The Moral and Theological Sin of Usury: A Christian Perspective with Insights from Douglas’ Social Credit, By James Reed and Peter West

In 2025, with median home prices in Australia's capital cities at $ 1, 034, 806, the financial system traps young Australians in a cycle of debt, siphoning wages into perpetual payments. From a Christian perspective, this is usury, not just high interest, but any exploitation of the vulnerable through lending, condemned across Scripture and church history. This discussion integrates C.H. Douglas' Social Credit theory, which critiques the debt-driven economy as structurally deficient, to argue that usury violates God's design for human flourishing by turning neighbours into revenue streams, a sin both morally and theologically abhorrent.

Biblically, usury is any interest charged on loans to the needy, particularly within the covenant community. The Hebrew term neshek (interest) means "a bite," evoking predation on the weak. In Israel's agrarian society, loans were often survival tools after crop failures or sickness, not speculative ventures. Charging interest exploited distress, defying the command to love neighbours (Leviticus 19:18). Texts like Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:35-37, and Deuteronomy 23:19-20 ban interest to fellow Israelites, especially the poor, while permitting it for foreigners, reflecting covenantal solidarity. The Torah's system, inalienable land (Leviticus 25:23-24), gleaning laws (Leviticus 19:9-10), Sabbath debt cancellation, and Jubilee land restoration (Leviticus 25:8-13), prevented debt traps, fostering free households. Psalm 15:5 praises lending without interest; Ezekiel 18:8 calls usury an abomination. Jesus' call to "lend, expecting nothing in return" (Luke 6:35) elevates this to sacrificial love.

The early church saw usury as a violation of Christian love. Basil of Caesarea called it a "war on the poor," John Chrysostom mocked money "breeding" profit, and Augustine linked it to greed. Councils like Elvira (305), Arles (314), and Nicaea (325) barred clergy from usury, emphasising pastoral duty. By the Middle Ages, the Third Lateran Council (1179) denied usurers sacraments; the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) tightened enforcement; Vienne (1311) declared defending usury heretical. Cities like London capped rates or voided usurious contracts. Franciscan monti di pietà offered low-cost loans to protect the poor, preserving households as Edmund Burke's "little platoons" that anchor society.

C.H. Douglas' Social Credit theory, developed in the early 20th century, complements the Christian critique by exposing the economy's reliance on debt. Douglas argued that modern production creates a chronic shortfall in purchasing power: wages and dividends can't match the total price of goods, as costs include profits and overheads reinvested, not distributed. Banks fill this gap with interest-bearing loans, creating a debt spiral where households borrow to consume, enriching financiers. This mirrors usury's exploitation, trapping people in what is a "client class." Douglas proposed distributing a National Dividend, a share of production's surplus, to citizens, reducing debt dependence and aligning with Scripture's vision of equitable access to resources.

Social Credit sees the financial system as inherently usurious, concentrating wealth by design. In 2025, with crushing rents and multi-million dollar homes, families need the bulk of two wages just to afford median homes, while investors buy 1 in 6 houses for rentals, locking out first-time buyers. Douglas' lens reveals this as a structural flaw: banks and investors profit by keeping households in debt, not enabling ownership.

The Reformation refined usury's prohibition. John Calvin allowed moderate interest for commercial ventures with shared risk but banned exploiting the poor. English laws under Henry VIII (1545) capped rates at 10%, later 5%. Catholic teaching, via Benedict XIV's 1745 encyclical, permitted "extrinsic titles" (risk, loss) but condemned profiting from distress. By the 20th century, Western laws shifted to consumer protections, yet Christian ethics hold a twofold test: Is the loan tied to enterprise with fair return? Is the borrower vulnerable? Exploitative loans remain usurious, sinful, whatever the rate.

Usury is wrong because it:

1.Violates Neighbourly Love: Loving others (Matthew 22:39) means seeking their good. Usury profits from desperation, car payments at 10.14% interest, buy-now-pay-later for groceries, turning survival into revenue, not mutual gain.

2.Undermines Households: God's economy ties land to families (Leviticus 25). Usury strips assets, from medieval tools to modern homes, creating "debt cattle." Investors turning starter homes into rentals thwart the biblical vision of rooted households.

3.Defies Stewardship: Money serves, not rules (1 Timothy 6:10). Usury treats it as self-breeding, prioritising profit over people. Douglas' Social Credit highlights how banks exploit this, hoarding purchasing power.

4.Perpetuates Injustice: Prophets like Amos condemned trampling the poor (Amos 5:11). Usury thrives on inequality; student loans target the young, not the prosperous. Douglas notes this concentrates wealth, defying equity.

5.Rejects Grace: Christian ethics mirror God's free grace (Ephesians 2:8). Usury demands a pound of flesh, unlike monti di pietà. Social Credit's dividend echoes this, redistributing wealth to prevent exploitation.

Today's economy embodies usury's sin. Mortgages eating half a household's income, 10% +car loans, and BNPL for pizza, trap families in a treadmill designed by lenders. Douglas' Social Credit diagnoses this as a systemic flaw: insufficient purchasing power forces debt reliance, enriching banks, while households falter. Theologically, usury rebels against God's image in people, fracturing communities into contracts. The church's unified stand, Fathers, councils, Reformers, marks this as a core sin, not peripheral.

Scripture and Social Credit align: finance must serve, not enslave. Christians can push for debt forgiveness, predatory rate caps, and housing affordability, echoing Jubilee. Douglas' National Dividend could inspire policies to distribute economic surplus, reducing debt's grip. Individually, Christians can lend generously (Luke 6:35) and build communities where households thrive. The church's alms and monti di pietà prove it's possible.

Usury's bite, profiting from pain, lives in 2025's debt-driven economy. Christians must name this evil, blending Biblical wisdom with Douglas' insights to restore God's design: neighbours lifting, not bleeding, each other.

https://insighttoincite.substack.com/p/the-biblical-sin-of-usury-and-why