[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / freeb / vichan ]

/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Email
Comment *
File
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?

File: daa2a8895271243⋯.jpg (146.3 KB, 720x717, 240:239, download.jpg)

e63437  No.809380

Did the Church change Its teaching regarding usury?

61ccde  No.809385

>>809380

Catholics got corrupted by the incestuous relationship with mobster/bankster families like the Medicis and Borgias (some whom became popes), but they never overtly promoted usury like Calvin finally did once the Reformation took place. This shaped the landscape of Scotland and England and eventually, and far more severely, America. Jews also finally found refuge and an opening here… as they were already moneylenders in old Europe. They played a better debt game, and eventually took over the structures that the British and Americans stupidly dreamed up.


0906d6  No.809387

No it is dogma, it can never change, it's in Denzinger

CLEMENT V 1305-1314

COUNCIL OF VIENNE 1311-1312

479 If anyone shall fall into that error, so that he obstinately presumes to declare that it is not a sin to exercise usury, we decree that he must be punished as a heretic.

Also

INNOCENT XI 1676-1689 Various Errors on Moral Subjects (II) * [Condemned in a decree of the Holy Office, March 4, 1679]

1191 41. Since ready cash is more valuable than that to be paid, and since there is no one who does not consider ready cash of greater worth than future cash, a creditor can demand something beyond the principal from the borrower, and for this reason be excused from usury.

http://patristica.net/denzinger/


904988  No.809394

>>809387

>1191 41. Since ready cash is more valuable than that to be paid, and since there is no one who does not consider ready cash of greater worth than future cash, a creditor can demand something beyond the principal from the borrower, and for this reason be excused from usury.

wait did the pope condemn time value of money

did no one tell the whole discipline of economics


726eca  No.809429

>>809394

>discipline of economics

Thats a pretty good joke.


2d3ddc  No.809462

>>809394

It's not a condemnation, it's stating that a creditor can charge a fee for the use of present cash in addition to it's repayment in the future. What is not permitted is the charging of compound interest.


33b965  No.809466


ab71ce  No.809474

>>809394

No, he condemned the justification of interest bearing loans based upon the time value of money, probably because any such justifications would effectivelly abolish the notion of usury.

>>809466

Because he's an idiot.


ab71ce  No.809475

>>809462

>What is not permitted is the charging of compound interest.

Where did you get this from?


726eca  No.809496

>>809466

Economics as a discipline is on par with astrology and economists are probably some of the worst people to ask about economics.

>>809474

Actually being this salty.

>>809380

The first step is understanding what usury is. This is one of the best resources ive found that breaks it down.

https://archive.is/bGq99


0906d6  No.809501

File: 7414bad2b249b02⋯.jpg (45.19 KB, 750x629, 750:629, urdmnl1ktay21.jpg)

>>809496

Thank you for the share brother, I look forward to reading this!


b48d8b  No.810326

File: 9322ec2d1f30c21⋯.jpg (45.58 KB, 576x720, 4:5, Carl Menger 576x720.jpg)

>>809496

>Economics as a discipline is on par with astrology and economists are probably some of the worst people to ask about economics.

I do agree and disagree. Most economic theories (and certainly the most accepted ones, like Smith's and Keynes's) have protestant and jewish roots. There is, however, also the Austrian School, which has catholic roots, and has a lot of similarities with the previous Salamanca Scholastic School (Spanish catholic scholars in the XVII century).

What this anon said >>809394 is completely in agreement with the Austrian school, and it's a fact about human nature: we rather have something today than having it tomorrow, since we can use it one day earlier and have to deal with one less day of uncertainty. If you're interested in proper economics, not just random numbers and graphs to justify the 14/5000

unjustifiable, I recommend Carl Menger's "Principles of Political Economics". It's funny who his book, written a 150 years ago, can easily debunk most of the prevalent economic theory of today.

One last word of warning: beware the American splinters of the Austrian School. As usual, when you take something Catholic but put it in a culture that's Protestant, it gets deformed. Milton Friedman may be pretty famous, but he introduces a lot of problematic propositions into his thinking.


a7122d  No.810330

>>810326

I thought the Austrian school was the one associated with Jews? Like Mises, Rand, Rothbard and the like?


ce2d03  No.810345

>>810326

So would you say Hayek is a must read?


b48d8b  No.810367

>>810330

>>810345

While Mises was of Jewish origin, he was a disciple of Böhm von Bawerk, a Catholic (who in turn was a disciple of Mengel). Mises's book "Socialism" is the strongest, most definite critique of Marxism in the field of economics. It is, however, the first generations that are worth reading: Menger, Friedrich von Wieser, and von Bawker.

I'd say Mises is the beginning of the end, himself and Hayek getting concerned a bit too much with politics instead of economics. By this time the "Austrian" school was already in the USA, subject to Jewish influences (with a lot of Jewish people fleeing Europe at that time). Milton Friedman cannot really be considered to be part of the Austrian school, and Murray Rothbard can hardly be considered an economist at all; he was an activist. Menger and the early members of the school were pure economists, devoted to their science, and refused to go into politics.

Ayn Rand isn't an economist either, and she never pretended to be one. She's a writer and, in my humble opinion, a pretty bad one, whose books only appeal to those who haven't read a proper book before (and I would place Rothbard in this category too; his style is at least more enjoyable, but his ideas are still exalted crap).

So the Austrian School is worth reading when it's Austrian, Catholic and in the late XIX century, early XIX. Afterwards it gets hijacked and becomes American and Jewish / atheist, and it also becomes a political movement instead of an economic theory. Rand was never part of the Austrian school but gets associated with it cause libertarians hold her as her big-nosed waifu.

"Principles of Political Economics" (sometimes just "Principles of Economics") is still a book that anyone interested in economics should read. It's an easy read, well put together, it's quite difficult to find anything objectionable about it and, most importantly, it's still relevant to today's world and economic thought. It hasn't been toppled yet.

If anyone is interested in ti, you can read it here: https://mises-media.s3.amazonaws.com/Principles%20of%20Economics_5.pdf

Feel fee to skip Hayek's introduction, though. He doesn't add anything interesting.


a7122d  No.810370

>>810367

Interesting post. Thank you, anon!


289dae  No.810553

>>810326

>the State should stimulate its economy during a recession

<wow this is satanic and wrong

lad…


6a7f54  No.810556

>>810326

The problem with economics is that they purport to predict future trends based on a rigid set of data while neglecting the holistic nature of economies. They often favor graphs and statistical abstractions and apply theoretical viewpoints not based on reality. The Austrians profess to believe this, yet continue to commit the same erroneous behaviors and projecting their own libertarian biases and economic principles in lieu of actual reality. They garner favor through post-hoc analyses that they never apply in analysis.

Commies are laughable, nazis are laughable, but libertarians are the most tempting to despise.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / agatha2 / animu / ausneets / b2 / choroy / dempart / freeb / vichan ]