Is Empathy a Sin? A Review of Joe Rigney's Book "The Sin of Empathy"

I have long heard the adage that one should never judge a book by its cover. It is supposed to teach us not to be quick to judge and base our whole opinion on something, typically metaphorically used about a person, without taking the time to understand a little deeper. The problem with this adage is that books have covers for a reason. They are given titles and artwork that are meant to catch the eye and encourage the customer to look deeper. So perhaps it would be better to say that we should not make a final judgment based on first impressions. I have passed over plenty of books simply because of the cover, and I have no desire to reevaluate them. Another adage worth considering in this context is the one that tells us that you never get a second chance at a first impression. Why bring this up in a book review, you might ask. It is because the book in question has quite a provocative title and cover, granting that the title is the real attention-grabbing element. It makes a striking first impression and compels us to make some judgments based on the cover. It is almost unthinkable in our day and age that someone would say that empathy could be sinful. After all, even non-Christians tend to recognize the golden rule to treat others the way you want to be treated, and who does not wish to be treated with empathy? I will confess that I was intrigued by the book's title. I have long held, and still believe that empathy is a good thing. To call something, especially something that is held out to be good by so many, sin is a bold claim. So what does Rigney have to tell us about The Sin of Empathy?

The Importance of Definitions

Any discussion on a topic like empathy should start with definitions. This is where Rigney starts. He lays out in clear, pastoral language what he means by empathy. He is not so much worried about the strict definition of the term since, as he points out, there is no real agreed-upon definition. Rather, Rigney is concerned with the term in its common usage. He states both in the introduction and the first chapter, "This book is not primarily interested in the "true" definition of empathy, but rather with its use and influence in our culture" (p. 21). There is a large part of me that balks at this idea. I am a firm believer in not giving up the dictionary. I believe that oftentimes, we lose the battle of the culture long before we ever engage because we fail to stand up and fight when words begin to take on a whole new meaning. The result is that we often end up talking past those who we want to confront with the truth because we are using the same works but have completely different meanings. That being said, I think what Rigney is doing here is good. He is engaging the culture in their own language and showing its issues. Throughout the book, he uses the term empathy in two senses. He states these two uses by saying, "First is simply as "emotion-sharing" and second the more negative use as "The sin of (untethered) empathy, which is the excessive and overpowering form of this passion" (p. 26). In the first sense, empathy is simply a common human emotion, being, on its own, neither good nor bad. It is simply part of the human experience. In the second, the main focus of the book, Rigney points out that empathy that is untethered or separated from truth can only be harmful.

What About the Negatives?

It is important to note a book's strengths and weaknesses when evaluating it. The problem, in this instance, is that I cannot seem to come up with any negatives. Do I wish he had gone a little deeper on some aspects? Almost certainly. But it is hard to call that a negative in this instance. An example of this comes in the first chapter, where Rigney engages with Brene Brown's views as they are portrayed in a widely viewed YouTube video. Only a single section, five short paragraphs, is dedicated to evaluating Brown's views. However, the evaluation is clear and concise. It leaves the reader with the option to test for themselves. In essence, I want the book to be more exhaustive than it is. Here, I have to admit my own differences from most readers. I love long books. I have no problem dedicating 20-30 hours to reading through a good book. At the same time, I must recognize that the size of such a book, regardless of the content, is off-putting to many. The size of Rigney's book, only 160 pages if you do not include the appendices, makes it accessible to more readers.

Why it is Worth Your Time

Here is where I attempt to make an argument for why you should read the book yourself. There are two parts to my argument. The first is one that I want to make in any review I give. That is to not simply take my word for it. I thoroughly enjoyed the book, having read through it twice now, and was challenged by it. But my judgment is not final on what is worth your time. That being said, there are some reasons why I believe that it would indeed be worth your time. Rigney is addressing an issue that is at the heart of our witness to the world around us. A trap that we can so easily fall into. As a Christian, I am called to care for the people around me. After all, James tells us that pure religion is to care for the widow and the orphan. We are to weep with those who weep and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Each one of these commands, and many others, calls us to care for the hurting people around us. The danger comes when we untether that need to help people from the truth. In chapter 4 discusses the complexity of living through the series of conflicts surrounding issues such as race, sexuality, and abuse. After outlining some of the realities and problems we face, Rigney asks some pointed questions that are worth quoting in full.

In light of all this, what should we do? First, we ought to look at the case of characters living beneath the progressive gaze and find ourselves. Have we compromised under pressure? Have our empathy and zeal led us astray? Have we avoided conflict to keep a false peace? Have we had hireling moments? Have we been steered? Have we steered others? (p.100).

I think this is a good summary of how the book operates. Certainly, Rigney offers answers to how we should respond to the sin of untethered empathy, but not in absolute terms. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to how we should respond to hurting people. But in our desire to help and comfort the hurting people around us, we must keep hold of the truth. Our desire to help must not lead us into sin. As Rigney states, "Our sympathy, if it is to remain faithful, must be anchored to what is true and good" (p. 141).

I recommend you pick up a copy of this book and read it. Even if you disagree with his conclusions, we need to be challenged in how we think about caring for people. We need more people like Joe Rigney who are willing to stand up for the truth while still calling for compassion and sympathy. You cannot truly have the one without the other.

Soli Deo Gloria