Norishemorehappyinhisrationalisticexplanationsofthewholemassofmyths。Hesupposesaterrificstorm，inwhichthelightningkindledthecombustiblematerialsofthecities，aidedperhapsbyanearthquake；butthisshowsadispositiontobreakawayfromtheexactstatementsofthesacredbookswhichwouldhavebeenmostseverelycondemnedbytheuniversalChurchduringatleasteighteenhundredyearsofitshistory。NorwouldtheexplanationsofSirWilliamDawsonhavefaredanybetter：itisverydoubtfulwhethereitherofthemcouldescapeunscathedtodayfromasynodoftheFreeChurchofScotland，orofanyoftheleadingorthodoxbodiesintheSouthernStatesoftheAmericanUnion。[446]
　　[446]Forthesemostrecentexplanations，seeRev。CunninghamGeikie，D。D。，inworkcited；alsoSirJ。W。Dawson，EgyptandSyria，publishedbytheReligiousTractSociety，1887，pp。125，126；seealsoDawson’sarticleinTheExpositorforJanuary，1886。
　　HowunsatisfactoryallsuchrationalismmustbetoatrulytheologicalmindisseennotonlyinthedealingswithProf。
　　RobertsonSmithinScotlandandProf。WoodrowinSouthCarolina，butmostclearlyinabookpublishedin1886byMonseigneurHaussmanndeWandelburg。Amongotherthings，theauthorwasPrelateofthePope’sHouse-hold，aMitredAbbot，CanonoftheHolySepulchre，andaDoctorofTheologyofthePontificalUniversityatRome，andhisworkisintroducedbyapprovinglettersfromPopeLeoXIIIandthePatriarchofJerusalem。MonseigneurdeWandelburgscornstheideathatthesaltcolumnatUsdumisnotthestatueofLot’swife；hepointsoutnotonlythedangerofyieldingthisevidenceofmiracletorationalism，butthefactthatthedivinelyinspiredauthorityoftheBookofWisdom，written，atthelatest，twohundredandfiftyyearsbeforeChrist，distinctlyreferstoit。HesummonsJosephusasawitness。HedwellsonthefactthatSt。ClementofRome，Irenaeus，Hegesippus，andSt。Cyril，“whoasBishopofJerusalemmusthaveknownbetterthananyotherpersonwhatexistedinPalestine。”withSt。Jerome，St。Chrysostom，andamultitudeofothers，attest，asamatteroftheirownknowledgeorofpopularnotoriety，thattheremainsofLot’swifereallyexistedintheirtimeintheformofacolumnofsalt；andhepointstriumphantlytothefactthatLieutenantLynchfoundthisverycolumn。Inthepresenceofsuchacontinuouslineofwitnesses，someofthemconsideredasdivinelyinspired，andallofthemgreatlyrevered——alineextendingthroughthirty-sevenhundredyears——hecondemnsmostvigorouslyallthosewhodonotbelievethatthepillarofsaltnowatUsdumisidenticalwiththewifeofLot，andstigmatizesthemaspeoplewho“donotwishtobelievethetruthoftheWordofGod。”
　　Hisignoranceofmanyofthesimplestfactsbearinguponthelegendisverystriking，yethedoesnothesitatetospeakofmenwhoknowfarmoreandhavethoughtfarmoreuponthesubjectas“grosslyignorant。”Themostcuriousfeatureinhisignoranceisthefactthatheisutterlyunawareoftheannualchangesinthesaltstatue。HeisentirelyignorantofsuchfactsasthatthepriestGabrielGiraudetinthesixteenthcenturyfoundthestatuelyingdown；thatthemonkZwinnerfounditintheseventeenthcenturystanding，andaccompaniedbyadogalsotransformedintosalt；thatPrinceRadziwillfoundnostatueatall；thatthepiousVincentBriemleintheeighteenthcenturyfoundthemonumentrenewingitself；thataboutthemiddleofthenineteenthcenturyLynchfounditintheshapeofatowerorcolumnfortyfeethigh；thatwithintwoyearsafterwardDeSaulcyfounditwashedintotheformofaspire；thatayearlaterVandeVeldefounditutterlywashedaway；andthatafewyearslaterPalmerfoundit“astatuebearingastrikingresemblancetoanArabwomanwithachildinherarms。”Soendedthelastgreatdemonstration，thusfar，onthesideofsacredscience——thelastretreatingshotfromthetheologicalrearguard。
　　Itisbutjusttosaythataverygreatshareinthehonourofthevictoryofscienceinthisfieldisduetomentrainedastheologians。Itwouldnaturallybeso，sincefewothershavedevotedthemselvestodirectlabourinit；yetgreathonourisnonethelessduetosuchmenasReland，Mariti，Smith，Robinson，Stanley，Tristram，andSchat。
　　Theyhaverenderedevenagreaterservicetoreligionthantoscience，fortheyhavemadeabeginning，atleast，ofdoingawaywiththatenforcedbeliefinmythsashistorywhichhasbecomeamostseriousdangertoChristianity。
　　FortheworstenemyofChristianitycouldwishnothingmorethanthatitsmainLeadersshouldprovethatitcannotbeadoptedsavebythosewhoaccept，ashistorical，statementswhichunbiasedmenthroughouttheworldknowtobemythical。TheresultofsuchademonstrationwouldonlybemoreandmoretomakethinkingpeopleinsidetheChurchdissemblers，andthinkingpeopleoutside，scoffers。Farbetterisittowelcometheaidofscience，intheconvictionthatalltruthisone，and，inthelightofthistruth，toallowtheologyandsciencetoworktogetherinthesteadyevolutionofreligionandmorality。
　　Therevelationsmadebythescienceswhichmostdirectlydealwiththehistoryofmanallconvergeinthetruththatduringtheearlierstagesofthisevolutionmoralandspiritualteachingsmustbeinclosedinmyth，legend，andparable。”TheMaster“
　　feltthiswhenhegavetothepoorpeasantsabouthim，andsototheworld，hissimpleandbeautifulillustrations。Inmakingthistruthclear，sciencewillgivetoreligionfarmorethanitwilltakeaway，foritwillthrownewlifeandlightintoallsacredliterature。
　　CHAPTERXIX。
　　FROMLEVITICUSTOPOLITICALECONOMY
　　I。ORIGINANDPROGRESSOFHOSTILITYTOLOANSATINTEREST。
　　Amongquestionsonwhichthesupportersofrightreasoninpoliticalandsocialsciencehaveonlyconqueredtheologicaloppositionaftercenturiesofwar，isthetakingofinterestonloans。Inhardlyanystrugglehasrigidadherencetotheletterofoursacredbooksbeenmoreprolongedandinjurious。
　　Certainly，ifthecriterionoftruth，asregardsanydoctrine，bethatofSt。VincentofLerins——thatithasbeenheldintheChurch“always，everywhere，andbyall“——thenonnopointmayaChristianofthesedaysbemoresurethanthateverysavingsinstitution，everyloanandtrustcompany，everybank，everyloanofcapitalbyanindividual，everymeansbywhichaccumulatedcapitalhasbeenlawfullylentevenatthemostmoderateinterest，tomakemenworkersratherthanpaupers，isbasedondeadlysin。
　　Theearlyevolutionofthebeliefthattakinginterestformoneyissinfulpresentsacuriousworkingtogetherofmetaphysical，theological，andhumanitarianideas。
　　InthemaincentreofancientGreekcivilization，theloaningofmoneyatinterestcametobeacceptedatanearlyperiodasaconditionofproductiveindustry，andnolegalrestrictionwasimposed。InRometherewasalongprocessofdevelopment：thegreedofcreditorsinearlytimesledtolawsagainstthetakingofinterest；but，thoughtheselastedlong，thatstrongpracticalsensewhichgaveRometheempireoftheworldsubstitutedfinally，forthisabsoluteprohibition，theestablishmentofratesbylaw。YetmanyoftheleadingGreekandRomanthinkersopposedthispracticalsettlementofthequestion，and，foremostofall，Aristotle。Inametaphysicalwayhedeclaredthatmoneyisbynature“barren“；thatthebirthofmoneyfrommoneyistherefore“unnatural“；andhencethatthetakingofinterestistobecensuredandhated。Plato，Plutarch，boththeCatos，Cicero，Seneca，andvariousotherleadersofancientthought，arrivedatmuchthesameconclusion——sometimesfromsympathywithoppresseddebtors；sometimesfromdislikeofusurers；sometimesfromsimplecontemptoftrade。
　　FromthesesourcestherecameintotheearlyChurchthegermofatheologicaltheoryuponthesubject。
　　ButfargreaterwasthestreamofinfluencefromtheJewishandChristiansacredbooks。IntheOldTestamentstoodvarioustextscondemningusury——thetermusurymeaninganytakingofinterest：thelawofMoses，whileitallowedusuryindealingwithstrangers，forbadeitindealingwithJews。IntheNewTestament，intheSermonontheMount，asgivenbySt。Luke，stoodthetext“Lend，hopingfornothingagain。”ThesetextsseemedtoharmonizewiththemostbeautifulcharacteristicofprimitiveChristianity；itstendercareforthepoorandoppressed：hencewefind，fromtheearliestperiod，thewholeweightoftheChurchbroughttobearagainstthetakingofinterestformoney。[448]
　　[448]OnthegeneralallowanceofinterestformoneyinGreece，evenathighrates，seeBockh，PublicEconomyoftheAthenians，translatedbyLamb，Boston，1857，especiallychaps。xxii，xxiii，andxxivofbooki。ForaviewofusurytakenbyAristotle，seehisPoliticsandEconomics，translatedbyWalford，p。27；alsoGrote，HistoryofGreece，vol。iii，chap。xi。ForsummaryofopinionsinGreeceandRome，andtheirrelationtoChristianthought，seeBohm-Bawerk，CapitalandInterest，translatedbySmart，London，1890，chap。i。Foraveryfulllistofscripturetextsagainstthetakingofinterest，seePearson，TheTheoriesonUsuryinEurope，1100-1400，CambridgeEngland，1876，p。6。
　　ThetextsmostfrequentlycitedwereLeviticusxxv，36，37；
　　Deuteronomyxxiii，19and26；Psalms，xv，5；Ezekielxviii，8and17；St。Luke，vi，35。Foracuriousmodernuseofthem，seeD。
　　S。Dickinson’sspeechintheStateofNewYork，invol。iofhiscollectedwritings。SeealsoLecky，HistoryofRationalisminEurope，vol。ii，chap。vi；andaboveall，asthemostrecenthistoricalsummarybyaleadinghistorianofpoliticaleconomy，Bohm-Bawerk，asabove。
　　ThegreatfathersoftheEasternChurch，andamongthemSt。
　　Basil，St。Chrysostom，andSt。GregoryofNyssa，——thefathersoftheWesternChurch，andamongthemTertullian，St。Ambrose，St。
　　Augustine，andSt。Jerome，joinedmostearnestlyinthiscondemnation。St。Basildenouncesmoneyatinterestasa“fecundmonster。”andsays，“Thedivinelawdeclaresexpressly，`Thoushaltnotlendonusurytothybrotherorthyneighbour。’“St。
　　GregoryofNyssacallsdownonhimwholendsmoneyatinterestthevengeanceoftheAlmighty。St。Chrysostomsays：“Whatcanbemoreunreasonablethantosowwithoutland，withoutrain，withoutploughs？Allthosewhogivethemselvesuptothisdamnablecultureshallreaponlytares。Letuscutoffthesemonstrousbirthsofgoldandsilver；letusstopthisexecrablefecundity。”
　　Lactantiuscalledthetakingofinterest“robbery。”St。Ambrosedeclareditasbadasmurder，St。Jeromethrewtheargumentintotheformofadilemma，whichwasusedasaweaponagainstmoney-lendersforcenturies。PopeLeotheGreatsolemnlyadjudgeditasinworthyofseverepunishment。[449]
　　[449]ForSt。BasilandSt。GregoryofNyssa，seeFrenchtranslationoftheirdiatribesinHomeliescontrelesUsuriers，Paris，Hachette，1861-’62，especiallyp。30ofSt。Basil。ForsomedoubtfulreservationsbySt。Augustine，seeMurray，HistoryofUsury。ForSt。Ambrose，seeDeOfficiis，lib。iii，cap。ii，inMigne，Patr。Lat。，vol。xvi；alsotheDeTobia，inMigne，vol。
　　xiv。ForSt。Augustine，seeDeBapt。contrDonat。，lib。iv，cap。
　　ix，inMigne，vol。xliii。ForLactantius，seehisOpera，Leyden，1660，p。608。ForCyprian，seehisTestimoniesagainsttheJews，translatedbyWallis，bookiii，article48。ForSt。Jerome，seehisCom。inEzekiel，xviii，8，inMigne，vol。xxv，pp。170etseq。ForLeotheGreat，seehislettertothebishopsofvariousprovincesofItaly，citedintheJus。Can。，cap。vii，can。xiv，qu。4。Forveryfairstatementsoftheattitudeofthefathersonthisquestion，seeAddisandArnold，CatholicDictionary，London，1884，andSmithandCheetham，DictionaryofChristianAntiquities，London，1875-’80；ineach，underarticleUsury。
　　ThisunanimityofthefathersoftheChurchbroughtaboutacrystallizationofhostilitytointerest-bearingloansintonumberlessdecreesofpopesandcouncilsandkingsandlegislaturesthroughoutChristendomduringmorethanfifteenhundredyears，andthecanonlawwasshapedinaccordancewiththese。Atfirsttheseweremoreespeciallydirectedagainsttheclergy，butwesoonfindthemextendingtothelaity。TheseprohibitionswereenforcedbytheCouncilofArlesin314，andamodernChurchapologistinsiststhateverygreatassemblyoftheChurch，fromtheCouncilofElvirain306tothatofViennein1311，inclusive，solemnlycondemnedlendingmoneyatinterest。
　　ThegreatestrulersundertheswayoftheChurch——Justinian，intheEmpireoftheEast；Charlemagne，intheEmpireoftheWest；
　　Alfred，inEngland；St。Louis，inFrance——yieldedfullytothisdogma。IntheninthcenturyAlfredwentsofarastoconfiscatetheestatesofmoney-lenders，denyingthemburialinConsecratedground；andsimilardecreesweremadeinotherpartsofEurope。
　　InthetwelfthcenturytheGreekChurchseemstohaverelaxeditsstrictnesssomewhat，buttheRomanChurchgrewmoresevere。St。
　　AnselmprovedfromtheScripturesthatthetakingofinterestisabreachoftheTenCommandments。PeterLombard，inhisSentences，madethetakingofinterestpurelyandsimplytheft。
　　St。Bernard，revivingreligiousearnestnessintheChurch，tookthesameview。In1179theThirdCounciloftheLaterandecreedthatimpenitentmoney-lendersshouldbeexcludedfromthealtar，fromabsolutioninthehourofdeath，andfromChristianburial。