Calling for a Return to the Doctrinal Ideals and Kingdom Ethics of the First Reformation
https://www.politico.eu/article/abdullah-ocalan-pkk-recep-tayyip-erdogan-turkey-kurdistan/
Erdogan has been in power for over twenty years and his tenure has been transformative - breaking with decades of Kemalism and Ataturk's secular vision for a modern Western-leaning state. Erdogan has shifted Türkiye to a presidential system, securing his power and while he is certainly a strong-man and authoritarian, his rule and word are not absolute.
Should I dispense with bank accounts? I wouldn't mind doing so but it's increasingly becoming impossible. I tried at one point years ago - operating on a cash basis, paying all my bills with money orders and the like. It's very difficult and frankly pretty miserable. It's not really possible anymore in a lot of urban locations. I live in the boondocks, where there are miles of endless forest, no traffic lights, and more deer than cars.
To me the issue is not about specifically paying usury or even enabling those who sin by taking it from me. I don't expect otherwise from the world - though I do admit I struggle with loving these people who right and left beat me down and steal the money right out of my pocket - money I literally earned by my own sweat. And unlike them I labour assiduously to be honest and fair in my dealings - to my own hurt if need be. I would rather have a clear conscience then shrug my shoulders and be like them.
My real issue is with those Christians who have jumped the fence and stand on the Babylonian side - exploiting not just society at large but fellow Christians. I expect the lost to engage in dog-eat-dog ethics - Darwin's survival of the fittest. This is as old as Cain and Lamech. But I do have a problem with the Christians who have entrenched themselves in the system and are right at home in these various industries and sectors of society - making money hand over fist on the basis of what is essentially legal extortion and Babylonian alchemy. I have a problem with Christians who have baptised this law of the jungle, this atheistic ethic that is completely opposed to New Testament religion.
...Usura rusteth the chisel
It rusteth the craft and the craftsman
It gnaweth the thread in the loom
None learneth to weave gold in her pattern;
Azure hath a canker by usura; cramoisi is unbroidered
Emerald findeth no Memling
Usura slayeth the child in the womb
It stayeth the young man’s courting
It hath brought palsey to bed, lyeth
between the young bride and her bridegroom
CONTRA NATURAM
They have brought whores for Eleusis
Corpses are set to banquet
at behest of usura.
From Ezra Pound's Canto XLV (1937)
Wrestling with the matter of usury and in light of recent discussions, I have been forced to address the question differently and through the lens of different contexts. This is not a question of situation ethics but rather applying wisdom and some Biblically-driven discernment to a question that is both simple and straightforward but also inescapably complex - and perhaps without solution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jTld1nmkq4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpVz4okhdRU
Several weeks ago I caught Jordan Cooper's videos dealing with the Ethiopian Orthodox man and the Knechtle's over questions regarding the Early Church. The videos of the exchange went viral and have been the source of considerable discussion. It's been something of a boon to Orthodox and Catholic apologists at the Knechtle's were demonstrably incapable of defending their position.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/beginning-at-the-end-of-all-things/
The theology and thought of Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920) is riddled with contradictions. On the one hand contemporary Dominionists wishing to posit a monistic view of society will quote Kuyper's famous dictum : 'There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!'
It's a pretty bold statement suggesting the boundaries of the Kingdom are all encompassing and there can be no room for dissent.
From time to time I will watch (usually in segments) the 2004 film The Ister, which is a three-hour fascinating re-telling and interpretation of Heidegger's talks on the Hölderlin (1770-1843) poem which was written sometime in the early 19th century.
So if the Rich Young Ruler had (in faith) obeyed the commands of God, his works would mean something. This does not suggest he could earn his salvation but rather it would be a testimony to the Holy Spirit working within him. Instead, he was an idolater and his understanding of the law was of the letter not the spirit. He had no real faith to speak of and when standing before Christ and receiving a face to face invitation from Him - he turned away. He wasn't interested.
Not long ago I listened to a sermon on the Rich Young Ruler in Matthew 19 and I was struck by the difficulty the preacher seemed to have in dealing with the passage. I agree, there are some interpretive challenges but I think that often these difficulties are the result of theological baggage that's brought to the text.