Et tu, Brute?

It's a bit past the Ides of March, but I think the title is still fitting. As was expected, Frank/Easter Group has released their own spin on CFC's ads, complete with their own supplied copies of the March 11 and (newly released) April 3 letter, where they are questioning, of all things, Vatican's judgement.

I'm not going to waste energy on picking their arguments apart, since they've sunk down to a series of "but...but...buts" like petulant children, and have resorted to focusing on a couple of sentences that are truly....well, besides the point. I mean, c'mon now, lets get to THE point you are trying to skip around:

You may not use the CFC name, Frank.

Would you like that in Latin, since you don't seem to like the English used by the good Cardinal of the Vatican?

It is heartbreaking to see you sink down to a legalistic approach (on registering the name with the SEC, since there are supposedly 8 companies that carry the CFC name), which you so blatantly use to attack Joe Tale and the IC with. I'd just like to point out that the SEC will most likely rule on whether your use of the name pertains to an industry similar to that whose name you are coveting and therefore cause legal and consumer confusion. The other 8 names are what, a school, a soap company I think...and well, you get the picture. Or do you?

How do you explain this email then Frank, where you acknowledge CFC's claim to the name but paint the Vatican in a bad light:

Hello all. I am in receipt of the attached letter from the Vatican to JT, which you may already have seen from the Net.

I do not know why JT would want to change the name in the Vatican approval from CFC to CFCGMFI. Perhaps it is to strengthen their claim on the name, since we left CFCGMFI but we did not leave CFC, and this our bishops have recognized. Anyway, the Vatican's reply reinforces our position that there is the spiritual reality of CFC, of which we are still a part, and then there is the legal reality, which is a subordinate reality. It also impacts on the reality that there are many CFC corporations throughout the world.

The Vatican says that the name CFC cannot be used by another association, and rightly so. However, CFC with something attached to it is another matter altogether. In fact, there are 8 corporations with the name CFC (with something after this) that are registered with the Philippine SEC. And of course the Philippine bishops have recognized CFC-FFL.

Bp Gabby Reyes met with Cardinal Rylko last April 21, in response to the lawyering of Archbp Arguelles on behalf of the IC and his brother. Archbp Arguelles, JT and Rouquel Ponte met with Cardinal Rylko last March 3. The fruit of that visit was Cardinal Rylko's letter to JT dated March 11. It was clear they were chastised, and this is the reason the IC never told anyone about the Vatican visit, much less show the Rylko letter even to their own elders. What the IC is doing now is trying to appear to comply with the Vatican's directives, but not really doing so. We pray that the Vatican will see through their machinations.

I have not yet talked with Bp Reyes, but Maribel has. She says he said the Vatican will recognize 2 CFCs in the Philippines, but would not permit the use of the CFC name in other countries by associations other than the CFC Global. If this is so, then it is good news that the Vatican will accept the Philippine bishops' decision to recognize CFC-FFL. But isn't their stand contradictory, accepting CFC-FFL in the Philippines but not "other CFCs" in other countries? I do not have the full story, but I do know, from my own visit last April 7, that the Vatican is concerned about the split that comes just two years after the permanent approval of CFC in 2005. In other words, though it was not said, I feel the Vatican needs to save face. That is why in the letter to JT, Cardinal Rylko stressed that the Philippine problem should not extend to other regions of the world. Of course he did not know that it already had divided the whole CFC world. This is probably because JT assured him that the split was just a local problem with a small splinter group leaving CFC.

So the Vatican might be forced by circumstances to continue to recognize CFC Global, since they exist by virtue of the statutes, even though the election of the IC was done not in communion with the bishops. Legal but not spiritual. What is now important for us is that we also be allowed to use the CFC name, though no longer just strictly CFC but with something appended to it.

I will be following up this email with another a little later. God bless.

frank

Has it come to this? Where you feel you can overstep the Vatican's rule on the matter because YOU think you know what they are thinking? Ingat brother...lest you commit the sin you keep accusing others of.

Well anyway, that's not for me to say, right? I am in no position to judge on whether the Vatican needs to save face, except maybe to recommend a good moisturizer. *drum roll please*

I'd just like to point out one tiny issue that jumped out at me after I saw your opus rely to the CFC ads. You might want to pay close attention to your attachments, since you are still distributing a forgery. Yeap, the March 11 letter you just emailed to everyone is the same document that ABS-CBN has. Et tu Frank?

Why didn't you just send out the one that Lachie received? You've had that even before the ABS article came out and it is much clearer, yet still forged. Or, just ask the Center for the originals? I'm sure they'd be happy to give you a copy.

To end, I'd like to share a bit more on why I don't believe the forged March 11 letter was just mistakenly folded when it was scanned, copied, cried over, whatever.

Lets go back to to the Love and Forgiveness entry. There you will find a letter from Cardinal Rylko to Bishop Reyes, dated March 15. I quote the good Cardinal:

I am enclosing a copy of the letter we sent to Mr Tale regarding also the steps to be taken.

Does it make sense now? Frank's good friend, Bishop Reyes has a copy of this letter. If Frank's copy had gone bad, mysteriously folded, or Photoshopped itself, it would be an easy matter to request another, correct copy from the good Bishop.

IF I was acting in good faith, that's what I would do.

Yet, Frank is email blasting out the forged one, again, and again...and again.

If any of you would like a copy of the Easter Group's response to the CFC ads, you know where to reach me. It's the least I can do to help Frank get his point across to as many of you as possible.

My friends, for the weekend I leave you on a happy note and a tune from the 80's, my favorite decade. In honor of all the spinning going on, here's Dead or Alive's You Spin Me Around.

God Bless and good cheer. =)