I always saw the Couples for Christ split as the natural lifecycle of an organization that's grown too big such that it finally gave way to entropic chaos (the historical Catholic Church is an even better example). But the Foundation Family for Life (FFL) versus International Council (IC) issue seems to be littered with the interests and egos of the elder leaders. Or so it seems from my limited point of view.
I'm going to take a more parochial view and relate the conflict to what SFC NY itself is experiencing right now.
In Singles for Christ New York, I often joke about not being concerned with the CFC division and picking sides because we're already in a three-way split anyway. I'm talking about the competition between units. This little crack never fails to elicit a few laughs.
Apart from the units, we're split more granularly into the groupings of friends. We call those groupings "barkadas". Sometimes we call them "cliques". Sometimes, we need to see them as both.
The competition or lack of cooperation among units is political, and it's similar to the high-level spat that the IC and FFL leaders are having. Although ours is more subtle.
Personally, I cannot even confirm the said "competition or lack of cooperation". The only reasons why I assume it to be true is because (1) when you make a remark about it in the presence of leaders, the leaders confirm it and (2) no matter how you try to ignore it, you feel it to be true.
The other kind of division, the "barkada" groupings may be attributed to cliquishness -- and that very well may be the true. But sometimes it's really just the way people are. There are people who naturally jive, while some combinations of personalities may seem a bit toxic. This is the only real challenge that has to be worked out -- working together and achieving our goals and ideals despite differences in personalities and backgrounds. The diversity, when worked through, actually contributes to the richness of the community that we serve.
The conflict between units -- the division that people talk about but no one will officially admit to -- is what I've always found bewildering.
I've been hearing about it for a while but have managed to ignore it for the past year or so because it didn't seem practical. There are specific strengths and talents that differ in concentration among the units. It makes little sense for one unit to do without the others. The "autonomy" among units made sense only on paper (and in people's vanities), but is not feasible in real situations. For one thing, such real autonomy was never achieved.
Division serves a systematic purpose in any organization. It's the science and economics of it: it's why units are divided into households, and households are only optimal up to a certain number. I've always thought this sense of order and organization was one of the strengths of the CFC ministries that facilitated its rapid growth. The formal division is really for administration purposes.
But the division conjured by the egos and vanities of the people in SFC NY is obviously un-Christian. It defeats the purpose of the organization. It's petty and political. It really does not deserve all the attention it gets if only it did not pose a real potential problem. And that's essentially how I think anti-cooperation here closer to home relates to the larger FFL-IC war.
But I've always ignored the greater FFL-IC conflict. I chose
to be unconcerned about it because I already have to deal with my own problems for one (charity begins at home). The issue is also outside my area of influence and
it's a moot -- not to mention annoying -- discussion. The leaders should be concerned. They have to be, especially those closest to CFC leadership. For me and a lot of people, it's an absolute waste of time.
Further, I want to ignore the FFL-IC issue because it's so disappointing.
The disappointment dampens the fulfillment of accomplishing something good within the organization's context because we become aware that right behind us looms the conflicts of the leaders whose mandates we've been trying to fulfill all the while. Our leaders sure can talk the talk, but can't walk the talk. I haven't opened my covenant card in a while. But I sometimes wonder if the elders open theirs -- even the elders who formulated the covenant card in the first place.
Think of it this way... Imagine being a devout Catholic and finding out that the Catholic Church is run by people who undermine Christianity itself. It's like serving a false church. It's serving a false organization. It's like finding truth and goodness in your plot in the context of the wrong story.
I'm inclined to say that maybe the CFC really needed to split and reexamine its leadership and guiding principles.
I thought the whole point of the CFC was to make a venue for knowing and practicing your faith and reaching out to the world -- "Renew the face of the earth" as the elder leaders had formulated years and years ago.
The CFC's center was supposed to be Jesus Christ and Christian teachings. Nowadays, it just focuses on itself.