Will you take a stand? Books for the journey Modern hymn writers Church crawl during frosh week PAGE 8 PAGE 12 PAGE 16 PAGE 20 PM# 40009999 R9375 A Reformed Biweekly | 68th Year of Publication | September 23, 2013 | NO. 2969 | $2.50 News. Clues. Kingdom views. Christian school supporters hit with unexpected repayments Many parent supporters of pri- Others waited for clearer direc- on the schools themselves, but vate Christian schools in Ontario tion from their local school board on the donation receipts of par- are facing a unique financial chal- or from CEAF and the Ontario ents who send their children to lenge. In addition to coming up Alliance of Christian Schools these schools. Nonetheless, this with funds to pay their children’s (OACS), knowing that these two is clearly a significant challenge tuition costs, they will also need institutions were attempting to for affected school communities to pay back the Canadian Revenue dialogue with the CRA in the as well. Agency (CRA) for some of their hope that reassessments would Over 40 Ontario Christian charitable donation tax deductions be dropped or recalculated. In the schools have participated in from 2010 to 2012. end these efforts were unsuccess- CEAF’s programs, and many of Since 1984, many Ontario ful and reassessments were issued. their families face significant fi- Christian schools have par- nancial challenges. Most school ticipated in the School Support Impact on schools boards have plans in place such as Program (SSP) operated by the When the news first broke in bursary programs, adjusted tuition Christian Economic Assistance January, CEAF immediately de- rates, and adjusted capital/operat- Foundation (CEAF), a registered clared a moratorium on the pro- ing budget lines, but this support charity formerly located just out- gram and began to work with the varies from school to school. In side of Hamilton, Ont. Accord- OACS to explore options to sup- some cases these plans have been ing to CEAF’s website, the SSP Parents have been assessed repayments as large as $15,000, which for some port affected families. The OACS developed quite recently. It is clear was developed to “provide arms- will make it financially difficult to keep their children in Christian schools. informed member schools, let- that communities are rallying to- length, third party grants to Chris- ting them know about the CRA’s gether, but it is also important for tian schools to support specific reassessment notices informing When the reassessment deci- contentions as well as their own the larger Christian school support programs at the school, other than them of tax monies owed. sion was passed down, parents efforts to dialogue with the CRA, community to be reminded that capital costs” and was based on were caught off guard and were urging them to consider other some Ontario schools already face established practices used in other Impact on families unsure how to respond. Some options besides reassessments. significant financial challenges and Christian charity organizations. More than 4,000 families are began to develop plans to pay It is important to note that the have for years. While this event CEAF, which was founded affected by the repayments, and the their reassessments immediately. CRA’s concerns are not focused Continued on page 2 in 1972 and closed its doors this impact will be significant. While year following the CRA decision, some families with only small do- claims to have been audited by nations to CEAF have not been the CRA in 1992, 1996 and 2006 reassessed by the CRA, many owe CEAF needs to take responsibility and that their programs had been thousands of dollars and they are left unchallenged. This changed, expected to pay this immediately. John Tamming however, in January 2013 when Some families owe in excess of One of the pastors of my youth the CRA let CEAF know that they $15,000. The timing could not be balanced the targets of his ser- had significant concerns about the worse, of course, because many of mons well. He would, of course, SSP and suggested that the receipts these same parents also face tuition stare at the frisky young people issued to Christian school parents costs for the new school year. Even in the balcony and preach against for funds distributed by CEAF though most communities are ral- any conduct beyond first base. But had been improperly designated lying around these families, there at tax time his eyes would drop to as “gifts.” In July 2013, CEAF was is a very real possibility that some the front pews and he would also informed by the CRA that their children will not be able to remain have a stern word for those about charitable status had been revoked in their regular schools. There is to meet with their accountants. and the organization ceased opera- also the added complication that Dangling my feet in the pews of tions shortly thereafter. In late July the CRA has made a number of Strathroy Westmount CRC I had and early August 2013, Christian errors in its reassessments, creat- no idea about improper write-offs CEAF and OACS have decided not to pursue political action in response school supporters began receiving ing further tensions and confusion. Continued on page 2 to the CRA's reassessment of thousands of Christian school supporters. PAGE 2 CHRISTIAN COURIER News Christian school supporters hit with unexpected repayments is “only” a one-year problem, it has the most of us, and it seemed clear that CEAF While some of these holdout communi- but against the powers of darkness and the potential to be a real threat to these schools. had done its homework and was basing its ties may be feeling validated for their deci- spiritual forces of evil. Christian schools, programs on acceptable practices. Like many sion not to participate in CEAF programs, it given their nature and mission, will always Questions and challenges affected parents, the OACS also trusted that is important to stress that programs like the face spiritual opposition and challenges. For Ontario Christian school communi- CEAF was above-board in its work. SSP were developed on the basis of existing We should not expect otherwise. Christian ties affected by the repayments, many ques- The OACS has been actively involved programs and charitable donation strategies. schools must be equipping the next genera- tions remain unanswered. Some schools are in efforts to support affected schools and It is certainly very clear that affected parents tion for transformational, on-the-ground, understandably frustrated with CEAF and parents, even though they could have just participated in good faith, trusting that their hands-and-feet-and-voice Kingdom build- with the CRA, wondering how this could as easily left the “problem” in the hands of local boards had done due diligence and ing, and the devil and his forces will stand have happened. Why did the CRA not sim- CEAF and the affected families. The OACS that CEAF itself had exercised appropriate in direct opposition to this work. ply direct CEAF to stop the program? Why, is committed to supporting schools and their discernment in developing and promoting Because of this, it is important that the instead, did they choose to reassess? Why donors until the issue is resolved. They will these programs. conversation doesn’t degenerate into finger- did they choose to reassess for three years? not abandon affected member schools, de- This is an important point given the pointing and blame-casting amongst Chris- Why did they not offer recalculations, par- spite these challenging circumstances. But “spin” that has taken place regarding the tians and Christian institutions (although ticularly when it is possible that some of the the biggest questions remain unanswered repayments. For instance, Christian school lessons must certainly be learned through charitable donation claims could have been at this point in time. What impact will this supporters have been labeled by some as this process). The challenges we face are appropriately recalculated (as the OACS have on families and schools? What support tax-dodgers – see the online comment significant, and should be addressed in com- argued unsuccessfully)? is available? Will it be sufficient? What thread in the Feb. 19, 2013 National Post munity. It is my prayer that the families and Others are frustrated with the OACS, impact might this have on other charitable article on this topic for a good example of schools touched by this difficult issue will wondering why this organization endorsed organizations that rely on similar programs? this. It is also important to note that col- experience the support of their local com- the use of CEAF for member schools. To a lective legal action is also being pursued, munities, as well as the prayers and support large extent this is an unfair response, given Other considerations and parents and schools who participated of the broader Christian community. the fact that the OACS – like other affected Some Ontario Christian school com- in CEAF are encouraged to consider their educational institutions – trusted that CEAF munities deliberately decided in the past to involvement in this process. Sean Schat is a former had developed programs with due diligence not participate in CEAF programs. These Christian high school and proper process. The longevity of the school boards did not feel the SSP passed Kingdom reflections teacher currently enrolled program and the fact that it had previously the “sniff test” – that there was not sufficient The battle here is not between Christian in graduate studies in passed CRA scrutiny served as sufficient “arm’s length” distance between the donors education and Revenue Canada, even if Education at Brock Uni- evidence of the program’s validity.