(pri)DEMON(th): The Sin of Empathy

Empathy has an interesting history, first appearing in 1908 as the German word Einfühlung, literally "in-feeling" and described the concept of projecting ones own imagined feelings and movements into objects, a concept which has since expanded to include "the emotional understanding of others’ feelings, sometimes describes a cognitive grasp of another’s thinking processes and at other times means acting in a caring manner to others." Because of the multifaceted use of this word "scientific studies of empathy now specify at the outset the type of empathy under examination." The original meaning is referred to as the aesthetic meaning and I think it has some great explanatory power. Perhaps as you read the word "in-feeling" you thought of incurvatus in se, this idea originally from Augustine and expanded on by Luther, of man being curved in on himself. We become so focused on ourselves we don't just look in on ourselves but we project ourselves on other objects. 

With those thoughts in mind, let's talk about the sin of empathy. While empathy in the sense of caring about others' feelings or being able to place yourself in others' situations has some positive use, it can become sin when empathy becomes the primary virtue that trumps all others. When empathy is placed above speaking the truth in love, it clearly is sin. Empathy is weaponized by placing the 'victim' as defined by intersectionality in the drivers' seat; the object of our empathy telling us how they should be empathized. This is something the LGBTQ+ has mastered. It would not be loving to not allow two consenting adults to express themselves in the privacy of their own bedroom becomes it would not be loving to not affirm a persons' chosen identity. Or as Chesterton put it, "mercy detached from justice becomes unmerciful." We can't detach forgiveness from repentance. We can't detach empathy from God's just laws. 

Within our synod, the sin of empathy has become apparent in several ways in the last year or so

- Our self-policing of language in the Honest Conversations leaders' guide

- The acceptance and use of preferred pronouns by some pastors

- The claim that attending a gay wedding is within the realm of Christian freedom

- Waiting for 'just the right time'  or only 'after lots and lots of love and lots and lots of gospel, [can you] talk to your LGBTQ+ friends who profess Christianity about their biblical sexuality'

- homosexual ideation vs. disgust at sin [1] [2] [3]

Often these things are couched in terms of hospitality. Genuine hospitality - opening up your home and breaking bread - is a good thing. But when, like empathy, we place that good thing above the more important things - the whole counsel of God, it becomes sin. 

The defense is sometimes made that these are in the realm of Christian freedom: that is, adiaphora. Ad Crucem News has an excellent article, The Adiaphoristic Goldilocks Zone, which I commend to your reading. It discusses several aspects of this argument. One point they make is that our Lutheran Confessions define two ways that illegitimate adiaphora are introduced: the first being oppression and violence, and the second being deceit and cunning. The argument from Christian freedom to sin, because empathy, is an example of the latter. They also make the excellent point that Lutheran identity cannot be reduced to the sacraments. It cannot be reduced to the Gospel in the narrow sense. Our Lutheran identity is confessing clearly the full counsel of God, which includes the proper use of law and gospel.

The law reveals the guilt of sin

and makes us conscience-stricken;

but then the gospel enters in

the sinful soul to quicken.

Come to the cross, trust Christ, and live;

the law no peace can ever give,

no comfort and no blessing.

The sin of empathy, then, is a form of antinomianism. 

The world may accuse us of lacking empathy if we don't acknowledge pronouns, if we don't attend gay weddings, if we use technically correct terms in place of euphemisms, and if we place Christ Crucified front and center in our witness. This is nothing new. While Satan's attacks have changed over the years (historically, men were persecuted over the second article of the creed; in our days it tends to be the first article), Jesus Christ remains our sure defense. And so we sing with Luther:

Destroy their counsels, Lord our God,
And smite them with an iron rod,
And let them fall into the snare
Which for Thy Christians they prepare.

So that at last they may perceive
That, Lord our God, Thou still dost live,
And dost deliver mightily
All those who put their trust in Thee.