tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21240636.post2229975874314426316..comments2024-03-21T17:13:34.747-07:00Comments on On the Contrary: Testimonials for Hoffman’s book on UsuryMichael Hoffmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09485741729327325322noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21240636.post-23334303636673561992013-02-01T16:15:21.670-08:002013-02-01T16:15:21.670-08:00Concerning Mr Flanagan's claim that 'Vix P...Concerning Mr Flanagan's claim that 'Vix Pervenit' is a 'Hegelian-like document' that has a 'huge loophole inserted into its midst [that] undoes the initial proscription'-- while such is certainly the case in its application--in the interest of fairness, I should like to point out that Fr O'Callaghan himself interpreted this controversial third plank of the encyclical to mean that a creditor could seek indemnity for legal costs (and legal costs only) if he had to go to court to recover the principal from the debtor, for this, he argued(as a faithful and truly obedient Catholic priest) is the only thing it could mean. The business with the Mountains of Piety appears more difficult to explain, and I refer you to the Fr's writings. Though I myself confess that I do not find his explanation to be altogether satisfying: for a fee rather than interest would certainly be a more apt and much less scandalous way to remunerate the 'ministers' or bookkeepers etc--who are by no means the creditors. Though the pontificate of Leo X is by no means remembered for its propriety.Justin Gleesingnoreply@blogger.com