Catholic Replies
Editor’s Note: For some valuable perspective on the recent radical Islamist terrorist attacks in Paris, consider the following remarks by Fr. George Rutler of the Church of St. Michael in New York City:
“When the haters of remnant Christian civilization struck Paris last Friday the 13th, many kept saying that it was ‘unreal’ and ‘inexplicable.’ But the blood was real, and the cruelty was totally explicable by the history of false religion and its embrace of evil. Fittingly, when the attack began in that concert hall, the band was playing a cacophonous piece, barely distinguishable from gunfire, called ‘Kiss the Devil.’
“Only those afflicted with the illusion of secular progressivism as a substitute for the Gospel seem bewildered. Evil is real and explicable by the Fall of Man. Through the battles that have been fought and endured as Mass was being said on our altar, those who knelt here have promised to renounce Satan, and all his evil works, and all his empty promises.
“It is different now that a whole generation has been taught to think that there is no evil to resist, and no holiness to attain. The highest ambition of our new ‘therapeutic culture’ is no loftier than the desire to ‘feel good’ about oneself. We were solaced by politicians telling us that ISIS has been ‘contained’ and is less dangerous than climate change.
“While Christians in the Middle East were being slaughtered in what the Pope himself called genocide, although our own State Department refused to call it that, coddled and foul-mouthed students on our college campuses were indulging psychodramatic claims of hurt feelings and low self-esteem. They are not the stuff of which civilization’s heroes are made, and when the barbarians flood the gates, their teddy bears and balloons will be of little use.
“Christ is the King of the universe because ‘He is before all things and in him all things hold together’ (Col. 1:17). To deny that is to be left in a moral whirlwind, thinking that evil is unreal and the actions of evil people have no explanation.”
Q. Usury is condemned in the Bible, but what about credit-card companies charging 20 percent plus or minus on unpaid amounts? Would it be morally okay to own stock in these companies? — R.B.K., via e-mail.
A. The traditional meaning of usury is the charging of an excessive or unjust rate of interest on money loaned, and Sacred Scripture and the Church have considered this practice to be a sin against justice and charity. However, as economic systems changed from barter economies to economies based on money, which could increase in value, the Church recognized a distinction between a lender taking exorbitant interest for a loan and taking a fair return for the risk involved in making the loan.
According to Fr. John Hardon’s Modern Catholic Dictionary, there are four situations that allow compensation over and above what was loaned. They are: “actual damage, loss of profit, risk to the object loaned, and danger from delay in returning what was lent. Only such titles, external to the loan when truly present, justify the right to claim and the duty to pay a just rate of interest on money loaned.”
So the Church’s basic teaching in this area never changed. It still condemns the charging of excessive interest for money loaned because it means an unjust gain for the lender. But when the unjust situation that had existed in certain economic systems changed, the Church calibrated its moral principles to the new situation and permitted what was no longer unjust.
One can debate whether it is usurious for credit-card companies to charge 20 percent or so interest on unpaid amounts, but you would have to take into account how many credit-card charges never get repaid, which companies undoubtedly factor into the interest rates they charge.
We can recall shortly after we were married trying to get a credit card from a major department store in Boston and being refused because we did not have a credit history. But how can we build up a credit history, we asked the store, if no one will give us a credit card?
The situation today is entirely different with a multitude of credit cards available merely by signing up for one. One thing these companies might be guilty of is making it too easy for seemingly unqualified persons to get several credit cards and then run up debts that they cannot repay.
Because the issue of what interest charges would be considered usurious is not black and white, we don’t see a moral problem in holding stock in certain credit-card companies. But if you felt in conscience that a particular company was really gouging its customers, then of course you should not own stock in that company.
Q. The Apostles’ Creed says that Jesus descended into Hell. Does that mean that He went to the Hell of the damned or only to where the just were waiting to go to Heaven? — C.G., Pennsylvania.
A. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 632) says that “Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there” [cf. 1 Peter 3:18-19].
The Catechism also says (n. 633) that “Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, ‘hell’ — Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek — because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God. Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into ‘Abraham’s bosom.’ It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham’s bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell. Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.”
In his Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas addressed the question about whether Jesus went down into the Hell of the damned:
“A thing is said to be in a place in two ways. First of all, through its effect, and in this way Christ descended into each of the hells, but in a different manner. For going down into the hell of the lost He wrought this effect, that by descending thither He put them to shame for their unbelief and wickedness; but to them who were detained in Purgatory He gave hope of attaining to glory; while upon the holy Fathers detained in hell solely on account of original sin, He shed the light of glory everlasting.
“In another way a thing is said to be in a place through its essence, and in this way Christ’s soul descended only into that part of hell wherein the just were detained, so that He visited them ‘in place,’ according to his soul, whom He visited ‘interiorly by grace,’ according to his Godhead. Accordingly, while remaining in one part of hell, He wrought this effect in a measure in every part of hell, just as while suffering in one part of the earth He delivered the whole world by His Passion.”
Q. I have a number of nieces and nephews, at least half of whom are living in invalid marriages. I hope to be able to leave at least a few dollars to all of them in my will as they seem to be living from paycheck to paycheck. Is it morally acceptable for me to leave money to those in invalid marriages? — J.S., Ohio.
A. We have always recommended not attending the invalid marriages of baptized Catholics lest one’s presence be seen as approval of their entry into a sinful lifestyle. But is one allowed to extend help to financially struggling couples who chose not to be married in a Catholic ceremony? We would say yes because you are trying to assist them in their monetary plight, not to endorse their sinful union.
Since they presumably know of your feelings about their marriages, your charity might prompt them to have these marriages regularized in the Church. In fact, you might express in your will your hope that they do this, even though you are not making it a condition for receiving an inheritance. In the meantime, keep praying for them.
