Books & Videos whose “ideas” are discussed in this here post:
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Note: I don’t expect anyone here to actually read these books and watch all these videos unless you’re really interested. I linked to them to demonstrate that even if many Christians are unaware there is a conversation going on amongst Evangelicals. There’s more – much more. These are merely the chief “influencers.”
As I’ve pointed out before the future of the church in America as it loses it’s privileged place in our culture is a subject of ongoing interest to me. Over the last five years or so I’ve noticed the growth of an interesting topic of conversation among Evangelicals. The so-called Culture Wars never cease but they often assume strange shapes. Why would Evangelicals become consumed by the subject of “Empathy?”
First of all what do we mean by the word, “empathy?” (It’s interesting how often these folks attacking the concept fail to really define what it is they’re attacking.) How is “empathy” distinguished from its cousin, “sympathy?”
Sympathy means feeling compassion or pity for another’s suffering. It retains a distance between subject and object. Empathy means to identify with another’s suffering and in some sense to share it. It compresses the distance between subject and object, even in some circumstances to eliminate it.
Sympathy says: I am sad that you are sad.
Empathy says: I share your sadness.
Now this distinction is certainly the stuff of moral philosophy but why does it so obsess Christians? Aren’t these feelings their very bread and butter (or would that be wine)? I mean, John 3:16, right? Philippians 2, right?
Weeelll…no.
Consequent to this viewpoint there flows a heavy emphasis on structure and order. Calvinists rely heavily on Augustine’s idea of the Ordo Amoris (the right ordering of affections). God and His law must always reign supreme. Empathy undermines this order by allowing emotional distress to subvert God’s moral law. Primacy shifts to the one who suffers.
In the video I linked to above with the conversation between Doug Wilson and Joe Rigney they elaborated on the value of the distinction between sympathy and empathy. That distance that sympathy allows you to “help” someone while standing firmly on the solid rock of Biblical truth, whereas empathy demands that you descend to the depths with them. Calvinism values intellectual distance, nonporous boundaries, and, of course(!), pastoral authority. The idea of abandoning your objective platform to “inhabit” another person’s subjective reality is viewed by these theologians as a dangerous surrender. Calvinism categorizes the world into absolute binaries: the Elect vs. the Reprobate. This framework allows believers to “steel their hearts” against sin and protect orthodox doctrine.
Now I don’t believe in “guilt by association” but it is interesting that our modern Christian Nationalist movement also draws heavily from this well of thought.
But what really astounds this ex-Christian is how utterly alien to the original sense of the Christian mission this is. I would love to hear one of these folks explicate chapter two of Paul’s letter to the Philippians. Isn’t it precisely what Jesus did, to enter into the life of the human, to know all, endure all, so that he could transcend all? Paul explicitly tells us we should do as Christ did. Empty ourselves and take the form of the servant, right? I’m sure the Calvinists have an answer that satisfies themselves.
Lenin is reported to have said that he could not listen to Beethoven because the music made him want to be nice to people and sometimes you couldn’t be nice. Sometimes it is necessary to bash heads to get things done. If you entered into emotional relationship with the Amalekites how could you cut the throats of their children?
But what class of human psychology automatically excludes empathy and identification with others?
Let me conclude by submitting for your consideration a new figure. The Christian Psychopath. A Christian who judges and condemns but cannot relate. A Christian who rejects love for duty and command. A Christian who empties himself, not of divinity, but of humanity. A psychopath worshipping a psychopath.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)