ISSN: 2710-4028 DOI: doi.org/10.54208/1000/0006 63
have resulted in an extensive set of court filings, docket
records, and published court judgments. Identification
of pseudolaw litigation can be a challenge (Netolitzky,
2016, p. 612 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 809-810), however,
with CERI, the All Creator’s Gifts website has operated
as a kind of archive, since Belanger usually publishes
certain “Notice” and “Agreement” documents that
involve CERI litigants. Fourth, the All Creator’s Gifts
record is supplemented by data collected in the anti-
scam Quatloos! website.7
1
Comparison of these sources
detected only limited “pruning” of CERI’s public
information to conceal events and establish revisionist
narratives.
Combined, these resources provide a lengthy and
substantial record of CERI operations. While these
resources do not capture the entire scope of CERI and
its activities, much data is available to characterize
interactions within this legal cult, and understand how
CERI and Belanger engage state, law enforcement, and
court authorities. In that sense, CERI is an unusual
“open book.”
III. The Church of the Ecumenical Redemption
International -A Mighty Fortress, or Potemkin
Village?
CERI is something of a “last man standing.”
The importation of US pseudolaw around 2000
(Netolitzky, 2018b, pp. 5-10) stimulated the emergence
and development of two distinct, substantial, and
ideologically different pseudolaw movements: 1) the
generally apolitical (or politically fluid) anti-income
tax Detaxers, and 2) the anti-government, criminal,
Freemen-on-the-Land (Netolitzky, 2016, pp. 616-627
Netolitzky, 2018b Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 814-820
Perry, Hofmann, &Scrivens, 2017, pp. 14-18, 28-29).
Both these communities are now essentially spent.
The results oriented Detaxer phenomenon collapsed
in the late 2000s after its claims consistently failed in
court (Netolitzky, 2016, p. 624 Netolitzky, 2018b, pp.
8-9 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 814-817). The Freeman
movement is also now only a remnant after its initial
leadership figures were discredited, and when several
generations of successor Freeman theories failed to
deliver their promised benefits: a “money-for-nothing,”
state-exempt, “freeloader” lifestyle (Netolitzky, 2016,
7 Quatloos! forums: https://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/index.
php.
p. 639 Netolitzky, 2018b, p. 10 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp.
818-831 Perry, 2017, pp. 16-18).
Amidst this eroding landscape, CERI has endured. Its
antecedents may even stretch back as far as the 1980s.
CERI is the brainchild of one man: Belanger. He
founded the organization in 2001, and since has been
the Church’s primary teacher, most active litigant, an
(unsuccessful) in-court advocate, and, overall, CERI’s
public face. The size of any pseudolaw population is
uncertain,8
1
but all available evidence indicates that
CERI has always been one of the smaller branches of
the Canadian pseudolaw phenomenon. Early in its
existence, CERI was centered on Belanger’s geographic
location: Edmonton, Alberta (Meads v Meads, 2012
ABQB 571, para. 134 Netolitzky, 2016, p. 627). Now this
group exists mainly online, knit together by Belanger’s
YouTube and Bitchute videos, weekly private video
conferences, and, most recently, a Telegram channel.9
Attendance and viewership for these online resources
is much lower than many other competing pseudolaw
examples.
Many pseudolaw gurus declare they have much in-
court and litigation experience, but those claims are
often false and/or deceptive (Meads v Meads, 2012
ABQB 571, para. 80). Belanger, however, does have
a decades-long record of frequent and diverse court
activity. Given that history, one might anticipate that
CERI would have exploited those opportunities to
develop, evolve, and hone its pseudolegal theories
and in-court strategies. However, as the subsequent
review of CERI’s court activities will illustrate, the
opposite, instead, is true. CERI, to date, has done
nothing but repeatedly ram the same misshaped key
into legal processes, failing over and over again, usually
with sharply negative consequences for its affiliates,
including Belanger.
CERI and its members have an atypical aggressive,
offensive litigation posture. In Canada, most pseudolaw
is employed to avoid legal obligations and debts, or to
8 Early media reports claimed Canada had 30,000 pseudolaw affiliates,
but that number has no apparent basis (Netolitzky, 2016, p. 612). More recent
information drawn from law enforcement sources estimated that Alberta
hosts about 150-250 active pseudolaw affiliates (McCoy, Jones, &Hastings,
2019, p. 61 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 807-809). This number has probably
undergone significant expansion during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic
(Netolitzky, 2023c).
9 Telegram channel name: “@paracletian”.
have resulted in an extensive set of court filings, docket
records, and published court judgments. Identification
of pseudolaw litigation can be a challenge (Netolitzky,
2016, p. 612 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 809-810), however,
with CERI, the All Creator’s Gifts website has operated
as a kind of archive, since Belanger usually publishes
certain “Notice” and “Agreement” documents that
involve CERI litigants. Fourth, the All Creator’s Gifts
record is supplemented by data collected in the anti-
scam Quatloos! website.7
1
Comparison of these sources
detected only limited “pruning” of CERI’s public
information to conceal events and establish revisionist
narratives.
Combined, these resources provide a lengthy and
substantial record of CERI operations. While these
resources do not capture the entire scope of CERI and
its activities, much data is available to characterize
interactions within this legal cult, and understand how
CERI and Belanger engage state, law enforcement, and
court authorities. In that sense, CERI is an unusual
“open book.”
III. The Church of the Ecumenical Redemption
International -A Mighty Fortress, or Potemkin
Village?
CERI is something of a “last man standing.”
The importation of US pseudolaw around 2000
(Netolitzky, 2018b, pp. 5-10) stimulated the emergence
and development of two distinct, substantial, and
ideologically different pseudolaw movements: 1) the
generally apolitical (or politically fluid) anti-income
tax Detaxers, and 2) the anti-government, criminal,
Freemen-on-the-Land (Netolitzky, 2016, pp. 616-627
Netolitzky, 2018b Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 814-820
Perry, Hofmann, &Scrivens, 2017, pp. 14-18, 28-29).
Both these communities are now essentially spent.
The results oriented Detaxer phenomenon collapsed
in the late 2000s after its claims consistently failed in
court (Netolitzky, 2016, p. 624 Netolitzky, 2018b, pp.
8-9 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 814-817). The Freeman
movement is also now only a remnant after its initial
leadership figures were discredited, and when several
generations of successor Freeman theories failed to
deliver their promised benefits: a “money-for-nothing,”
state-exempt, “freeloader” lifestyle (Netolitzky, 2016,
7 Quatloos! forums: https://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/index.
php.
p. 639 Netolitzky, 2018b, p. 10 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp.
818-831 Perry, 2017, pp. 16-18).
Amidst this eroding landscape, CERI has endured. Its
antecedents may even stretch back as far as the 1980s.
CERI is the brainchild of one man: Belanger. He
founded the organization in 2001, and since has been
the Church’s primary teacher, most active litigant, an
(unsuccessful) in-court advocate, and, overall, CERI’s
public face. The size of any pseudolaw population is
uncertain,8
1
but all available evidence indicates that
CERI has always been one of the smaller branches of
the Canadian pseudolaw phenomenon. Early in its
existence, CERI was centered on Belanger’s geographic
location: Edmonton, Alberta (Meads v Meads, 2012
ABQB 571, para. 134 Netolitzky, 2016, p. 627). Now this
group exists mainly online, knit together by Belanger’s
YouTube and Bitchute videos, weekly private video
conferences, and, most recently, a Telegram channel.9
Attendance and viewership for these online resources
is much lower than many other competing pseudolaw
examples.
Many pseudolaw gurus declare they have much in-
court and litigation experience, but those claims are
often false and/or deceptive (Meads v Meads, 2012
ABQB 571, para. 80). Belanger, however, does have
a decades-long record of frequent and diverse court
activity. Given that history, one might anticipate that
CERI would have exploited those opportunities to
develop, evolve, and hone its pseudolegal theories
and in-court strategies. However, as the subsequent
review of CERI’s court activities will illustrate, the
opposite, instead, is true. CERI, to date, has done
nothing but repeatedly ram the same misshaped key
into legal processes, failing over and over again, usually
with sharply negative consequences for its affiliates,
including Belanger.
CERI and its members have an atypical aggressive,
offensive litigation posture. In Canada, most pseudolaw
is employed to avoid legal obligations and debts, or to
8 Early media reports claimed Canada had 30,000 pseudolaw affiliates,
but that number has no apparent basis (Netolitzky, 2016, p. 612). More recent
information drawn from law enforcement sources estimated that Alberta
hosts about 150-250 active pseudolaw affiliates (McCoy, Jones, &Hastings,
2019, p. 61 Netolitzky, 2023a, pp. 807-809). This number has probably
undergone significant expansion during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic
(Netolitzky, 2023c).
9 Telegram channel name: “@paracletian”.
