What Would You Not Do for Love? [Epiphany 4B - 1 Corinthians 8:1-13]

 The Rev. Jeremiah Williamson

1 Corinthians 8:1-13

 

What would YOU not do for love?

 

What would you not do for love?  That is the question.  More specifically: would you not eat the meat, you know, for love’s sake?  The Apostle Paul posed this question to the Christians in Corinth: are you willing to say no to some delicious idol meat – not the flesh of idols, of course, but animal flesh first offered to idols – if it really mattered to the person in the next pew?

 

That is the question of this morning’s epistle reading.  And people think the Bible isn’t relevant to our lives…  Probably you have had this very conversation with your friends a hundred times.  Likely a cousin has blocked you on facebook because of your out-spoken opinion on this very touchy tenderloin topic.

 

Perhaps a little background information would be helpful. In the first century, Corinth was a prominent city within the Roman Empire.  It was an important center of trade, an economic power.  Not only that, it was a sophisticated city – “the heart of Roman imperial culture in Greece.”[1]  And it was famously steeped in pagan religion; it was home to prominent temples of worship, including the temple of Aphrodite. 

 

As was common in the ancient Roman Empire, the local and imperial deities were woven rather intentionally into practically every aspect of life.  It was difficult, and at times even dangerous, to navigate public life without pledging one’s allegiance to the gods.  Their invisible hands touched everything.  Those who refused to bow before the gods could find their economic fortunes impacted, could find their patriotism questioned, and, in the worst of times, could find their lives threatened. 

 

And so being a monotheistic, Jesus-loving Christians in Corinth in the first century was a complicated matter.  It even complicated the most basic things in life, like dinner time.  Because those pagan gods had their hands even on the meat.  And this, as we know from this morning’s reading, is the complication which it seems Paul was asked to address.  Here’s what happened: animals were sacrificed to the gods during pagan rituals in Corinth; the extra meat, the meat not required by the gods, was sold in the neighborhood market because why waste it.  And that meant grocery shopping became a complex moral conundrum – and so did dining with your neighbor or ordering take-out. 

 

Now some of the Christians in Corinth reasoned their way around this problem.  They argued that since the idols and gods did not technically exist, according to their monotheistic theological belief system, the meat was fine to eat.  Other members of the community, especially those who had most recently traded their idols for the cause of Christ, disagreed.  To them, it felt like an unholy compromise.  This is the conflict to which Paul is responding. 

 

Although the issue specifically addressed in today’s passage might not be a hot topic in the 21st century Church, these old Pauline epistles are still helpful; they offer an important reminder to those of us who occupy the Church today; they remind us that Church people have never found consensus easy.  Jesus did not leave us with a tidy set of rules or regulations; he did not give to his followers by-laws or canons.  He gave us each other; he gave us people.  And so our faith has a long history of disagreements – sometimes healthy and productive disagreements, sometimes short and simple scrapes over adiaphora, sometimes the Spanish Inquisition. 

 

Idol meat is not for us an urgent issue; it is not a divisive topic in the Episcopal Church or in this parish.  We know that it was a big deal for at least one church a long, long time ago.  But even though the Corinthians thought it was a matter of great importance, I’m not convinced that Paul thought it was.  I think Paul was around enough church people to understand that the meat melee would not be final parish argument; as long as the church in Corinth had at least two members, they would also have some conflict. 

 

Paul didn’t give them a clear-cut answer in his letter; he offered them something far more valuable: he offered a way to live together.  He posed a question for the Church in Corinth: what would you not do for love?  There was no law against the meat – not in the city, not in the Bible.  There was no written code to which Paul could appeal; no verse he could cite.  The meat eaters were well within their rights.  They were free to eat the meat.

 

Paul just asks them not to.  They could have won the argument; Paul asks them to take a loss, to give in a little for something good: for each other, for love.  He gives them a way into a future together: you must be willing to trade a little liberty for a lotta love. 

 

The meat controversy is a relic of a bygone past, preserved only by its inclusion in an ancient canonized letter.  But the question of the tension between the individual and the community, between liberty and love is a struggle that refuses to be left behind. 

 

And it is a struggle that threatens to make or break every human community – including our own faith community.  I don’t think it is too much of an exaggeration to say that every human community is a miracle.  Human relationships are hard; they require us to do the unthinkable: sacrifice one of our most treasured and defended values: personal freedom.

 

The truth is: every time we enter into a relationship we lose something, we lose a little bit of our freedom.  Any lasting relationship, whether with spouse or children or church, requires us to love someone else so much that we amazingly come to prioritize their needs over our wants. 

 

I am proud to say that this parish has embraced this selfless love during the difficult days of this pandemic.  We have made beautiful little sacrifices throughout to protect and support each other.  You have visited each other through screens and held in hugs and worn masks because that is what love requires.  The members of our crack A/V team have arrived early and left late every Sunday because they love the people who listen in their cars and the people who join us from the safety of their homes and they want them to be able to worship with their parish family.  Vestry members have met way more often than they expected, trading personal time to attend to the well-being of our parish family; staff members tore up their job descriptions and got to work; big-hearted lay pastoral caregivers, unable to visit in person, started working the phones so that no one, including those without computers, would feel alone in these days of physical distancing.  While some churches were busy suing the state or challenging guidelines, this church was busy living the beautiful, sacrificial love Jesus modeled for us.

 

We will probably never need our Bishop to mediate between those in our congregation who eat idol meat and those who refuse. But the question at the heart of this passage is essential to the survival of every fragile community of humans: what would you not do for love?  What are you willing to give up so that we can grow?  What losses will you take so that we can thrive?  What are you willing to sacrifice for a higher purpose, for the common good of our parish family, so that we can together live into the future that God wants for us?  It is a question as relevant today as it was when it flowed from the pen of the apostle 2000 years ago.

 

Today, at noon on Zoom, we will meet in our Annual Meeting and we will be reminded that we are governed by a Constitution and canons and parish by-laws and vestry decisions.  But also we will be reminded that those are not the things that hold us together.  What holds us together, what makes us a family, what sustains these precious relationships we so deeply value, is that beautiful sacrifice we make for each other: love.




[1] The Jewish Annotated New Testament, 287.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Chrism Mass of Holy Week 2024

A Retrospective [Psalm 126 - Advent 3]

By the Rivers of Babylon [Epiphany 5B - Isaiah 40:21-31]