Is Usury still a sin?

[joab]

If lending money at interest—any interest—is usury, and usury is a sin, then we are all sinners if we:

• Have a savings account or checking account that draws interest

On that note, most employers around here have gone to direct deposit. Therefore, I now have a savings account just to get paid from my job. If this is the only way to get paid, then I don’t feel it is a sin(usury).

Of course, living hand-to-mouth, the savings account is back to $10 just about the day after payday. I think in 3 years I have recieved less than a dollar in interest.

 

[JimG]

JimG;2616376:

If lending money at interest—any interest—is usury, and usury is a sin, then we are all sinners if we:

• Have a savings account or checking account that draws interest

On that note, most employers around here have gone to direct deposit. Therefore, I now have a savings account just to get paid from my job. If this is the only way to get paid, then I don’t feel it is a sin(usury).

Of course, living hand-to-mouth, the savings account is back to $10 just about the day after payday. I think in 3 years I have recieved less than a dollar in interest.

Less than a dollar in interest? Well, I sure wouldn’t bother to confess the sin of usury on that account!!

 

[joab]

joab;2633974:

Less than a dollar in interest? Well, I sure wouldn’t bother to confess the sin of usury on that account!!

It isn’t very high on my list at the confessional!

I only leave the $10 in it to hold it open. I know the bank would appreciate more left in, but that has to wait until the children either leave home or quit wanting to eat, etc.
I got hit by fraud a few years ago, and the credit card companies immediatly jumped my interest as well. I couldn’t pay for one month while we attempted to correct the fraud and get my money back. I believe that that is a sin because we were desparate to even eat as everything was gone and here is my credit card company digging me in deeper.

The good side of this, is not only do I pay cash or don’t buy, but no one will steal my identity as my credit is shot.

 

[Tenants]

This may be true while we have a government we can trust in these matters, but if you lived for instance in Zimbabwe . . . .

I just read through this chain regarding usury and hope that this is still being discussed by Catholics.

In reading this chain there seemed to be two things lacking —First, the definition and ownership of the original currency being used was never identified. Currency is owned by the people of the country in question and is scared and the power of issuance not to be given away to private entities.

Secondly, the definition of a Central bank and its authority and its implied, inferred benevolence. A central bank has issued paper currency as an interest bearing note meaning that today’s dollar is paid off by tomorrows less valuable dollar—so impossible to pay off, by design.

Place faith in the devine not in mere fallible men prone to influence and weaknesses with no oversight who run the global Central Banks. These banks are not part of any one country yet are more powerful than all. Non-governmental off-book transactions initiated from one central bank to another of $16 trillion dollars have been reported upon by various main stream organizations. An entity unto itself that could move an amount of $16 trillion at one instance is hands down the most powerful entity in the world and in need of transparency.

Do not lump banking into one pile. Differentiate between central banks, bond exchanging banks and all others. The first two are the usuarous scourge that needs to be routed out.

I am not trying to be combative so please let me know your impressions. I have been immersed in this of late and am horrified by what I am seeing.

 

[didymus]

Those who point to ancient teachings forbidding the charging of interest should, as usual, look at the CONTEXT of the teaching. In those days, there was no such thing as INFLATION. The economies simply worked differently. Since the economies of the day used barter for necessities instead of currency currency was mainly a means of storing excess wealth. In that light it makes perfect sense to say that it was sinful to charge another interest when he borrows money that you otherwise had no use for at the time anyways and the returned amount still had the same buying power as when it was borrowed!

So the teaching hasn’t changed, economics has changed.

OR the economics changed and the Church changed Her teaching to keep up – which would seem the most reasonable explanation if I were not already Catholic.

Forget usury as interest on loans, how about fees banks charge on checking accounts/debit cards &c? They are earning interest on your money and then charging you for access to it.

 

[Abu]

The Church hasn’t changed Her teaching on usury.

Scripture, the Fathers of the Church, the decrees of councils and popes condemn the taking of interest on loans to the poor and the greed of usurers, but say nothing about the charging of interest in general.

Deuteronomy 23:20: “You may charge interest to a foreigner,” indicating that interest-taking is not presented as inherently evil or sinful. The larger ethical issue of the morality of interest-taking is not addressed in the Old Testament. Rather, interest was viewed only as a problem of social justice. The problem of commutative justice, i.e., of equivalence of value in an exchange of present for future goods, remained quite untouched (Thomas F. Divine, S.J.,* Interest*, 10).

With free enterprise as developed by the Late Scholastics, the Church defined what is meant by usury. Session X of the Fifth Lateran Council (1515) gave its exact meaning: “For that is the real meaning of usury: when, from its use, a thing which produces nothing is applied to the acquiring of gain and profit without any work, any expense or any risk.”

Consequently, as loaning money did involve loss of profit to the lender and further risk of loss from delay in returning the money loaned, this did justify interest that is just and justifiable.

Today, the term “usury” is usually reserved for taking excessive (i.e., unusually high for the economic conditions) interest on a loan because of someone’s circumstances: The greed of the lender takes unjust advantage of the weakness or ignorance of the borrower. [See *Encyclopedia of Catholic Doctrine, Our Sunday Visitor].

 

[Quirious]

Why would you accept a credit card with a 33% interest rate?

Most credit cards have a clause in the agreement allowing them to jack the rate up as high as they feel like if you miss a payment. With some cards, this can be triggered simply by being late once. There were once anti-usury laws which capped interest rates at 18%, but the lenders didn’t like that and lobbied to have the law repealed, and it was, under President Reagan, I think.

 

[Tenants]

Usury or credit is only slightly damaging when using the example of a personal credit card, what I would like to hear people talk about is the usury being performed at the societal level upon all nations and all peoples and all religions by the Central banking authorities globally. It is this power that is a common enemy, the common evil to all peoples and no one is talking about it.

 

[IrishSFV]

Usury or credit is only slightly damaging when using the example of a personal credit card, what I would like to hear people talk about is the usury being performed at the societal level upon all nations and all peoples and all religions by the Central banking authorities globally. It is this power that is a common enemy, the common evil to all peoples and no one is talking about it.

Exactly. Libya is a case in point.

 

[Tenants]

In Iraq the dinar was taken away from Iraq and now the Iraqi dinar is printed in England by the Central bank there. Yes, the same will be done with the Libyan dinar. I do not know where the church leaders are in regard to this crime of crimes.

 

[JimG]

Looks like a four year old thread has been revived with a somewhat different application. I don’t know that the Church has ever addressed the benefits or evils of central banking systems.

As for interest, it is simply the price of money. I don’t know why the Church would wish to invoke price controls on any item including the price of money.

Currently my bank is paying something less than 1% for interest on my savings, while the money is being devalued at a rate of about 3% per year, which means my savings are becoming less valuable. Who is guilty of usury here? Me, for accepting interest on money I loan the bank, or is the bank guilty of theft for not paying me enough to offset the cost of inflation?

 

[Tenants]

Hi Jim,

Your bank is not the question. The Central banks that issue currency play the song that all others must dance to. The question is why was a system installed that creates inflation—this is not necessary as has been witnessed many times throughout history.

This is not a question of fiat versus gold or any such question this is why would a people, any people, give the right to print their nations currency away? These private companies then set up a system where inflation and debt is created by design.

Most people never ask themselves the definition of a dollar or the interest bearing note that the dollar is. In other worlds today’s dollar is paid off by tomorrows less valuable dollar–so in a society driven by debt and borrowing you could never be debt free. Why would a country charge itself crippling interest? Answer: —it would not.

This was a focal point of Church activity in the majority of Church history and has been unspoken of in our lifetime.

 

[Quirious]

In Iraq the dinar was taken away from Iraq and now the Iraqi dinar is printed in England by the Central bank there. Yes, the same will be done with the Libyan dinar. I do not know where the church leaders are in regard to this crime of crimes.

Iraq once printed its money in Switzerland because it lacked the technology to print money. With the embargo the Swiss bailed, and it started trying to print money in Iraq. The printing was so primitive that the counterfeiters had tons of fun, and the currency was worth about the price of the paper it was printed on. You might notice that Iraqi “swiss” currency is collectible. Saddam’s currency is good to light cigars. Until Iraq has the technology to print currency, there is nothing wrong with printing currency for them which is difficult to counterfeit.

 

[Abu]

Quirious, #53
Until Iraq has the technology to print currency, there is nothing wrong with printing currency for them which is difficult to counterfeit.

JimG
As for interest, it is simply the price of money. I don’t know why the Church would wish to invoke price controls on any item including the price of money.

Quite so. You have both identified a mass of confused thinking running through this thread.

 

[JimG]

Hi Jim,

Your bank is not the question. The Central banks that issue currency play the song that all others must dance to. The question is why was a system installed that creates inflation—this is not necessary as has been witnessed many times throughout history.

This is not a question of fiat versus gold or any such question this is why would a people, any people, give the right to print their nations currency away? These private companies then set up a system where inflation and debt is created by design.

Most people never ask themselves the definition of a dollar or the interest bearing note that the dollar is. In other worlds today’s dollar is paid off by tomorrows less valuable dollar–so in a society driven by debt and borrowing you could never be debt free. Why would a country charge itself crippling interest? Answer: —it would not.

This was a focal point of Church activity in the majority of Church history and has been unspoken of in our lifetime.

It’s certainly true that inflation is the official policy of the U.S. and has been since the 1940’s at least. Ben Bernanke is so afraid of deflation that he has no qualms about expanding the money supply and reducing the future value of dollars.

He also has no qualms about exercising price controls over the one item all of us must use–money, and interest which is the price for the use of money. Official policy is to reward spenders and penalize savers.

 

[Tenants]

Hi Jim,

I did not post this stuff to get into one upmanship. I just figured someone might actually know if there is an active part of the Church that is addressing this.

Federal Reserve policy is not US government policy. These policies are performed by all Central banks globally and they are the well source of most instability and financial problems–my question is not America focused.

As for the Dinar — Iraq printed their money in the past without England.

I was wondering why the Church is not weighing in on the most powerful force in the world–global Central Banks and currency issuance—why is the Church absent as a machine of rhetoric and education.

 

[Abu]

Tenants, #51, 54
The Central banks that issue currency play the song that all others must dance to. The question is why was a system installed that creates inflation—this is not necessary as has been witnessed many times throughout history.
These policies are performed by all Central banks globally and they are the well source of most instability and financial problems–my question is not America focused.
I was wondering why the Church is not weighing in on the most powerful force in the world–global Central Banks and currency issuance—why is the Church absent as a machine of rhetoric and education.

While the problem of Central Banks and the manipulation of money by governments is real, the Church is not there to work out economic matters and, in fact, Pope Leo XIII said “If I were to pronounce on any single matter of a prevailing economic problem, I should be interfering with the freedom of men to work out their own affairs. Certain cases must be solved in the domain of facts, case by case as they occur…[M]en must realise in deeds those things, the principles of which have been placed beyond dispute…[T]hese things one must leave to the solution of time and experience.” [Quoted in *The Church And The Market, Dr Thomas E. Woods, Lexington Books, 2005, p 4].

Pius XI wrote of “matters of technique for which [the Church] is neither suitably equipped nor endowed by office.” Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, 41] “….economics and moral science employs each its own principles in its own sphere.” [QA, 42]

A stable currency has been seen as a requirement:
From Centesimus Annus (Bl John Paul II, 1991):
“48. Economic activity, especially the activity of a market economy, cannot be conducted in an institutional, juridical or political vacuum. On the contrary, it presupposes sure guarantees of individual freedom and private property, as well as a stable currency and efficient public services. Hence the principle task of the State is to guarantee this security, so that those who work and produce can enjoy the fruits of their labours and thus feel encouraged to work efficiently and honestly. The absence of stability, together with the corruption of public officials and the spread of improper sources of growing rich and of easy profits deriving from illegal or purely speculative activities, constitutes one of the chief obstacles to development and to the economic order.”

 

[JimG]

Hi Jim,

I did not post this stuff to get into one upmanship. I just figured someone might actually know if there is an active part of the Church that is addressing this.

Federal Reserve policy is not US government policy. These policies are performed by all Central banks globally and they are the well source of most instability and financial problems–my question is not America focused.

As for the Dinar — Iraq printed their money in the past without England.

I was wondering why the Church is not weighing in on the most powerful force in the world–global Central Banks and currency issuance—why is the Church absent as a machine of rhetoric and education.

Abu has mentioned some of the social encyclicals of the Church. But to be honest the Church has probably not spoken about central banking because it has no particular expertise in the matter. Neither do I. But the policies of central banks can certainly be a matter for discussion. You might want to start a new thread just to discuss that issue.