The poor ask for medicine and you offer them poison; they beg for bread and you give them a sword; they plead for freedom and you subject them to slavery; they implore to be freed from their bonds and you entrap them in an inescapable net. - Basil of Cesarea
One of the most common arguments against “social justice Christianity” is that this prophetic and socially-attuned version of the faith is a relatively recent development, something born out of the World Wars, identity politics, and liberation theologies of the 20th century. Yet this is patently untrue especially when it comes to Christianity’s long history of condemning exploitation of the poor. On usury, the predatory lending of money at exorbitantly high interest rates to the poor, the Old and New Testament and early church fathers such as Basil of Cesarea, John Chrysostom, and Ambrose of Milan make many of today’s most fiery social justice preachers look like kittens.
“You rich,” Basil fairly sneers in his Homily on Psalm 14. Delivered during his episcopate at some point between 363-378 CE in what is now modern-day Turkey, Basil stated “Listen to the advice that we give to the poor in view of your inhumanity: Bear any suffering than the calamity that will come from usury.” Basil was speaking to the wealthy landowners who were also the primary lenders to the poor of Cesarea. He denounced their lending practices from the pulpit stating, “Indeed, it is extremely inhuman that some have to beg for the most basic necessities to support their lives while others are not satisfied with the capital they have, but excogitate ways of increasing their opulence at the expense of the poor in distress... The poor ask for medicine and you offer them poison; they beg for bread and you give them a sword; they plead for freedom and you subject them to slavery; they implore to be freed from their bonds and you entrap them in an inescapable net.”[1]
Inspired by Basil’s homily, the fourth century bishop Ambrose of Milan offered equally searing words in his homily On Tobit. Ambrose even mimics Basil’s forceful opening line: “You rich, such are indeed your favors! ... For you even the poor are a source of profit. You subject the poor to usury; you know how to oblige them to pay you interest even when they do not have enough to look after their basic needs.”[2]
It is difficult to imagine almost any Episcopalian or Anglican preacher today standing in a pulpit and inveighing against bankers, mortgage, student loan, and payday loan industry executives as forcefully as these two bishops did in the fourth century. Even so, we probably should. Lenders have never ceased “excogitating ways to increase their opulence at the expense of the poor in distress”, and one can readily point to the recently deregulated payday loan industry and racial disparities in mortgage lending as egregious examples of taking advantage of the poor. The Church needs to reacquaint itself with its long history of condemning usury. This includes exploring the Old and New Testament’s abhorrence of predatory lending toward as well as the writings of figures like Basil of Cesarea, John Chrysostom, and Ambrose of Milan, among others, from the first few centuries of the Church.
One of the challenges of recovering a focus on usury is that there is an overwhelming amount of material to explore on the topic. For the purposes of this blog post, therefore, I will focus my comments on Basil of Cesarea whose Homily on Psalm 14 incorporates many of the main teachings on usury in the Old and New Testaments. After reviewing those themes, I will address one explanation for why usury has been largely abandoned as a matter of concern for the Church today and ask whether it isn’t time to take this topic up once again.
Basil of Cesarea
Basil of Cesarea - also known as Basil the Great - is a fascinating figure whose work and witness integrates the philosophical, prophetic, and philanthropic traditions of Christianity. Born to a family of wealthy Christians in 329 in Caesarea, capitol of Cappadocia, Basil practiced as a lawyer until a chance encounter with the Christian monk Eustathius of Sebaste rekindled an earlier interest in hermetic asceticism and ultimately led Basil to leave his law practice. In 357 he traveled to Palestine, Egypt, Syria, and Mesopotamia to learn more about ascetic practices and distributed his personal fortune to the poor along the way. While in Egypt, he visited Pachomius, an abbot credited with having brought solitary ascetics into an organized form of communal monasticism for the first time. His travels and visit with Pachomius’ community would inspire Basil to found a monastery on his family’s estate, an experience that would thereafter shape Basil’s understanding of the social and communal purpose of wealth.
When he became a bishop in the latter part of the fourth century, Basil of Caesarea embraced a relatively new, public role for a Christian leader -- that of ‘lover of the poor.’ As I’ve written about here for Episcopal Relief & Development, he embodied this role amidst a famine that overtook Cesarea in 369 and preached forcefully to the wealthy of the city, laying bare the hidden suffering of the poor in vivid terms, and raised funds for food and medical aid.
Basil’s focus on the needs of the poor is again evident in the forcefulness with which he condemns usury in his Homily on Psalm 14. His words still leap off the page today. There, Basil reflected on the Psalmist’s condemnation of “the evildoers who eat up my people as they eat bread” (Psalm 14: 4) and sees the charging of interest on the poor as a form of devourment that ultimately leads to slavery. He urges the wealthy to lend their surplus money to the poor without any interest whatsoever: “Give your surplus money, do not burden it with interest, and both you and your debtor will fare well...But if you look for interest, be satisfied with those given by the Lord. He will pay, through the poor, the due interest.”[3] Significantly, Basil grounds his call to lend without interest in Jesus’ teaching on lending found in the Gospel of Luke: “Now what does the Lord advise? ‘Lend to those from whom there is no hope of repayment.’”[4]
Basil’s choice to cite Jesus’ teaching is significant because there appears to be a general misconception that the New Testament is silent on lending with interest and usury.[5] In contrast, theologian Douglas Meeks argues that “Probably the most consequential economic saying of Jesus for the history of the West is ‘Lend, expecting nothing in return’ (Luke 6.34-35, cf. Matthew 5:42). This command, together with that of Deuteronomy 23:19, impelled the Christian tradition through the Reformation to condemn the injustice of usury.”[6]
In Luke 6:34-35 Jesus states, “If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.” This teaching is not an off-handed comment but occurs in a place of central importance within the Gospel of Luke. It is a part of the Sermon on the Plain which begins with Jesus saying that it is the poor, the hungry, and the weeping who are blessed.[7] Further examples of debt and release from debt occur in the Gospel of Matthew’s parable of the unforgiving servant (Matthew 18:23-25) and, as I will discuss later, in Jesus’ proclamation that he has come to bring Good News to the poor (Luke 4:18a) which invokes the Year of Jubilee's release from debt and enslavement.
In citing Jesus’ teaching to lend without interest, Basil also indirectly drew on the extensive Old Testament traditions that abhor predatory lending to the poor. This is especially apparent in Basil’s description of debt and indebtedness as “slavery” and “an inescapable net.”[8]
In the Old Testament, creditors are described as coming to take away debtors’ children as slaves (2 Kings 4:1); it describes the horrific results of families having to borrow money on their own fields to pay the King’s tax: “We are forcing our sons and daughters to be slaves, and some of our daughters have been ravished; we are powerless, and our fields and vineyards now belong to others,” (Nehemiah 5:4-5). The connection between usury and slavery is perhaps most movingly expressed in the prohibition on charging of interest on the poor that appears in Leviticus 25:35-38: “If any of your kin fall into difficulty and become dependent on you, you shall support them; they shall live with you as though resident aliens. Do not take interest in advance or otherwise make a profit from them, but fear your God; let them live with you. You shall not lend them your money at interest taken in advance, or provide them food at a profit. I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of Canaan, to be your God.”
The main thrust of the prohibition against predatory lending, then, is that it returns the poor to a form of slavery, something which tragically seems as true today as when the writers of Leviticus penned this prohibition between the fourth and sixth centuries BC.
Bringing Good News to the Poor: Release from the Enslavement of Debt
As discussed above, Basil’s condemnation of usury rests on Jesus’ teaching to lend without interest which occurs in the Gospel of Luke. Jesus’ prohibition itself invokes the longstanding aversion to charging interest on loans made to “kin who have fallen into difficulty” found in many parts of the Old Testament. In a similar way, Jesus’ announcement of his mission as bringing Good News to the poor (Luke 4:18a) also builds on the Old Testament’s longing for a Year of Jubilee which sees the releasing of debtors from their debts and slaves from enslavement.
Because Jesus’ pronouncement that he has been anointed to bring Good News to the poor is of such importance, it is worth following the biblical wormholes from Luke to Isaiah to Leviticus to get a better grasp of the tradition and imagery Jesus is depicted as referencing. In this passage of Luke, Jesus is quoting Isaiah 61:1-2a which foretells of a future anointed one who brings Good News to the oppressed: “He has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed, to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and release to the prisoners; to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn.” Both Jesus and Isaiah’s inclusion of the term ‘the year of the Lord’s favor’ connects the anointed one’s mission to the priestly proclamation of the Year of Jubilee, a time when all agricultural work must cease, debts, slaves, and indentured servants are released, and ancestral property that was previously sold reverts to its original owners (Lev 25.8–17; cf Deut 15.1–3,12–18). An essential image of Jesus’ mission is, therefore, the release of the poor from the enslavement of debt.
And yet, despite this extensive biblical teaching and early Christian tradition, mainline Christianity has by and large set the issue of predatory lending aside. Why?
Ian Harper and Lachlan Smirl’s essay on usury in the Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics cites the emergence of England’s welfare state as a turning point in the church’s involvement in discussions of loans and interest. “In England, the state began to assume responsibility for the welfare of the poor with the passage of the Act for the Relief of the Poor (also known as the ‘Elizabethan Poor law’ or ‘43rd Elizabeth’) in 1601. Similar legislation was adopted in other parts of the world… From these beginnings governments in the world’s developed economies gradually assumed greater responsibility for the welfare of their most disadvantaged citizens.”[10] They continue by noting that formal government-administered welfare programs have now replaced the charitable loans organized by religious bodies which were once the primary source of relief for the poor while, at the same time, loans have become almost exclusively focused on commerce rather than charity. “These developments have stripped usury, at least in a Western context, of its antisocial connotations, and in large measure explain its demise as an issue for the modern Church.”[11]
Yet isn't this an instance in which the Church has thrown out the baby with the bathwater? Although it makes sense that the Church’s role as the primary body providing a social safety net and charitable loans to the poor has been displaced by government-administered programs, it is clear there is still a need for the Church to raise its voice on the persistent problem of predatory lending.
Usury is rampant today particularly in the form of payday lending. To cite just one very recent example: just prior to a 2016 popular referendum that resulted in the banning of payday loans, the average interest on these types of loans in South Dakota was 652%. One can imagine the impact of such an interest rate on a South Dakotan family that had to borrow $100 to make rent. Tragically, after a brief period in which this ban was into effect, President Trump’s administration instituted a permanent loophole for payday lenders that has rendered South Dakota’s 2016 ban moot.[12] The payday loans are back and we remain in a country in which God’s people are forever being “eaten up as bread” as Psalm 14 puts it.
 |
| Photo by Cat Branchman (or maybe someone who just calls themselves that name?) |
The example above is also interesting in that aspects of this story also capture a cultural perspective on who is to be held responsible for debt. In stark contrast to the biblical and early church tradition which generally places the moral onus on the lender rather than the lendee for having trapped people in ‘inescapable nets’ of poverty, US culture has tended to stigmatize debt-holders in shocking terms. This was starkly embodied on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade in February 2009. In a video rant that later served as inspiration for the rise of the Tea Party, CNBC reporter Rick Santenelli scorned the idea that the U.S. government would help subsidize ‘the losers’ mortgages’ to the applause of traders all around.[16] Wittingly or not, we now know that many of those who Santenelli referred to as ‘losers’ mortgages’ were actually intentionally targeted by unscrupulous lenders. In part because of voices like Santenelli, homeowners never ultimately received debt relief and that “despite the biggest housing collapse in post–Great Depression American history, indebted home owners were left drowning underwater with only minimal assistance from the government.”[17]
The Archbishop of Canterbury began speaking out forcefully against the payday loan industry in England but -- how to put this delicately -- the Church of England’s credibility on this issue was somewhat undercut when the Financial Times revealed in 2013 the Church had invested millions of pounds in England’s leading payday lending company Wonga, a company that the Washington Post claimed charges annual percentage rates of more than five thousand percent.[18] This usury scandal ultimately led to Archbishop Justin Welby to recommit to divesting the Church of England from the payday lending company and encourage church membership to join existing or church-founded credit unions, but the damage had been done.[19] Who will lead on this issue?
What to do?
Tragically, many parts of Basil of Cesarea’s Homily on Psalm 14 remains just as relevant today as when it was first uttered. Basil told the wealthy who were lending money in Cesarea that “If you take from the poor, you commit the worst crime of inhumanity: you derive profit from miseries, you gain money from tears, you oppress the needy, you starve the hungry. You have no mercy whatsoever, you do not realize the bond you have with those who suffer.”[20] Tragically, such lines could just as easily be directed today at payday loan industry and Wells Fargo and Bank of America executives in light of their companies' predatory lending tactics. And, to be clear, this is just to name a few examples of what is, in fact, a much more widespread phenomenon.
Local leadership on this issue matters a great deal more than resolutions and churchwide statements (though these are certainly important too). What would it look like to preach about the biblical perspective on usury and debt? Would this be an opportunity to integrate the prophetic and the pastoral, particularly in light of the way that debt weighs on people in their day-to-day lives? People may be surprised to discover just how much the Old and New Testaments have to say on these issues, including the fact that Jesus connected his mission to the longed-for pronouncement of release from debt and slavery. Bible studies on these passages would be opportunities for people to explore both what the biblical tradition has to say about the predatory charging of interest on loans to the poor, and to begin to share their own experiences about debt in their life.
I am also struck by the line that Basil wields at the wealthy. “You rich, listen to the advice that we give to the poor in view of your inhumanity: Bear any suffering than the calamity that will come from usury.” While this might have been rhetorical flourish, there is indeed a role for the church to play in warning people about predatory lending. In my Brooklyn neighborhood, there are municipal signs pasted on trashcans and bus stops warning people that student loans must be paid back, a regular reminder to me that there is an alarming amount of intentionally-created confusion about loans and debt. Financial literacy programs can have a profoundly empowering impact and can help people to avoid getting entrapped by unscrupulous lenders. How might the Church be a source of education and clarity on this issue?
At the church wide level, there is also a significant need for advocacy for more regulation of the payday loan industry and holding major banks accountable for clear instances in which they practiced predatory lending. But beyond this, the Church can help establish lending alternatives. One inspiring example comes from the Diocese of Los Angeles. In the wake of the Rodney King riots, Dr. Gloria Brown, the Diocese of Los Angeles and Episcopal Relief & Development established the Episcopal Federal Credit Union to help devastated communities avoid the payday loan and pawn shops that were the only lenders left as major banks abandoned the hardest-hit areas.[21] Nearly thirty years later, this credit union is proving to be a bulwark against the economic impacts of COVID-19. It continues to offer low-interest, small loans to struggling families, and at the end of March 2020 they announced an emergency cash fund for churches whose cash flow has dropped and a 50% reduction in their customary interest rate for congregational loans. What would it look like for the Episcopal Church to replicate the credit union model in other parts of the country?
As I hope I have shown here, one has to carefully ignore a great deal of scripture and tradition to come to the conclusion that Christianity should have little to say about issues of social and economic justice. In stark contrast to those who believe that 'social justice Christianity' is a relatively new phenomenon, Basil of Cesarea’s fourth century writings and the biblical tradition he invokes speak to how central economic justice issues have historically been to Christianity. Tragically, on the issue of predatory lending, the Church appears to have forgotten some of this history -- at least domestically -- and so there is a need for this to be explored once again.[22] Such a refocusing effort would get to the very heart of Christianity and Jesus’ mission to bring Good News to the poor, one that sees the inbreaking of God’s Kingdom as release from the enslavement of debt.
________________
[1] Rhee, Helen. Basil’s Homily on Psalm 14. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity. Location 419.
[2] Rhee, Helen. Ambrose of Milan’s On Tobit. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity. Page 108.
[3] Rhee, Helen. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity (Ad Fontes: Early Christian Sources) . Augsburg Fortress. Kindle Edition. Page 67
[4] Rhee, Helen. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity (Ad Fontes: Early Christian Sources) . Augsburg Fortress. Kindle Edition. Page 67
[5] Ian Harper and Lachlan Smirl, Usury, The Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics, Page 566. “In contrast to the Old Testament prohibitions against usury, the New Testament is silent on the subject. In particular, nowhere does the New Testament record Jesus teaching against the taking of interest.”
[6] M. Douglas Meeks, Economics in Christian Scriptures, Oxford Book of Christianity and Economics, Page 17
[7] Luke 6:20-21
[8] Helen Rhee. [Basil’s] Homily on Psalm 14. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity (Ad Fontes: Early Christian Sources). Augsburg Fortress. Kindle Edition. Location 419
[9] M. Douglas Meeks, Economics in Christian Scriptures, Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics, 17.
[10] Ian Harper and Lachlan Smirl’s essay on Usury, Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics. 576
[11] Ian Harper and Lachlan Smirl’s essay on Usury, Oxford Handbook of Christianity and Economics. 576
[12] Moattar, Daniel. “Trump to Payday Lenders: Let’s Rip America Off Again.” February 2020 - https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/02/trump-payday-loan-bank-rule/
[13] Rothstein, Richard. “A comment on Bank of America/Countrywide’s discriminatory mortgage lending and its implications for racial segregation.” January 2012
[14] Rothstein, Richard. “A comment on Bank of America/Countrywide’s discriminatory mortgage lending and its implications for racial segregation.” January 2012
[15] Rothstein, Richard. “A comment on Bank of America/Countrywide’s discriminatory mortgage lending and its implications for racial segregation.” January 2012
[16] Mian, Atif. House of Debt. University of Chicago Press. Kindle Edition. Page 135.
[17] Mian, Atif. House of Debt. University of Chicago Press. Kindle Edition. Page 135
[18] Sharlene Goff and Brooke Masters. “Church of England invests in Wonga backer”. July 2013. https://www.ft.com/content/1855c6bc-f544-11e2-b4f8-00144feabdc0
[19] Trevor Grundy, “Following scandal, Archbishop Justin Welby offers to open up credit unions”, Washington Post, July 2013 - https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/following-scandal-archbishop-justin-welby-offers-to-open-up-credit-unions/2013/07/26/8507c410-f628-11e2-81fa-8e83b3864c36_story.html
[20] Rhee, Helen. Wealth and Poverty in Early Christianity (Ad Fontes: Early Christian Sources) . Augsburg Fortress. Kindle Edition. Page 67
[21] Miramontes, Jennifer. “Credit Unions for Economic Justice”. March 2020 issue of ECF Vital Practices.
[22] Financial literacy programs and lending initiatives are frequently components of international aid.
Comments
Post a Comment