves up to be rewarded with a supernatural reward in
heaven. God accepts those acts of charity just as if we did them
to Himself -- how wonderful!
Even little children should be taught to give up, during Lent, such
things as candy, sweet drinks, treats and the like. They can be taught
to eat their cereal without sweetening and so forth. Unless the parents
are mortified themselves, they will find it hard to train their children
in mortification. Children can be taught not to touch a novel all during
Lent, and then it may be that they will never or hardly ever waste their
time on such useless and generally mind-weakening reading. Let us
try to make this Lent the best one we ever lived. We will know and
experience the truth of Our Lord?s words, ?For my yoke is sweet and my
Observations on the Rite of Baptism
We are taught in the catechism that for a valid sacrament we must have:
Although it is not generally expressed there is another element that must
always be present, and that is the proper rite. Let me explain
- lest you think I am adding something that does not belong to Catholic
the proper matter,
the proper form
the proper intention
I feel sure that all of you have heard about the way the Church always
treated Anglican Orders. In a formal document, Pope Leo XIII declared
Anglican Orders invalid - not because of improper matter or because of
improper form or even because of improper intention of the minister.
He condemned Anglican Orders because the rite used did not sufficiently
express the Catholic intention to make a valid Catholic priest. He
had to admit that they ordained men to be priests, but he said that the
word ?priest? was neutered of its true meaning; it was emptied of the Catholic
theology of the word. Hence, that was the point of condemnation.
Once again, Anglican Orders were condemned to be invalid not because
of lack of matter (although that may have also been present), not because
of form (although that may have been present) and not because of the intention
of the minister (although that may have been present), but because of the
defective rite. Let us put it this way. If the rite is defective,
even if all the other elements are one hundred percent present, the sacrament
is still invalid. We have seen the sign on the road: ROAD CLOSED
-- BRIDGE OUT. Then we know for sure that we cannot sneak through,
no matter how we try. The same is true when the rite of a sacrament
is no good.
There are two things that can ruin a sacramental rite. The contrary
intention of the one(s) who wrote the rite and/or the very wording of the
PROOF of Invalid Baptism - from Novus Ordo Ritual
I shall start out with a classical example where the makers of the rite,
independent of any words in the rite, neutered the sacrament of baptism
for the Novus Ordo. I have before me the following book: The Rites
of the Catholic Church, as Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical
Council and Published by Authority of Pope Paul VI. English translation
prepared by The International Commission on English in the Liturgy, PUEBLO
PUBLISHING CO, New York Their imprimatur is dated July 14,
From pages 3 to 12, the heading of each page is: Christian Initiation.
From pages 13 to 182 is written: Christian Initiation of Adults.
From pages 183 to 284 is written: Baptism for Children. Would
any one of you who reads this believe that the rite of ?Baptism for Children?
is meant to give more reality than was given to the adults? Note
well, both of those headings (for adults and children) were introduced
by ?Christian Initiation.? My dear friends and enemies: both
adults and children according to the authors of this Novus Ordo rite receive
no more than initiation. Pope Leo XIII would say in this case:
?Baptism for Children? is emptied of its true Catholic meaning. Although
the word baptism is used, in this case, it really means initiation.
We shall look at the matter and form of the adult baptism as seen on
page 147, Number 356 of the Novus Ordo ritual:
?The celebrant takes baptismal water from the font and
pours it three times on the bowed head of the candidate, baptizing him
in the name of the Trinity: N., I baptize you in the name of the Father,
he pours the water a first time, and of the Son, he pours the water a second
time, and of the Holy Spirit, he pours the water a third time.?
I see the matter (water) properly applied, so the matter is valid, and
the form is perfect. Let us (for the sake of argument) presume the
minister really intended to do what the Church does. The rite still
makes that baptism at best doubtful and at worst invalid.
For the baptism of children I want to bring out two things. The
intention of the rite is doubtful/invalid by reason of the titles
on the pages of the introduction and the rite for adults, as pointed out
On page 234 of the above noted Novus Ordo ritual we read:
?Celebrant: Is it your will that N. should be
baptized in the faith of the Church, which we have all professed with you?
There you have, as with the adult ?initiation? (note the word, baptism),
what one could call a clear case of (1) valid matter, (2) valid form and
(3) valid intention to ?do what the Church does.?
Parents and godparents: It is.
?He (the celebrant) baptizes the child, saying: N., I
baptize you in the name of the Father, He immerses the child or pours water
upon it. and of the Son, He immerses the child or pours water upon it a
second time. and of the Holy Spirit. He immerses the child
or pours water upon it a third time.?
Let us discuss the point that I have used against the validity of this
procedure in my document on ?The Vatican II Rite
of Baptism - for Children - Is it valid??
The questioning as just stated above is: ?Is it your will that N. should
be baptized in the faith of the Church, which we have all professed
with you?? The italics show a modification of the word baptized.
Let me explain this.
Doubtful or Invalid Baptism
If you stop at a fruit stand where they have all the fruit boxes with mixed
fruit (pears, peaches and apples) you get just that when you buy one.
If you say I want a fruit box with only apples, that modifies the word
?fruit? which was (pears, peaches and apples), and so the pears and peaches
are now missing. In the Catholic rite the question is like the original
fruit parcel: ?Do you wish to be baptized?? There are no modifications
to ?baptized?, so what Catholic theology tells us, is in baptism; you get
all of it. With a sacrament you get it all, or you get nothing. The
Novus Ordo baptism for children gives, at best, a doubtful baptism, and
at worst, an invalid baptism. Since I left the Novus Ordo in 1976,
the above has been my judgment and my decision; hence, there are no doubtful
or invalid baptisms in the flock that God assigned to me to bring into
the Catholic Church. I repeated each and every Novus Ordo baptism
conditionally -- as one and all will testify. When the new and true
Pope appears on the scene it will be up to him to pronounce officially
on this all-important matter. If per chance, my judgment was in error,
I did no more than give a conditional baptism, so I did not place an unconditional
sacrament of baptism on a valid baptism. My knowledge of the above
facts forced me to act as I did for the glory of God and the salvation
There are times when there is a very narrow gray line between a certainly
valid baptism and a doubtfully valid baptism in the case of Protestants.
In no way or form am I involved in the heresy that says ?heretics cannot
administer valid sacraments.? Here is my faith. Heretics have the
power to administer valid sacraments - any person on earth for baptism
? and valid bishops for Holy Orders - period. If a sacrament becomes
invalid, is it because of one of the above mentioned defects; (1) in the
matter (2) in the form (3) in the intention and (4) in the rite itself
(as understood and declared by Pope Leo XIII in his judgment of the Anglican
Protestants Do Not have Infant Baptism
If Protestants, as a policy do not have infant baptism, that is a source
for doubting their proper intention. It indicates that they give
baptism merely as a rite of initiation as the Novus Ordo now proclaims,
as seen above. Why? If they can look on their child going though
death without doing all they can to have it baptized, they show that intent.
They even say, ?Wait to baptize them until they can determine if they want
to be a Protestant or not.? That is the same as saying, ?Wait to
put them into the Boy Scouts until they determine they really want to be
a Boy Scout.?
Clear the Reasonable Doubt
We must never use probabilism in regard to performing or accepting any
sacrament. If there is the least reasonable doubt, one may not let
it go until the doubt is cleared away.
You may say God would never let anyone give an invalid sacrament.
I know that He will never permit invalid Orders to get into His Church
so that the Sacrament of Orders ceases to exist. Just look what happened
to a papal election. God permitted all the Cardinals to elect a non-Pope
when they elected John XXIII. Had the Cardinals acted responsibly,
they would not have brought the Novus Ordo misery into this world.
A valid baptism is most important. If one?s baptism is invalid,
he never ever validly receives any other sacrament. He gets forgiveness
from mortal sin only through the act of perfect contrition. God will help
him in that if that is all he has to work with because of his invalid baptism.
A Catholic with an invalid baptism (sacramentally) is no different than
any other pagan in the world.
Example of Novus Ordo Error on Baptism
I have before me an original parish bulletin from HOLY ROSARY CATHOLIC
COMMUNITY, August 17, 1986, Medford, Wisconsin 54451. Before bogus
Council Vatican II, that place was rightly called a Catholic Church.
Among other things the priest, Father Den (so signed - nice and mod) said:
?The Church (world-wide and local) [I
am glad he added these words for you to see.] in its view of God
sees Baptism as being certainly important -- but it does not perceive Baptism
as being totally essential for a baby?s salvation, as understood at one
time. ?Limbo? was never an officially defined truth in the Church.
Original sin is not looked at in the same way it used to be -- God also
loves the un-baptized very, very much.?
Except for my [comment]
above, that is his text, word for word.
God's Love for Baptized and Un-Baptized
God surely loves all creatures, un-baptized ones also, but only as natural
beings. He does not see Himself in un-baptized babies in the form
of sanctifying grace, so there is no reason to say that He ?also loves
the un-baptized very, very much.? Father Den is a false prophet bamboozling
a gullible public. The Catholics that I serve hold the above bulletin
in their packets of documents which I freely distribute - year in and year
It is a sin against the Holy Ghost to refuse to accept the known truth,
and those who commit that sin are given over to believing lies.
Knowing what I know about the Novus Ordo baptisms, I have from the very
beginning (1976) given conditional baptism to all those who joined me in
the Catholic Faith.