Michael Hoffman Talks About Usury. What Do You Think?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Athanasiy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Boy_Wonder said:
When the thesis is nonsensical, the only response is our darling coniglia’s “cheap jokes”.

Nothing angers prideful autodidacts more than when their pet theses are met with mirth.
Click to expand...
Another sister mockery unfit to use arguments on the subject
 
I’d like to see more about whether or not usury was really considered sinful at one time in the Church, since I’ve not ever heard of it before. And considering the source here (Hoffman), I don’t trust his views on the subject one bit. That doesn’t mean that he may not get a few things right, but he’s kind of a scary guy, IMO.

IMO, there are times when it’s helpful to borrow money. But then there are times when it’s a burden, such as our own government being trillions of dollars in debt to banks. That’s just wrong, to me. There’s a old saying, which is very Catholic…“everything in moderation.” The same should be applied to the borrowing of money.
 
Boy_Wonder said:
He’s a little vermischt in his thinking. Sure seems to be as terrified of a smart woman with a pretty bunny punim to the same degree as he detests the creditors who are hounding him. Gey vays?
🤷
Click to expand...
To understand what’s going on, you’d have to look up some of Athanasiy’s threads on the Holodomor and who he blames for it.
 
Denise1957
I’d like to see more about whether or not usury was really considered sinful at one time in the Church, since I’ve not ever heard of it before.
Click to expand...
See posts #4 and #8
 
Abu said:
As a statement re usury, “The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not” is incorrect.

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 Catholic Late Scholastics, the Church defined what is meant by usury. It is Session X of the Fifth Lateran Council (1515) that 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
Click to expand...
, Our Sunday Visitor].👍
 
I was under the impression that the Church changed its teaching on interest and what is considered usury and what is not.
 
👍
Abu said:
Since a lender does lose the benefits from interest. or use of his money in other ways, that’s precisely what makes the charging of interest legitimate and worthy – he has expense and risk – a great Lateran Council understanding of the use of money.

In Quadragesimo Anno, 1931, Pope Pius XI states that “the ‘capitalist’ economic regime has spread everywhere” (#103) and ‘it is evident that this system is not to be condemned in itself. And surely it is not of its own nature vicious.’ ”

But those thus relying on feelings, whims, wants, desires, opinion and prejudices, fail utterly to face the reality which is:
“But with trade expanding in the middle and late middle ages, the science of economics continued to develop allowing the Church to see that the long held belief in the sterility of money was incorrect. The Church still wanted to defend the poor, but She also began to recognise that there exists an opportunity cost to money. On could morally lend money at a rate of interest that corresponded to what could have been obtained by the lender in an alternative investment decision had the money not been lent. The teaching underwent a development with a new understanding of money.” Entrepreneurship in the Catholic Tradition, Fr Anthony G Percy, Lexington Books, 2010, p 76].

As Fr William G Most emphasises:
“The teaching on usury has not changed. Usury is taking excessive interest. Excessive interest rates remain unjust and sinful. Most states still have specific laws against usury. Society determines the precise amount that is excessive within its economic structures.”
[See: *The Consciousness of Christ
Click to expand...
:
[catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getchap.cfm?WorkNum=215&ChapNum=10]](http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getchap.cfm?WorkNum=215&ChapNum=10])

As the use and value of money became better understood, “in the early sixteenth century, the Franciscan Juan de Medina became the first scholastic writer to defend the idea that risk assumed by the lender constituted legitimate grounds for charging interest.”
“Provided he demands a moderate interest for the money he lends, this demand is never unjust.” (Emphasis added by Woods to the *Catholic Encyclopedia *article).
[Note: *Catholic Encyclopedia, A Vermeersch].
The Church and the Market, Dr Thomas E Woods, Jr., Lexington Books, 2005, p 114-115].
 
Athanasiy said:
Another sister mockery unfit to use arguments on the subject
Click to expand...
Do you have an argument in favor of Michael Hoffman’s anti-Semitism? I see no need to list out the arguments against something that all Christians should readily condemn.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top