“CHOOSE THIS DAY WHOM YE WILL SERVE”
What is sin? Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.
So says the Westminster Shorter Catechism (Question 14).
“Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness”
So says the Word of God (I John 3:4)
If it is charged that to commit usury is to sin, then it is charged as well that to commit usury is to transgress the law of God. That usury is a transgression of the law of God may be shown by three statutes in the law; Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:35-37, and Deuteronomy 23:19-20. The reading of these Scriptures ought to be an adequate demonstration of the unlawfulness of usury, but in our generation we see a blind turning away from the principle of law. Some have hardened their hearts in blatant unbelief. At best they regard law as having some foundation in Nature, but regard the statutes and ordinances of God as superstition. The very
idea of one binding his thoughts and behavior according to the requirement of God’s law is anathema to them. To such unbelief arguments and reasonings about usury are not addressed; but a simple proclamation of repentance. As Jesus urged Thomas, the doubting Apostle, “be not unbelieving, but believing” (John 20:27). Blessed is he in whose heart the word of the Sovereign Lord creates belief. However, there are many who would count themselves as believers, who would
claim to take seriously the exhortation of Paul, “therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey its lusts” (Romans 6:12), and at the same time esteem broad sections of God’s law as no longer applicable. These are ones who, by design or by sheepish ignorance, would excuse usury as no sin under certain circumstances or conditions, because they regard God’s command against usury as qualified on various points. This hesitancy to conform to God’s law may be addressed in a number of ways. There may be an endeavor to show that God’s law in fact is not qualified in any manner which they propose, and that it in fact is binding upon men still to this day. This approach was taken elsewhere. Another approach to this problem, which shall be the present course, is to bypass altogether all the petty discussions about qualifications and applicability of usury statutes, and show that usury is a transgression of the Decalogue.
The validity of this method is evident in the fact that the Decalogue forms the bedrock of law, not only in the civil and ecclesiastical spheres, but also in the Scriptures. The hundreds of statutes and ordinances of God rightly may be considered “case law”, any violation of which is predicated on a more fundamental violation of one or more points of the Ten Commandments. Though there is much controversy over the status of the many statutes and ordinances, and our duty vis-a-vis them, hardly anyone argues that the Ten Commandments no longer are binding. Evangelicalism has become increasingly vocal in recent years concerning violations of the law which are rampant in America, e.g. abortion, homosexuality, statism, etc., and the confidence with which they speak is derived from the binding nature of the Ten Commandments. Some of the burden of sorting out the controversy over the usury statutes is relieved upon showing that to commit usury is to violate the Ten Commandments. The following discussion therefore shall proceed to demonstrate that to commit usury is a violation of the First, Second, Fourth, Eighth, and Tenth Commandments.
THE FIRST COMMANDMENT
Exodus 20:3, “You shall have no other gods before Me”
To commit usury is to transgress the First Commandment in as much as all sin arises from turning away from God and turning toward creation. Like Eve, the usurer listens to that tantalizing voice, “Indeed, has God said?” (Genesis 3:1) He esteems himself as a competent judge of good and evil, rather than submitting always and only to the Creator for such judgements. In this way the usurer’s sense of good and evil is perverted in its very foundation, and is vulnerable to all manner of corruption. If sinning affords a sensual pleasure to his flesh, and if it seems convenient to do so – that is, to do so is to run in the deep tracks that already have been cut by the centuries-long march of Babylon – then he is more ready to
justify his sin by some subtle means that otherwise never would have
occurred to him.
If one has another god, whether oneself or some guru of economic advice or theory, then the words of the true God, the Creator, are discounted. It is the words of the other god which now are heeded. Our Creator put us into the garden to
____________
1. see Rushdoony, The Institute of Biblical Law, Vol I, p.10
cultivate it and keep it (Genesis 2: 15). In our sin, He increased the intensity of the work and toil which was our lot by creation, for He said to Adam, “By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread” (Genesis 3:19a). But in violation of the First Commandment, the usurer has chosen another god. This false god has said that the intensity of our labor has not increased, but decreased. In fact, he has said that our goal ought to be to cease our labors altogether. Today, many hold that labor is to be avoided. Many flirt with usury, and become petty usurers, because they despise work. They listen to the voice of the other god, and not the words of their Creator. Spewing falsehoods, the usurer declares unto them that they ought to cease the drudgery of work, and rather put their “money” to work instead. However, the conception that “money” labors and begets other money is but a device by which the usurer tries to block out of his mind the convicting reality that his goods derive not from the labor of “money”, but from the sweat of another’s
brow. The usurer does not work, but says that his “money” works. However, a moment’s serious reflection reveals that this merely is a euphemism. There is no true sense in which “money” can work. The best that one could say is that the “work” of money is to promote the trade of goods and services among men. But money does not assist in the production of goods. The goods of this life may come into being only through some productive process. This is where true work is done. The usurer may acquire goods by means of a money payment, but by what means has he acquired the money? Did he give goods or services and receive a money payment for them? No, he merely has granted a loan and received usury. He has his goods by the sweat of another man’s brow, in defiance of the directive of his Creator that he shall have them lawfully only by the sweat of his own brow. We lawfully may benefit from another’s labor if he labors under our employment, for which we pay hire, or if he labors for us as a gift. But the debtor is in neither of these positions, and in fact is in a position that is the opposite of both of them. The usurer pays him no hire for his labor, rather the borrower both labors and pays the hire as well in the form of usury. The produce of his labor is not a gift that he bestows upon the usurer, but is extortion that the usurer exacts of him.
The practice of the usurer is in defiance of the requirement of his Creator, yet he continues in sin – even the so-called believer – because in the hardness of his heart he has chosen for himself another god. This is not to say that everyone who receives usury consciously has taken another god. Only the most hard of heart continues in evil knowingly. But when the so-called believer listens to that tantalizing voice, and seeks to become unproductive, to live unlawfully off of the productive efforts of others, then knowingly or not he has repudiated the words of his Creator, and chosen rather the way of Babylon.
SECOND COMMANDMENT
Exodus 20:4-5, “You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth. You shall not serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me.”
Usury is idolatry. Idolatry in ancient times was fairly simple because men tended to translate their ideas into visual images. Modern men are more apt to entertain their ideas in the abstract, but they should not be so foolish as to suppose that the lack of visual images frees them from any guilt of idolatry. Idolatry essentially is a sin of the mind, as v.5 indicates (“You shall not serve them”). It is ascribing to some aspect of creation that which rightly is ascribed only to the Creator.
Usury violates the Second Commandment by exacting from the borrower a service to idols. The payment of usury is a tribute which the serf pays to his lord. The greater the magnitude of his debt, the more god-like the usurer becomes to him. It may seem therefore that it is not the usurer, but the borrower who is guilty of idolatry. But, the essential nature of usury requires that the usurer is a god in his own eyes. His lust for gain spurs him to exact tribute from the needy who must borrow. It is the rare debtor who religiously and actively worships his creditor. More typically, he resents usury and the exacting creditor. This hardly is in keeping with a heart-felt idolatry. The real idolatry in usury emanates
from the heart of the usurer, for he is the one who is roving about seeking
whom he may devour. He is the one who, more than anyone else tends to
regard himself as a god.
We are not to be gods to one another. None of us is to enter into slavery, and none of us is to be exalted as a god. We ought to be brothers one to another, who join in worship of the only true God. In the early medieval era the bishops of the church chastised land barons for enslaving their brethren as serfs. The situation did not change overnight, but the eventual result of constant pressure was the emergence of freedom for the common man. This is one of the astounding aspects of the influence of Christianity on Western civilization, which was exhibited most gloriously at the founding of our nation. But usury is turning our land back into the feudalism of lords and serfs. Jesus said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not so among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant” (Matthew 20:25-26). Though the Scriptures say that Moses was as God to Aaron (Exodus 4:16), yet this was only in the sense that he declared the word of God to him, as a prophet. So it says that Moses, through Aaron, was as God to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1), for he declared the word of God even unto the pagans. But the usurer would make himself as God unto all men, not in order to declare the word of God to us, but in order that he might declare unto us his own word. He does not ask, “How may I serve you?” Nor does he exhort us, “Join me, brethren, in worship of the Almighty.” Rather, he seeks to reap a gain out of our sweat, and exact the tribute tax of rent and usury to the glorification of himself. He asks, “Where is the needy one who might serve me?”
The professional usurers, who sit atop the great pyramid of usury that has spread over our land, commend themselves as almighty in a way that petty usurers cannot. They claim unique creative powers. They lend not their capital upon usury, but they claim to create “money” out of nothing, which they lend out upon usury. The Scriptures testify that it is our Creator God who “calls into being that which does not exist” (Romans 4:17b), but now the grand usurers claim to possess these same creative powers. Petty usurers venerate them as gods, in violation of the First and
Second Commandments, and seek after their produce (which they devotedly call “money”) because they consider it to be wealth. By claiming to have created wealth themselves, the chief priests of usurers have as much as denied that wealth consists in what God has created. Their faithful serfdom labors diligently in hope of tasting even a small part of this illusory “wealth”, not heeding the warning of their Lord, “Do not work for the food which perishes” (John 6:27).
God has warned His people that if they enter into idolatry they will provoke His wrath, for He is a jealous God. He has promised that the outbreak of His wrath against idolatry will be felt onto the third and fourth generations. This is exhibited in the modern world most dramatically in the case of usury. The idolatry of usury spawns only a legacy of judgement. The offspring of usurers inherit hardness of heart and blindness of eyes. Usury is an obstacle that bars the way to true Deity and bondsman. Henry Smith well characterizes the misery of a family whose generations are plagued with usury:
The Usurer shall crie unto his children [from hell], Cursed be you my children, because you were the cause of these torments, for least you should be poore, I was an Usurer, and robbed other, to leave riches unto you. To whome, the children shall replie againe, nay, Cursed be you father, for you were the cause of our torments; for if you had not left us other mens goodes, we had not kept other mens goodes. Thus when they are cursed of God, they shall curse one another, curse the Lord for condemning them, curse their sinnes for accusing them, curse their parents for begetting them, and curse themselves, because they cannot helpe themselves.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT
Exodus 20:8-10, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six
days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.”
Usury breaks the Sabbath. Since the modern mind is dull, it must be
pointed out that if there was any true sense in which “money” could work,
then to the above there would have been added, “or your money”. It
already has been shown that “money” in fact does not work. But inasmuch
as the usurer perceives it as working, and does not give it a Sabbath rest,
therefore in his heart he is a Sabbath breaker. Actually, there are two respects in which this is true. There is a positive requirement of the Fourth Commandment, “Six days you shall labor and do all your work” (v.9). The usurer despises work, and manifestly holds this positive requirement in contempt. He loves income, but hates work. The more consistently Babylonian one becomes in his outlook on life, the more there will crystallize in his thinking the goal of abundant income and the
cessation of work. However, is there not a true sense in which this ought to be our goal? We have been told, “There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God. For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His.” (Hebrews 4:9,10) Will not all of our needs be addressed directly by our God, Who will supply us with such abundant income that “the water of life” shall be provided to us “without cost” (Revelation 21:6b), and will us give such light that there will not be need of a sun to shine upon us (v.23)? Indeed,
this is a glorious vision. It is as glorious as the vision of men dwelling together in unity. The goals of the City of God, and the goals of the earthly city may be made to appear quite similar on the surface. But, below the surface they are as different as righteousness and lawlessness. The ancient Babylonians, in their hatred of God, and in their effort to live independently from Him, sought to achieve a powerful
_____________
Smith, An Examination ofU sury in Two Sermons (1591; Norwood: Walter
Johnson, inc.,1976)
unity by means of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11). Modern Babylonians relentlessly pursue their war against God, and are busy constructing a modern tower by means of which to achieve their evil ends. It is the monolith of usury.
Their hope is to achieve the perpetual income and the perpetual rest from works, that in reality shall come only from the hand of God, and shall be bestowed only upon His people. Men cannot generate this income or this rest from their own devices. As long as we continue in this world, our duty under God is to work six days, and rest on the seventh day as a testimony of our dependence on Him, and of the glorious rest that one day shall be ours.
Then there is the negative requirement of the Fourth Commandment. On the seventh day there must be a cessation of work. But the usurer, even if only in his perception, drives his “money” relentlessly. He calculates his usury day and night, week in and week out, year after year. Some may say, “Does not the crop in the field also continue to grow and increase, even on the Sabbath?” This is the work of God, who causes the increase (I Corinthians 3:6). Still it was His command that the land shall have a Sabbath one year in seven (Leviticus 25:2-7). The “money” of the usurer, in his own conception, has no Sabbath at all. Yet the continued labors of this “money” do not bring forth fruits which sustain men, but the fruits of destruction and misery. It is, in the most charitable light, the burdening fruit of necessity, for it is usury which makes the Sabbath breaking labors of the debtors seem necessary to them. “You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit; but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.” (Matthew 7:16-20)
As we glance over the economy of modern America, Sabbath-breaking appears rampant. But it is not the usurer who appears to be the chief offender (though we have noted their offense in despising the positive requirement of this command). We have a 24 hour! day, 7 day! week, 52 weeks! year, year upon year economy, and it is staffed by masses of debtors. This was not always so. How did it become so? The answer may be seen on a popular bumper-sticker – a parody on a tune from the musical version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs – whose message is
both humorous and tragic: “I OWE, I OWE, SO OFF TO WORK I GO”.
It is the mass of debtors who break the prohibition of the Fourth Commandment, which they do of felt necessity. The usurer’s lust for unjust gain requires the perpetual churning of America’s, and indeed the world’s, economic machine. It is because “money” in fact does not work that millions of debtors must work. Would anyone look with compassion upon a brother that suffers hardship because he will not work on the Sabbath day? One would expect rather to find little support for a
Sabbatarian conviction. The faithfulness of our Sabbath-keeping brother will convict us of our Sabbath-breaking. Rather than come under that conviction, some ridicule the Sabbath-keeper in an attempt to excuse their own Sabbath-breaking. This vested interest in Sabbath-breaking on the part of a great mass of debtors is due to the uncharitable and non-brotherly demands of usurers. Through the counsel of an array of “Christian” financial advisors, Christians by the millions have become petty usurers. They are told that they must be “good stewards” of what God has given them. So, they have “interest bearing” checking accounts, Certificates of Deposits, Treasury Securities, Annuities, and a number of other “investments”. What have they invested, but the paper and electrons that have been “created” in the image of the priests of Babylon? In what have they invested, but the pagan economics of usury? Will they not be among those who stand by in dismay while Babylon meets her demise (Revelation 18)? Have they really been good stewards of what God has given them, or do they even realize what God has given them? We ought not to participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them (Ephesians 5:11). Petty usurers do not expose the Sabbath-breaking scheme of the professional usurers, but they excuse their evil deeds, and participate in them. In so doing they flee from the law of God, and contribute to the pretended necessity of their own Sabbath-breaking labor.
The usurer rests when he ought to work, and works when he ought to rest. God has directed man to work, to care for the world and achieve dominion over it. But the usurer avoids this appointed task, and seeks rather to achieve dominion over his fellow man. He hates true work, and so schemes to live by the true work of others. Yet in his own mind he is a ruthless taskmaster, who drives his slaves (in this case “money”) without end, day in and day out, day after day. That this also requires the ceaseless labors of his debtors is of little concern to him. Such is the Sabbath of
usurers.
Exodus 20:15, “You shall not steal”
Usury is stealing. As case law, the statutes prohibiting usury in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, refer primarily to the Eighth Commandment. Though it has many offenses, usury basically is stealing. The truth of this is difficult for many to perceive because their senses are so trained to excuse usury. It also is difficult to perceive because it is difficult to define just what constitutes stealing.
It obviously is stealing if one man takes another’s property by force. But this cannot define stealing strictly, because sometimes no force is involved. What do we say of the one who casually takes what he finds lying unattended? To cover this case, we might want to define stealing as one man taking another’s property without the other’s permission. However, in that case, those who, by trickery and deceit, cajole another into granting permission for them to take their property, are not guilty of stealing. Of course, we all treat the “confidence scheme” as theft. How, then may we define stealing in a way that will cover all cases? The most
general definition of stealing is that it is the unlawful transfer of property from one man to another. If one man gives a gift to another, this is not unlawful. If one man makes a loan to another, this is not unlawful. Nor is it unlawful for one to repay a loan. Indeed, the law requires that one grant loans to his needy brother, and that the other should repay (Deuteronomy 15:7-8). However, the lender can make the thing loaned a gift to the borrower, and in that case he is not obliged to repay.
All manner of stealing is condemned in the Scriptures as unlawful. The statutes in Leviticus 6:1-5 covers a wide variety of ways in which one man may be guilty of stealing another’s property.
Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “When a person sins and acts unfaithfully against the Lord, and deceives his companion in regard to a deposit or a security entrusted to him, or through robbery, or if he has extorted from his companion, or has found what was lost and lied about it and sworn falsely, so that he sins in regard to anyone of the things a man may do; then it shall be, when he sins and becomes guilty, that he shall restore what he took by robbery, or what he got by extortion, or the deposit which was entrusted to him, or the lost thing which he found, or anything about which he swore falsely; he shall make restitution for it in full, and add to it one-fifth more. He shall give it to the one to whom it belongs on the day he presents his guilt offering.”
All manner of thievery is condemned. The usury statutes condemn yet one more scheme of thievery. When a man is given a loan, he receives property from another man, yet this is not stealing, for we have seen that God requires the giving of loans. When a man repays a loan, here again we have one man receiving property from another, but still, this is lawful. The one good serves as the property which is given and received by both parties, both of which it cannot do instantaneously. Nor would there be any point to it, even if it could do so, for the borrower receives the
property in order to use it for a time. In his heart there is the intent to repay at a later time. The lender holds the borrower’s obligation to repay. Assuming good faith on both parts, neither the making nor the repaying of a loan can be considered stealing. However, if the borrower does not repay, and if the lender becomes convinced that it no longer is the borrower’s intention to do so (or never was his intention), then he may prosecute the borrower as a thief. In keeping with the problems of defining human interaction, whether the receipt of property loaned is to be considered stealing depends largely on the intent of the borrower’s
heart.
Now, what of a loan upon usury? All of the above applies to the lending and repaying of the principal. Now, how do we consider the usury – that which the borrower pays to the lender in excess of what was loaned? Here we encounter the subtle evil of usury, for it cannot be delivered from the charge of theft, yet it hardly is perceived as stealing. The usurer receives his usury from the victim, and the victim receives nothing in return – not even an obligation for a later time, nor was he giving a gift to the usurer. The usurer is a thief. Now, all manner of abstractions are raised in an attempt to excuse the usurer. It hardly can be maintained that usury is a gift. In the Middle Ages, the usurer and his victim plotted together to call usury a gift that was given the usurer in gratitude for giving the loan, but this was done deviously, solely as a means of evading usury laws, and did not emanate from the borrower’s heart. But there are many attempts to show that in fact the borrower does receive something in return for usury paid, and that therefore the usurer” is innocent of theft.
It may be said that the borrower received whatever gain he got out of the use of the borrowed property in return for the usury he paid. It certainly is true that the borrower may gain from the use of borrowed property, for if he did not, there would be no point in borrowing. A pertinent question to consider is: from whom did he receive that which he gained? Did he receive it from the usurer? Suppose it was a shovel that was loaned. Suppose further that the borrower’s use of the shovel was to tend a garden. The produce of the garden is what the borrower gained through the use of what was loaned, but he gained it by means of his own toil and the grace of God in attending the growth of his crops. He did not receive it from the usurer, and yet a portion of his crops must be returned along with the shovel as rent or usury. Did the borrower pay a portion of his crops in order to gain the remainder? Rather he gained his crops by the sweat of his brow, yet he does not feed his family what his labors produced, for he feeds the usurer a portion of it, in return for nothing.
Alternately, it might be said that in return for usury, the borrower receives the service of the usurer making the loan. It was not for nothing, some may think, that the borrower gives the usurer a portion of his crops, but for the use of a shovel. If the usurer had not loaned the shovel, then the other could not have grown his crops. But he did not buy the shovel, he gave it back when he was done with it. Suppose a shovel may be bought for three bushels of wheat. Suppose the usurer requires, for the “service” of providing a shovel, one bushel of wheat. If the borrower remains needy – which is more likely in the case that the usurer is siphoning off his produce – and he borrows the shovel three years, then he has paid the usurer three bushels of wheat, and has bought the shovel. But he as not
bought it for himself, but for the usurer. If he borrows the shovel another
three years, then he buys another shovel for the usurer. Now the usurer
can loan out two shovels. In time he will have three, and then four shovels
that he may loan. He will become a lord, with a large serfdom under his
power.
This is not in keeping with the nature of service. One cannot claim that he is doing anyone a service if he is not doing for them what he might as well do for himself. The laborer justly trades his services for hire because the labor he provides his employer accomplishes a task that he might require for his own purposes. IT a man who owns a shovel tends the garden of a man who has not a shovel, he is providing a service of labor, and he may receive a portion of the crop as hire. “The hard working farmer ought to be the first to receive his share of the crops” (II Timothy
2:6) He might as well tend his own garden, so his tending another’s garden rightly is to be considered a service. But has he served anyone by taking up his shovel in hand? That is a service to no one. One who simply takes a shovel from its place into his hand in no wise benefits himself. It is not until he applies labor, using the shovel, that benefit – and thus service – accrues. Just as it is no service to himself, so it is doing no service to another if he simply puts his shovel into the other’s hand. if the other applies the labor, and tends his own garden, then he is the one who is providing the service. The giving of a shovel is only a loan, and only a
shovel is required in repayment. Anything more that is given in repayment is usury. It cannot be excused as payment for services rendered, for in fact no service was rendered.
Usury is theft. This fact cannot be ignored, nor can it be excused. The professional usurer, the prophets and priests of Babylon, are well aware of the thieving and enslaving nature of usury. It is the petty usurer, and particularly the one who would hope to be counted as a citizen of the City of God, who has difficulty in perceiving and admitting this fact. The gains of usury are so tantalizing that he does not easily come to admit that they are gotten unlawfully. He has been trained to perceive himself as being a “good steward” when he enters into all manner of usurious “investments”. This is what they have been taught that Jesus required of the wicked slave who buried the money in the ground (Matthew 25:14- 30). However, a simple reading of the text reveals that it was not Jesus who required it, but the wicked slave’s distorted conception of a hard, thieving master who reaps where he did not sow, and gathers where he scattered no seed (v.24). It was a thief who required thievery of his slave, so it is the thieving world-class usurer who tantalizes and seduces Christians into this wickedness. There must be repentance.
THE TENTH COMMANDMENT
Exodus 20:17, “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”
Covetousness breeds usury. Covetousness is more than simple desire. For the righteous, the desire for goods which he does not own is what motivates him to produce those goods, or to produce other goods which he may trade for the goods he desires. There is nothing wrong with such desires. Covetousness, however, is a desire for something that belongs to another, which one would acquire unilaterally – apart from any production or trade. It is the germ of theft. It is a lusting after that which one cannot lawfully obtain. Covetousness is conceived of evil motives. In
the case of usury, it emanates from a natural desire for wealth that is tormented by an antecedent despising of work. Wealth comes from work. Ultimately all wealth comes from the hand of God. As it is His decree that we work in order to live, in our experience the wealth which we acquire in this life is gotten through someone’s work. The usurer avoids work, for he is under the delusion that his “money” is working. Yet only the stubbornly ignorant can fail to understand that all of the tangible goods which service our needs and wants come only from some productive process, which in turn is driven by human work. The usurer may forget this truth, because he simply “buys” what he wants using the “profits” of his usury. Though avoiding work, the usurer nonetheless desires the produce of work. The righteous response to such desires is to labor to produce either the good desired, or some good which may be traded for it. In either case, the righteous man eats his bread by the sweat of his face. However, the desire for wealth turns into lawlessness when one’s creative faculty is devoted to seeking a means of acquiring wealth while at the same time avoiding work.
As we have seen, one difficulty in judging the affairs of men is that often it is only the intent of the heart that makes the difference between righteousness and lawlessness. That is why it was necessary that among the acts of lawlessness which God condemned in His law there should also be the censure of this lawless motive.
James listed the evil motive as the only reason why God should not fulfill “ask and you shall receive” (James 4:3). This sinful attitude must be prohibited by law because man must have the conviction of sin in his heart before his sin spills out into actions that damage his brother, or his people as a whole. The covetous one may repent before God, and no one else may know that he sinned. But the hardness of men’s hearts is displayed in the fact that gross covetousness constantly turns into adultery, theft, and murder. In the case of these external sins, repentance before God must be accompanied by restitution to the brother who suffered damages. But the sin of usury is so veiled to this modern age that we hardly find any repentance or restitution. The usurer typically thinks that no one sees the covetousness that is in his heart, so he has no pragmatic reason to repent. The damages which he inflicts upon his brethren and upon his people are nearly imperceptible – not in themselves, but as damages caused by usury – because this neo- Babylonian society has been trained to excuse usury. Without the convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit, revealing the Word of God to the hearts of men, usury shall feed upon the goods of the land like an omnivorous sponge, whose capacity grows with every particle that is absorbed, until the whole of the people is reduced to an outright serfdom under the would-be gods. The Proverb runs, “He also who is slack in his work is brother to him who destroys” (Proverbs 18:9). If the slack worker is brother to the destroyer, who is the destroyer but him who does not work at all?
This may sound much too alarming and sensational to be true, or to be a realistic outcome of a normal distemper like covetousness. However, consider the effects of unbridled covetousness, that is, of the work avoidance and accompanying illicit desire of the usurer imputed to men universally. If no one worked, no goods would be produced. In that case, the only available goods would be naturally occurring goods. As everyone would desire such goods, but no one would want to acquire them lawfully, we might well imagine the consequences:
1) men would be at perpetual enmity one with another, as each one would be but an equally unscrupulous competitor for whatever goods were available,
2) no one would engage in any productive effort, and therefore the supply of naturally occurring goods would diminish (as nomadic peoples have demonstrated throughout history), and
3) 1 and 2 above would feed upon one another, and each would escalate until either humanity became extinct (not likely) or an elite emerged from the chaos to corner the supply of resources, and prescribe meager production efforts to the mass of underlings (most likely). The latter result is the virtual image of communism, and has been the lot of Babylonian usury-accommodating cultures throughout history. The only difference between our present situation and what is described above is that as of now we still have quite a number of men who still are engaged in productive enterprises. However, the number who contribute nothing to production, and instead affect an inordinate drain on available goods, is growing. More and more men are being seduced by the temptation to cease their labors and let their “money” work for them. Those who are left to produce goods now must produce not only what may be sold, but also what must be given in usury. Apart from repentance, the persistent covetousness of usury assures that the latter proportion can only grow indefinitely.
*****************************
Jesus said that nothing of the law would pass away until all was accomplished (Matthew 5:17-19). He did not diminish man’s duty to God, or to his brother, rather He enlarged upon it. He said, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another.” (John 13:34) But this is not a new duty, rather it enlarges our understanding of the requirement of the Decalogue. On the principle of love, Jesus said that we must not only abstain from killing, but also abstain from hate; we must not only abstain from adultery, but also from lust (Matthew 5:21-28). Paul said, “love does no wrong to a neighbor; love therefore is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:10) Jesus coupled this principle of love for men with the requirement of loving God, and said of this pair, “On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets”. (Matthew 22:40). We have exposed the evil of usury on several fronts, in examination of several points of the law. That which is evil is supremely condemned by that on which the law depends, for usury manifestly is
lacking in love. The usurer is in want of true love for God, for in defiance of His law, the usurer excuses his sin in preference of temporal pleasures. He also is in want of true love for his brother, for he would feed off of him rather than labor to feed himself. As Henry Smith put it:
The Usurer loveth the borrower, as the Ivye loveth the Oke: The Ivye loveth the Oke to grow up by it, so the Usurer loveth the borrower to grow rich by him. The Ivye claspeth the Oke like a lover, but it claspeth out all the juice and sap, that the Oke can not thrive after: So the Usurer lendeth like a friend but hee covenanteth like an enemy, for he claspeth the borrower with such bands, that ever after he diminisheth, as fast as the other encreaseth.
A truly Christian economy is built upon service. The development of a variety of goods is brought about by one’s attention to his brother’s need. Goods change hands through trade as men supply goods to one another’s benefit. But in a righteous economy, no need is regarded as permanent. Should men no longer need some trinket that one had been producing, a basic attitude of service will stimulate such a one to discern what it is that men now need instead. Should one who supplies wood find that his brothers have succeeded in improving their conditions so that they no longer need his wood for heating their homes, and that now they need gas to bum in their furnaces, he should not resent that his occupation has
become less lucrative, rather he should rejoice that his brothers have done well. His serving spirit will direct him to consider what he may now provide in order to address their needs. The usurer, however, does not serve, and thus does not manifest love for his brothers. He seeks to serve his own needs by loaning out property at usury. If no one needs what he has to loan, he does not rejoice that his brothers have done well, and do not need to borrow, rather he considers how he may tantalize them into covetousness along with himself, that they may adopt needs in their minds for which they must borrow. The sin of covetousness may so captivate a man that he not only will borrow in order to satisfy his lust, but pay usury as well. This is the state the usurer seeks for his brother. Should all the tenants of an apartment building prosper and buy homes for their own, would the “landlord” rejoice over the prosperity of his serfs? The usurer
___________________
IBID
would mourn the loss of his rents. The usurer does not have his brother’s welfare at heart, but has a vested interest in the continued need of his brother. The usurer, in fact, does not even perceive that he has a brother.
It is for shame that Christendom has entered into this enmity. Paul exhorted the Galatians, “For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself. But if you bite and devour one another, take care lest you be consumed by one another.” (Galatians 5:14-15) The bite of usury threatens to consume America. Shall the ethics of Babylon conquer our land? It will happen only as we who are of God’s household refuse to live by His laws. But by our refusal, we cannot overturn His laws, for nothing of His law shall pass away until all is accomplished. In Deuteronomy 28, God has told us what we may expect in the event that we despise His laws. We are told before hand, “The Lord will smite you with madness and with blindness and with bewilderment of heart; and you shall grope at noon, as the blind man gropes in darkness, and you shall not prosper in your ways; but you shall only be oppressed and robbed continually, with none to save you” (v.28- 29) Today this is fulfilled in our midst. By usury we are oppressed and robbed continually. The blindness, madness, and bewilderment that has overcome us does not even permit us to discern the true nature of what has
come upon us. Ephesians 5:5-14,
For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them; for you were formerly darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness and righteousness and truth), trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. And do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them; for it is disgraceful even to speak of the things which are done by them in secret. But all things become visible when they are exposed by the light, for everything that becomes visible is light. For this reason it says,
“Awake, sleeper,
And arise from the dead,
And Christ will shine on you.”
Let us not suppose that the plague of usury oppresses us only by the designs of “international bankers”, or some other group. Men are not sovereign in the world. We are not in reality compelled to live like Babylonians. It is in unfaithfulness to our God and His Word that we have so become entangled. But, the sins which so easily entangle us become a scourge in the hand of God. Let us not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord. He disciplines every son whom He receives. We cannot defy His laws and expect that we shall escape the consequences. God is not mocked. The calamities of our sin are to stimulate us to repentance. “He disciplines
us for our good, that we may share His holiness. All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.” (Hebrews 12:10-11). Some in American Christendom are experiencing the sorrows of the Lord’s discipline. They have had enough of debt. They are ready to repent. Others still are intoxicated by the gains of usury. They will not repent of usury, nor do they wish for their brothers to stay out of debt, for there must be someone to pay their usury. If there will not be repentance, we can be sure there will be more discipline. This
is certain. The question is, what how much discipline must we endure
before we turn?
If we do not repent in time, we will be caught up in the destruction that perpetually attends Babylonian life. A temptation we face, in addition to the false riches of usury, is to excuse our sin, and ease the convicting sensation in our hearts, by blurring the distinction between law and lawlessness. But this can only be a blurring of our own vision, for in reality no aspect of the City of God can be confused with any aspect of “the earthly city”. Dr. Kuyper said, “Do not forget that the fundamental contrast has always been, is still, and will be until the end: Christianity and Paganism, the idols or the living God.” Speaking of the political troubles at the turn of this century, Dr. Kuyper responded in a manner
that speaks as well to the problem of usury, “Of course, this danger would be far less menacing in case Christendom, in both the Old and the New World, stood united around the Cross, shouting songs of praise to their King, and ready as in the days of the crusades to advance to the final conflict. But how when pagan thought, pagan aspiration, pagan ideals are gaining ground even among us and
____________
Abraham Kuyper, Lectures on Calvinism (1898; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), p.198
penetrating to the very heart of the rising generation?” The average reader is the offspring of the generation of which he spoke. The pagan stronghold in our land has only strengthened since Kuyper spoke. It is all but lost to the present generation that we face a crisis of lordship. Israel knew exactly what
Joshua was saying when he challenged them, “Choose for yourselves today whom you will serve” (Joshua 24:15a) Were Joshua to put this challenge to the modern church, we would be hard-pressed to know even what choice we were given. We say “Lord, Lord”, but we do not the things He commands us. If we persist is usury, we have made our choice to follow the paths of Babylon, and we surely shall endure the hardships of her fall.
Let us separate ourselves from the “earthly city”, for great will be her fall. Let no one of God’s household any longer suffer the pollution of Babylon. We must return and be revived, for Christ will clothe His bride with spotless robes. Shall He find us to be in unfaithfulness with Babylon, bowing before her priests, and worshiping at her shrines, or will we be found laboring in love and service of one another? Will we be among those who are dismayed at the fall of Babylon or, will we find her fall to be cause for rejoicing?
Revelation 18:1-20: After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illumined with his glory. And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! And she has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird. For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the passion of her immorality, and the kings of the earth have committed acts of
immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich by
the wealth of her sensuality.”
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, “Come out of her, my people, that you may not participate in her sins and that you may not receive of her plagues; for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. Pay her back even as she has paid, and give back to her double according to her deeds; in the cup which she has mixed, mix twice as much for her. To the degree that she glorified herself and lived sensuously, to the same degree give her torment and mourning; for she says in her heart, ‘I sit as a queen and I am not a widow, and will never see mourning.’ For this reason in one day her plagues will come, pestilence and mourning and famine, and she will be burned up with fire; for the Lord God who judges her is strong. And the kings of the earth, who committed acts
___________
IBID
of immorality and lived sensuously with her, will weep and lament over her when they see the smoke of her burning, standing at a distance because of the fear of her torment, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, Babylon, the strong city! For in one hour your judgement has come.’ And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn over her, because no one buys their cargoes any more; cargoes of gold and silver and precious stones and pearls and fine linen and purple and silk and scarlet, and every article made from very costly wood and bronze and iron and marble, and cinnamon and spice and incense and perfume and frankincense and wine and olive oil and fine flour and wheat and cattle and sheep and cargoes of horses and chariots and slaves and human lives. And the fruit you long for has gone from you, and all things that were luxurious and splendid have passed away from you and men will no longer find them. The merchants of these things, who became rich from her, will stand at a distance because of the fear of her torment, weeping and mourning, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, she who was clothed in fine linen and purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls; for in one hour such great wealth has been laid waste!’
And every shipmaster and every passenger and sailor, and as many as make their living by the sea, stood at a distance, and were crying out as they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, ‘What city is like the great city?’ And they threw dust on their heads and were crying out, weeping and mourning, saying, ‘Woe, Woe, the great city, in which all who had ships at sea became rich by her wealth, for in one hour she has been laid waste.’ Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you saints and apostles and prophets, because God has pronounced judgement for you against her.”
An ancient philosopher once remarked that given a sufficiently long lever and a sufficiently firm fulcrum, he could move the world. The average reader of this present work has a much more difficult task facing him: that of moving the church. The ancient pagan had in view only hypothetical tools, however, the Christian is equipped with what is in reality the most firm foundation in the Word of God. The lever that operates on this fulcrum is his understanding in truth, and his action according to conviction. The force that is generate d by this operation is irresistible, but the idea in moving the church is not merely to create a sense of awe that such a thing could be done. The goal must be maturity in Christ. We move the church in order to repair it, or to set it in a better place. Let the reader grasp the lever, and so purge his own life of usury – and then operate the lever in order to do his part in purging this sin from the church. The economic reformation of the church will provide a guiding light for the reformation of the American economy, for the glory of God and the prosperity of His people.