"The Sin of Empathy" by Joe Rigney

Sometimes It's Hard to Review a Book

I rarely read a book I really dislike. I try to read a variety of books, not necessarily ones I always agree with completely, but this book was especially challenging. I struggled to finish it. Working in social justice circles, among the materially poor and vulnerable, this was hard on my conscience. But I ploughed through for the sake of integrity, and here is my review. A few books have been written recently on this topic of empathy being nefarious, but I think this is the only one I will read.

• A Distorted Definition of Empathy

  The premise of the book is that empathy is bad. But that is based on a false definition of empathy. The author assumes empathy means you are soft on people and identify with their feelings to the point that you cannot have an objective outlook. In contrast, he says that compassion is good because it allows a person to keep a distance. He goes on and on about the dangers of empathy, but his definition of empathy is flawed from the start.

  It is possible to feel with people and walk in their shoes whilst still maintaining good boundaries and a healthy perspective. Many of us do that on a daily basis. I would hope to be in that number.

  On p.11, he writes that “empathy is a suspension of judgment”. I strongly disagree. He also says that empathy is a lack of rational thinking. A particularly sad statement is when he assumes that victims of abuse exaggerate. I often hear that also, but that could not be further from the truth. In fact, if anything, victims of abuse are usually reluctant to tell the full facts out of shame and trauma. He also compares victims to soccer players who exaggerate their pain on the sports field. How insulting and callous! The book sends the message that sensitivity is weakness.

• Binary Thinking

  The author often refers to “The Truth” but that is his version of the truth. He also warns against “The World”, which is typical of evangelical narrative. The author writes in binary terms mostly. There is an “us-vs-them” tone to the book.

• Savior Complex

  This is something many Western white people fall into. They think they can save the world. The old colonial mindset is still very much alive. Joe Rigney claims that pity is good. He disregards empathy (feeling for and with others), but he loves the concept of pity, which is very condescending and paternalistic. He is very uninformed about the culture of aid work in recent years. Supporting our neighbors in need in a respectful, reciprocal way is an alien concept to him. He sees himself as a savior, a white knight in shining armor coming to the rescue of weaker people. That is not a culturally respectful narrative. There needs to be mutual learning, which does not seem to be part of this author’s world.

• Violence is Necessary

  One of the most shocking aspects of the book is its advocacy for violence. The author quotes the Old Testament and writes that “sometimes pity and compassion are strictly forbidden”. That is a dangerous and slippery road. On p.81, he refers to specific examples of violence in the Bible as good things.

• No Third Party Oversight

  On p.60, Joe Rigney makes fun of third-party investigations. At a time when the church faces so many scandals, objective third-party oversight is so important, but of course, that would mean opening the church up to real scrutiny, and who in the evangelical world wants that?

  I have personal experience of this, as I have often begged for neutral third-party investigations by organizations such as GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment), only for my appeals to fall on deaf ears. If we have nothing to hide, why be reluctant?

• Homophobia and Transphobia

  The author uses particularly derogatory language when addressing the LGBTQ community. He displays a level of callousness which is frankly shocking. On p. 91, he describes trans people as “Frankenstein”. Shameful!

• Misogyny

  Joe Rigney reserves his most scathing words for feminism. The vitriol he bestows on women is unmatched. He also comes across as racist, which, of course, is not surprising, considering his level of general prejudice.

  He devotes a whole chapter to feminism, 24 pages out of 139! He has a bone to pick! He derides women as being the first to adopt empathy, therefore making them weak: “The same impulse that leads a woman to move toward the hurting with comfort and welcome becomes a major liability when it comes to guarding the doctrine and worship of the church.” Oh dear… Jesus has left the building.

• Fear-Mongering

  We are now entering into Christian Nationalism. Fear-mongering is one of its hallmarks. On p. 36, he quotes, “The emotional fusion that lurks beneath modern appeals to empathy is far more destructive than lack of concern or understanding.” Yikes!

  Again on p. 45, “As with mercy, so with empathy. Untethered from justice and the moral law and planted in the sentimental marshlands of humanitarianism (or critical theory), empathy becomes a man-eating weed, devouring families, relationships, even churches and ministries.” This is extremely manipulative discourse, and it is rooted in baseless assumptions, but if said with enough confidence, people fall prey to this kind of narrative.

• Political Bias

  It is unusual for me to read religious books that are so obviously biased politically. Joe Rigney is clearly right-wing and makes no bones about it. In one fell swoop, he condemns CRT, anything he deems “progressive”, “woke” (he uses that word a lot), cultural marxism, social justice, the “coastal elites who inhabit urban centers”, “the left”, etc.

  On p.53, he makes the following assumption, “Under the progressive gaze, progressive values and concerns were normalized and taken to be the default operating system for society.” I disagree with that. The author makes a lot of assumptions in his book without quoting any particular sources of information or personal experiences.

  His unfounded opinions make it difficult to trust anything he says, such as, “But in American culture in the twenty-first century, it is the progressive gaze that poses the greatest threat to Christian faithfulness. Given the pervasiveness of progressive ideology in Big Government, Big Business, Big Tech, Big Education, Big Sports, and Big Media, the primary pressure on Christians is from the left.” What??? I am not even sure who he is referring to when he says “the Big so-and-so”.

• Conclusion

  All in all, the book was hard to read and very disappointing in terms of credibility. This man seems afraid of his own emotions. We are not in danger of too much empathy; in fact, quite the opposite. The book seems to be written by someone who has not been personally involved in serving others. Not once does he share his personal experiences, and that always makes me suspicious. He also never shares about lessons learned. The book comes across as arrogant and lacks humility and curiosity.

  The author makes a lot of assumptions that show he is not in the trenches. He derides spiritual abuse in a way that shows that he has not spoken to survivors. He minimizes trauma in a very callous way.

  It looks like he writes from within the confines of his comfortable office. He also talks about “studies” without providing references, which is unprofessional and discredits his opinions.

  He comes across as a privileged white man who has very little interest in finding out more beyond his own assumptions. Without curiosity, there can be very little growth.