Consider a retired couple who spent 40 years working hard and raising a family. They own their home and have enough saved to live comfortably throughout retirement. They can even enjoy some of the finer things in life. After all their needs and comforts are taken care of, they find themselves wanting even more. They might consider buying a vacation home or a new boat. Meanwhile, their adult children struggle to afford a first home or support their families. They are getting by, but just barely.

Their children are certainly not entitled to their money. But if the parents’ financial security is already assured, shouldn’t they at least consider whether some of their money would do more good helping their family than purchasing another luxury?

If the parents’ financial security is already assured, shouldn’t they at least consider whether some of their money would do more good helping their family than purchasing another luxury?Tweet This

How Did We Come to Think This Way?

In our “constantly online” culture, we often hear the stereotypes that millennials are lazy or that boomers are selfish. While these are gross exaggerations, a generational divide exists in how we view wealth and the responsibilities that come with it.

This divide appeared in a 2024 survey conducted by Charles Schwab. It surveyed high-net-worth boomers (ages 59-76), Gen X (ages 43-58), and millennials (ages 27-42). Regarding wealth transfers, 45% of boomers wanted to enjoy their money themselves, compared with 11% of Gen X and 15% of millennials. It also found that 97% of Gen X and millennials planned to share their wealth during their lifetimes, compared with only 56% of boomers.

Meanwhile, younger generations face obstacles to financial security. According to Pew Research Center, the median home price rose from 2.6 times the annual income of households headed by someone under 40 in 1990 to 3.5 times in 2024. Additionally, according to the Social Security Administration’s 2026 Trustees Report, the Social Security retirement trust fund is projected to be depleted in 2032, when continuing income would only cover 78% of scheduled benefits. While current retirees have been receiving their full scheduled retirement benefits, younger generations face the prospect of entering retirement with a system that may no longer be able to fulfill those same promises. These are just two examples, but they illustrate the challenges facing future generations.

Whatever role public policy plays, two questions come to mind: What responsibility do the financially secure have toward future generations? And does our responsibility toward our children end once their immediate needs have been met? Christianity has never taught that our responsibility to others ends simply because we believe we have earned the right to a more comfortable life.

Christianity has never taught that our responsibility to others ends simply because we believe we have earned the right to a more comfortable life.Tweet This

Is Our Wealth Really Ours to Do With as We Please?

The Church has long taught that while wealth is not inherently bad, possessing it comes with a responsibility to others. In fact, the Catechism describes property owners as stewards who should share the benefits of their possessions with others, beginning with their own families (CCC 2404). Earning something may give us a right to possess it, but not freedom from responsibility for its use.

St. John emphasized that Christian love must be demonstrated through how we treat those in need:

“If someone who has worldly means sees a brother in need and refuses him compassion, how can the love of God remain in him? Children, let us love not in word or speech but in deed and truth.” (1 John 3:17-18)

In the fourth century, St. Basil the Great spoke powerfully about the responsibilities that accompany wealth in his homily I Will Pull Down My Barns. Near the end of his homily, he asks, “Who are the greedy?” His answer: “Those who are not satisfied with what suffices for their own needs.”

St. Basil continues his rebuke:

“The bread you are holding back is for the hungry, the clothes you keep put away are for the naked, the shoes that are rotting away with disuse are for those who have none, the silver you keep buried in the earth is for the needy. You are thus guilty of injustice toward as many as you might have aided, and did not.”

St. Basil’s homily is certainly harsh, and he doesn’t hold back his criticism of those who neglect people in need. But perhaps his words should make us question whether we’ve become so accustomed to enjoying everything we’ve earned that we’ve stopped asking what we ought to do with it.

Earning something may give us a right to possess it, but not freedom from responsibility for its use.Tweet This

Does Our Responsibility End When Our Children Grow Up?

Our culture generally agrees that parents have a responsibility to support their children. We feed them, clothe them, provide shelter, and we generally want our children to grow up healthy and successful. But when does that responsibility end? Once they turn 18, move out of the house, or graduate from college? Most would agree that parents are not obligated to financially support their children indefinitely, but does that mean our responsibility to consider their future disappears once they become independent?

The Bible offers a broader understanding of our responsibility to future generations. In the Book of Proverbs, King Solomon writes:

“The good leave an inheritance to their children’s children” (Proverbs 13:22)

Paul also emphasizes the responsibility of family members to care for one another, particularly those who are dependent on their support:

“And whoever does not provide for relatives and especially family members has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (1 Timothy 5:8)

While neither of these passages establishes that parents have unlimited financial responsibility to their adult children, both point toward responsibility beyond our own personal desires. Helping an adult child buy a home is not the same moral obligation as providing food to someone who is hungry. That doesn’t mean our responsibility disappears once our children become independent. There is a difference between recognizing that our children must become independent and believing we no longer need to consider their future.

The question is not whether future generations are entitled to everything we have accumulated. They are not. We should be asking whether we are entitled to disregard their future well-being for the sake of our own enhanced lifestyle.

I don’t think there is a simple answer to how much we should spend or give away. But if we are constantly looking to spend more on luxuries while ignoring the needs of those around us, our priorities deserve some serious reconsideration.

The question is not whether future generations are entitled to everything we have accumulated. They are not. We should be asking whether we are entitled to disregard their future well-being for the sake of our own enhanced lifestyle.Tweet This

You Can’t Take It With You When You Go

We often say, “You can’t take it with you when you go,” as though that settles the question of what to do with our money. And while we may deserve to enjoy what we have earned, that cannot be the only consideration.

Since we can’t take our wealth with us, maybe we should consider what good it can accomplish while we are still here. We may have every right to spend our money as we please. But whether we should spend it entirely on ourselves is a different question.