Usury Stated Overthrown, Treatise · Part 2 · Section 4 – Section 6
NUM. IV.
But here my Adverſary will ſay, this makes for me, who am damaged by the Borrower, if, keeping my Money for half a Year, he pay me nothing; becauſe, if I had had it, I might have gotten by it. But,
I anſwer, Not at all it makes for him; becauſe Lending here muſt needs be that which we call free, and is commanded, whereas his is Uſurious and Interdicted, Deut. 23.19.
2. But I have not yet done with the Holy Scripture, which makes juſt Damage allowable.
Conſequentially in the New Teſtament alſo; for, in 2 Cor. 8.13. that great Apoſtle, ſpeaking of Alms, ſaith thus; For I mean not that other Men be eaſed, and you burthened. Whence-from a great Writer deduceth this Inference, in theſe words, The Apoſtle will not, that even in the Giving of Alms, much leſs in Lending and Borrowing we ſhould ſo deal, as other Men ſhould be eaſed by the grieving of our ſelves. Now, if I lend to pleaſure another, and for want of mine own at the appointed time, I am indamaged in my Credit, o… hindred of my lawful Gain.
Whereunto I add that great (a)Downam in Pſal. 15.5. inferring and reaſoning thus, It is againſt Equity, as the Apoſtle ſaith in a like Caſe, that to the Creditor ſhould be foreign, and to the other foreign. Recompenſing Uſury, alias Damage, is due by the Law of Nature. Bolton, p. 54.Downam, who infers the ſame from the ſame Scripture.
3. Damage is grounded upon Equity and Equality, which the Holy Scripture requireth of us, to be obſerved by us, 2 Cor. 8.13. But by an Equality, from whence alſo Divines maintain by a Conſequence the Doctrine of Damage; as you may ſee in the Margin, who is cited for it.
4. It is due by the Law of Nature; for this is the Law of Nature, and Natural Equity, (b)Melanchton de Definit.Nemo locupleretur cum alterius injuria, Let not Man enrich himſelf by hindring of another, ſaith that great Divine, Melanchton. And again he tells us, that Damage, alias Intereſt, is a Debt due by the Law of Nature, &c. And again, having aſſerted Damage ariſing from a Contingent Loſs, and from Gain ceaſing, he ſaith, that The Reaſon is drawn from Natural Juſtice.
And as for the Law of Nature, that is made Scriptural and Divine, by that great Apoſtle, in two places. 1. Rom. 2.15. where it is called, The Law written in the Heart; that is, in the (c)Wherein the Law of Nature ruleth ſaith a Famous Writer.Conſcience, (d)The Law of Nature is a Dictamen, or a Dictate of Conſcience, and ſo a Direction by God himſelf, put into Men's Minds and Hearts, admoniſhing them what they muſt do or omït. Bullinger. Decat. 2. Serm. 1. So Muſculus.inſcribed by God himſelf. And 1 Cor. 11.14. where he maketh Nature a Doctreſs, teaching us, that It is a ſhame for a Man to wear long Hair. Which is alſo applicable to Uſury, that even Nature teacheth us, that it is a ſhame for a Man to lend upon Uſury, and to be an Uſurer, which even Uſurers themſelves ate (e)John Bromyard, in Summa praed. Tit. Uſura.aſhamed of, to be ſo called; as one, to ſhame them, writeth of them, ſaying, that Uſurers bluſh, and are aſhamed to anſwer for their Trade, that they are of ſuch a Trade.
5. We are to think upon whatſoever is juſt, Phil. 4.8. that is, ſo as to do it; but to pay and to give Damage is juſt, becauſe it is (f)Juſtitia eſt ſuum cuique tribuere, neminem laedere; Juſtinian. in ſuis Inſtitut.juſt to give every Man is due, Rom. 13.7. and ſo conſequently, Damage to whom it is juſtly due. Where give me leave to ſubjoyn the words of a renowned Writer, ſaying, that (a)Panormit. de Uſaris.Damage (called Intereſt alſo) is juſtly due. And adding, Not only when a Man has lent, and for want of receiving again of his own in appointed time, he ſuffereth Damage; but alſo, when, wanting his own to employ for his beſt advantage, his Gain and Encreaſe is hindred. As for Example, I lend freely, mark FREELY, looking to receive mine own again at a certain appointed day. The day came, I received it not; for want of it, I forfeited, at that day, a Bond to another Man; and the Forfeiture is asked of me in part, or to the utmoſt: I doubt not but Reaſon and Conſcience will that I may demand ſuch Recompence of him to whom I lent freely, as I am compelled, for want of mine own, to make to another, to whom my Bond and Obligation by that means is forfeited. Thus he. And is not ſuch Damage juſt? Is it not to give to all their dues, according to the fore-quoted Scripture? Rom. 13.7.
6. Damage here maintained is according to the Law of Nations (as Uſury is againſt the Law of Nations) which (b)Quam a Natura proceſſiſſe ſacile intelligere licet, Calepinus, p. 63….proceedeth from the Law of Nature, and is like that written in Men's Hearts and Minds alſo; and, by name, maintaineth a Rendring of Pledges and things lent, and is againſt the keeping of ſuch things back, becauſe it thereby becomes Damage. Whereupon it followeth, that it is a Law founded in Scripture, as the Law of Nature, Rom. 2.15.16. it being the iſſue of it, as even now I ſhewed.
7. Damage is alſo grounded in the (c)Hoc autem jus Scripto conſtat ut ſunt leges & plebiſſcita, Idem ibid.Civil Law, which ſpeaks according to the Scripture, and differs from the Law of Nations, in that it is written (d)Which is the ſame with the Law of Nature, being deduced from it; and unleſs it be ſo derived from it, is no Law, but only an Idol, or falſe pretence of Law, ſaith a renowned Author,as the Scripture is written, and ſaith the ſame that the holy Scripture ſaith about Damage.
For (e)Juſtinian the Emperor, Tit. 47.Juſtinian the Emperor, who has written thoſe famous Law-books, called his Inſtitutions, having diſtinguiſhed certain Caſes from uncertain, did determine that the one ſhould not exceed double, and the other ſhould be determined by Judges: which is alſo ſo ordered by Scripture, as I quoted i… out of Exod. 21.22. All which ſheweth how Scriptural Damage is.
8. It is according to ſound (a)Uſury is againſt Reaſon, but Intereſt is not; Bolton.Reaſon, as Uſury is again… Reaſon; which the Scripture alſo approveth and alloweth, Act. 17.2. Chap. 18.14. Chap. 24.25. Rom. 12.1. 1 Pet. 3.1…. Eſa. 1.18. chap. 41.21. and according to which I may receive Damage, as it ſhall be allowed me by Impartial, Godly and Juſt Judges, becauſe there is reaſon for it, and Scripture too, ſtrengthening reaſon, that what one would have another d… to him, he ſhould do to another, and which the aforeſaid Law of Nature alſo teacheth: and on the contrary, therein no reaſon for it, that I having lent a Man my Money freely▪ I ſhould be harmed by him for my kindneſs ſhewn him; … forbearing to pay me, for my need and Indemnity, at the time appointed.
NUM. V.
Here let me ſubjoyn the Verdicts of other Divines alſo.
And 1. That of (b)Gabriel Biel, in 4. Diſt.G. Biel again; who ſaith, If I receiv… not my Money, freely lent, at a certain day appointed, and forfeited at that day a Bond; Reaſon and Conſcience will, that I my demand Recompence.
2. The ſame words almoſt I find in the (c)Upon Pſal. 15.5.Author of T… Conviction of Uſury, and deſire may be remembred upon a ne… Account; If, at the covenanted time, I receive not mine … again, then what harm ſoever do betide me after that day, f… the forbearing thereof, Reaſon wills, that it be recompenced … the Borrower; Meaning Reaſon warranted by Scripture alſo: Which requires our Reaſons, and ſtrong Reaſons too; as … cited for it even now, Eſa. 41.21.
But Reaſon perſuades me now to make an end of this maſter of Damage, becauſe I have been ſomewhat long, if no… too long about it, and to go forward; becauſe there remai… for me another ſharp Encounter, which I muſt enter into about the Definition of Uſury, which my Antagoniſt ſo much impugneth. Only theſe three things I will firſt add.
1. That my very Adverſary's own Author, Mr. Mayer, by him cited, and to be read in this Book, 2. p. Num. 80. herein is for me: for he ſaith thus, that If the Borrower do not repay, ſo as that the Lender cannot have it again in due time for his Maintenance, the Borrower Trading with it from Year to Year; it is not againſt this Precept to require Recompence. He doth not ſay Uſury, which is forbidden; but Recompence, which we ſtand for, and hold with him in.
2. That the very firſt two great and learned Divines which God raiſed for a Reformation, Luther and Melanchton, aver the ſame, touching Damage, which my Friends and I do here aver. Their words are theſe,
1. Luther's, To recompence a Damage is not to give or take more than the Principal; but it is a hurt which cometh to the Lender, contrary to his Will, whereby he is compelled to ask a Recompence.
2. (a)Me…ancht. in Philoſ. Morali.Melanchton's, When a Debter has given a Cauſe of Loſs, if he make a recompence for the hindrance which his Creditor is come to by his means; ſuch Gain is not Uſury, nor unlawful. But that Gain is Uſury, and unlawful, which is gotten only for the Loan of Lending, when no danger or hindrance is come by the lending.
(b)Idem ibid.And again ſaith that Phoenix of Germany, Melanchton, May any thing above the Principal be demanded in conſideration of the hindrance had by the lending of the ſame? I anſwer, that is called Intereſt; which is either becauſe he is damaged, or becauſe ſome Gain indeed is loſt by the lending, &c.
I ſay, that that deep learned Scholaſtick, the renowned, and moſt highly eſteemed Aquinas, I mean, has written ſo fully, ſo groundedly, and ſo ſatisfactorily of this thing called Damage, as that when his much and copious Reaſoning about it ſhall be ballanced with that little of (c)Whoſe All of Ʋſury is but ſixteen Leaves, which ſome ſo extol abo…e Volumes.Spanhemius and Grotius, by the Champion cited, and brought againſt Damage, it will be but as a Candle ſet in the Light of the Sun.
NUM. VI.
But here I am deſired to anſwer three Queſtions.
The Firſt is, whether a Man may lawfully look for ſomething again, when he lends his Money upon this ſuppoſition of his delay?
Whereunto I anſwer, That the aforeſaid Gabriel Biel, in the forecited Deciſion, has anſwered it by that which he has ſaid above of this thing, whereto I ſubſcribe.
The Second is, whether a Jew might receive this Damage of his Brother, if he kept his Money, lent him, beyond his time, ſuppoſe a quarter or half a Year longer?
I anſwer, Doubtleſs he might if he were much hindred and damaged by it, becauſe God did moſt eminently provide for the Jews Indemnity by a Law formerly cited, and made for them Primarily, and for us Secondarily.
The Third Queſtion is, Whether a Lender, that puts out an hundred Pounds for a Year to his own Damage, may not as juſtly receive Satisfaction for that Damage, as well as the next Year, ſuppoſe the time be expired, and Payment delayed, &c.
For Anſwer hereunto I have this to ſay.
1. That bleſſed (a)Bolton, pag. 56.Bolton has anſwered this fully pag. 58. 59. 60. See his Book.
2. That a Lender in ſome Caſe muſt be contented to loſe his very Principal, and look for no Satisfaction at all, as it has been formerly ſhewn, to be partly the meaning of that place, Luk. 6.35.
3. That to Godly wiſe Men, who do not put their Money upon Uſury, it is no Riddle at all (as he ſaith it is to him) to receive Money upon the Account of Gain ceaſing, or leſs ariſing; and yet to damn a Man that receiveth any thing back for one, two, three or four hundred Pounds lent for ſeveral Years: becauſe the one is againſt the Law of God, viz. to receive Uſury, Deut. 23.19. which he calls Satisfaction, as Uſurers uſe to nominate it, being aſhamed to call it Uſury; and becauſe God condemns it, Ezek. 18.12, 15. But as for the other, it would be againſt the Law of Nature, which alſo is God's, written in our Hearts. Rom. 2.16. not to recompence a Man's Loſs which he ſuſteins by the Borrower, after he has lent it for a certain time freely: Which becauſe the Uſurer will not do, I ſhall bring one Learned and Godly Man or other to ſecond me in this; and bleſſed (a)Bolton in his Diſcourſe concerning Uſury, p. 56, 57, 58.Bolton ſhall be the Man; who ſaith Intereſt or Damage may grow due, ſay Divines, two ways.
1. By Loſs ariſing.
2. By Gain ceaſing, &c.
In which two Caſes I may lawfully provide for my Indemnity, by exacting an equal Recompence at thine hands, and thou art bound in Conſcience to make good this Uſe or Hindrance, which by thy default I ſuſtein. And this, he ſaith, is no Uſury, for there is a great difference between them. Thus this holy Man ſeconds me.
He ends with Jeering, being full of his Jeers.
It is ſome comfort yet, he ſaith, that Intereſt is lawful with this German Divine. But what Comfort? A poor and cold One I am confident of; becauſe this German Divine, and ſo many Engliſh ones too, do combine together and ſymphonize ſo as they do in this matter of Intereſt; making it lawful Damage, and damning Uſury and Uſurers to the Pit of Hell, as it hath been formerly oſtended and ſhewn.