Ownership

The issue of ownership is a large one. At the public level it raises profound questions that have preoccupied philosophers, economists, legal thinkers and political scientists, as well as creating many national and international conflicts. It has also raised complex decisions involving politicians, civil servants, lawyers and corporate managers, leading to wide-ranging antitrust laws, court battles and family quarrels. Historically, ideas of possession took root more tenaciously in North American soil than elsewhere, perhaps because so many people who came to the New World were have-nots. As the information society grows and the Information Superhighway becomes more extensive, ownership issues are becoming increasingly problematic in areas relating to copyright and privacy.

The topic raises several pertinent questions for us. What does private ownership mean? How much should we own? What is involved in saying “this is mine” or “that is yours”? When should ownership be an individual and when a joint affair? How does private ownership—of property, vehicles, possessions—appear and work within the economy of God, not just human economy?

The Nature of Private Ownership Today

In our society ownership involves primarily our right to acquire, use, enjoy and dispose of our assets—whether land, wealth, home, animal, goods or copyrights, trademarks, policies or professional rights of tenure—in whatever way we choose, subject to legal provisions. The foundation of ownership is possession, but this is not enough when someone else has a stronger claim. We can own things individually or in partnership with someone else, such as a spouse or family, or with strangers, such as a time-share arrangement in a condominium. We can own something permanently or temporarily (for example, until someone comes of age). We can own things in the absolute sense or in a derivative but de facto absolute, such as holding a ninety-nine-year housing lease from a government agency. But ownership involves not only the claim this is mine but in some sense this is me. For in some measure what we own tends to reflect who we are. It is a symbolic expression or concrete extension of ourselves. In other words, it has to do with being as well as having.

Ownership can be established in many ways, in some cases simply by holding possession or by shaking hands, in others only after finalizing protracted agreements. People may also exercise their ownership in a wide variety of ways—well or badly according to their care for what they own, selfishly or generously depending on how little or much they share with others, ostentatiously or modestly according to whether they flaunt their possessions, carefully or casually according to whether or not they give forethought to the fate of what they own when they die (see Will, Last).

Christian Attitudes Toward Ownership

In Christian tradition, the moral dimensions of private ownership have been often addressed. Thomas Aquinas taught that private property was not a right in natural law but only in human law, and that its use must not reflect avarice or waste but temperance, generosity, benefaction and almsgiving. The Puritans also tended to encourage modesty in the area of possessions, thrift with respect to money, and generosity with respect to giving. Apart from occasional documents, such as the Pastoral Constitution on the Modern World or certain World Council of Churches reports, in recent times the church has done little to question widespread possessive attitudes toward ownership or the social obligations attached to it. This is no doubt partly because church congregations themselves often own large holdings.

What happens when we view ownership from God’s point of view? For many Christians this changes little. They may view what they own as coming from God’s hand and as a sign of God’s blessing, but that is the extent of the issue. This is the position of some conservative believers who regard the right to private ownership as an integral part of the Christian message. They may see this right as an indispensable element of being an individual. “Without property, without something that really belongs to a person and characterizes him, it is difficult to be more than a cipher or a cog” (Harold Brown in Chewning, 2:127).

In other cases, looking at ownership from God’s perspective has led Christians to the view that they should own things only in common, not privately. This is the position of some branches of the Christian community movement. These people often regard the practice of common ownership as indispensable to being a disciple of Christ. As with monks and nuns in the older Catholic tradition, unless a person yields up their private property, or future right to it, they have not reached a mature level of Christian obedience.

Ownership in Biblical Perspective

The Old Testament concern to grant each Israelite a portion in the land suggests that having some property is an important part of belonging to God’s people (Numbers 26:52-56; Joshua 13-19). There were laws against moving landmarks and therefore stealing another’s property (Deut. 19:14; Proverbs 22:28), and injunctions against stealing others’ property (Exodus 20:15; Proverbs 11:1; Proverbs 16:11). Property may be acquired on the basis of a gift (Deut. 1:8) or inheritance (Deut. 21:16; Proverbs 19:14). Its use by the owner is guaranteed even when someone else is using the goods involved (Exodus 22:7-8). It is the inalienability of land that lies behind the provision that every fiftieth year, the year of Jubilee, lands and houses that someone had been forced to sell to another for the sake of survival were to resort to the original owner (Leviticus 25:8-34; Leviticus 27:17-24). For though people might sell their land, it must always be possible for the family to get it back (Leviticus 25:25). In this respect the old covenant is unapologetically materialistic.

On the other hand, there is a continuing emphasis on God being the ultimate owner of the land: “The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you are but aliens and my tenants” (Leviticus 25:23). The highest possible use of property is also to honor God with any increase that it brings (Proverbs 3:9). Apart from land, houses and possessions, there were other objects a person could own that exceed what we are accustomed to today: in the case of a man they included his wife and daughters as well as slaves (Exodus 20:17). Though some people owned a great deal, exemplary servants of God rate other things as more important than material wealth (Genesis 13:8-12). An excessive view of owning, which tends to trust in riches, love of luxury and oppression of the poor, is consistently condemned by the prophets (Isaiah 3:16-23; Isaiah 10:1-2; Ezekiel 7:19-21; Amos 6:1, 4; Micah 2:1-2).

In light of the full teaching of the New Testament—which does not insist on common property for all Christians but on the generous, sacrificial sharing of one’s resources (see 1 Cor. 16:1-4; 2 Cor. 8:1-9)—a place for what we call private property appears again, though, for reasons I shall indicate in a moment, this is not the best way of describing it. On the other hand, the practice of Jesus and his disciples suggests an abandoning of ownership for those involved in a common mission (Luke 5:11, 28; Luke 14:25-33; Luke 18:18-23, 28-30). There was financial sharing among the disciples as well as among Paul and his coworkers, though the apostle certainly earned wages for distributing to others (John 12:4-6; John 13:27-29; Acts 20:34). Though the example of the early church in Jerusalem is often cited in support of this practice, a closer reading of the text shows that it was surplus property that was sold and distributed to those who had need (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32; Romans 12:13). In the early churches this practice may not have been as exceptional as many think, nor mainly a product of intense apocalyptic expectation. Certainly Paul regards one of the purposes of possessions as the possibility they provide of giving to others (Ephes. 4:28). There is evidence of Christians sharing some of their possessions throughout at least the next five centuries (Grant).

Underlying both approaches is something more fundamental that does not always come to the surface. What we call ownership, whether individual or joint, would be better termed trusteeship or stewardship. In a profound sense there is only one Owner. Everything comes from and belongs to God (Psalm 24:1-2; Psalm 95:4-5). What we have is, strictly speaking, not given to us to own in any absolute sense. It is rather entrusted to us: we are made trustees of what comes our way and are accountable for how well we use it to serve God and to serve others. We do not have a right to any of our possessions; they are given from God, who could take from us at any time. It is our responsibility to view what we “own” through the lens of our calling to reflect God’s character and ways, to fulfill the ministry and vocation God has given us, and to share with others in the church or who are in genuine need.

Some Principles of Responsible Ownership

The first time I encountered an attitude toward ownership based on trusteeship rather than possessiveness was in the form of a churchgoer who offered me the use of his automobile on Sundays whenever I needed it. I thanked him profusely for his generosity, but he replied, “There is nothing generous about it. This car is not mine but God’s. God has entrusted it to me for my own use and for my family, as well as any of God’s people who would benefit from it. I am simply trying to put it to the use for which it was intended.”

This is how we should regard all that we own. By no means does this require us to be undiscerning about who we entrust what God has entrusted to us to. Some people will demand that we share; of these we should beware. Others will accept our open-handed offers but not handle what we share with them carefully, as we would handle it ourselves or as they would want us to handle something of theirs. Some will even abuse or exploit what comes their way, or only receive but never reciprocate, even when they could do so. Precisely because we are trustees of what we have, we must learn how to balance our own and our dependents’ or Christian community’s needs with those of other needy people with whom we come in contact. We also need to ensure as far as we can that what we share with others is kept in the best possible condition so that it can continue to be of benefit to people. Sometimes this will mean saying no to otherwise appropriate people.

We should also consider carefully how much we need to own as individuals or as a family, or how much we could own certain things in common with others. The danger of wanting to possess too much was strongly criticized by Jesus (Luke 12:15). Our households—inside and out—are full of possessions which we use only once a week or less. When we live close to others whom we know, we could share or jointly own many tools and implements and even appliances. Under some circumstances, within the family, this can even be arranged with cars or homes. This raises larger questions about owning property and how much we should own. This need will vary from person to person, and will depend on a whole variety of factors, such as our income level, dependents, vocation and setting. There is no uniform answer, except perhaps to say that among middle- or upper-class believers, generally much less could be owned than is generally the case. But this raises the issue of a home ownership (see Home) and simpler lifestyle, on which more is written elsewhere in this book.

Beyond such questions is the deeper issue of sorting out how much we own what we have or how much it owns us! It is one thing for what we own to be an expression or extension of ourselves. It is altogether another if it defines us and our life revolves too much around it. This basic issue is a matter for serious reflection, for at stake is nothing less than idolatry (Ephes. 5:5; Col. 3:5). But then the sharing of what we own also calls for much prayer, advice, discernment and learning from experience. It is a risky adventure of faith in which we will sometimes make poor judgment calls and at other times entertain angels unawares. Though they sound as if they are polar opposites, we should always remember that owning and giving are actually closely related, just as are individual and community. This is certainly the case with God, and increasingly we see the connection between the two. We live constantly within and through that tension as we gradually reflect more of God’s own nonpossessive nature and large-hearted view of ownership.

» See also: Community

» See also: Investment

» See also: Money

» See also: Stewardship

References and Resources

W. Brueggemann, The Land (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977); R. C. Chewning, Biblical Principles and Economics: The Foundations (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1989); E. Fromm, To Have or to Be? (New York: Harper & Row, 1976); R. M. Grant, Early Christianity and Society (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1977); D. J. Hall, The Steward: A Biblical Symbol Come of Age (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990); M. Hengel, Property and Riches in the Early Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974); L. T. Johnson, Sharing Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981); C. B. MacPherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964); G. Marcel, Creative Fidelity (New York: Farrar, Straus, 1964).

—Robert Banks