101 flavors of condemnation

Jesus didn't come into the world to "condemn the world." But apparently some of the rest of us did.

AI image created by Google Gemini (pretty amazing - you should try it)

I ran across a social media post this week from a friend from years ago. At the time we knew her, this woman got frustrated with her faith community and began posting sweeping, fierce accusations against the motives and character of the entire institution.

Eight years later, my heart sank to see her still doing the same thing. I wonder, does the anger ever get old? Does she ever feel wearied of a life full of so much condemnation of others she’s never met?

In many popular ideologies today—the kind that dominate podcasts and social media, especially TikTok—they always sound very smart and enlightened. But dig a little deeper and you’ll often find unvarnished resentment at the core: an enmity that sets people against each other fundamentally.

The most common form of condemnation, of course, is individually directed: the kind we see showing up in so many families (“That spouse of mine is the reason I’m unhappy … that child of mine … that parent of mine … that sibling … that neighbor … that roommate … that coworker.”)

No book I’ve read better gets at the heart of this kind of personal resentment and how to be free of it than Bonds that Make Us Free (see this talk by the author).

But individual-level condemnation is tame compared with the more sweeping, broad-based variety taking hold of so many American hearts and minds.

Group-based condemnations

When was the last time you saw or heard:

• Conservatives condemning “hypocritical, dangerous” liberals—and liberals dishing out the same to their country’s benighted conservatives.*

• Women condemning men generally, and many men now doing the same to women as a whole.

• White folks casting minorities or immigrants as threats, contrasted with Black Lives Matter-styled cynical narratives about pervasive “white privilege” everywhere you look.

• Sexual and gender minorities also tend to condemn anyone not “allied” with popular ways of approaching LGBT issues. And increasingly, a subset of that latter group more vocally and forcefully condemns sexual minorities too (especially those identifying as “trans.”)

• Then, there are non-religious folks condemning believers, and believers often painting atheists and agnostics with malevolent-toned broad-brush strokes.

• And, of course, the poor are prone (even without Marx in their ear) to condemn those with wealth or “elite status” as inherently selfish and corrupt, while the wealthy have plenty to say about lazy commoners.

There are official labels for all of this, from hyper-partisanship and Marxism (or “cultural Marxism”) to toxic feminism and toxic masculinity. There’s also anti-religious bigotry and anti-atheism (atheistophobia), along with garden-variety bigotry, and queer liberation ideologies or “pride culture.”

Whatever other virtues and enlightened sentiments these ideologies might share, in practice, every one of them effectively turns entire groups against each other: men against women, rich against poor, white against black, Reds vs. Blues, secular vs. religious, etc.

Institution-wide condemnation

Another form of condemnation brands entire institutions as wholly corrupt and unworthy of respect and trust. That includes wholesale condemnations of:

• The university system in America as largely corrupting and radicalizing in its impact.

• Newspapers and media outlets as entirely agenda-driven, and impossible to trust—along with every politician.

• The modern healthcare system as “wholly corrupt” and “really wanting to keep us all sick!”

• Any and all government as useless at best, and destructive and oppressive at worst.

• Organized religion as “really only about power, and money and control.”

• Any organization financially prospering—whether businesses or churches—as corrupt and self-serving.

My friend Ben Pacini wrote in Deseret News recently about “Super Distrusters” who are defined as people with “no faith” in at least three of five core institutions of society.

Notice how all these flavors of condemnation, importantly, are packaged in ways that make them appear virtuous.

Cloaked in nobility

When was the last time you saw someone say anything fully condemning, prefaced by something like: “now, what I’m about to say (about that individual or group or institution) is going to sound very sweeping; that’s because I have so much resentment that the only thing I can see about this is purely negative.”

No way. Not going to happen. That would be a little embarrassing for anyone to admit. Far better to wrap all that harshness in a prettier package—with some kind of sophisticated, moralistic language to back it up.

And, in fact, virtually every one of these sweeping condemnations referenced above are, indeed, typically wrapped in language that sounds incredibly noble and lofty:

• Condemnations of our political opposite are cast as “fighting for democracy” or “standing up against tyranny” or “loving the country.”

• Liberal condemnations against anyone hesitant to embrace pride culture is cast as “standing up against hate” or “fighting bigotry,” while blanket condemnations of the gay community are cast as “standing up for morality” or “defending the family.”

• Condemnations of men as a whole are positioned as brave attempts to “confront sexism” or “dismantle patriarchy,” with condemnations of advocates for greater female empowerment are rationalized as standing up to “toxic feminism” with “anti-male bias.”

• Condemnations of a particular faith are positioned as “brave truth-telling” with a kind of martyr’s “integrity,” some of whom also position themselves as ceaseless victims of past religious dogma.

What’s important here is how sophisticated-sounding and morally superior these explanations sound. Rather than admit to being consumed by resentment and grievance, the condemner positions himself or herself most often as a courageous truth-teller, who is simultaneously publicizing a brave exposé, and standing up to the (despicable) system.

Any subsequent push-back or resistance is further cast as persecution or expected consequences for the courage to raise their voices for truth, justice, etc.

But isn’t condemnation sometimes deserved?

In fairness, some people and practices certainly do deserve condemnation. Evil is real. And when it shows up, we should say something and do something about it.

Yet it was Jesus Christ himself—one with more authority than most to actually confront evil—who famously told Nicodemus that God didn’t send Him into the world “to condemn the world,” but instead, to save it!

If that was Christ’s focus, wouldn’t it be strange of our personal focus became condemnation more than salvation?

Yes, that ultimate salvation will one day include a “day of vengeance,” something that the prophet Isaiah repeatedly warned about. That event will, I believe, center on bringing horrifying evil to justice (such as abuse and other violence): all that is most worthy of condemnation.

Perhaps some institutions, groups and individuals merit the same kind of vociferous condemnation. But how can we be sure? And who gets to decide?

Compared with objective evil, so many of the examples referenced above are debatable, with competing arguments and theoretical frameworks at odds. For instance, various group-level transgressions by “men” or “feminists” or “white people” require a great deal of theoretical, structural explanation and words that end in “-ism” to make any sense of the concerns.

That might mean more discussion is needed, rather than just more resentment.

The alternative to condemnation

The alternative to condemnation, by the way, is not resignation or pretending everything is all okay (with our family members, our faith, our government, our world, or different groups in the world).

Rather, it’s believing in the redemptive potential of all the above. Isn’t this, again, the heart of what Christ taught and offered the world? For instance:

• Sure, there are serious issues with American universities. But have you ever experienced the beauty of students or scholars grappling with conflicting ideas in pursuit of truth?

• Likewise, we all know the American medical system has some major issues. But have you ever experienced loving attention from a (mainstream) nurse or doctor doing everything they can to alleviate your pain?

• Absolutely, various religious communities grapple with their own failings, weaknesses and sin. But have you not also witnessed equal measures of their grace, compassion and virtue?

I personally love how basic Christian teaching levels the playing field: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Translation: We all struggle. We all fall short. We all need grace (that includes all individuals, all groups, and all institutions).

The alternative to condemnation, therefore, isn’t to close our eyes and pretend “all is well.” Rather, while keeping our eyes wide open, this means prioritizing the redemptive love of the Living God who shows all of us—starting with our own heartaches—how Heaven can “make all things new.”

Feeling that grace for ourselves then allows us to say, “yes, the world is a mess—most of us are too. But there’s incredible potential in all of this (including you) that I can see. And I want to be a builder that works to help everything and everyone around me find more of that.”

Sweetness chased away

Why does any of this matter?

First of all, because there’s a painful drag that constant anger and resentment brings into life. When that burden becomes so omnipresent, however, I think many people stop realizing they’re carrying an extra load.

But it’s more than that. There’s also a joy that comes from being able to extend grace to others in their weakness. And being able to see truth showing up in many different places, and appreciate the beauty and goodness in people of many backgrounds.

In my experience, there’s also a tangible relief in being able to grant that most people are well-intentioned. They really are “doing the best they can” (including those engaged in problematic practices or holding views of how the world should operate that we find wrong, and even repulsive).

This is what people miss when their hearts and mind are dominated by some form of condemnation. But I believe the consequences go far beyond short-term well-being.

Progress stopped

The word “condemnation” is most often used in a Christian context to refer to an unhappy state in relation to God where one is “damned” (something our faith community defines as being “stopped in one’s progress”).

Doesn’t this definition line up with the psychology of condemnation? People in a state fixated on the mistakes of others struggle to grow themselves. They learn a lot less!

For me, this reveals another way to understand that word “condemnation.” When you find yourself in a “state of condemnation” towards another individual, group or institution, it becomes very difficult to hear God’s voice and grow as the person you need to be.

A cloud hangs over you. And it’s harder to see so much of the light God infuses into the world and people all around you.

As Jesus told Nicodemus, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light.”

In that constricted place, something about the flaws, the mistakes, the failings, and the wrong has captured our attention more than the virtues, the triumphs, the graces, the nobility of what’s going on around us.

In that place, it’s pretty darn hard to look around and see anything good or beautiful anymore—let alone become better ourselves.

Maybe Jesus was on to something in pleading with us to “judge not.” And maybe Paul really had good reason to plead for us to “think no evil.”

If nothing else, our hearts need the permission to turn away from the real evil that is at work around us. And focus our minds on something far better.

Thank Heavens for that.

---

*Note: One day I’m convinced we will look back on political hatred with shame, like we now do with racial hatred.