https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3078.htm
Here's my attempt to summarize his beliefs (please correct it if it's wrong):
It is a sin for people to lend at interest - things like interest on credit card purchases, car loans, student loan, and mortgages, are considered to be sinful for the lender who lends and expects interest back on the loan, because they are not producing anything and so to take such interest is a kind of theft.
The thief who takes such gains at interest is bound to pay back what was stolen (but is in justice entitled to the principal or the thing or amount loaned if they lawfully possessed it).
The borrower does not sin if they take a loan at interest of necessity: a poor student who must take a student loan to get an education may do so without sin (although it might be worth asking the question if it is possible to fund education without having to take on such loans at interest).
It is lawful to be a landlord and make money from renting things since one owns those things and provides a tangible good or benefit.
It is lawful to make money from investments, since one is a part owner of such a company and such companies produce value.
Not covered in the text: it may be a sin to invest in companies who openly promote sin like "woke" companies, because of one's cooperation with the sin as a part owner of the company (saw another article mention "material" versus "proximate" cooperation in others' sins, does anyone have any input on this?)
Covered but mentioning it for emphasis: The Christian ideal seems to be the opposite of usury, which is to lend without expecting interest nor the principal (what was loaned) to be paid back: "But love ye your enemies: do good, and lend, hoping for nothing thereby: and your reward shall be great, and you shall be the sons of the Highest; for he is kind to the unthankful, and to the evil." (Luke 6:35) It would be lawful however to ask for what was loaned back though - one is not bound to lend without expecting anything back, but this is an ideal to strive towards beyond what is required in strict justice - this is "going the extra mile" morally.
I needed this today!
This is a logical problem for me:
That conflicts with this:
Seen from today's perspective (as a personal lender. Not a bank):
I am a "landlord" of my money. I "rent" you my money for a period of time. You pay me "rent" every month, and at the end I also expect you to return the money you "rented" from me. Substitute "apartment" for "money" and nothing changes.
You received a tangible good or benefit by "renting" my money/apartment. Namely, you got the use of the money/apartment for a period of time, while I did not get the use the money/apartment. In either case, I also took the risk you would destroy my "property" while it was in your possession.
The distinction is somewhat arbitrary, and comes down to whether you consider money to be a tangible necessity for living life, or simply an accounting mechanism. The argument can be made both ways, but in modern times when we are in a fiat system and money depreciates in value over time, I would think the money as tangible property argument is actually more correct.
Perhaps once we are back on a gold monetary standard my opinion may shift in the other direction. In a stable money system, goods should get cheaper over time, thus I lose nothing letting you use it as long as I don't need it and you return it. That is absolutely not true today however.
Important caveat:
Charging interest on money that does not actually exist, AKA fractional reserve banking, IS a problem. Because in that case I never had the money to give you. I am "renting" you something I don't actually own.
Interests are needed for people to want to loan and face the risk of losing their money.
However, it is definitely a sin to put people in perpetual debt. Definitely something wrong with "money games". With borrowing and wait for inflation then pay back what you owe.
Oh yea interest is also needed for inflation.
Can we stick to the more serious issues fren? share this on the Christian .win
I'd think this to be a top serious issue affecting everyone's finances negatively today
edit: not going to continue the comment chain unless the other comment does, but I certainly would not consider this to be a distraction but an important issue that has long gone negelected with importance rivaling the topics mentioned in below comment.
We aren't going to abolish interest, and it's not the problem. Look at inequalities in Muslim countries.
For real, there's a battle going on, stop it with these distractions. Eyes on election decertification, Maxwell trial, and stop the vax_xed mandates.
How can usury be a sin? I thought this was big business for Jews, who gave us the law? If it's not a sin to be part of an investment, then why isn't usury considered an investment? Many loans are for starting businesses. I'm sure the Christian ideal is charity. The NT church COULD run on charity if God's ppl had faith, but we don't. The church sends it's needy to the gov't for "benefits" that they are told they paid into and deserve. So there is no blessing of thankfulness to a brother who saw a need and helped you, and there's no brother who is blessed for his charity.
Interesting analysis, however in Matthew 25 :26 (NASB) it reads, “But his master answered and said to him, ‘You worthless, lazy slave! Did you know that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter seed? Then you ought to have put my money in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest."
This is a parable told by Jesus about the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus recognized that interest is paid for money deposited, and the only way that works is when a bank loans out money and charges interest. It can then pay the depositors interest on their money.
I would like to add that Jesus also said to return to Caesar what is his when asked about taxes. He was alluding to the fact that if you follow him you will not need money as referenced many times when he encourages those that follow him.
Jesus Sends Out the Twelve
9 When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, 2 and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. 3 He told them: “Take nothing for the journey—no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt. 4 Whatever house you enter, stay there until you leave that town. 5 If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” 6 So they set out and went from village to village, proclaiming the good news and healing people everywhere.
We are to rely on God alone and not the constructs of man. (mark of the beast)
Realizing the situation for what it was at the time is not an endorsement to continue in the situation.
Jesus did say in Matt 6:24 "“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon." Mammon is money, wealth, and material possessions. If a person serves mammon, it would indicate a love for the world, and not a love for the Lord.
I John 2:15-16 says, Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.
People who charge high interest rates on borrowed money to take advantage of those in need could easily fall into the group described by John.
Yes!
Must make a clear distinction as I am guilty of loving the world.
“Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%208&version=NIV
I think we might nearly be here
That passage is referenced also in Luke 19:23 and addressed in Article 1: Objection 1. By interest, I believe they here mean profit on an investment, rather than interest on a loan. Additionally, Jesus was talking more about making spiritual gains rather than speaking positively of loaning at interest: