Usury And The Catholic Church: Sinful Or Not?

Usury, or the practice of making loans that are seen as unfairly enriching the lender, has been a contentious topic throughout history, with religious, moral, and legal implications. While the term usury can be used in a broader sense to refer to taking advantage of others' misfortunes, its specific definition in the context of Catholicism and Christianity is the charging of interest on loans, which was once considered a sin. This belief was rooted in the idea that money is meant to facilitate exchange and, therefore, charging a fee for its use is unjust. However, over time, the Catholic Church's stance on usury has evolved, and it is no longer considered a sin in all circumstances. This evolution was influenced by changing economic conditions and a recognition that interest can serve a legitimate purpose, such as compensating lenders for the risk of losing their capital. While the Church still condemns extortionate charges or taking advantage of the poor, it is accepted that lending money at reasonable interest rates is not inherently sinful.

Usury is a sin if it takes advantage of the needy

Usury, or the practice of making loans that are seen as unfairly enriching the lender, has been a contentious topic throughout history, with religious, philosophical, and legal dimensions. While the specific definitions and attitudes towards usury have evolved, the exploitation of the needy through excessive or abusive interest rates remains a central concern.

In the Catholic Church, the condemnation of usury has a long history. The Church Fathers, including St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Pope St. Leo the Great, denounced usury, particularly when it involved taking advantage of the poor. This stance was reiterated by several popes and councils throughout the medieval period, with usurers facing severe penalties, including excommunication and the denial of Christian burial.

The medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas provided a significant justification for the condemnation of usury. He argued that money is a medium of exchange and is consumed when spent. Therefore, charging interest on a loan is akin to "double charging," as one is selling both the money and its use. Aquinas also drew on Aristotelian philosophy, asserting that usury contradicts justice and natural law.

However, the Church's stance on usury began to evolve in the sixteenth century. Thinkers such as Calvin and progressive Catholics like Collet and Antoine argued that interest-taking was not inherently usurious if it represented the real difference between the value of present and future sums of money and was not merely extortionate. This evolution in thinking reflected changing economic circumstances and the recognition that investment opportunities and market conditions had shifted since the time of Aquinas.

Today, the Catholic Church still forbids usury, specifically extortionate charges, as outlined in the Code of Canon Law. However, not all interest-taking is considered sinful. The Church recognizes that investing money in interest-bearing schemes can be practical and even necessary in the modern economic landscape. This evolution in the Church's position demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the complexities surrounding usury and a willingness to adapt its teachings to changing social and economic realities.

In conclusion, while usury has been a controversial topic throughout history, the Catholic Church's position has evolved to recognize that interest-taking is not inherently sinful if it does not exploit the needy. This evolution balances the principles of justice and mercy, ensuring that lending practices do not unjustly enrich the lender at the expense of those in need.

The Catholic Church still forbids usury

Historically, usury was understood as the charging of interest of any kind and was considered wrong or illegal in many societies, including ancient Christian, Jewish, and Islamic societies. The Catholic Church in medieval Europe, following the teachings of Thomas Aquinas, regarded the charging of interest at any rate as sinful. Aquinas argued that charging interest on a loan is a form of "double charging", as one is selling both the thing and the use of the thing.

While the Catholic Church has updated its understanding of usury to reflect modern economic realities, it still condemns the practice. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that those whose "usurious and avaricious dealings lead to the hunger and death of their brethren in the human family indirectly commit homicide" (CCC 2269). The Church teaches that usury is morally impermissible, but this does not mean that any charge above the principal on a loan is always wrong.

The Church's teaching on usury is based on the principle of justice in exchange, which requires equality between what is given and received. Usury, or charging excessive interest, contradicts this principle and is therefore incompatible with the happiness of the virtuous person in this life and the next.

Usury is condemned in the Old Testament

The Old Testament "condemns the practice of charging interest on a poor person because a loan should be an act of compassion and taking care of one’s neighbour". It teaches that "making a profit off a loan from a poor person is exploiting that person" (Exodus 22:25–27). Similarly, the charging of interest (Hebrew: נֶֽשֶׁךְ, romanized: nešek) or the taking of clothing as pledges is condemned in Ezekiel 18 (early 6th century BC), and Deuteronomy 23:19 prohibits the taking of interest in the form of money or food when lending to a "brother".

In the Old Testament, the Israelites were forbidden from charging “usury,” or interest, on loans to fellow Jews (Deuteronomy 23:19), but they were permitted to charge interest on loans to foreigners (Deuteronomy 23:20). A mention of this usury law in Leviticus 25:35-38 makes it clear that it applied to loans made to fellow Israelites in poverty. Having to pay back the loan with “usury,” or interest, would only put them further into debt and was not beneficial to the economy. Loans to foreigners, however, were considered international business and approved. This law served as a reminder to the Jews that helping those in need is something that should be done without requiring anything in return.

The Old Testament is not the only religious text to condemn usury. Similar condemnations are found in religious texts from Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

The New Testament is silent on the matter

The New Testament does not directly address the issue of usury, and there is no explicit condemnation of interest-taking in its passages. Instead, the New Testament focuses on broader themes of benevolence and mercy. For instance, the passage in St. Luke (vi, 34, 35) has been interpreted by some as a censure of interest, but it primarily encourages general benevolence and love, as seen in Luke 6:34-36.

While the New Testament is silent on the matter, early Christian scholars and theologians formed their own interpretations of usury, influenced by the Old Testament and the broader social and economic context of their time. The Patristic tradition, for example, believed that the prohibitive passages in Scripture applied universally, condemning usury as exploitative and contrary to divine law. This view was particularly prominent among the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries, who decried the moral decadence and greed prevalent during that era. However, their vehement denunciations did not articulate a comprehensive doctrine on usury but focused on decrying the exploitation of the poor and vulnerable.

The New Testament's silence on usury, therefore, left room for interpretation and debate among Christian thinkers. While some saw any interest-taking as usury, others distinguished between moderate and excessive rates, with the former being justifiable under certain circumstances. This evolution in thinking about usury reflected the changing economic landscape, as opportunities for investment and the understanding of money evolved over time.

The Church's stance on usury has changed over time

The Catholic Church's stance on usury, which is the practice of charging interest on loans, has evolved significantly over time, reflecting a complex interplay between theological, moral, and practical considerations. Initially, the Church took a hard line against usury, considering it a grave sin that exploited the needy and violated natural law. This perspective was rooted in biblical teachings and the works of early Christian thinkers like Augustine of Hippo. However, as economic realities became more complex, the Church's position began to undergo a gradual transformation.

During the Middle Ages, with the rise of commerce and banking, the issue of usury came to the forefront. The Church recognized the practical need for lending and borrowing, especially to facilitate trade and economic development. This led to a nuanced approach where certain types of loans with interest were tolerated, as long as they were fair and did not lead to excessive profits. The concept of "just price" emerged, suggesting that lenders could charge a reasonable fee for the service provided, covering administrative costs and a modest compensation for the risk undertaken.

A pivotal moment in the Church's changing stance on usury came in the 16th century with the Protestant Reformation. Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin argued for a more lenient view, suggesting that usury was not inherently sinful as long as it was done responsibly and without exploiting the borrower. This perspective gained traction, and it influenced Catholic thought, pushing for a reevaluation of the traditional position. The distinction between "usury" and "interest" became more pronounced, with interest being seen as a legitimate compensation for the use of capital.

Eventually, the Catholic Church underwent a significant shift in its teaching on usury. In the 19th century, Pope Pius VIII formally abolished the prohibition on usury, recognizing the changing economic landscape and the role of lending in modern societies. This decision was further solidified in the 20th century, with the Church focusing more on the ethical dimensions of lending practices rather than a blanket condemnation of interest-based loans. The emphasis shifted to promoting just and equitable economic systems that protect the rights and dignity of all people.

Today, the Catholic Church's position on usury is largely informed by principles of social justice and the common good. While recognizing the legitimate role of lending and borrowing in a modern economy, the Church emphasizes the need for responsible and ethical practices. This includes concerns about exploitative interest rates, particularly in relation to the poor and vulnerable, as well as the potential for financial systems to perpetuate inequality and injustice. The Church encourages Catholics to be mindful of these issues and to advocate for economic structures that promote the well-being of all, rather than the enrichment of a few.

In conclusion, the Catholic Church's stance on usury has indeed changed over time, moving from a strict prohibition to a more nuanced and contextual understanding. This evolution reflects the Church's engagement with the complexities of economic life and its commitment to promoting justice and solidarity in societal structures. While the specific teachings have adapted, the underlying values of compassion, fairness, and respect for human dignity remain at the heart of the Church's guidance on economic matters, including lending and usury.

Frequently asked questions