Private Property, the Great Commission, and the Trinity

In a recent email discussion, a friend from church recently noted, “I don’t think anyone is going to argue that government has carte blanche to take property from people.”

As I told him, I don’t think that is the case. For starters, I certainly would.

And so might folks like the justices on the Texas Supreme Court, who gave Texas state and local government carte blanche when they opined “Property owners do not acquire a constitutionally protected vested right in property uses.” Just like the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court did, when five of them allowed the city of New London, Connecticut, to take Susette Kelo’s house in order to develop a new office park for Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. In doing so, they wrote, “For more than a century, our public use jurisprudence has wisely eschewed rigid formulas and intrusive scrutiny in favor of affording legislatures broad latitude in determining what public needs justify the use of the takings power.”

I am pretty sure that the 4,200 mostly black residents of the Poletown neighborhood, in Detroit would take my side in this discussion. But I’ll never know for sure since I can’t find them because, well, Poletown doesn’t exist anymore. The mostly black former residents’ 1,400 homes were condemned and torn down to make way for a new General Motors plant, a decision supported by the all-white Michigan Supreme Court. Cart blanche, anyone?

If there is one group of which I am 100 percent positive that they agree with me on this, it would be the Texas Municipal League. It members condemn what was formerly known as “private property” just about every single day. And nobody has run them off; they are still around. But I don’t need to ask them, because they have already said that the Kelo decision (see above) “simply confirms what cities have known all along: under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, [takings for] economic development can be as much a ‘public use’ as a road, bridge, or water tower.” Carte blanche.

My guess is that James Leonard might have a few thoughts about all this. I don’t know much about him, though, except that he was stopped driving a car for speeding. The police searched his car and found a safe in the trunk. After obtaining a warrant–Leonard had denied their request to open the trunk, they found $200,000 and a bill of sale for a house. The police didn’t believe Leonard’s claim that the money was from a house, though, saying the money came from the sale of drugs since Hwy 59 is a “drug corridor.” So they seized his money through what is known as “civil asset forfeiture.” And the Texas courts failed to give him back his money–despite the fact he was never convicted of–or even charged with–a crime.

Even more infamous than the Kelo case is the ObamaCare case, in which U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and four of his fellow justices said the government can tax people for refusing to purchase health insurance. Notably, these same five justices recently joined together in supporting the carte blanche ability to kill babies in the womb the Supreme Court had previously given to folks in Roe v. Wade.

So, the truth of the matter is as long as they follow a few legal niceties, kinda like the Soviet Union usually did with its political prisoners–they didn’t murder them until had coerced or tortured them into signing a confession, American federal, state, and local governments can, if they really want to, pretty much take our property, either real property or our money or goods, for whatever reason they want. Although, occasionally, if you want to spend a LOT of your own money, you can stop them.

Christians should care deeply about property rights. Not only do they stand at the heart of economic and political liberty, but they are God’s provision for mankind to carry out the Cultural Mandate-and the Great Commission. There is no way we can successfully be fruitful and multiply and fill the world with Jesus’ disciples without private property. We see what that looks like in countries where private property is not valued: China, the Soviet Union, Botswana, and even New York, prove that where private property is not valued, neither are people.

If we really want to understand property rights, we must understand the trinitarian nature of private property. Genesis 1:1 clearly establishes God as the owner of creation. Genesis 1:28 tells man to fill and subdue the earth (His property) and have dominion over every living thing (also His property). God didn’t transfer ownership–He is still the original owner, but He did delegate ownership. We see man’s responsibilities in properly exercising this delegation over God’s property in parables like the Parable of the Talents.

Life works like the Trinity. Nobody is an individual without built-in relationships that cannot be discarded, no matter how much we try. It works that way with property ownership too.

When I as an individual own property, it isn’t just mine to use as I wish. I must use it to benefit not only myself but others. In an unfallen world, doing so would be easy, because i would have both the desire to do so and the wisdom to know how to do so. It is not so easy today, but I must do the best I can. The best way to figure that out is by examining how I affect other people’s property.

So, for instance, if I dig on my property and dump the dirt on another’s property, I am likely not using my property correctly. However, if I paint my house yellow and my neighbor doesn’t like it, that is more likely on his end. The government, then, could tell me not to dump my property on his property, but couldn’t (well, shouldn’t) tell me not to paint my house yellow.

Zoning, most building codes, eminent domain, and the like all clash with this Trinitarian view of private property ownership. And these actually result in worse stewardship of the earth that God has given us. This should be of concern not only to Christians, but to all who care about the earth, wherever they think it might have come from. The challenge for all of is, though, if we fail to submit to God’s word, then we think that we know best how to accomplish all these things.