Vix Pervenit: On Usury and Other Dishonest Profits by Pope Benedict XIV

Both the Judeo-Christian and certain pagan traditions such as the Greeks consider any interest in loans or “usury” as immoral. This is because money is meant to represent human effort and, generally, any amount over and above that is unnatural since it does not actually represent anything.

Modernist interpretation of the word usury, however, is watered down to mean something like “excessive interest”, as if to tacitly justify small amounts. This is probably (1) a deliberate psychological tactic by the controllers of money, change the meaning of the word and it changes the way people think; (2) goodie-two-shows Christians who don’t want to be “judgemental” since interest in finance has become the norm.

Pope Benedict XIV (b. 31 March 1675 – d. 3 May 1758), born Prospero Lorenzo Lambertini, began his pontificate on 17 August 1740. On 1 November 1745, he issued a papal encyclical warning of usury, triggered by the issues encountered in Italy. In a broader context, the modern debt-based financial system as we know it has already been in place for some years.

The document is approximately 1,900 words in 11 sections and simply repeats what has been written and said before.

I. The nature of the sin called usury has its proper place and origin in a loan contract. This financial contract between consenting parties demands, by its very nature, that one return to another only as much as he has received. The sin rests on the fact that sometimes the creditor desires more than he has given. Therefore he contends some gain is owed him beyond that which he loaned, but any gain which exceeds the amount he gave is illicit and usurious.

II. One cannot condone the sin of usury by arguing that the gain is not great or excessive, but rather moderate or small; neither can it be condoned by arguing that the borrower is rich; nor even by arguing that the money borrowed is not left idle, but is spent usefully, either to increase one’s fortune, to purchase new estates, or to engage in business transactions. …

There is the consideration that contracts may vary without justifying “usury”.

10. In the fourth place We exhort you not to listen to those who say that today the issue of usury is present in name only, since gain is almost always obtained from money given to another. How false is this opinion and how far removed from the truth! We can easily understand this if we consider that the nature of one contract differs from the nature of another. By the same token, the things which result from these contracts will differ in accordance with the varying nature of the contracts. …

Pope Benedict XIV

---

Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!

---