Following more than fifty years of Christian ministry, I heard this phrase for the first time only a day or two ago. As a somewhat amateur confessor long familiar with the seven popular labels for sin (plus some extras), I was intrigued to see how or where empathy might fit in terms of the original meaning of sin, i.e. “missing the mark.”
After all, every virtue has its corresponding vice.
It seems to have emerged from objections to Bishop Mariann Budde’s recent plea for mercy for those who are vulnerable to the proposed execution of the 47th President’s Executive Orders.
One needs to sift through the backlash to the Bishop’s request, dividing those protests that cannot abide any implied criticism of a freshly minted president from those that genuinely object to empathy as a worthwhile virtue.
My brief research reveals the following points and counterpoints about empathy being considered sinful:
The term “sin of empathy” doesn’t have a well-documented origin or a specific date when it was first coined. However, the idea gained attention in recent years, particularly in discussions among some Christian communities. For example, Joe Rigney, president of Bethlehem College and Seminary, discussed this idea in 2019, drawing on C.S. Lewis’s “The Screwtape Letters” to argue that empathy can be seen as sinful because it involves sharing in another person’s suffering rather than helping them from a position of strength.
It’s a relatively modern term used in theological and philosophical debates rather than an ancient concept.
Empathy vs. Justice: Empathy can be seen as a weakness or manipulation when it conflicts with strict justice. Some believe too much empathy undermines justice and truth. This is similar to how the religious leaders accused Jesus of breaking Sabbath laws by showing compassion. True justice is not just about enforcing laws, but understanding the circumstances and experiences of individuals. Empathy allows us to see beyond the surface and consider the context of actions, leading to more compassionate and fair judgments.
Gender Dynamics: Empathy is sometimes labeled as too feministic, seen as soft and nurturing, in contrast to the masculine trait of enforcing justice. Labeling empathy as overly feministic and contrasting it with a masculine concept of justice is misguided. Mercy and justice are not confined to gender roles. Throughout history, both men and women have demonstrated empathy and justice. Biblical figures like David and Deborah exemplify that tenderness and strength can coexist, regardless of gender.
Manipulation: Some see empathy as a tool to manipulate decisions through emotions rather than logic. True empathy, however, is genuine and selfless, allowing one to understand another’s experience. There is no room for ego, deceit or ulterior motives. It is only possible through a sound balance of heart and mind.
Historical and Religious Context: The “sin of empathy” idea suggests that showing too much empathy fails to uphold strict religious or moral laws. This ignores the core teachings of many religious traditions. Jesus consistently demonstrated empathy and compassion, even when it conflicted with strict interpretations of the law. This approach emphasizes the spirit of the law, which values love and mercy above rigid adherence to rules.
Balancing Empathy and Justice: Critics argue for a balance between empathy and justice, but this does not make empathy a “sin.” Empathy is a crucial component of a just society. It ensures that justice is tempered with compassion and understanding. A balanced approach recognizes that empathy and justice are not mutually exclusive but work together to create a fair and humane society.
So, is empathy sinful, the Achilles heel of bleeding hearts?
Let’s move beyond “Yeah, Nah!” to a resounding “No!”
Let’s celebrate empathy as a vital aspect of human interaction that enriches our understanding and application of justice. True justice is rooted in compassion, and empathy is a powerful force that drives us to be more understanding, caring, and fair.
Wondering Pilgrim 