It is ungodly and impious, against the first Table, because it dependeth not upon Gods Providence, but is assured by Bonds against the Act of God.
+ As it be, Vsurers security is to arm himself against the ordinary frauds, negligences, or other follies of the Borrower. If by the hand of God an extraordinary loss do happen, by the like meanes also an extraordinary gaine may be raised sometimes, both which belong to the borrower, except the mercy of the lender, to whom he is to trust, relieve him. And surely the Vsurer hath greater cause, and seems also to trust God more than any other man, and is least armed against him.
He had need pray against foul weather, tempest, wind, and wrack; for although he be no Husbandman, Merchant, Tradesman, no Labourer, yet by the thriving of all these he must live, if all or any of these miscarry, it is not his bonds many times which help him.
Neither against the hand of God only is he unarmed, but against the frauds of men many times his security cannot defend him. How many have been defrauded of their principal debts by fraudulent deeds of gift, by concealing of goods, and divers other wayes?
……….
++ It may be I can alledge as good a Text for Usury. I think the 6th of Luke which is alleged against it may with better reason be produced for it, and if we will stand to the literal and common sense of the word in the Original, we may conclude that it is not only allowed, but commanded there; what exceptions can be taken if a man should translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lend upon Vsury? Is not that the proper signification of the word in all Authors? Hath not the Latin borrowed the words Danista an Vsurer, and Danisma Vsury, from the Greek? Although our Translation saith only Lend, this general word may also comprehend Lending upon use. It accords with the Original, and crosseth not the Translation. But it may be Lending upon Vsury may be here in this Text allowed by our adversaries, if we will observe, as it followeth in the Text, to look for nothing again.
These words of looking or hoping for nothing again although they be answerable to the vulgar Translation, yet in the Original they have another more proper signification, as is shewed by Beza, who is no friend to Vsury; you shall have his words in his Annotations upon Luke. 6. 35. ‘I confess (saith he) that I never read in any other place the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this signification [to hope for] when as properly it signifieth to Despair.
And surely it may seem that our Lord in this place did consider what doth many times hinder men from lending their mony to their poor brethren (to wit the fear lest they lose what they lend to the poor) and therefore he would remove that fear from us, and bring us to this pass, that as often as we help our neighbour for Gods sake, we should never think that it may be to our loss, since God makes himself a pledge and surety that we shall receive with much Vsury whatsoever we lend: If we follow this interpretation, then instead of [looking for] we must say [despairing] and so the Syriack Interpreter understood this place—They are decei•ed which wrest this place for the prohibition of Vsury; as if Christ had forbidden us to covenant or exact any thing above the principal. Thus far Beza; wherein we have his opinion and reason, and by the help of his direction the Text may be most fitly translated, Lend upon Vsury not despairing; for to lend looking for nothing again, is, as the Bishop of Winchester hath observed, not to Lend but to Give.
|||- Filmer, Robert, Sir, d. (1653). EEBO Bodleian Library records – unstructured. [35], 119 p. London: Printed for Will. Crook, 1678.
Share this content:
