Three developments or reversals of Church doctrine?

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,536
55,220
Woods
✟4,587,204.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
*You are in the Catholic forum*

“The Church changed its teaching on usury.” If I had ten cents for every time I have heard this, by now I might have enough to buy myself lunch-and more! However, if I had been collecting interest on that money, would I had earned enough to make me immoral?

It seems a hard pill to swallow either way...

Continued below.
Three developments or reversals of Church doctrine?
 

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
*You are in the Catholic forum*

“The Church changed its teaching on usury.” If I had ten cents for every time I have heard this, by now I might have enough to buy myself lunch-and more! However, if I had been collecting interest on that money, would I had earned enough to make me immoral?

It seems a hard pill to swallow either way...

Continued below.
Three developments or reversals of Church doctrine?

An observation:
In a world of fiat money and current monetary policy of programmed inflation ( so programmed reduction of money value) interest barely covers that loss in value if at all. So there is no real gain. It mitigates a loss.

It is also interesting that during the course of the Roman Empire, the progressive reduction of valuable metal in coin massively reducing value, achieved much the same result. It was arguably one factor in the demise of the empire.

The higher rates of interest in commercial finance at least partly reflect the percentage cost of default, not profit,

If we consider usury is charging punitive interest to those with little choice or other access to money, ( which is what I believe was meant in OT) then I do not think the movements in fiat currency qualify, or most lending services.
 
Upvote 0

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
3,000
1,859
69
Logan City
✟747,349.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If we consider usury is charging punitive interest to those with little choice or other access to money, ( which is what I believe was meant in OT) then I do not think the movements in fiat currency qualify, or most lending services.

Interest rates on home loans in Australia (and most other loans) are probably as low as they're going to get right now.

But there are exceptions. What we call "Pay Day Lenders" and pawnbrokers, including one rather well known outfit, grossly overcharge the poor for their services. They practice usury.

I do a bit of work with the Saint Vincent de Paul Society. One lady we helped was desperate for cash, so she hocked her TV for $100 AUD. If she could pay off the amount plus accumulated interest within 3 months, she'd have gotten it back. But if she could not, it would have been sold.

What was the interest on that loan? Forty dollars per month, or 40% per month. No doubt these pawnbrokers, respectable or not, have high default rates, have their own costs to meet, building leases, overheads, staff wages etc. And in the case of her particular funding source, television advertising.

But 40% per month is outright usury.

In case you're wondering, Vinnies paid out her loan as it was then, and she got her television back. We were also able to assist her with some basic supplies, namely food.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Those are the ones I condemn as well. particularly the ones with menaces
And compounding interest that results in 200 percent or more repayment

But just a word of caution: the default rates are huge.
A simple example.
If a loan is made to three individuals of 100 at 40 percent
And just one of them defaults ie 33% default.
The net return of the company (after lots of administration)
Is 140 +140 +0 =280 on capital of 300 .
They dont even break even: they lose 20 percent and then have to pay all their costs.
If there are 4 and only 1 defaults. They only get back 420 against capital of 400
They made 20 on 400, which is 5 percent before costs, and for that return they are far better off lending to reliable secured loan clients.
The default rate has to be less than 20 percent and interest of 40 for their gross return to even get to double digits. Out of which they have to pay for the shop, staff so even then on net return there is none, they only break even.

In hard figures 40% is not the ripoff it seems if default rate is greater than 10



Interest rates on home loans in Australia (and most other loans) are probably as low as they're going to get right now.

But there are exceptions. What we call "Pay Day Lenders" and pawnbrokers, including one rather well known outfit, grossly overcharge the poor for their services. They practice usury.

I do a bit of work with the Saint Vincent de Paul Society. One lady we helped was desperate for cash, so she hocked her TV for $100 AUD. If she could pay off the amount plus accumulated interest within 3 months, she'd have gotten it back. But if she could not, it would have been sold.

What was the interest on that loan? Forty dollars per month, or 40% per month. No doubt these pawnbrokers, respectable or not, have high default rates, have their own costs to meet, building leases, overheads, staff wages etc. And in the case of her particular funding source, television advertising.

But 40% per month is outright usury.

In case you're wondering, Vinnies paid out her loan as it was then, and she got her television back. We were also able to assist her with some basic supplies, namely food.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,169
16,010
Flyoverland
✟1,224,091.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
The Syllabus of Errors and the Vatican II teaching on Religious Liberty would appear to be a little difficult to mesh, but perhaps there is a way to do so?
They would appear on the surface to be simply irreconcilable. But that presumes a simplistic fundamentalist reading of both texts. Both texts, from the 1860's and the 1960's, just like Scripture, have context that we need to pay attention to.

One thing about the Syllabus is that it lists errors in a form reminiscent of the anathemas of the council of Trent,not that any person exactly holds the condemned proposition, but that if someone did they would be condemned. We have to be careful about how we extend those propositions and try to apply them to today. Some are obvious. Some not so much.

So it's complicated historical work to show that the two documents are in synch, and easy for people to claim they are not.
 
Upvote 0