Catholic Fatherhood, growing in geekiness, holiness and intelligence.

kc0lex (Matthew). Get yours at

Monday, November 26, 2007

WWJD? Ummmm, maybe not! ! !

One of the worst fads to come out of Christianity is the marketing of a simple question that people now ask to figure out what they should do when faced with a challenge of how they are to act. WWJD, What Would Jesus Do? Honestly, while the answer may be interesting, insightful or maybe even beneficial I know it's the wrong question to ask.

First, let's take a look at what the answers to the question could be:

  1. Forgiving sins of others (pretty sure this is reserved to God)
  2. Feeding the Poor (yes, this is a good one)
  3. Loving our neighbor (again, just an awesome thing to do)
  4. Dividing households
  5. Setting the earth ablaze
  6. Throwing tables over and driving people out of the room with a whip

The main problem that I have with the question, WWJD, is that we are not Jesus, we are not God and we should not have the attitude that we should act as God acts. A better question would be "Jesus, What do You Want Me to Do?" Yeah, I understand that it isn't as fashionable, catchy and probably wouldn't make lots of money if you tried to market it. Marketing and money aren't what life is all about.

I do believe we should imitate Christ in His humanity and humble ourself to the will of the Father, no to be like him but because He asked us to take up our cross and follow Him. As the Lord's prayer, where Jesus taught us to pray, Thy will be done, not My will be done.

The biggest reason we must submit to God and His will is that we are not able to read hearts. We should do what Christ wants of us and not what we think Christ would do.

Let Go
Let God

Under the Mercy,

Matthew S

1 comment:

Paul said...

#6 is the one that would most lock up the brain of the average WWJD-type, I think. As someone observed several years ago, when asking that question, be sure to remember that the answer sometimes is "wig out and knock over tables." Perhaps not theologically precise, but it gets the point across. Your critique, of course, is point on.