When empathy becomes a “sin,” you know the spell of patriarchy is cracking.
This isn’t theology—it’s damage control disguised as doctrine. The fearful clinging of men who confuse compassion with compromise, and authority with divine right.
Rigney doesn’t fear manipulation. He fears softness. He fears the feminine. He fears the mirror of other people’s pain because it threatens the illusion that his God only speaks through pulpits, not wounds.
But the gospel was never about insulating the righteous from emotion. It was about incarnation—God becoming vulnerable flesh.
Jesus didn’t come with one foot in and one foot out. He wept. He touched lepers. He broke for us.
The sin isn’t empathy. The sin is pretending you can love without it.
Elon Musk may have contributed to the idea that empathy is bad in a Joe Rogan podcast on Feb 28. “We’ve got civilizational suicidal empathy going on…”.
There is a more dangerous spin to demonizing “empathy” in that their practical solution is to substitute pure cruelty to supposedly save (their) society.
This book came out on February 25th, which is about the same time as that podcast. I don't know how the conversation actually got started. I assume that the conversation in fundamentalist circles got a certain amount of legs well before the actual publishing of the book. Given Project 2025 and how it's agenda is being promoted by the presidency, I can certainly see the two as being related.
Thanks for your thoughtful reflections on empathy as sin! The way vocabularies are getting reconstructed and turned upside down it gets so confusing, which is the intent, I’m sure.
You wrote “ … the new feminist organizational power dynamic, this breaking off of “power-with” from “power-over”. “
But is “power-with” a feminist power dynamic? Maybe what the feminists have set forth is a rediscovered “person-honoring” power dynamic, one that existed before The Fall, in The Garden, before death (“depersonalization,” “dehumanization”) was introduced on the scene.
I don't think of the Fall as a literal event in history. I see it as myth that helped the ancient Hebrews understand the human condition. So, I don't see this as a rediscovery.
That said, I don't know to what extent that story with it's implications about power (a portrayal of Adam and Eve as partners) influenced them (or those earlier in the process of developing the notion). It's safe to say that Christian theology did influence social agendas in the 1800s and early 1900s. So, it's possible that the pre-Fall vision influenced the feminist vision. But, beyond saying "it's possible", I can't say more.
Again, good question. I think this might be a potential topic for further research if there is an historian interested in such things.
Empathy as a sin was mentioned in the sermon yesterday. I am part of a missional church and the reaction was what a ridiculous suggestion. Empathy is Christ
This reminded me of a lesson taught in Stephen Ministry training. The minister hangs onto a tree (God/faith/truth) and leans in and holds the hand of the person who is in the mud pit (crisis). We teach reaching out and support but do not slide into the mud pit with them.
The irony, of course, is that Jesus was the ultimate empath: He literally incarnated, lived, suffered, enjoyed, ate, drank, died and resurrected in order to completely be one with humanity. The only time He was ever angry and punishing towards humans was with the fundamentalists of His day, the Pharisees and Sadducees, because of the hardness of their hearts and their extreme bias against empathy / sympathy. Part of the problem of fundamentalist Christianity today is that they long ago abandoned Jesus, the real Jesus of the Gospels, in favor of an Old Testament punishing God who would keep people in line through fear and punishment, a God who no one could ever please or placate. And they want to keep it that way, because it's all about the power (and the money), just the way it was back in the first century AD. It's blasphemy all the way...
I believe there are theologies out there that portray the Incarnation as changing God because God was basically empathizing with humanity in Christ. So, yeah, the power of empathy to change everything is part of the whole point of the cross for many.
And I read the issue of the Pharisees pretty much the same way you do. It's not about who they were as pharisees, it was about how they were reading and using the sacred texts.
When empathy becomes a “sin,” you know the spell of patriarchy is cracking.
This isn’t theology—it’s damage control disguised as doctrine. The fearful clinging of men who confuse compassion with compromise, and authority with divine right.
Rigney doesn’t fear manipulation. He fears softness. He fears the feminine. He fears the mirror of other people’s pain because it threatens the illusion that his God only speaks through pulpits, not wounds.
But the gospel was never about insulating the righteous from emotion. It was about incarnation—God becoming vulnerable flesh.
Jesus didn’t come with one foot in and one foot out. He wept. He touched lepers. He broke for us.
The sin isn’t empathy. The sin is pretending you can love without it.
"The sin isn’t empathy. The sin is pretending you can love without it."
Well said!
Elon Musk may have contributed to the idea that empathy is bad in a Joe Rogan podcast on Feb 28. “We’ve got civilizational suicidal empathy going on…”.
There is a more dangerous spin to demonizing “empathy” in that their practical solution is to substitute pure cruelty to supposedly save (their) society.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/03/05/politics/elon-musk-rogan-interview-empathy-doge
This book came out on February 25th, which is about the same time as that podcast. I don't know how the conversation actually got started. I assume that the conversation in fundamentalist circles got a certain amount of legs well before the actual publishing of the book. Given Project 2025 and how it's agenda is being promoted by the presidency, I can certainly see the two as being related.
Thanks for your thoughtful reflections on empathy as sin! The way vocabularies are getting reconstructed and turned upside down it gets so confusing, which is the intent, I’m sure.
In the interview he does talk about controlling the meaning of language, so I suspect you're right.
Thank you for acknowledging the working definition of manhood all centers on the toxic version of it.
You're welcome. We need to move beyond it to a psychologically and socially healthy understanding of manhood.
You wrote “ … the new feminist organizational power dynamic, this breaking off of “power-with” from “power-over”. “
But is “power-with” a feminist power dynamic? Maybe what the feminists have set forth is a rediscovered “person-honoring” power dynamic, one that existed before The Fall, in The Garden, before death (“depersonalization,” “dehumanization”) was introduced on the scene.
Thank you for your reply. That's a good question.
I don't think of the Fall as a literal event in history. I see it as myth that helped the ancient Hebrews understand the human condition. So, I don't see this as a rediscovery.
That said, I don't know to what extent that story with it's implications about power (a portrayal of Adam and Eve as partners) influenced them (or those earlier in the process of developing the notion). It's safe to say that Christian theology did influence social agendas in the 1800s and early 1900s. So, it's possible that the pre-Fall vision influenced the feminist vision. But, beyond saying "it's possible", I can't say more.
Again, good question. I think this might be a potential topic for further research if there is an historian interested in such things.
Empathy as a sin was mentioned in the sermon yesterday. I am part of a missional church and the reaction was what a ridiculous suggestion. Empathy is Christ
Ridiculous indeed!
This reminded me of a lesson taught in Stephen Ministry training. The minister hangs onto a tree (God/faith/truth) and leans in and holds the hand of the person who is in the mud pit (crisis). We teach reaching out and support but do not slide into the mud pit with them.
I love Steven Ministry training! That's a great analogy.
The irony, of course, is that Jesus was the ultimate empath: He literally incarnated, lived, suffered, enjoyed, ate, drank, died and resurrected in order to completely be one with humanity. The only time He was ever angry and punishing towards humans was with the fundamentalists of His day, the Pharisees and Sadducees, because of the hardness of their hearts and their extreme bias against empathy / sympathy. Part of the problem of fundamentalist Christianity today is that they long ago abandoned Jesus, the real Jesus of the Gospels, in favor of an Old Testament punishing God who would keep people in line through fear and punishment, a God who no one could ever please or placate. And they want to keep it that way, because it's all about the power (and the money), just the way it was back in the first century AD. It's blasphemy all the way...
I believe there are theologies out there that portray the Incarnation as changing God because God was basically empathizing with humanity in Christ. So, yeah, the power of empathy to change everything is part of the whole point of the cross for many.
And I read the issue of the Pharisees pretty much the same way you do. It's not about who they were as pharisees, it was about how they were reading and using the sacred texts.