CEF/DIL: Reviewing the District’s Letter with a Critical Eye / Part 2

This article is reviewing a letter by District President Schaeffer to the members of the ABC District. Part 1 covered the introduction and the three major points of the letter, this article will address the closing paragraphs, and the concluding article will have some closing thoughts.

In a complex financial situation as that faced by the Alberta-British Columbia District,

There’s a few aspects to this “complex financial situation” that need to be kept in mind:

• This situation is substantially the creation of ABC District in the 1990s and early 2000s when the Boards at the time decided that decisions in favor of “ministry” to support high-risk real-estate ventures trumped the promise to use other people’s money strictly for low-risk loans to schools and churches.
• The named respondents in this proceeding are limited and the charges are specific – namely that they misled investors about the health and security of the fund and what they were doing with investor deposits.

Overall I’m not seeing how the question of “did these people mislead investors” is “complex” – except possibly for how District and counsel for the respondents are endeavoring to cloud the issue in an effort to create reasonable doubt.

it is prudent to withhold judgment until all the evidence and fact has been collected and presented.

Before I address this, I’d like to take as short trip into dictonary.com’s definition of “manipulate“:

verb (used with object), ma·nip·u·lat·ed, ma·nip·u·lat·ing.

1. to manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner: to manipulate people’s feelings.
2. to handle, manage, or use, especially with skill, in some process of treatment or performance:to manipulate a large tractor.
3. to adapt or change (accounts, figures, etc.) to suit one’s purpose or advantage.

Returning to the President’s letter, this totally-reasonable request to withhold judgement leaves out the fact that by-and-large District’s behavior over the years has been one of suppressing the distribution of evidence as it pertains to CEF’s health and the involvement of District personnel in this whole affair. In the context of this letter, the author is advocating the reader put off judgement until all information is available while leaving out the small fact that he’s the head of an organization that has actively worked to withhold the very information the reader would need to render judgement.

Another point to consider is that the CCAA monitor and the Task Force has generated a tremendous amount of information on this matter that – in my opinion – conclusively demonstrates that District used depositor funds for things other than building schools and churches – where else did the funds come from to build POP and the various senior housing projects which have since gone under?

Personally I find conduct that asks people to withhold judgement in the face of such a “cloud of witnesses” rather disingenuous and smelling of an agenda that is more about marginalizing this whole affair and getting people to forget this ever happened instead of working towards Christians justice and reconciliation.

We request that you continue to keep this situation in your prayers.

On this I wholeheartedly agree, though I suspect my prayers are somewhat different from that of the author(s).

I will present some concluding thoughts in the next article.