ONE PERSON’S MEAT IS ANOTHER’S POISON
Cooke’s-Portsmouth United Church
August 23, 2015
John 6:56-69
The story is told of a young theological student who had to preach his first sermon in front of his
professor and class. He was intentional in putting together a rather nicely constructed sermon
that reflected Biblical scholarship; had a feel-good balance to it with good illustrations and a
well- rounded conclusion. The hour to present arrived and with fear and trembling he started. His
confidence began to grow as he continued because he could see the students nodding in
agreement as he made each point. By the time he had finished he was secretly beginning to think
he had aced it. He was not quite ready for the Professor’s comment at the end. The Professor
turned to the class and asked: “Was there anything in that sermon that would have got Jesus
crucified if he had been the one delivering it?”
Perhaps the question should have been rephrased to match Jesus’ question to his disciples in this
morning’s reading from John’s gospel. “Does this offend you?” (From a sermon preached by Bill
Peddie).
As much as I read this text and did NOT want to reflect upon it with you this morning, it holds
an implicit truth that most preachers and public servants are keenly aware of: do not speak words
that your hearers do not want to hear.
Do not offend. Tell them what they want to hear and in a voice that is neither too passionate or
dull, with words that neither threaten nor cajole, strike a balance between theological base and
1
application and make sure that everyone goes home happy. To that end I have struggled with
sermons that I fretted were too deep and may be too confusing to follow. Conversely I worry by
times that my reflections are not deep enough; such that hearers may decide to attend another
service to get deeper sustenance upon which to chew. This is a voluntary organization and
anyone can leave at any time so we try never to rock the boat. Don’t offend or disappoint! Be
aware of boundaries. Don’t speak words that are difficult to understand or distasteful.
Clearly we are reminded in this text from John’s gospel that it was no different for Jesus.
People clamored after him when he was dispensing bread without limit and working feats of
miraculous healing. His words sat easy when he was affirming the marginalized and perhaps
even taking issue with the religious elite and authority that broke the backs of the faithful. But as
soon as he pushed the boundaries a little bit and demanded an intimate and incarnational
relationship between his followers and himself, then the masses abandoned the man and his
message. The message became shocking and distasteful. One person’s meat is another person’s
poison.
In first century Palestine, Pagans might eat flesh with blood but not the children of God and so
those who could not comprehend the message of Jesus beyond literalism walked away. They
answered the rhetorical question of Jesus with their feet. And when Jesus was left with his
twelve disciples he asks them if they too wanted to extricate themselves. “Do you wish also to go
away?” And while they stayed staunch and supportive for the moment, the day did come when
one betrayed; one denied and all ran away and hid.
2
It has never been easy to be a disciple and it has never been easy to be an effective leader or
messiah. The day invariably comes when the diet of the hearer needs to change from
metaphorical milk and Pablum to meat. There are challenging issues and concepts that are not to
be shunned in the name of religion or faith. The time comes when we all must listen to that
which we would rather not hear, not because it necessarily offends, but because it is difficult to
get our heads and hearts around. It is much easier to walk away and not have to try and unravel
the puzzle.
I have been mildly curious about the Mike Duffy trial that has been ongoing for months in our
national history. When the story first broke about inappropriate billing and spending I thought
that it was highly ironic. The defense of the disgraced senators is that the rules on claimable
housing and expenses is not very clear. Given that it is the mandate of the Canadian Senate to
give legislation “sober second thought” I wondered how some ever ascended to such a lucrative
position.
If they cannot discern the difference between honest and fraudulent expenses, why should we
assume that they can decipher and discern legislation? More than “who knew what and when” I
make the assumption that the whole truth will never be uncovered and it will only add to the
cynicism that many already feel about politics.
Why bother to cast a ballot when the good of the one rather than the needs of the many is the
prevailing attitude? What difference does an election make? Is there an honest leader in the race
who will navigate the country through these challenging times of recession, unemployment,
terrorist threat and global bankruptcy? Will talk of scandal and cover up make any kind of an
impact on the outcome? I suppose that time will tell whether truth will be revealed and at what
3
cost, but the seeds of cynicism are taking root; we come to expect corruption in politics and pay
little or no attention. We dismiss the controversy with a wave and walk away disgusted and
disappointed. More than who knew what and when I am most curious about if the controversy
will impact negatively on voter turnout. I suppose the converse is also possible: people may be
so disgusted with the controversy that there may be a protest vote. Let us not forget that Jesus
was clamored after by times and shunned at other times. “Do you also wish to go away?”
This is the fifth Sunday in a row that the lectionary has used the metaphor of bread. I can be
honest with you and share that I am tired of thinking about it and tired of preaching about it; but
that is precisely the point that John is trying to make. While bread is not specifically referenced
in the scripture for this morning, it follows a teaching about living bread come down from
heaven. And like those original followers I am growing tired of the metaphor. In a sermon titled
Looking for God, David Lose has written: note that St. John calls these folks not simply “the
crowds,” as in earlier passages, but rather “disciples.” The people in today’s reading who now
desert Jesus are precisely those who had, in fact, believed in Jesus, those who had followed him
and had given up much to do so. But now, finally, after all their waiting and watching and
wondering and worrying, they have grown tired, and they can no longer see clearly what it was
about Jesus that attracted them to him in the first place, and so they leave. Is there not an easy
application for the text in our setting of post modernity?
Many have accepted that religion is little more than an opiate for the people; that we exist just
fine to greater and lesser degrees as individuals whether we believe or not. Perhaps more than
challenging our levels of repugnance theologically, this text feeds into the apathy that is rife in
society. We have not set the bar very high for elected and appointed officials and know from
4
experience that we have all experienced moments where the challenges of life trumped our
awareness of faith. We may not walk away but we have known moments of hunger: hunger for
answers when life disappoints and people that we love are made to suffer; hunger for truth in a
time of hypocrisy; hunger for peace in an epoch of threat; hunger for serenity when much is
demanded of us.
I remember a frustrating day in our daughter’s life when she was ill and I knew not how to
comfort. You know those moments as parents where everything you say is wrong or strikes a
chord that only exacerbates the situation. I finally suggested that we get in the car and drive to
the water.
We got out of the car and I sat on the rocks and kept an eye out for the parking authority who
may ticket my car that I had parked at an unfed meter. She moved closer to the water’s edge and
picked up smaller rocks and stones and began methodically throwing them as far as she could
into the water. There was still some ice dotting the shoreline and it was not yet spring; but the
promise of spring was in the air with warmer temperatures, refreshing breeze and many people
out enjoying the day.
I don’t know how long she stood there heaving stones into the water and I experienced a barrage
of emotions and internal questions. When she threw her last stone she came and sat beside me
and I did not speak; lest I say the wrong thing and undo any good that the rock throwing may
have achieved. She finally said, “I feel better; we can go home now.”
Maybe we all walk away from the demands of living a faithful life from time to time. Maybe
some of the invisible promises and tenets taken on faith and void of proof are beyond our ken
5
from time to time. But maybe because we have ingested the metaphorical flesh and blood and
have the incarnate Christ within us, we come back. Amy Howe has written: In the moment that
we choose to eat Jesus’ flesh and drink Jesus’ blood we choose life. We give up on the notion
that we are in control. We understand, accept and celebrate that we are no better or worse than
another. We accept that we are loved by God, even in those most challenging moments when we
find it easier to focus on the temporal over the eternal. And grace will always lead us home, even
if nothing in our reality has changed.
The pain of death may grip; the challenges of living with ill health will persist; the universal
threats and the hypocrisy are still rife, but somehow we come in faith, hope and peace. This is
the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thanks be to God! Amen
6