However we first go back to the very early days of Belanger's journey to guruhood, prior to his conversion to King James fundamentalism to when he was more of a free spirit, a marijuana smoking druid! Back in the 90's Edmonton had a branch, sorry, a Grove, of Edmonton Grove of the Church of Reformed Druids. They were led by Kevin Sisk, this solid citizen;
http://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-n ... in-alberta
As this article from 1994 relates the Church seemed to be essentially a front to justify marijuana and alcohol consumption without any interference from government by claiming it was a constitutionally protected religious right when otherwise banned or regulated substances were used in religious observation. Police raided their church in response to neighbor's complaints;
Belanger was involved in the Edmonton Druids (sounds like a football team) and even claimed That he was the Head Druid and minister of the Onoway Grove of the Church of the Reformed druids. Belanger's Christian Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International was a later iteration of the Druid church. We've already covered part of Belanger's transformation here;“It was in response to some complaints we had about activities going on inside,” a police spokesman said. Police thought they were raiding an after-hours drinking club.
“When the officers entered, they found about 70 people drinking and playing darts. Beer was being sold. Police seized some beer, liquor and wine.” Two men were charged with the illegal sale of liquor.
But Sisk said the Druids were praying telepathically. The cans of beer and bottles of rye and vodka were “Druid fluid” — a religious sacrament like Roman Catholic communion wine. The $3 collected for each can of suds was an offering, not a list price.
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9261&p=173438#p173438
where Belanger was a minister of both the Church of the Reformed Druids and the Church of the Universe. I assume he was covering all bases and the Reformed Druids still claimed to worship Druidism, however they understood it, and the Church of the Universe was Christian. Both claimed the right to use marijuana as part of their religious practices.
In Meads v Meads at para 185 Justice Rooke explained that the Reformed Druids in Edmonton were a precursor to the modern CERI:
This background get us to the early 2000's with Belanger as a somewhat peripheral player moving from paganism to Christianity. However even in 2004 his beliefs still seemed somewhat fluid and he was bragging about his joint Druid/Christian background supported by a very impressive listing of academic theological credentials. He listed these in a letter he sent to Douglas Finley of the Canadian Conservative Party on behalf of the Armstrong Ecclesia of the Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International;Some CERI members were involved in an earlier (unsuccessful) attempt to claim a religious right to use marijuana: R. v. Fehr, 2004 ABQB 859, 368 A.R. 122. At that point they defined themselves as “Reformed Druids”. In the present CERI members could be classified as King James Bible literalists. This Court therefore may have been witness to the cusp of the transformation (or conversion) of CERI from faith to faith, as in R. v. Fehr the “reformed druids” interpreted Exodus 30:23 as the basis for their claim: paras. 20-21.
(http://allcreatorsgifts.blogspot.ca/200 ... ative.html):Sincerely offered in performance of a function of my calling as an officiating Minister and founder of the Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International 2001 and of and the Cariboo Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids 2003, The Head Druid and minister of the Onoway Grove of the Church of the Reformed druids 1993; Received Philosophy Degree in 1992 From the Edmonton Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids, and Master of law degree in 2000 from Grand Druid Kevin Sisk under a charter mission from the Assembly of the Universe, Honorary Minister of the China Grove of the Church of the reformed Druids 1992 and international law Consulting minister for the Belize Grove of the Church of the Reformed Druids 1993 and a Chartered mission brother and research consultant of the Assembly of the Universe Hamilton Ontario 1969 al and the Center for Self Awareness and the Church of Christian Science being all interfaith churches All glory to God and his infinite wisdom. May we all be humbled by his mysteries.
Keep in mind that his 2000 Master of Law degree was bestowed on him by Kevin Sisk, the individual in the above picture. Not something I'd want to wave about in a job interview but I guess that is not an issue for Belanger.
So we arrive at early 2002 and apparently the first attempt at Belanger's "Christianity lets you stiff your creditors scam", the one that is currently working so well for the Volks. So who was the first guinea pig to risk his home by reneging on his mortgage? It seems to have been the good minister himself! Belanger seems to have been a man of some substance before his crazy days. He had a house, was married to Cheryl, and had children; also, I assume, a job. Then he fired this shot across the bow of the bank that held the mortgage on his house;
http://archives-2001-2012.cmaq.net/en/node/7439.htmlMonday, January 28, 2002 - 12:00
Author: Edward-Jay-Robin Belanger (excele1@direct.ca)
The Banks have been ripping off, in violation of God's command, the common man and rich alike for centuries. Is hope in the wings of the Angels or is faith only applied by works? We shall see how the Money Changers plan to deal with faith vs money in this unprecedented showdown of integrity and God's law with the avarice of an ancient vampire.
From: Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger and family
C/o Heatherdown ecclesia of the Church of Ecumenical Redemption International near Onoway, Alberta.
1-780-967-3915
To: (note - Various parties, Chairmen of major firm boards, bank officials, etc.)
Dear Sirs and Madams, Chairman Charlie Baillie, and honorable directors of the board of the Toronto Dominion Bank;
I thank God , your patience and good faith to be able to present you with this letter of communication.
I am a man created by God, his minister, and named as Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger, with wife Cheryl and family also of God’s fleshly creation. I am a sincere minister of God, and in faith and performance of my duty as a function of my calling, as respected and protected by 176 of the Canadian Criminal code, in her majesty's defense of the faith, do hereby claim having been fraudulently exposed to an alleged mortgage and credit line with your corporate institution Canada Trustco #266 and in practicing my faith and honor and calling as a minister of God, I have a few questions that will help clarify our alleged relationship. No joinder herein is intended by this letter of Christian abatement and questions.
Firstly my name is mine only, and by my faith in God is extremely private and sacred to me and it is not allowed or indeed lawful for anyone, corporate body, man, woman or machine to alter my name without my permission. If you choose to act with integrity and you reply in good faith I will only accept mail in that name exactly. For good faith I offer it to you as Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger ,not to be construed or taken as to offer any contractual relationship with you, along with the repetition of the demand to not alter enter or record my name in any fashion or manner differing from that which is accurate as I have provided herein. My faith in God and the King James Bible advises me that bearing false witness is a sin and unacceptable in God's eyes. It also states that Usury and coveting is a sin as well as theft.
My royal rule of law being the King James Bible, is the supreme law of Canada as promised and proclaimed by Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. This was sworn to and promised by her majesty during her coronation ceremony in 1953 and such rule of law is spoken of in the Canadian constitutional preamble, being the intent of parliament. This is not a disputable fact!
This is a religious issue and my Christian faith requires I inform you again, that I believe, I was lied to by your institution and by that deception you obtained my promissory note or equivalent financial instrument. It appears that your system of offering to loan that what you do not have is based on deception and fraud and is void abnitio on the face of the record as you failed to fully disclose this pertinent fact to me. It also appears you have altered my name for a financial purpose with intent and according to the RCMP that is fraud as well. Your officials prior with Canada Trustco being Walter Oliveria who noted via letter to me it was beyond the banks control and was in the hands of international financiers. William Edmund .Clark has repeatedly ignored my notices and Affidavit’s to not alter my name and has requested no permission of me to assign the alleged loan/mortgage to you, a different institution being a chartered Bank and not a trust company. And being under different laws than the institution that I originally was misinformed by..
You hold no bonafide contract with me as it appears fraud was applied and it is therefore impossible to assign a fraudulently obtained debt to third party without gaining the permission of the so called debtor to modify the contract obtained in fraud so as to transfer it to the third party. No permission in knowledge or good faith was ever obtained from myself as a minister of God or my wife and children who I have power of attorney over. My family's property has been declared a church and in faith I pay no taxes as it is not corroborated in the Bible to do so and is in fact biblically resisted and counseled against at Romans 16:17-20
"Render unto Caesar that what is Caesars" is used to give the impression that we should pay tribute money as tax unto Caesar.. Caesar was a Roman pagan god self declared. YHWH's council unto those that worship false gods and offer tribute to them is destruction and death. Jesus refused to pay Caesar any money as the Gold is God's and he is the only God and we shall put no others before him. We are to not add unto God's laws nor take away from them. Deuteronomy 4: 1-2; 12: 32.
I hope you will appreciate this is not a challenge or a threat just a notice of my faith in God and his law and a request to not discriminate against my faith by attempting to proceed against me in knowledge of my faith and how your so called contract is in violation of that faith and law.
I am looking forward to your acceptance of this offer of good faith, in providing a termination of what ever arrangements you believe you may have with my family's Church property NE 31 -53- 1- W5th in the county known as Lac Ste. Ann Near Onoway in the province of Alberta with the account number of 501981 at the Canada Trustco branch # 266 and in good faith and Christian manner of forgiveness in your understanding of your error I will offer no procession against you as previously indicated.
If you decide to act in bad faith, and proceed in fraud as the institution you stand for has in the past, I will be put into a defensive position of utilizing the Supreme law of Canada to expose your bad faith and fraudulent actions in a class action suit along with well over 1000 other members of the faith that are aware of your apparently criminal actions of bearing false witness usury, fraud, extortion, theft and religious discrimination..
1. Have I come to a correct point of learning, that in fact that I have been taken advantage of and lied to by the institution when I came to the trust company known as Canada Trust in 1986, asking for a mortgage/ loan ?
2. Did this institution lead me to believe they had possession of the money by the advertisement’s and as such offered the impression I was going to get a loan of funds from them or money taken out of, basically, their pocket into mine? Does my inquiry and assumption prove accurate about this arrangement, as it appears that this was not a loan at all but an exchange and a massive swindle at that?.
3. Is this logically deducted with no dispute in math upon the simple fact that before I was given anything I put down something, some thing of value, my promissory note, a negotiable instrument classified as funds, real value?
4. Did you take that financial instrument and deposit it in your bank in an account you created, then classified it as your asset, that asset you then took to the central Bank of Canada per the bank of Canada act and asked for cash/funds in return for face value of my promissory note/funds? Did you use my promissory note/funds to create the cash/funds? Does this appear to mean by any standard of definition an exchange? Why was this exchange not disclosed in the so called loan agreement I signed as a promissary note? Does this transaction appear to be of a fraudulent nature?
5. Is offering, someone man or woman created by God and living in a country that recognizes that the King James Bible defended by her majesty is the Supreme law, the impression that you were loaning them your money/funds in your possession when in actuality and truth you had no money/funds to loan him until it was created by the one man or woman wishing the alleged and offered loan, by providing their promissory note/funds to your institution, called fraud ?
6. If any truth offered and contained herein is in error this man would demand your attention to the fact you must rebutt with your own evidence of the error of my assertions. Please in good faith and fair communication standing, respond to this letter of faith and request within fourteen days. If no reply is received, we will conclude you are in tacit agreement and in estoppel acquiescence with our position of fraud on your part and will be providing an offer of settlement to our family and church, or you will be acting in extreme bad faith and will attempt to conduct a criminal conspiracy to defraud me of my property through the courts who I might add will have to provide proof of their allegiance to the Queen and the rule of law and understanding of the meaning of that allegiance..
I invite and in good faith and understanding of the supreme law of Canada, a fully bonafide and understanding sworn allegiant court of dignity along with a members of the BAR that will provide proof of their understood allegiance, as I am a Christian minister who in my faith and duty to God and her majesty Queen Elizabeth defender of the faith ,cannot accept nor be compelled to accept a court or alleged agents of her majesty that will not acknowledge their understanding of the oath of allegiance to her majesty and as such the royal rule of law that her majesty stands in defense of along with her allegiant chosen, and by such failure to provide such reasonably requested proof of such understood allegiance, would by such obvious action of refusal to provide such proof to a request by one as myself as a Christian minister of God and in that claiming the authority to make such a request, would and does violate section 337 of the Criminal Code that applies to all government agents and officers of the court.
The subsequent jurisdiction created by such understood allegiance invokes royal law only based upon a tort or harm to another party or their property or a violation of the commandments. I am the harmed party here, not a corporate Vampire.
I would appreciate the letter I have offered with locus standi, replied to in all points addressing them concisely to the point clearly and in the truth and with documented evidence of your assertions. If you fail to reply in good faith I accept your tacit consent of my assertions and answers to my questions in the affirmative as being estoppel acceptance by you and await your offer.
Please include all precedent that would indicate that this is indeed a loan and not an exchange that would dispute the U.S. of A Minnesota Credit River Decision of Judge Martin Vincent Mahoney of December1968 that established that the banks and the Federal reserve are private banks and created money out of thin air and committed fraud.
Thank you very much for your assistance regarding this. This is not to be construed as an evasion tactic but would rather be the defense of my right in all contract to receive the truth in the full and without reservation, for the benefit of myself my family and my heirs, with regards to the content of any contract that would bind me by its performance guarantee.
In light of discovery that there has been a lack of full honest disclosure of what backs the value of the money, who funded the loan, the method the loan was funded and that an exchange was represented as an loan, to what a reasonable man would determine as fair and with locus standi, it would appear again to a reasonable man that such action nullifies that promissary note or equivalent financial instrument, that was fraudulently acquired , in essence from the beginning and leaves the person who funded the loan in a position to collect all the interest that was fraudulently extracted and stolen from them by the one who fraudulently misrepresented themselves as the party funding the loan and having full possession of the funds advertized to be loaned before the party desirous of a loan came along.
I do appreciate the opportunity to address you and the directors of the board at this time and thank you for your full response regardless of your religious opinion and “contra locus standi
Note that many of the arguments he used trying to fend off the Volk's creditors in 2014 were here already developed in 2002.
1 - He'd paid the loan off by signing his note to Dominion Trust because he created value with his signature (paragraphs 3 to 6 above).
2 - He claimed the trust company was bound by a unilateral contract.
3 - He claimed his home was a church and therefore protected by law.
4 - Writing his name in capitals was fraud.
5 - As a Christian minister he was exempt from normal laws relating to debt.
6 - His belief in the King James bible supercedes any other law because the Queen swore to defend the bible in her coronation oath making the bible superior to man-made laws.
However his scheme worked exactly as well in 2002 as it worked for the now homeless Volks. From a November 28, 2002 article from the Edmonton Sun;
Inevitably the scene played out exactly as you'd expect. In 2003 Belanger and family were foreclosed and kicked out. Apparently he had to be thrown out by the RCMP. No doubt vehemently protesting that they were violating a religious sanctuary and manhandling a minister of god. Since then he seems to have shed wife and children, a permanent home, gainful employment but not his belief that his magic will work if he can just find that last final key that will unlock god's wrath on the unbelievers. He didn't find it with the Volks.Pay interest? It's against my religion!
By RAQUEL EXNER, EDMONTON SUN
An area minister who runs a small church out of his home is refusing to pay TD-Canada Trust the interest on his mortgage because he says it goes against one of God's commandments and his religious beliefs.
Edward-Jay-Robin: Belanger, a minister with the Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International near Onoway, said he has paid the principal of his mortgage, but he won't pay the remaining $41,000 in what he deems interest.
In a statement of claim filed with the court in January, Canada Trustco Mortgage Company says Belanger owes $12,224.53 on his mortgage - most of which is principal, not interest. The company further claims Belanger owes $27,898.49 for a line of credit.
Belanger says the First Commandment in the Bible says you shall not bow down to false gods, which he claims includes banks. So he feels he shouldn't have to pay interest on his property because it would be paying taxes to a false god. "In this country, you can't be told what to believe. You can't be forced to violate your beliefs. I can't be forced to pay taxes to Revenue Canada. I can't be forced to pay interest to the Toronto Dominion Bank. It's in the King James Bible."
Furthermore, Belanger says banks perform exchanges, not loans, so banks shouldn't be charging interest, which he claims is usury and a violation of his beliefs. "They exchanged my (promisory) note, which was the original funds. So who provided the funds? I did by my signature. They're exchanging your note for theirs. It's not a loan."
Edmonton lawyer Doug Hughes, who represents the bank in this foreclosure action, said he doesn't "feel there's any merit in any of the positions that (Belanger's) taken." And this kind of case is unlike anything Hughes has dealt with before, with the defendant claiming he can't pay interest because of religious convictions.
