catholicPittsburgh.org

Reflections on the Fifth Sunday of Easter

By Fr. G. Dorsey

The readings for this Sunday:

Acts 6:1-7

1 Peter 2:4-9

John 14:1-12

“Beloved, let yourselves be built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Christ Jesus.”

The scriptures of this week continue the challenge to the first century newly baptized to live in a markedly distinct fashion from their former patterns of life. So, too, the call is for us to develop patterns of growth so that we are built into a living edifice truly acceptable as followers of Christ. The Gospel calls us to respond practically in the decisions of everyday conduct so that it fits with this new life we are to live. There is the obvious challenge to individual decision making as we relate to each person we meet. More than ever we find it a real challenge in a very complex world to make decisions that reflect the new life of grace we are trying to live. Acting rightly out of such decisions could well be termed “spiritual sacrifices”; would render us “ acceptable to God.”

One of the labels we put on authentic conduct of this “new life” is acting with justice. By Baptism we understand justice not just in terms of respect for the property rights of other but more basically, respecting the value and worth of each person and of persons in community. We recognize the value due to God, the value due others. That is the starting point of Christian justice. The person acting justly operates from mind and heart, from logic and faith, from rule of law and love. The measure of justice comes from within, even though there are practical norms of law and fairness to be met.

Acting justly often engages us in making critical judgments about practical matters that have a real bearing on the valuing of the worth of others and what might promote or impinge on them. Take the current matter of the interest on credit card debt. A notice comes by mail that the First Holding Bank is now charging you almost five hundred dollars when you borrow four hundred dollars from First Holding via a credit card charge! It is another way of describing the current charge on unpaid balances of 24+%. What judgment could be made on such an increase? How does it fit with 1 ½ per cent interest that First Holding is paying on ordinary savings? Could we label the credit card interest as usury? Does not our sense of justice lead us to ask such questions?

Usury is ordinarily defined as interest charged above the rate allowed by law. Certainly, in modern times interest in itself is no longer considered usury and interest for charges made on time are normal and accepted practices of business. Loan-sharking is certainly unjust and would fit the term usury. What are we to make of this 24+% rate? How does it fit just conduct in relationship to others? Is this rate a reasonable penalty for those who have abused the rights of First Holding Bank to receive payment for their serving as a lender in practice? Even when it is imposed on those who regularly pay their balances in full?

The Christian view of justice has to take the common good into account. Is the common good being observed by the deluge of offers to switch to a new credit card company with promises of no or little interest ( for a time!)? Making credit easy for many is a real advantage to some persons, but when it involves lulling persons into a false economy of time payments with eventually paying a very high price for product, the practice may meet the requirements of “truth in lending,” but it surely works against individuals and whole groups of persons. Young people who have their diploma or their marriage license colored with heavy credit card debt ( at 24+ %) should have known “borrower beware,” yet they appear to have been considered easy prey for those who have little regard for them as persons, and have seen them as another great source of the millions in profit from card interest.

It leads to a curious wondering: is there a basic effort to increase the indebtedness of great numbers of people, so that they are in a permanent subservient relationship to First Holding Bank or any of the institutions? Whether by design or by result, is this not disregard for the inherent value of a whole body of persons? Is this not unjust?

What to do? I believe we need to evaluate lending practices from the viewpoint of all the dimensions of justice. Certainly the legal issues have their place. Justice viewed from the sense of the common good also has its place, if only as a way of understanding the total reality of situations that affect so many people’s lives. As persons of faith we need to act justly. It is also important for us to make judgments about the world around us, especially situations of persons as they struggle to meet their basic needs.

Some practical suggestions—On the slip you return with your credit card payment add a clear sentence indicating your displeasure with the new high rates. Also, contact your state agency that deals with banking and write the same. If you or someone else is considering a consolidation of credit card debt, first contact a group like Consumer Credit Counseling to make sure that what you plan to do is fair and just.:

We should be like the wise vacationers who recently went to the Atlantic coast of Florida. When the helicopters spotted the schools of sharks swimming near some beaches, it was good for everyone that they were spotted. Also very wise that no one pretended they were dolphins!