Sunday, April 20, 2008

Love and Forgiveness

Update 4/20/08:

After much thought and contemplation, I decided I should also show you the letter that prompted Bishop Reyes to write his. There seems to be a bit of confusion in the comments as to who Bishop Reyes' letter was addressed to, and this will help clear things up. Also, as to who the source of these letters are, well, they are currently being circulated in the FFL community, so I don't see why we in CFC should not have access to them as well. They are part of the "truths" that are being revealed, and each serve in its own way to give clarity to what is happening now.

So, to give a bit of background:

March 3, 2008.

Bro Joe Tale, along with Archbishop Arguelles and Rouquel Ponte paid a visit to the Vatican on march 3, 2008 and met with Cardinal Rylko. They had, according to the Cardinal, a "dialogue."

March 15, 2008

The Cardinal, presumably out of respect to the official spiritual adviser of CFC, notified Bishop Reyes of Bro Joe Tale's visit in a letter dated March 15, 2008.

March 15 Letter from Cardinal Rylko to Bishop Reyes

Back track...

A few days before that letter to Bishop Reyes, March 11 to be exact, another letter was sent by the Cardinal to Bro Joe Tale, acknowledging a fax sent (I assume, in relation to and in deference to the Vatican's wishes), a recap of their dialogue, and to further clear up the Vatican's wishes. It was this letter that the ABS-CBN got their hands on and made available for download. I believe this letter was sent only to two parties, CFC/Joe Tale and Bishop Reyes, who the Cardinal said he furnished a copy to in his March 15 letter.

About two weeks later...

That leads us now to this letter sent on April 3 by Bishop Reyes to Cardinal Rylko, apparently in response to the Cardinal's march 15 letter. There are many ways to look at this, but as I've refrained from giving my input earlier, I will allow you all to make up your own minds. I think it speaks for itself and the Bishop himself lets us know exactly where he stands in it.

April 3 letter from Bishop Reyes to Cardinal Rylko/The Vatican

I'd like to make a call to everyone for reflection. Let us be careful how WE react.

Anger and vengeance are not Fruits of the Holy Spirit. Reflect deeply on what you really want to express. I will not be moderating comments.

I have tried to detail the timeline of these letters to best of my understanding. I don't claim to know the exact chain of events, but merely used common sense and logic to put two and two together. I may be wrong, and I welcome correction or your own take on things.


Anonymous said...

sabi po ng sulat ni bishop gabby
...the group of Mr. Frank Padilla followed the bishops while the group that is with Mr. Joe Tale did not. The group of Mr. Frank Padilla did not participate in the elections.

naku sorry po talaga, excuse me po bishop pero nandun po si frank kasama si gerry, si lachie, si gie, si maribel, dating mga cfc mga ffl na ngayo. nag register po, kumuha ng balota, nag vote po sa referendum tapos po nag silently, quietly walk out
Pwede po paki correct:
Mr Frank Padilla participated in the elections, he participated in the referendum and then he went out

......The complaints of the group of Mr. Frank Padilla regarding the Gawad Kalinga (which is with the group of Mr. Jose Tale) was proven to be true, namely that Gawad Kalinga was veering away from the purpose and charism of the Couples for Christ

Excuse po uli bishop, mawalang galang na po. Kelan po nagkaroon ng investigation, sino po ang mga umupo sa panel, may deliberation po ba, may complainants, may proof, may research. Bali baliktad po ang process na tinukoy ko, kasi po mukhang naging ganun yung verdict nyo kasi nga balibaligtad ang process. Sorry po muli
Correction lang po sa processo:
Investigation precedes conclusion and verdict comes in the end

.....and that Gawad Kalinga was receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies that produce contraceptives.
Kaunting dagdag po, bishop, it was approved po and nag witness po si Franl Padilla sa signing ng MOA.

....After the elections of June 22, 2007, the Couples for Christ was divided and the two groups exchanged accusations, some of them were malicious and nasty.
Correction po uli:
Hindi po divided, minus lang po; kasi ang umalis po kaunti kaya na bawasan ang cfc, kaya dapat po ganito:
A small group together with the ex-exec director of cfc left/split/went away...

argggg hindi ko na talaga kaya. pero kakayanin ko ito. sorry talaga cd, mahirap huwag magalit, pero tama ka ang galit ay kapayapaan sa puso. I forgive and I will ot jusdge and will not get angry and will not get even.

peace tayo bishop

Anonymous said...

ay sorry po pahabol lang, medyo talagang nanginginig ako kanina.
Ulitin ko lang, ako yata ang dapat na i-korek ang ibig ko pong sabihin-
ang may galit sa puso ay walang kapaya[aan.

peace ulit tayo bishop, hane?

estelito.iii said...

Hi CD!

Long time no write. Although i've been constantly reading updates to this blog via rss reader for the past few months, this time i somehow think i won't be able to sleep if i don't write my reflection on this letter.

first off, to whom was this letter addressed to?

i sort-of understood what bishop gabby was trying to say in the letter. at this point in time i am no longer offended or angered by statements that to which i know deep in my heart have been long discussed and have also been long inside my head as to be "not entirely true".

i'd like to say that the decision of bishop gabby to give the recognition to ffl was one of his wisest methinks. although my heart would have wanted it not to happen, as he puts it in this letter i somehow understand.

BUT, choice of words is what could have been improved in this letter. there are some things as i earlier said that are "not entirely true" to what i have been informed of (note: not claiming i know all the circumstances of these things), that might still be hurtful for others in cfc.

now, what are we, those in cfc to do with this letter? try to understand where bishop gabby was trying to point at. swallow whatever pride and urge to strike back with a witty retort or even try to resurrect arguments of yesterday. let us not be bothered by these things, i know we all know better.

nw19socal said...

Just to be clear and fair, to whom exactly did the bishop address this letter?
Did the bishop wrote this April 3rd letter unsolicitedly or in response to a request or instruction by his superior(s)?

Anonymous said...

Again, and praise God for continually bringing light to those in the darkness, let us all in unison say: WE in CFC love and forgive! We love our neighbors with no distinction as the Father loves all His children.

FULL STOP, brothers and sisters. No sense resurrecting pain and anger on matters that "had been." We are moving on and as the saying goes ... "Only God knows." Let the Good Lord deal with the good Bishop. There is wisdom to be learned in the turn of events.

God is love and division is not part of this love. The question is: Who left? What kind of models are we to our children if we show them via our actions that going away is the solution to problems in the family. Heads up, our conscience are clear!

We have so much to do and time awasting on matters that have no relevance on the love that God is so generously giving us so we can give more. Again, "We in CFC love and forgive."

Jesus I trust in You!
"Show Me"

i_agree said...

sounds like a true member of a communiy for Christ. I agree with estelito:

"swallow whatever pride and urge to strike back with a witty retort or even try to resurrect arguments of yesterday. let us not be bothered by these things, i know we all know better."

i just don't know what will be the use of this blog if that happens.

johnpaul said...

Who forced the good bishop to explain in writing his decision?

Pray tell WHO?

DisappointedAndHurt said...

Simple lang ito mga kapatid. I think Bishop Gabby was reprimanded by Cardinal Rylko for giving recognition to FFL. So he wrote a letter explaining why he took such an action. But we all know that his explanation is not entirely true. Therefore I suggest the IC should request for a different Spiritiual Director. I suggest Cardinal Rosales na lang.

CFC West C Sector said...


It's better to Love and forgive...

Thanks IC!
Thanks CD!
Thanks CFC!

Anonymous said...

Righteous Anger...

I remember Jesus correcting the pharisess and sadducees.

Did Bp. Reyes research the purpose and reason why the election was to be delayed....

Such recommendation was a political ploy to put someone back in power...

it wasnt about unity... everything was pre-plan to a "T" that they even had contingency plans if Fank wasnt able to return....

started propagating that CFC was disobedient to the Bishop's recommendation(tell me common sense, when can 1 be disobedient to recommendation... one can be disobedient to a direct order)

They had no reason to reconcile based on their Easter planning.

We are all equal in the eyes of GOD. We can only try to be accountable but in the end... God knows the measure of one's heart, even bishops, popes, me, you, saints, and sinners.

.... i am just inviting you to look beyond the titles and position and call a spade, a spade... if their is injustice or if truth has been censored or ignored have the voice of courage to say "foul" and call a spade, a spade.

ps. check the major donors (money, land) to diocese of antipolo. It might explain certain points of view. There is nothing wrong with getting donation... it might explain different motives.

I commend and honor those who have moved on. I only ask for your patience if some of us still need to vent out.

Pray for me as i pray for you.

Anonymous said...

the letter was sent april 3, 2008
it was addressed to cardinal rylko.i got this from ffl friend, thank you my dear friend, i got a copy of:
- 2 page letter of bishop gabby dated april 3
- a copy of the letter of cardinal rylko to joe tale (IC) dated march 11
- a copy of the letter of cardinal rylko to the good bishop

1) if this is an internal letter of internal affairs of cfc, as the as explained by the latest email that cfc leaders received from IC, then how come it is an item for discussion within ffl? oh btw these letters is making the rounds of ffl . they knew about this even before us cfc members.
2) if this is an internal letter, how did it get to the abscbn news reporter?
3) let us follow the paper trail, from vatican to bishop gabby- then to ____- then to abscbn?
4) ffl? or cfc?
5) must i send this to everyone?
6) one thing is evident here, add that to this letter of our good bishop to vatican, hahaha is correct our dear spiritual has a heart that beats for another group.

okay cd, i know and i accept that our cfc spiritual adviser loves someone else. well we are told to love one another, so let us just do that and not to forget, love another one too, as our good bishop has shown by example.
thank you

soundtek said...

Hi Anonymous:


The desire of vengeance. Its ethical rating depends upon the quality of the vengeance and the quantity of the passion. When these are in conformity with the prescriptions of balanced reason, anger is not a sin. It is rather a praiseworthy thing and justifiable with a proper zeal. It becomes sinful when it is sought to wreak vengeance upon one who has not deserved it, or to a greater extent than it has been deserved, or in conflict with the dispositions of law, or from an improper motive. The sin is then in a general sense mortal as being opposed to justice and charity. It may, however, be venial because the punishment aimed at is but a trifling one or because of lack of full deliberation. Likewise, anger is sinful when there is an undue vehemence in the passion itself, whether inwardly or outwardly. Ordinarily it is then accounted a venial sin unless the excess be so great as to go counter seriously to the love of God or of one's neighbour.

WillyJ said...

We should know where we stand, I suppose the issues need a clear and definitive Church position, we are not getting it so far and it has dragged on for so long and that is why it continues to hurt a lot of people.

First off, when responding to challenges like this, the faithful Catholic must bear in mind this foremost paramount consideration: Fidelity to the Catholic Magisterium. The Church that Christ founded has persisted and prospered for over 2,000 years due precisely to the preservation of objective morality, the unbroken legacy of the deposit of faith, and most primarily due to the constant protection and guidance of Jesus Christ Himself who said “I will be with you always to the end of the earth”.

The objective truth must be upheld at all times, but this must be balanced by charity, humility and forgiveness. Thus the prime apostle Peter said:

"Always be prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence" (1 Peter 3: 15)

Thus it is with gentleness and reverence that we are to approach the trials and challenges in the course of our practice of the faith, but the primary consideration must be to seek and uphold the Truth. Seek and uphold the objective morality of our faith, regardless of opinions, preferences, personalities and situational exigencies. We see Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI repeatedly affirm there is no conflict with Faith and Reason.

Bishop Reyes’ letter raises a number of issues, but we must distinguish between doctrinal instructions and advise on temporal, administrative matters. Doctrinal instructions in unity with magisterial authority must be unconditionally obeyed, while advise in temporal matters of the laity should be respected but not necessary considered as imperative. Administrative matters concerning organizations of laity are best left for the laity themselves to decide, as long as they stay within the bounds of Catholic doctrine.

That being said, there are certain issues that present themselves clearly as one proceeds with an objective appraisal of Bishop Reyes’ stated letter to the Vatican Commission on the Laity:

1 - “Veering away from the purpose and charism of the Couples for Christ”.

This appears to be a persistent core contention against the CFC. The statement itself is a contradiction in terms. Charism is a GIFT from God, one simply cannot arrogate unto oneself a certain Charism. Charism is freely given by God to a chosen follower or group of followers. 1 Cor 7:7 says: “Each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.” Thus one makes fruitful use of a Charism regardless of one’s personal preferences. No one can choose nor dictate a Charism for himself or for others. One accepts and uses a gift that is freely given to him by God Himself. If a God-given Charism is pursued privately or collectively in a community of believers for the benefit of the Church, then the issue that it changes over time is a non-issue, presuming that it ever does. “Veering away from the Charism...” is definitely a non-issue that, strangely enough, is being made as a prominent issue.

2 – “GK receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies that produce contraceptives.”
Again a persistent contention but thoroughly confusing. Pray tell us the basis so we can understand. A conscientious Catholic should be able to understand whether this specific act of GK in “receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies that produce contraceptives” constitutes formal and/or material cooperation with evil. By formal cooperation, did GK associate itself directly with promoting contraceptives in the course of accepting funds? Did GK as an entity profess sharing the contraceptive mentality when it accepted those funds? By material cooperation, did GK actively participate and help those donor pharmaceutical firms promote and sell contraceptives? Does an objective assessment of this (supposed) formal and material cooperation justify a wholescale indictment of GK? This is a serious issue that needs to be clearly laid to rest both from a clear doctrinal standpoint and the factual incidences relative to GK’s involvement relative to the matter.

3 – Administrative matters concerning Lay organizations.

Belongs principally to the prerogatives of the laity and that is all there is to it. This is especially so when it comes to organizational elections. This is not to say that the laity should not seek the wisdom of its clergy advisors when confronted with administrative matters. Rather, it is prudent to seek spiritual advisors’ inputs when faced with any internal administrative challenges within the lay group. Lay organizations should conscientiously consider clergy advise on administrative matters, yet the burdens, decisions and ultimate responsibility rest on the laity themselves. But when matters of faith and morals arise and the clergy steps in to direct with authority, it is imperative to obey, as a faithful Catholic should. At this point, it is incumbent upon the clergy that the pastoral guidance be explained fully with clear references to Church tradition. When the clergy does in fact come to this, we should understand that the clergy is not and should not be expressing an opinion, but draws from clear magisterial authority. It is all about 2,000 years of church history. It is all about Fidelity, it is all about Faith and Reason. It is all about protecting the Church, and finally it is all about each one of us always “prepared to make a defense to anyone who calls you to account for the hope that is in you”.

God bless us all.

solidyfc said...

Just for the people out there that is thinking that the IC is running this blog, and gonna blame the IC for distributing this letter..

NO, this blog is a personal point of view of T2 CD. Its just his personal way of "defending" the cfc fulture. And is no way speaking on behalf of the council. He just got his sources and etc. And post them. The Ic is not telling him to do it. He does it our of his free will.

And about the letter, I really hope that Bishop Gabby would make his point, because earlier on the year of 2007 he told the news and the CFC that THERE WAS NO DISOBEIDIENCE...tpos ngaun meron ulit?

I hope that we would learn how to REALLY FORGIVE and REALLY LOVE, not just making plastic statements coming out of our mouths and not out of our hearts. This is a part of our work in CFC. God is just bringing us BACK TO BASICS :)

To be a stronger community we must do it out of Pure Love :)

Titos just want to share a verse we learned in SHOUT. I am a YFC btw :) KFC since 1995 just crosseverd on 2004

1 John 3:16-18

"This is how we know what LOVE is. Christ gave his life for us. We to then ought to GIVE our lives for our brother. If a rich person sees his brother in need, and yet closes his heart against his brother. How can he claim that he loves God. MY CHILDREN, our love shouldn't be just WORDS and TALK. It must be TRUE LOVE which SHOWS ITSELF in action

Un lng po :) GBU all

WillyJ said...

“Loving one another” should not preclude rebuking or correcting others, while standing up uncompromisingly for the objective truth. Indeed such love even demands such righteous correction. Try thinking terms of bringing up your own children, and the countless times you have to discipline and correct them out of love. Jesus himself rebuked even his own disciples often enough without mincing words. He even called Peter “Satan” once while rebuking him. I say this because I see that “loving one another” looks like being constantly misconstrued as passively tolerating error in others to avoid hurt feelings at the expense of proper evangelization. Such is a misplaced application in the expression of true love for one another. Being witnesses for the Faith and upholding the truth at all times must be the paramount duty of Christians, as we guide others to the true path as motivated by love. While we go about this, we should certainly moderate it by charity, humility, and forgiveness. But we should never compromise the truth. Now every time we take each other to task for loving one another, we should not stretch it to ridiculous terms that are contrary to what Jesus himself taught.

Anonymous said...

anyone care 2 commment? :)

let_us_be_clear said...

let me summarize what you all are saying here, except for a very few.

CFC THEME: We are under no one. The bishops and Vatican can just recommend.

CFC BATTLE CRY: Blame Frank and FFL! Blame the bishops! Blame the Vatican! Yes, blame the reporters too!

CFC MEANING: Couples For the Council

C.D. said...


Nice one, THANK YOU.


Thanks to you too. =)

To let_us_be_clear:

That's what I call putting your fingers in your ears and screaming "NO NO NO NO!" ike certain children I see in Greenhills when they don't get what they want. Would you like to be lovingly corrected now or later? If you keep avoiding reasonable discussion and keep turning things black and white like that, you might soon find a way to justify the crusades again. Keep it up. =)

In any case, you came to the wrong place to TAUNT.

God bless.

solidyfc said...

to let_us_be_clear

T2 or Tita :) again po, the bloggers here, are not the WHOLE CFC! We cannot just say that CFC is blaming the bishops, frank and etc. because of what is happening. The bloggers here are just people who wants to share their opinions,and share their feelings. whether it may be right or wrong our fellow brothers and sisters may correct them on that

And besides...wla pa po yata ito sa 15% ng CFC members kumpara sa 700 pr 900 K members ng buong CFC. The bloggers and even T2 CD can't represent the WHOLE CFC in blaming people. They can't speak for CFC. The only one who could speak for CFC is the council, the EA or the BOE. So let's review the council's action.

1. Did the council blamed T2 Frank? Na sinabi nilang "AYAN ANG MAY KASALANAN"
2. Did the council popously persisted that they were right in their every moves, or did they remained quiet and promised to solve the issues
3. Did the council threw malicious words to the ones who left? telling that those people are sinful?

I repeat, people who speak in this blog, and even the owner of this blog itself DOESN'T SPEAK FOR CFC ITSELF. Their just expressing their opinion. If you think that this people are not following the theme of CFC "Love one Another" then correct them, do not take their word as if its CFCs official Statement.

BTW T2s and Titas find the song

The Prayer of Saint Francis in your Glory song Book :)

GBU all

Click here: ABS-CBN copy of Letter fr. Cardinal Rylko to Mr. Tale said...

The above link from ABS-CBN News letter. For those who haven't read it....

Love & Forgiveness is what cardl Rylko said in this letter.

solidyfc said...

btw t2s and titas, ndi sa minamasama ko na nka post itong letter ni bishop gabby at ni cardinal, pero isn't that called snooping? Di ba pag nakadress lng kay T2 Joe, dpat si T2 lng makakabasa unless otherwise he authorized us to read it. Its a privacy issue.

And for the letter of Bishop Gabby, naka adress lng po ito sa cardinal di ba? Pero is it true na may circulation rin of this letter to the FFL?

un lng po

Anonymous said...


From your own admission, you do not have direct information on what is going on, so my questions are:

Why do you try to tell the story and invite people to conclude from incomplete picture? Don’t you have leaders that are supposed to do it, if they think it’s needed? Can’t you ask your IC about official statements on what’s happening than trying to understand them?

Nahilo na ako sa iyo. Three days ago, gusto mo ng palitan si bishop, and then thank you dear bishop and now may kasalanan na naman so bishop.

Hindi ba ikaw ang nagkakasala diyan sa ginagawa mo?

C.D. said...


I don't have "direct" information, but I do have the same ones that everybody has, so I'm attempting to get to the bottom of things and sharing my thoughts. Is there something wrong with that?

Also, there was already an official statement, one on the CFC official website and a letter to ABS-CBN.

While I never called for him to be replaced, I did question Bishop Reyes' ability to be impartial, seeing his obvious loyalty to the other group. One can thank him though, and still feel that we are better off with another spiritual adviser, right?


ah-men said...

Anonymous said...


"Why do you try to tell the story and invite people to conclude from incomplete picture?"
brother the picture is not complete for you because you are not a cfc member. for us in the cfc, this letter of bishop gabby complets the puzzle. i have always felt that something was wrong in the 'picture', that bishop gabby did not seem to fit in the affairs of cfc. am i the only one? no. this letter is the proof that bishop gabby is definitely 'the spiritual adviser' of ffl.

"Don’t you have leaders that are supposed to do it, if they think it’s needed?"
comment: yes, we do and we know what they are doing. precisely because you are not a cfc member you are not aware of this.

"Can’t you ask your IC about official statements on what’s happening than trying to understand them?
comment: yes we have IC statements which was sent out to all members. our exec director joe tale was on the radio last night explaing all this.

"Nahilo na ako sa iyo."
kaya ka nahihilo kasi hindi ka kasi cfc member, all these are internal things in our community. if you want to understand more, come join our clp and be a couples for christ, or hold, or sold, or sfc, or yfc...whatever applies

"Three days ago, gusto mo ng palitan si bishop, and then thank you dear bishop and now may kasalanan na naman so bishop."
matagal na namin hinihingi na palitan si bishop gabby, ayaw niya. so what else is there to do but say thank you and to forgive him of all his kasalanan

"Hindi ba ikaw ang nagkakasala diyan sa ginagawa mo?"
'and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from every evil'


ah-men said...

comment to what, let_us_be_clear said...

"CFC THEME: We are under no one. The bishops and Vatican can just recommend."
comment: we are one with the church, but it is not blind obedience, but active submission. now, it is a mouthful definition but one does not have to be a harvard graduste to understand. active submission is what is being done today, as it should be

"CFC BATTLE CRY: Blame Frank and FFL! Blame the bishops! Blame the Vatican! Yes, blame the reporters too!"
our battle cry is-
Lift high the banners of love, sound the trumpets of war, Christ has gotten us the victory hallelujah!

"CFC MEANING: Couples For the Council"
comment: you absolutely show what ID you are wearing because mine says-
Couples For Christ!

Thank you brother for your comment, as cd says anger is not a fruit of the spirit.

Comment: Know the spirit by its fruit!


Anonymous said...

Comment lang po on the letter of Bp. Gabby Reyes...

My Dear Bishop,

It is so obvious naman na you are too bias in rendering your judgement. Ginamit niyo pa ang pangalan ni Bp. lagdameo and Bp. Villegas. Mukha naman pong taliwas ito sa results ng dialogue ninyo of both CFC and FFL with the commission on laity.

Bishop, (naturingan pa naman kayong Bishop) hindi bat kayo ang ang pastol ng iglesia? na sana'y nagiging bukal ng pagkakaisa at pagmamahalan, ng kapayaaan at pagpapatawad. Bakit ngayun...ipinalandakan niyo pa ang mga ganitong bagay, nung magpa-interview kayo sa abs-cbn. Mukha yatang naging kasangkapan pa kayo na masira ang CFC sa publiko!

Hwag niyo naman gamitin ang inyong pulpito para pumanig sa iisang grupo. Hwag niyo gamitin ang inyong abito para pumanig sa iisang tinig. Hwag naman po sana ninyong gamitin ang inyong "cap" para lalong pag-initin ang dalawang kampo. At higit sa lahat, hwag niyo naman gamitin ang tungkod ninyo para sa pansariling kapakanan.

Ikaw man din ay tao rin, hindi ka perpektong obispo, at wala kang infalliability. Bakit hindi mo subukan kunin ang opinyon ng mga kasamahan mong obsipo na may miyembro din ng Sangguniang Layko, at pag-usapan ng maayos kung papano na hindi kayong mga obispo makasakit at bagkus maging kasangkapan ng pagmamahalanat pagkakaisa ng dalawang panig. Kung banat kayo ng banat ng mga pahayag na sobrang "obvious" namang panig sa FFL, katulad ng:

1. gaya ng sinabi ninyo: "the complaint of FP regarding GK (headed by JT) were proven to be true that CFC is veering away of the true charism of CFC."

comment: Talaga bang nag"veer-away" ang CFC? Nagkaroon ba ng hearing on both sides and presentation of evidence? Did the Committe on Laity conducted an oral argument on both sides to present the both sides as to why or why not it veered away? isang araw lng naman kayong nag-usap, at hindi niyo pa pinagharap yung leaders ng both groups, tapos hindi pa yung mga mismong concern ang nandun sa dialogue, tapos sasabihin ninyo. nag-veer away na!

2. "...that the group of FP followed the bishop's recommendation and the group of JT did not."

comment: Bakit hindi ninyo sinabi sa letter ninyo ang reason according to CFC (header by JT) kung bakit they proceed with the election? Kayo na rin ang may sabi na wala nga kayong authority sa CFC on a national level, then sana pina-unawa niyo kay Tito Frank na wala nga kayong authority on the national level. And they should not capitalize that issue as a basis for saying, defiance to the bishop, disobedience to the bisop and etc. At hindi rin kayo dapat na magtampo pa or bigyan ninyo ng personal na grudges and hindi pagsunod ng CFC to postpone the election. You know the fact nga na walang authority ang mga bishops over the CFC on a national level (legally) tapos kung maka-hirit kayo sa statements ninyo, parang ang kulang na lng i-excommunicate ninyo ang CFC. Sana turuan niyo si Tito Frank na kilalanin ang independence ng CFC authority on the national level. Kaya nga binigyan ng Vatican at ng CFC ng recognition ang CFC as a "private international association of the faithful" to enjoy the priveleges of that association katulad ng th right to elect leaders, tapos ngayun sa inyo pa kami makakarining ng mga kung anu-anong pahayag laban sa election na yun!

3. "...we did our best to maintain their unity and prevent from irreperable division by asking them to postpone the election"

actually to be honest Bishop, with all due respect. Si Bp Lagdameo, naniniwala ako na he did his best to maintain unity.. dahil aside from recognizing both groups in his diocese, he directed both groups to respect their different charisms, and thrusts. He instructed his people in the diocese not to do anything that would harm each other. In other words, close the issue and move on. The same with Bishop Soc, when he opted to remain silent after the election. Pero with you bishop, i do not think you did your best to maintain the unity. In fact have to realize now that what you are doing (making these statements, sending a bias report to the vatican) is again waking up the tension between the two groups.

My piece of recommendation to you my dear Bishop:
Please tell tito Frank to shut up and just focus on his mission. itigil na sana natin ang tirahan sa isa't isa! Hindi na sila pinapatulan ng IC actually, but with these statements, you are forcing the IC to make a statements so as not to confuse their members! Whatever communications you have with JT, vatican, CFC-IC, will you PLEASE maintain the confidentiality of that to the person involve and instruct the FFL not to make it as their discussion topic for their meetings! I think you have more auhtority to Tito Frank because he belong to your diocese! Tell him to shut up and the rest of his members!



Bishop, Kung seryoso ka nga talaga sa sinasabi mo na you want to maintain peace and unity among the two groups! Ito ang recommendation ko!

1. Direct Frank (not to convince but DIRECT) tutal he is under your diocese, to move on and refrain from attacking CFC-IC by waking up these issues again. Tell him that the issue between him and the IC is over. And the issue between the Church/Bishop and the CFC-IC regarding his complaint with veering away, should be dealt by your committee only with so much CONFIDENTIALITY! if Frank listens to you then i belive that he is an obedient catholic. but if not, then it is all HYPOSCRISY!

2. Conduct a series of dialogue between the bishops (member of the Committe on Laity) and the workers of GK. Listen to them first. Clarify the issues, request Tony Meloto is possible, Luis Oquinena, Issa Cuevas and Joe Tale-as chairman and discuss how we could better improve the work with the poor programs of GK. Attend in their GK Congress, Expo, Summit and build a house yourself. At saka mo sabihin na nagveer away kami sa charism. Magpainit ka sa init ng araw the wholeday, humawak ka ng martilyo at pako, kasama ng ibang mga bishops, matulog ka sa GK sites kasama ng mga mahirap, makipaglaro ka sa SIBOL at SAGIP at SIGA. At saka mo sabihin na nag"veer" away ang GK.

3. Arrange a dialogue with the CFC-IC, talk to them together with the other Board of Elders. Once and for all, please close the issue with them. Kung hindi madala sa isang araw na usapan. Conduct it in a series of meetings. I hope the IC and the Board of Elders will find time to discuss these with you!

4. Please lang, handle all these things with extreme confidentiality and outside the influence of your good brother Frank Padilla. To be honest, bka naluto na rin yung utak ninyo! He must be out of this together with his influential companions too!

5. makakamtan mo ang tunay na pagkakaisa at kapayapaan!

Kung hindi mo kaya o ayaw mo gawin ito, you better resign as chair of Sangguniang Laiko! To be honest, you have mess us all!

I say this Bishop to you, with all my heart and with all my love to the Catholic Church.

Sana lang ilagay niyo rin sa Canon Law na ang ordinary lay man can correct a Bishop or Cardinal! Para naman fair!


Pakipasa naman ito sa mahal nating obispo.

PS: If this is too personal attack, sinadya ko po para naman klaro yung punto ko!

Anonymous said...

Will somebody please remove the confusion in the Bishop's mind about the elections of June 2007?

Will somebody please send the Bishop that agenda/minutes of their strategy meeting detailing the planned non-participation of the FAP's Playboy Bunnies / Easter Group team on the election, should the Elders Assembly proceed with the 7-0 election?

The Bishop withheld critical data in his letter to the recipient --supposedly Cardinal Rylko?-- so you could see that Bishops are just as human as you and me; and very political too!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

A simple catholic believer's plaint about Bishop Gabby Reyes:

-- Bishop Gabby I have prayed for you to see the light relative to that simple matter your duplicity, i.e. that of your being openly pro-FFL/FAP and spiritual adviser to CFC. The prayer I asked God of was for HIM to tell you NOT to be in a 'conflict situation' nor place yourself in a potential situation where you Bishop's honesty may be put to a test and query. I see that you remain in that position to this day. So God has not replied to my prayer.

-- So starting today, I will now add another prayer. I will plead to God that your Church elders, particularly Cardinal Rosales, the Papal Nuncio and Cardinal Rylko and your Bishop peers in the 'Laiko' talk to you as a friend to show their love for you by giving you advise to quit this; to tell you to step down as CFC's spiritual adviser (S.A.).

-- I will also pray that you pour out all of your remaining physical energies towards the rearing, tending, gawad-ing kalinga to your FFL followers, specially your most special & beloved friend & their President, FAP!

-- Pag ginawa po ninyo ito Bishop, meaning binitawan ninyo na po ang pagiging S.A; then kahit no po si God ay hindi na malilito sa conflict ng inyong prayers for FFL (mas marami siguro prayers para sa kanila) at para sa CFC (naniniwal po ako na kahit kaunti pinagdarasal din ninyo ang CFC - kasi ng spiritual adviser kayo di po ba?)

Salamat po Bishop

Athrun Atreides said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

disobedience is such a big word, if you call your son disobedient it is because he does everything that is contrary to what you say- EVERYTHING- he does not inform, does not consult and always acting and deciding independently. i think that was not the case for the CFC.
To say that the group of JT and the group of FP(parang barkadahan or a frat, the term used is not reflective of who we are)
There was a 'recommendation'. it was discussed, the IC at that time consulted leaders and bishops, just like an obedient child. The election was held Frank and eastergroup participated in the referendum. Was it part of the election- yes! Otherwise the election would have been a moro-moro. First part was a referendum and the second part was the election of IC and BOE. That was the complete process. To walk out after the first part does not make it less of a participation. They participated and the procedure was legal.we can not go around in circles forever, at some point we have to move on.
fact: election was legal
it was not disobedience
everyone participated

Bishop gabby said: The complaints of the group of Mr. Frank Padilla regarding the Gawad Kalinga (which is with the group of Mr. Jose Tale) was proven to be true, namely
a) that Gawad Kalinga was veering away from the purpose and charism of the Couples for Christ
is this true- no
purpose of cfc- evangelization
it is the same (yesterday today and tomorrow)
charism- proof of the workings of the Holy Spirit is gk, it is the flowering of the cfc community, after under going renewal it is now open to do God's work- care for the needy

b) Gawad Kalinga was receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies that produce contraceptives.
is this true: yes
is it wrong:
yes, according to the vatican
not in the eyes of cfc members

bishop gabby said: Had I not acceded to their request to be given recognition as a diocesan association of the faithful, they would have been disappointed and disillusioned with us bishops. They would have felt that they, who had been obedient to the bishops regarding the elections, were the ones who were abandoned by the bishops, were left out in the cold.

fact: We have a spiritual director today who guides not our community to peace and understanding. CFC was the one left in the cold.

bishop gabby said: To my mind, we have just to make the best of the situation. My decision to give the Couples for Christ for Family and Life recognition as a diocesan association of the faithful was prompted mainly by pastoral reasons.
fact: bishop gabby wields more power than he thinks he has. he has the power to end this conflict. one directive- tell frank and the ffl to go ahead and do their work- with one distinct marching order- go and do it with their own name Foundation for Family and life.

Otherwise FFL will always be the Amalekites who stood in the way of the Israelites in their journey to the promised land.

monette said...

hi cd,

i received a text message last night that Joe Tale guested at DZMM/ ABS CBN tele radio from 8:30 - 10pm. Sayang I read the text message at 10:30 pm, so tapos na ang program.

i hope, that someone, recorded the program and is willing to share it to everyone through this blog.

i am very interested in what Joe Tale has to say. (let us continue to pray for his, he is still recovering from malaria)


jonitanitayturin said...

1. Anonymous says,
“I commend and honor those who have moved on. I only ask for your patience if some of us still need to vent out.”

Thank you, brod/sis... I say, we are all moving on, even as we clear away the path we’re following through our own forgiving, panting towards a better-paved highway... In God’s time, of course. So yes, we’ll see this through for love of that Man on the Cross, our God, who is “The Truth.” HE will set us free.

2. CD, we may be looking at seven (7) or more letters/documents here. Based on my understanding of the sources available through this blog, I have listed these:

a. Sometime, 2007 - Reyes to Turjillo – (implied in the letter of Turjillo to Reyes)
b. Nov 26, 2007 - Turjillo to Reyes (ABS-CBN; FFL website)
c. Before March 3 - Letter/s re: visit to Vatican by Tale, Ponte, Arguelles (???)
d. After March 3 - Fax from Tale to Rylko; Recap by Rylko or by Tale (???)
e. March 11 - Rylko to Tale (ABS-CBN)
f. March 15 - Rylko to Reyes (ABS-CBN; IDOTRCFC)Was there another so-called “letter-reprimand” from Rylko to Reyes sometime here?
g. April 3 - Reyes to Rylko (ABS-CBN; IDOTRCFC)

3. His Excellency Cardinal Rylko instructed Bro. Joe Tale in the letter of March 11, thus:
“...In this regard, it is important that you follow the recommendations that the ecclesiastical authorities have indicated.” He furnished Bishop Reyes a copy of that letter on March 15. On April 3, Bishop Reyes informed Cardinal Rylko of his recommendations to avoid the split of CFC and his reasons for acceding to it with his formal recognition of the breakaway FFL. So, may I caution: “Mga kapatid, igsoon, hinayhinay lang…make haste slowly…festina lente”.

4. WillyJ here has accurately discussed (wow!, bless you, brother) the objective philosophical and theological norms that underpin an episcopate’s intervention in the administrative matters of lay organizations. All this and the related bloggers’ comments will hopefully “bring the good Bishop to a boil!” (pun included). Yet, in view of Cardinal Rylko’s directive, we may now have to stop our “beating to pulp”, and “bickering” on the definition and use of the term “recommendation”, and make every possible effort toward a loving disposition and obedience to Bishop Reyes, who is our Spiritual Adviser. God will certainly make a way to make him love us, too. Or we may engage him on this subject some other way and some other time, perhaps?

5. Now, about our own grappling with bits of the TRUTHPasensiya na, CD and all, but really I am bothered that we’re all (treated) like hungry dogs lunging at every bit of bare bone that is thrown around...THIS MUST STOP! In the light Cardinal Rylko’s directive to follow our bishops, “where’s the beef” from the IC? Or may the hungry and suddenly angry mouths NOW TURN AGAINST their handlers, so to speak, for those “kernels of information” that MAY have curiously turned hateful because they are seemingly regarded as some kind of charism, the same “gift” that was morbidly assumed by a former and dissident CFC leader as exclusively his!!!???

CD, it really pains to even faintly consider this, but......“Et tu, Brute...” Not you, of course, but perhaps one or some of them?

Anonymous said...

Cardinal Trujillo has passed away. May God rest his soul in peace.

Anonymous said...


Because of this blog you are causing others to sin, i.e. quick to judge other person, especially a bishop! I remember the issue before was about the CFC split with LNP and I think all the CFC elders are guilty of this, not just Frank Padilla. I think Tony Meloto and Roquel Ponte have a lot of explaining to do. But this ABS-CBN report came in to the picture and totally changed the issue. Going back, one blogger called for a public apology from these elders because of dishonesty in leadership.

Anonymous said...

Kawawa naman ang FFL... lahat na lang gagawin nila so they can prove to themselves that they made the right choice...

I really pity them. I think they REALLY deserve our prayers.

May God Bless Them.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...


"Because of this blog you are causing others to sin, i.e. quick to judge other person, especially a bishop! I remember the issue before was about the CFC split with LNP and I think all the CFC elders are guilty of this, not just Frank Padilla. I think Tony Meloto and Roquel Ponte have a lot of explaining to do. But this ABS-CBN report came in to the picture and totally changed the issue. Going back, one blogger called for a public apology from these elders because of dishonesty in leadership."

yes bro,this blog will lead to sin, if you will be angry, if you will judge, if you will call others to judge and be therefore, let us follow what cd is saying to exercise restrain and to remember that the fruit of the spirit is peace.

this blog gives us an opportunity to ask ourselves, can we be peaceful and not be judgmental faced with real exchange of letters that we read here?

to be a disciple is to do that which the Lord wants, not what we want. to carry our cross, to love the cross we carry and to carry it everyday. He requires 'dying to ourselves', to say no when we want to say yes. to be peaceful instead of being angry, to understand others instead of judging them.

therefore bro if you say that this blog causes others to sin it includes you. perhaps you too should look inside yourself and ask- is this blog leading me to sin? if the answer is yes, then please refrain from visiting this site. sabi nga ng kanta, tukso layuan mo ako!

Anonymous said...

listen to the interview of JT last night

part 1
part 2

Anonymous said...

Greetings to Everyone!
Peace and goodwill po,

sabi ni Bishop Gabby Reyes:

"The complaints of Frank Padilla regarding Gawad Kalinga (headed by Joe Tale) was proven to be true, namely that GK was veering away from the purpose and charism of CFC and that GK was receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies that produces contraceptives."


1. On receiving funds from pharmaceutical companies:

My dear Bishop, i think that the CFC_IC have made a strong stand on the statement tey have made concerning their commitment for PRO-LIFE. I Hope that you would give them that of your full trust.

2. That GK is veering away, ... that there is over-emphasis on social over spiritual..and etc.

Bishop these statements are debatable and argumentable. The evidences presented by FFL during your August 2007 dialogue as well as the queries made is not a sufficient proof to conclude that GK veered away from the charism and purpose of CFC. In fact, GK is the fulfillment and realization of CFC's charism and purpose. Anong saysay ng aming kakasigaw ng "praise the Lord" at "alleluiah" kung paglabas namin ng simbahan, maraming mahihirap ang nagugutom, walang matitirahan, ang namamatay sa simpleng sakit dahil sa walang pera, ang nagiging mahirap dahil sa sila'y dukha? Our religious practices would all be another level of HYPOCRISY if we will not do real love for the poor.

The truth is, GK unmasked the hypocrisy in the many faces of CFC. mas madali kasing magsabi ng tungkol kay Kristo kaysa sa ipadama si Kristo sa mahihirap.

it is unfair Bishop that you will say it is an "over-emphasis" when we do our christian charity out of the box.

It may be true, that there were some cases as cited by FFL as their grounds why GK veered away from CFC, but again we will say that this is an ISOLATED CASES and does not reflect the totality of GK mission and vision.

and you have insulted us, the hundreds of thousand of volunteers, who were not paid and do a lot of sacrifices for the poor. Yung mga CFC members pong wala na ngang sariling bahay, yet they still afford to help build houses for the poor.

It is painful and insulting for us when you concluded by saying the GK veered away from the charism, when it was thru CFC and its teachings that made us to be selfless in helping the poor without any salary or compensation or allowance. Wla na nga kaming tinatanggap, tapal pa kami. Kung hindi niluto ng maayos ang mga utak namin by the teachings of CFC on how to love the poor, maybe matulad kami ng mga hipokrtiong pariseo at hudio na lumayas na sa CFC.

We believe that what we did was our ultimate sacrifices for reaching out to the poor and also evangelizing the rich.

Maybe, what Frank understand of evangelization of the poor is for the poor to join CFC, and evangelizing the rich and the powerful is also by making them join CFC..para he will have a strong control over the weak (poor) and the powerful (rich donors) Huh! I tell you..its a big DUH!

And since they (FFL) seldom or rarely hear the word "CHIRST" or "GOD" in the GK sites, they assume that the GK work is overemphasizing social over spiritual. That they say we are giving social services without God. Ang galing naman umaniobra ng kwento ano, Bishop? Paniwalang paniwala din kayo?

But Bishop, you fail to see that more of proclaiming the gospel by word of mouth, we proclaim Jesus, the risen Lord, by action, by doing it. By expressing it rather than just saying it. Palibhasa kasi, si Bro. Frank ninyo hindi naman araw-araw sa GK sites, hindi naman siya caretaker eh, hindi naman siya community organizer, or program manager. Taga-tingin lng sila (FFL) kapag may malaking event, saka lng sila nandun, pero wala sila sa mga day-today na trabahong behind the scene. Mas madalas pa yata sila sa Roma, vatican, USA, Canada, kasama ng mga obispo at kapariang sosyal din.

Bishop, bibigyan ko lang kayo ng pala-isipan. How would you feel, if the lay faithful conclude na masama ang mga pari at obispo, kasi nang-re-rape sila, si Bishop Yalung may tatlong anak pa! Si Bishop Bacani nagka-issue pa ng sexual harassment sa isang dating secretary niya, at lalo na sa USA. inakupo! ang mga pari dun maramin bakla at pedophile! Is it fair and just ba Bishop to conclude that the Clergy are veering away from living their true vocation as a consecrated man of God? Of course ..hindi... dba? Isolated cases lang lahat yun..dba? At you handle the matter with extreme confidentiality from the lay faithful dba?

Eh di sana, iyang ganyang proseso din ang inisip ninyo na binigay sa CFC at GK. Isolated cases does not make a conclusion that CFC or GK has veered away! And handling these issues should be dealt with extreme confidentiality with only those leaders involved.

Ang nakakalungkot pa nito,si Cardinal Rylko request CFC to make a public apology for that isolated cases na as if Bishop, it was the center of GK work. Naturingan pa naman kayong Spiritual Adviser namin, hindi niyo man lang kami pinagtanggol. Pa-request -request pa kayo ng PUBLIC APOLOGY from CFC, hi hindi niyo nga magawang ipa-PUBLIC APOLOGY yung mga kapwa ninyong CLERIKONG nagkasala ng kasalanang sexual, bagkos, tinatago niyo pa ito sa publico. Of course we won't ask the clergy to do a public apology on matters of sexual abuses by the priests.

My point is look at the biggest HYPOCRISY behind the scene. Hindi hamak na mas condeming yung failures ng clergy kaysa sa mga lay faithful.

Ang hinihingi ko lng po,...sana mabigyan ng patas na pananaw ang mga bagay na ito! And give justice to the sacrifices of hundreds of thousand of Catholic Christian volunteers who selflessy gave themselves for the the work with the poor because of their great love for GOD.

Maraming salamat po


Anonymous said...

I listened to the whole Radio interview last night with Bros Joe Tale and Greg Monteclaro on a DZMM Radio Program hosted by 2 SVD priests: Fr. Bel San Luis and Fr. Jerome.

Isa lang ang masasabi ko: Sobrang bait ni Joe Tale... kung saan pwede na siyang "bumawi" at "gumanti" sa lahat ng mga maling pinagsasabi ng FFL, hindi niya ginawa.

He did not even correct the statement that "frank Padilla is the founcder of Couples For Christ".

Hello? How can a participant be a founder?

WillyJ said...

Is it licit for GK to accept donations from pharmaceutical companies that sell contraceptives?

Upon application of the principle of cooperating with sin, it appears that GK, in accepting donations from pharmaceutical companies selling contraceptives, commits a mediate, material cooperation which is remote to the sinful act of marketing and selling contraceptives. The act is still permissible as it applies to the principle of double-effect, wherein the unintended bad effect of potential scandal is considered indirectly voluntary at most. The act itself furthermore do not constitute a scandal in the sense that the act of accepting donations is not intended to lead others into the sin of using contraceptives. If GK publicly makes its stand of denouncing contraceptives at the same time as it accepts those donations, then that should reinforce the non-applicability of the scandal clause. Nevertheless, accepting such funding might create confusion among the faithful, as they might give the impression that the use of contraceptives is acceptable practice. Applying further the factor of proportionately serious reasons, the remote serious harm of creating confusion while accepting donations must be ranged against the immediate serious work of helping the poor which GK has been addressing to a high degree of success, which in turn redounds to God’s work and consequently the work of the Church. I think the late Cardinal Sin was somehow thinking along these lines with regards to his publicized stand on accepting donations.

So my short answer is yes, under the conditions, it is licit for GK to accept donations from pharma companies which sell contraceptives, and it does not constitute a sin as well. I am not a theologian though and I am willing to be corrected on this.

Anonymous said...

Well, the Lord said the truth shall set you free.

Maybe on a bigger scale the Lord allowed CFC to go through this trial so He could use it to correct the clergy as well.

The Lord will look into the many things written here about Bishops:

a Yalung with kids,
a Gabby Reyes with two faces - one for CFC and one for FFL

Pareho pareho tayo mga kapatid... ako marami din sala
si Frank Padilla meron din
Si Joe Tale meron din

So let's all pray, pray pray!

Anonymous said...

I understand the hot issue here is about the GK partnering with a pharmaceutical company, perceived to be an anti-life device or drug manufacturer.

This is water under the bridge, but we all also know that if there was no such thing as a resignation in February, and election in June, and an official launch of FFL in August (all in 2007), then this matter about partnership with corporations providing GK with tainted funds would have been all non-issues to CFC. Nor GK.

Why? Because at that time cockpit of CFC plane would still be Capt. Frank Padilla...and Bishop Gabby Reyes would be happily 'bugging' only his fellow Bishops and priests in the 'Laiko'! And he would only be a spiritual adviser to CFC on paper and all of us in CFC will be 'unconcerned' about the church or clergy demands on CFC -- ably justifying our common act by merely parroting what our esteemed leader/writer/author said in our 'CFC best-seller - 'Friend or Foe'

But those days are gone forever, because God willed it so!

God separated us! Maybe God discovered who is the ‘Foe’

Then He watched how everyone re-acts!

Fast forward to March-April of 2008 and this moving event of Tale-Rylko and Rylko - Tale communication is putting us all in a tense situation again. And the Bishop is merrily re-hashing old arguments and this time his audience is the good Cardinal Rylko. Meantime, he exposes himself that he is actually confused on his role: Defender ba of FFL or Spiritual Adviser of CFC?

On another hand, Tale/Ponte makes a decision (after convincing some of the CFC IC who were not in the know, because they were not in Vatican with Cardinal Rylko) that they had to put out an ad in the papers, admit a scandal and apologize for it and then keep the decision to the 7 of then and then boom! They went to Vatican with a complete file of the documents of the 2007 split of FFL people, but at the last minute, they did not leave it with Rylko.

Effect: We had to print an ad with Phil Star! We had to terminate a contract, and in the process lose a brother and his wife and a sister in their CFC service, confuse & stun the members with surprise because the communication(letters) they had with Vatican were kept to themselves (confidential is the term); while on the other hand an ABS-CBN writer (who I suppose is so innocent of the whole expanse of this reality) receives a copy or copies (ganoon na ba ang journalism ngayon?) and follows her instincts and writes an article.

In effect, what was happening was the media had the info but the leaders of CFC under the IC did not know what hit them....kaya ngayon we have this bundle of inputs in this blog. And Joe Tale had to bother being in DZMM telling all interested to listen about what we already know. These talk shows can’t get into the real meat of the problem. Thanks to CD, we have a way to express our thoughts and feelings.

Now as a member of CFC, what do I do?

Pray for our Council for none of them could really makes us all happy individually nor as a council.

Pray for them that sometimes it is better for them to forewarn their members of whatever storm they are about to lead us to. If you review meetings and memos, there was none whatsoever that officially informed the CFC leadership body in Metro Manila about that result of the meeting with Vatican. So about the admonition and being chided, we had to learn it from Ms. Fonbuena! (buti pa siya ni hindi yata siya SFC, meron siyang balita!)

A last un-solicited advice to CFC IC, each time you think confidential… please be advised that the information is already with Bishop Gabby Reyes or Frank Padilla.

malachi3/widows might said...

It is joyful that Cardinal Rylko of the Vatican wrote Bro Joel Tale and the CFC a letter of guidance and "admonition". Why ? because it reiterates its Vatican recognition to CFC. Eat your heart out Biboy and FFL. Do you have such a letter? Wala kasi your not recognized by the Vatican. The Vatican does not recognize "usurpers"

Anonymous said...

here is another REAL CFC member, yeah the Couples For the Council attitude -:)

malachi3/widows might said...
It is joyful that Cardinal Rylko of the Vatican wrote Bro Joel Tale and the CFC a letter of guidance and "admonition". Why ? because it reiterates its Vatican recognition to CFC. Eat your heart out Biboy and FFL. Do you have such a letter? Wala kasi your not recognized by the Vatican. The Vatican does not recognize "usurpers"

Anonymous said...

Hi everyone,

I am just trying to go over the Letter of Bishop Reyes' letter to the Cardinal.

Your Eminence/Your Excellencies

the love and joy.....

"With regard to the conflict in the Couples for Christ, I would like to explain to your good self as to why I, as Bishop of Antipolo, gave recognition to the Couples for Christ for Family and Life (the group of Frank Padilla)recognition as a diocesan association of the faithful".


CD, Aside from the letters you have posted in this blog, are there any other letters that the Cardinal sent to Bishop Gabby asking for his explanation as to why he gave recognition to a new group who claim CFC? If there is none (mga kapatid) and the only letter is the one where Cardinal Rylko reported to Bishop Gabby regarding Joe Tale and Roquel Ponte's visit to the vatican, i have not seen in any part of the letter asking the good Bishop to explain!

Does this mean, the good Bishop becomes defensive? Does this mean that FFL or Frank was a bit worried because he realize that it is not only him who can go to the vatican but also Joe and Roquel? Does this mean that FFL is afraid that the vatican will hear a different angle of the story of separation and crisis?

Now, FFL in their "sound the trumpet" claims that they proclaim the truth. Why not allow CFC (headed by the IC) together with its GK board present and explain themselves to the vatican too?

Are you afraid that the real truth will come out?

"When the three bishops, ...made a strong postpone the election...the group of Frank Padilla followed...while the group that is with Mr. Joe Tale did not. The group of Mr. Frank Padilla...."


I think, since you have done an explanation as to why you recognize the FFL group in your diocese, then to be fair and impartial, you explain in a good and understandable manner as to why the CFC proceeded with the election. How many times the IC, the Board of Elders and the Elders Assembly have cleared this things to you, yet you repeat the same issue like Frank.

Bishop, please make up your mind, is the election matter CLOSED or is it still grudging your heart? Legally, do you have the right to resent? When CBCP gave CFC a national recognition as well as the vatican for international recognition, do you recognize also CFC's privelege or right to excercise their independence on matters of ADMINISTRATION and GOVERNANCE being a lay organization?

CFC governance issues are purely political and has nothing got to do with the matters of doctrine and faith. This things should not be mixed up. But FFL is trying to mixed these two so you have a reason to come in.

"The complaints of the group of Mr. Frank Padilla... was proven to be true..."


Where is the truth, when there was no real communication between you and GK? You did not asked the GK workers to come and explain to you and listen to their explanation, did you?

I think Bishop it is better to say it this way,:
"There might be some cases that veers away from CFC's commitment to Pro-Life but does not embody the whole program of CFC and its work with the poor program called GK. Thus, I urge the present CFC council to convene together with the GK Board and me as their spiritual adviser to discuss and come up with the clear guidelines concerning the matter so as to protect the integrity of CFC as a pro-life organization." Does it sound more humane and consoling Bishop?

"After the...elections the CFC was divided and the two groups exchanged accusations."


What did you do Bishop on the middle of exchanging emails being their spiritual adviser? It would not reach to a separation, if had you release a STOP ORDER for both camps to exchange accusations.

What is more disheartening is you recognize the group of Frank, when you yourself allow that there will be two groups in CFC.

"A month later, the group of Frank came to me telling me that they would like to separate from the group of Mr. Joe Tale and form CFC-FFL. The reason they gave was to end the tension and hostilities..."


Bishop, as of today, did the tension and hostilities end? Maybe for CFC-IC it was over but not for Frank and the FFL.

Have you asked them (FFL)of what is their real intention in forming FFL? Did they form the group to provide them an opportunity to serve God according to their own charism and spirituality or did they form the group to counter the existing CFC and to prove to you and to the CFC IC that FFL is right and IC is wrong?

I thought, you have instructed both parties to move on and do service to God according to their own charism and spirituality? Why is it that until now, FFL looks for every opportunity or create an issue that would exalt themselves to the high heaven at the expense of putting down the CFC and the IC?

Are you serious in your instructions Bishop? Bishop Lagdameo made a letter addressing all the CFC in his diocese to respect each others charism. Being the president of CBCP, FFL should have heeded on that direction but they did not? Now, is it not that FFL is defying the bishop's directions?

sinabing tumigil na ...sige pa rin ng sige!

"...Besides, after the was hard for them to work together again."


Bishop, I do not think it is hard, if you have told Frank to be submissive to the CFC that he himself has molded. If he thinks that he have given his 26 years in CFC, he would have trusted on the wisdom of his new leaders and elders in the community.

Frank should not have to be afraid to submit himself to the IC's authority in the same manner that the hunders of thousands of members all over the world have entrusted their spiritual life to Frank. Don't you know that an ordinary CFC member (Before the split and in the early years of CFC)would believe more of Frank's direction that of his parish priest or Bishop?

But why Frank did not submit himself? Why he did not trust that the council is competent enough to deal his complaints without his influence? What is he afraid of? Is it because he doesn't want the way the IC will handle the issues and complaints? Is it because he has his own solution to his own complaints and he wants to make sure that his own solution will prevail?

"Furthermore, they say, their group has a different thrust and emphasis from that of the group unde Mr. Joe Tale."


Bishop, the CFC's thrust, vision, mission and philosophy have not changed and will never change! This is the assurancde that the IC have given to all the members worldwide.

Now, FFL have told you that they have a DIFFERENT THRUST AND EMPHASIS. Meaning...they are no longer CFC! Isn't it? CFC says "we remain to where we are", FFL says, "we are different"...therefore they are no longer CFC!

"Had I not acceded to their request to be given recognition as a diocesan association of the faithful, they would have been disappointed and disillusioned with us bishops...."


Bishop, all i could say is DUH!
What sort of right do they have to be disappointed with you? If they are really true to their advocacy of submission to the Bishops, it should not be them controlling or manipulating you but it must be you who have full control over them, isn't it?

If they are really obedient to you, they will no longer question you supposing you will say like this, "Frank, submit yourselves to them (IC), be obedient. I will take care and assure you that i will guide them (IC). No need for you to form a new group."

Besides, the council term is only 2 years, Bishop. Why not ask the group of Frank to wait for two years. Give the new council the chance also to prove themselves of their competence as leaders who can lead the CFC in the next two years.

"They would have felt that they, who had been obedient to the bishops regarding the election, were the ones who were abandoned by the bishops, were left out in the cold."


Bishop, don't be too childish like them in rendering your judgement. Why would they feel that you will abandon them or left them out in the cold? That's preposterous!

Both groups know and even you that CFC has the right of independence on matters of "governance". Do you recognize that right? Do you recognize that privelege?

If they resent to you and feel abandoned supposing you advise them not to form a group but submit themselves to the newly elected council, then all i can say is that they have not grown up in their maturity after being in CFC for the last 26 years! Akala ko ba bawal magtampo sa CFC?

"Although hampered by the fact that we, .....did not have authority over CFC in the national level, we did our best to maintain their unity and prevent irreperable division by asking them to postpone the elections.?


Bishop, as you have said, you do not have authority on the national far as ELECTION matter is concerned. I just hope that you respect CFC's privelege on this case and make the FFL to understand the same.

Since, you do not have full authority, it is only JUST that CFC can proceed with their election as they wish and according to the dictate of their conscience even if this is not in accordance to your recommendation. All i just hope is that you have not hold grudges or resented on this and FFL have also respected this privelege. And should not be used as a basis for the reason of separation.

I belive my dear Bishop, that the real reason for their separation, was because they were not happy with the result of the referendum. What they want to happen did not happen and since they do not want to gave up on their agenda, few days after the election Frank appeal to the international community for withdrawal of support to the IC. Until they choose to separate and form the FFL.

Now you added the injury by allowing them to form a new group and even give them diocesan recognition.

In truth, there is nothing wrong with what you have done if they form the group for the purpose of catering their charism and spirituality, but they have used you and your position to spread the lies by claiming that CFC defies the Bishop, that we are disobedient and so on and so forth. How did they use you and your position? Well, by quoting you all the time into their advantage and attack the CFC-IC.

"But the group of Mr. Joe Tale went on with the elections. Now, the Couples for Christ is divided."


I beg to disagree that the cause of division was the election. FFL and Frank's move to form a group and separate from CFC is the cause of division. Their strong insistence of what they want , which the majority of the elders and leaders have not agreed with them have made them disappointed and walked out in the middle of the election.

These scenario Bishop, is no longer new even within the Catholic heirarchy. Take the example of Soceity of Pope Pius X, the protestant and etc.

Please do not discredit the CFC or the CFC elders who went on with the election as the reason for division. It is their (FFL) own will to separate themselves from the community. They should be responsible for their own action, and should not pass on the burden of guilt to the leaders who decided to proceed with the election. They must also respect the wisdom of the elders assembly. Have they done that..there would be no division. Have they followed the statutes and the by laws, then there whould be proper order.

"The division is irreparable, in the sense that it is very hard for the two groups to work together again."


Bishop, it would be irreparable if FFL choose not to repair it. CFC-IC extended their hands already, they did not fight back in malicious pronouncements from FFL, but it is still hard for FFL to lower their pride. They were the one who left, who separated, then they should be the one to come back..and besided we welcome them in open arms.

It would not be impossible for them to work with us, if they know how to be submissive and obedient, like how they taught us before.

It would be reparable if you order the FFL to dissolve their association and merge with CFC and submit to their authority and order CFC to accept them and forgive everything. let us see who is the real obedient in your order.

"To my mind, we have just to make the best of the situation. My decision to give the CFC-FFL recognition as a diocesan association of the faithful was prompted mainly by pastoral reasons".

Reaction/ Question/Comment:

Bishop, can you cite few of your pastoral reasons as to why you recognize them?

And since it is because of pastoral reasons, can you pastor them and their actuations? Let them all close the issue and never talk again or bring it in public attention thru news and media, and ask them to focus on their own work, charism and spirituality.

God bless you all!

Bro. Mero :-)

CFC Global... Warming!!! said...

Actually, Bishop Gabby doesn't recognize the FFL.

(Weh! you might say, but hear me out.)

He recognizes a group called "Couples for Christ for Family and Life", as seen in his letters.

That is the group he recognizes, not "Couples for Christ Foundation for Family and Life".

"Couples for Christ for Family and Life", for all intents and purposes, is a fictional group, as real as, say, the World Organization of Human Protection.

Ergo... the diocese that supposedly was the first to recognize the FFL...doesn't actually recognize it at all.

(Of course, this is just word play, people... I wish my analysis was true, but it's just a technical matter that Bishop Gabby has yet to address.)

Deo Volente said...

To "CFC Global... Warming",

It's not in our culture to twist words. Leave that to the politicians.

But yes, that's a funny and entertaining post. :-)

Orlando said...

Gud pm po, to mr./ms. anonymous (april 20, 2008) and to brods and sisters in both CFC and FFL. Let us all pray for the deliverance of our community. Kung sumunod lang sana cla sa suggestion na hindi muna magkaroon ng election at lutasin muna ang problema from within. And ngayon naman sinasabihan ng Vatican na magkaroon ng public apology. HINDI PA RIN SINUNOD ANG VATICAN. Saan na kaya tayo pupulutin. CAN WE STILL THRUST OUR LEADERS.

JOJO BAJAR of Laguna

malachie/widows might said...

To anonymous who called me a real CFC member "Couples for the Council",just to inform you that there is no such organization. Couples For Christ, Foundations of Family life,Ligaya ng Panginoon. There is no Couples for the Council. Its obvious this anonymous does not know where he or she belongs. Iam glad you are FFL move on kapatid.

C.D. said...

To Orlando/Jojo Bajar:

Please read this:

Then go here:


C.D. said...

To everyone,

Just a little reminder to keep it nice in here. Thanks guys.


Anonymous said...



malachi3/widows might said...

I am having doubts about this blog, is this helping us? As a vent of our pent up emotions siguro,please correct me if I am wrong or enlighten me.Our culture in CFC has been to honor one another. But what will we as CFC do when we are being attacked,shepherds have the rod and staff as tools of his trade. The staff for correction(used to prye the thick wool of the sheep to remove lice or kuto in Pilipino) and the rod for warding off attacks from wolves. Is it okay to use the rod to ward off the attacks of FFL? the ABS CBN spin saan galing yun? sino may motive? Sino nagbibigay ng disinformation sa Vatican, sa mga Ubispo at kay Bishop Gabby e.g. Frank Padilla's group did not participate in the June Elections,Frank Padilla was not party to the signing of MOA with Pfizer. Yes we are indeed not against mere mortals but principalities,forces of evil. I think we should all follow the example of Bro Joe Tale and that is responding to all evil with goodness and love. Love conquers all.Iam appealing to FFL members to follow the example of Bro Joe Tale.

Anonymous said...

To: Orlando/Jojo Bahar or Laguna:

Bro, I beg to disagree on the thought that..."had the 4man-council or elders assembly followed the recommendation to pstpone the election, there would be no separation or we would not have the kind of crisis we are having now."

I think it is unfair for the elders assembly to ba tagged as disobedient since CFC being a recognized private association of the faithful has all priveleges to excercise on matters of the association's governance.

What i see is,... had we CFC (both who stay in IC and joined FFL) remain submissive to our leadership and faithful to our by laws and have respected our long-time tradition of election, then we have prevented the crisis.

I am just wondering, for a long time that we had so many crisis, yet we remain strong and united and it did not shaken the community. Remember, the times when the Urgino left, the move of CFC Las Pinas to be dependent and many other crises, we followed our by laws, and we trusted the wisdom of our leaders.

When Frank voluntarily resign, i cannot understand, why he cannot trust and submit to the wisdom of the 4 remaining council whom, he prayed over in the MCG teaching, who he worked with for a very long time, whom their children are long time friends.

Why FFL has to accuse the 4-man council a Meloto-sided council?

Maybe they have their own arranged solution already and that any other proposed solution that would not coincide or would not lead to their ultimate solution is totally unacceptable to them. Isn't it? What's the proof? READ THEIR MINUTES OF THE MEETING..

This is (as for me) is the ultimate cause of the crises and separation! When we fail to trust in the wisdom of who is in the top leadership. Akala kasi ng FFL..sila na lng ang nakakaalam ng lahat ng sagot at solution sa CFC. And without them in the top governance would mean to them that CFC will veer away. Haaaay naku!

Bro. Mero :-)

oe said...

i received a paper entitled "The Real Issue, The Real Truth", which supposedly is from the CFC Ugnayan Media Center, and is a response to FFL's "The Real Issue".

Mentioned in it was a letter from Cardinal Rylko of Vatican to the IC upholding the statue that there can only be One CFC in the world and that no other association may use the name CFC.

CD or anyone, can we post this letter here?

Anonymous said...

i always hear people say that frank resigned, but never heard people say that he was removed from service. viva IC! :)

Anonymous said...

make me a channel of Your peace
where there is hatred let me bring Your love