In a
conversation I had years ago with a very wealthy man and civic leader
who lived in a different locale, he said he wasn’t going to leave any of
his quite substantial wealth to his children. Instead, he was going to
divest himself of his wealth through philanthropy. His intention was to
spend all of his wealth before he died.
“What
about your children?” I asked.
The man
responded: “While they were growing up, my wife and I gave them
everything they needed. As adults, it’s now their turn to use their
abilities and talents to make their own fortune.”
Another
very wealthy man and quite important person who lived in the same locale
at the time differed with regard to what he was going to do with his
quite substantial wealth. In a conversation, he said he had set up
charitable trusts for each of his children so that his children and
grandchildren would never be without money to provide for everything
they wanted and whenever they wanted it.
I
happen to have known the children of both men, having observed them
while they were growing up. Looking on from a distance, you’d not have
noticed very much difference between them. All were raised in
unbelievably sumptuous homes. All wore the very finest of “designer
label” clothes. All went on rather extravagant vacations, not once but
several times each and every year.
There
was, however, one difference I noted at the time. While the
children of the man who was purposely divesting his wealth through
philanthropy were much more actively engaged in group-oriented
activities, the children of the man who had established charitable
trusts appeared to prefer activities involving only one or two friends
or acquaintances. Furthermore, during their high school and
undergraduate years, it was not at all unusual for the children of the
father who established charitable trusts to become involved in numerous
“indiscretions” and “run-ins with the law.” But, given their last name
and their father’s status within the community, there never were any
significant consequences attached to their misconduct and sometimes
illegal conduct. It also was quite well-known among teenagers and young
adults that this man’s children were involved heavily in alcohol and
drugs. Over the years, their addictions became so serious, I was told,
that their father built a residential rehabilitation hospital in a city
located about three hundred miles away so his children could receive
treatment secretly.
The
last time I heard anything about that man’s children, it had taken
several years and, in some instances, several rehabilitations, to
overcome the host of problems that had led each of them to conclude that
alcohol and drugs would solve their problems. Since that time, however,
I haven’t heard anything about them.
Interestingly, I don’t know much about what happened to the children of
the man who was intent upon spending his substantial wealth through
various philanthropic endeavors. I knew they went to college, got
married, had children and the like, but that’s about all. However, I
recently learned that this man’s children have done very well. They’re
successful in their careers as lawyers, politicians, and one is a
journalist. All are very involved in civic affairs and one in municipal
governance. And, they have dedicated a lot of time and donated a lot of
money to a variety of charitable endeavors.
The
reason I’m relating the stories of these two fathers, their views about
inherited wealth, and the lives of their children has to do with the
idea I believe “lies behind” Jesus’ parable about the rich man and his
two sons. That idea can be framed by asking this question: “What do
parents owe their children?”
It’s a
very important question because we live in a capitalist society where
the building of wealth and passing it on to future generations so that
their lives will be better in the next generation figures so prominently
that we almost take it for granted that parents are obligated to provide
an inheritance of money or property. For their part, children typically
expect to receive an inheritance when their parents die. It all sounds
so “nice and clean” because it flows through our bodies like blood or
water through the gills of fish. But, I can personally attest to
the fact that it is not at all unusual following the funeral of a
surviving parent for terrible squabbles, arguments, and yes, even
fisticuffs to be exchanged among children after the terms of the
surviving parent’s will are made public for the first time.
Yesterday morning, I happened to turn on “FOX and Friends Weekends.”
One of the segments concerned a recent article published in Money
magazine entitled “Building the Big Sum You’ll Need.” What sparked my
interest wasn’t the segment’s content, but Kelly Wright mentioning to
the journalist that his 19-year-old son had recently asked him about
helping him make some decisions about investing in the stock market for
his future. After the journalist applauded Wright’s son’s
interest—something the journalist said every young person should do—the
journalist then discussed some of the things young people should
consider as they think about what they their future financial needs will
be. The journalist said something like: “Be sure to figure into the
equation the size of the inheritance you’ll be receiving.”
When I
heard that statement, I was stupefied. I shouted at the television,
“Children shouldn’t expect to receive an inheritance!”
Just
what do parents owe their children? That is the implicit
question “lying behind” Jesus’ parable about the rich man and his two
sons.
The
religious and moral answer to that question is quite simple. Beyond
providing children the food, shelter, clothing, family social life, and
education (including moral and religious education) they need to mature
into healthy and holy adults, parents don’t owe their children anything
and, furthermore, their children shouldn’t expect anything more. By
divine obligation, parents are required to provide everything a child
needs—not everything a child wants—in order to mature into
adulthood…and nothing more. Anything beyond providing for those basic
needs should be a completely unexpected “gift.”
It’s
when children expect more than they need and begin to believe their
parents owe them everything they want that big problems emerge.
Take
Jesus’ parable where the two sons responded to the question, “What do my
parents owe me?” The younger son, believing his father owed him a
portion of the estate, demanded it even before his father died. Quite
likely, the elder son believed his father owed him a portion of the
estate, but we aren’t told whether this son believed his portion should
be given to him prior to his father’s death. And, for some astonishing
reason, the father decides to divide the property between his two sons
before he dies.
But,
sure enough, that’s when the big problems emerge.
The
younger son squanders his inheritance, we are told, on a “life of
dissipation,” that is, on everything he wanted but didn’t need. We
aren’t told what the older son did with his inheritance, but it is
likely he took care of his father and tended to what was now his
property. That is, the father placed all of his trust and what future
he had in his two sons without demanding anything in return. Perhaps
that explains why, upon hearing the news of his brother’s return, the
older son’s envy, jealousy, and resentment come to a full boil. Here he
had stayed home, had taken care of his father, and had put up with
whatever it takes to care for an elderly parent. That’s when the father
said to the older son, “You are here with me always; everything I have
is yours. But now we must celebrate and rejoice, because your brother
was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.”
Parents: can you imagine your children demanding an inheritance from
you? …before you die? And, if they did, would you freely give away your
Roth 401-K “nest egg” and all of your other property without argument
and without bargaining, come what may? Are you willing to trust your
children to take care of you until you die? Do you believe this
something appropriate for a child to ask or an appropriate way for a
parent to act?
The
parable seems to respond “Yes,” but not if we’re focusing simply upon
the money and property, as any good capitalist would. Instead, consider
what the father did following his younger son’s departure. We’re told
the father frequently climbed the hill that would make it possible for
him to see his son returning. Instead, the father climbed that hill
fully expecting to see his son returning one day. What the father did
was to pray and to live in hope that his younger son would come to his
senses.
And,
that’s the lesson. Notice that the father gave what he owed his younger
son—not what he wanted (the father had already done that) but what he
needed. The father gave the gift of his continuing love to his younger
son when, by human standards, the father should have locked the door
because of his son’s dissipated lifestyle and the way he had wasted the
inheritance. That is one reason why the father is the hero of this
parable.
During
this season of Lent, we’re challenged to change how we think about those
basic things of life that have very much to do with what we expect of
God, our family members, our friends, and ourselves. Today, the parable
of the rich man challenges us to change how we think about what we
expect from our parents. Beyond providing what we need to mature into
healthy and holy adults, what else should we expect? The answer is
“nothing”…if we are thinking about material things like money and
property. What we should expect is “something”…if we are thinking about
spiritual things like love.
We can
go a long way toward experiencing Easter peace and joy if, during this
season of Lent, we remember to be grateful for our parents. They have
given us everything we need to mature into healthy and holy adults.
And, instead of allowing greed, envy, jealousy, and resentment to feed
our desire they will give us what we want—an inheritance—that they
instead will continue to give us what we truly need, the gift of God’s
love present in our hearts, come what may!
|