| Editor: Brother Bruno Bonnet-Eymard | N° 95 – August 2010 |
|
THE ROMAN DERELICTION OF DUTY
(CONCLUDING AND FINAL EPISODE)
Our friend, Rolland Broquet, whose exchange of correspondence with our Bishop we published (He is Risen n° 94, July) received this short letter from him:
Bishop of Troyes
I thought that our exchange of letters was that of a bishop with someone from his diocese and now they are found in the CRC review. I consider that you have deceived me, that you breached faith with me.
Sadly yours,
OUR COMMENTARY
In a personal letter to someone from his diocese, our Bishop accuses us of lying. The addressee asks me for explanations. I give them to him… with all the publicity that our modest review permits, in order that none of those whom our Bishop privately puts on their guard against us may be unaware of them. The sixty-four thousand dollar question is: Who is breaching faith with whom?
29 June 2010
Feast of SS. Peter and Paul.
Your Excellency,
Mr. Broquet gave me your “saddened” letter, and asked me what was to be done: Not reply? Apologise? I thus take my pen again, publicly, as is right and proper, in order to obey Our Lord: « What you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops » (Mt 10:27), « for there is nothing hidden that will not become visible, and nothing secret that will not be known and come to light » (Lk 8:17).
You should have thought that a good Christian like Mr. Broquet would in all conscience be unable to become the accomplice by his silence of Rome’s dereliction of duty and of Mgr Daucourt, who condemned the Abbé de Nantes without a judgement while letting the opposite be believed, i.e., that a judgement had been rendered.
Let me remind you of the commitment you made when we met at the very beginning of your episcopate. You promised me that you would inform yourself. Now you are informed, with full knowledge of the objective elements of the cause: this allows you to certify that the Abbé de Nantes was condemned without a judgement on the substance and without the possibility of defending himself. The result is that, even if you disagree with his analysis of the Council, and even if the Community is not recognised, as the present Bishop of Troyes, you have the duty of publicly rehabilitating the Abbé de Nantes by officially acknowledging the nullity of the sanctions that were decided by your predecessor, in conformity with canon 1620-7 and 1620-8.
As bishop, successor of the Apostles, guardian of the Faith in your diocese, you have the moral duty of officially demanding that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith act in conformity with the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus to judge the doctrine of the Abbé de Nantes, which I presently defend, giving myself the power to explain fully this thought (Art. 52) to which all the members of our Community adhere, as well as thousands of friends and sympathisers. This doctrine is disseminated in a monthly review and on an Internet site, which goes beyond the limits of your diocese and France.
As for us, with all the respect due to the Bishop of Troyes in communion with the Holy See, we have confidence that you will do your duty; but we know also that if you refuse to do it, you will answer for it before God.