Leaven Leaven

Volume 3 Issue 3 The Lord's Supper Article 4

1-1-1995

Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at

Emmaus Emmaus

David Lertis Matson dlmatson@hiu.edu

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven

Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology

and Philosophy of Religion Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Matson, David Lertis (1995) "Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at Emmaus," Leaven: Vol. 3 : Iss. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol3/iss3/4

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Katrina.Gallardo@pepperdine.edu, anna.speth@pepperdine.edu, linhgavin.do@pepperdine.edu.

8 Leaven, vol. 3, #3

Breaking the BreadBreaking the VeilRecognition of Jesus at Emmaus

by David Lertis Matson

Along with salt, bread was a vital commodityin the Ancient Near East. For the average person ofbiblical times, "keep giving us each day our dailybread" (Matt 6:11; cf. Luke 11:3) was an apt prayerindeed. Though different types of bread were eatenby rich and poor;' bread itself remained the staplediet of the ancient world, with the price of grainserving as an infallible indicator of economic condi-tions at any given time.

As the ancient world depended upon breadfor life and sustenance, so the church depends uponthe bread of the Lord's table. The first Christians inJerusalem were continually "devoting themselves"to the breaking of bread as part of their daily lifetogether (Acts 2:42, 46). Originally part of a commonmeal, the Lord's Supper was both a human anddivine means of nourishment: "As often as you eatthis bread" (1 Cor 11:26) reminds one of the impor-tance that frequent celebration of the eucharist hadin the lives of the early Christians."

The act of "breaking bread" thus assumes adeeply religious significance on the pages of the NewTestament. The noted scholar I. H. Marshall ob-serves that in the New Testament breaking bread is"a fixed and constant part of the Lord's Supper." Inhis Corinthian correspondence, Paul describes "thebread that we break" as a participation (koinonia) inthe body ofChrist (1 Cor 10: 16). In the oldest accountofthe Lord's Supper, he goes on to recount how Jesus,on the night ofhis betrayal, broke bread (1 Cor 11:24),an action also depicted in the Gospel narratives(Matt 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19). Jesus, actingas the head ofthe household, celebrates the Passover

meal by reinterpreting the elements of bread andwine in terms of his approaching death.

Yet it is Luke among the writers of the NewTestament for whom "breaking bread" becomes a"classic" way of referring to the Lord's Supper (Luke9:16; 22:19; 24:30, 35; Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7,11; 27:35).Of the many references listed here, the meal sceneembedded in the story of Emmaus (24:13-35) is themost theologically charged: only after Jesus in-structs the two disciples on the road to Emmaus andbreaks bread in their house are they able to recognizethe risen Lord in their midst (24:30). At story's end,Luke summarizes the entire sequence ofevents thusly:"Then they told what had happened on the road, andhowhe had been made known to them in the breakingof the bread" (24:35).4 The prominence of the tablemotif as a setting for Jesus' revelatory activity makesthe Emmaus account "extremely valuable in settingforth Luke's sacramental theology."

The purpose ofthis essay, then, is to explorethe meaning of "breaking bread" in the writings ofLuke and Acts, using the meal at Emmaus as the keyinterpretive framework. As the climax to the first ofLuke's two volumes (Luke 1:1-4; Acts 1:1), theEmmaus narrative occupies a strategic "pivot" posi-tion, allowing the reader to look "backward" to thetable fellowship practice of Jesus in the Gospel ofLuke and "forward" to the depiction in Acts ofbeliev-ers breaking bread in their homes.

Revelation at EmmausThe story of the disciples on the road to

1

Matson: Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at Em

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1995

Emmaus unfolds in four distinct but interrelatedscenes: 1) the two disciples describe the ministry ofJesus to a stranger (Jesus) whom they are kept fromrecognizing (24:13-24); 2) the stranger interprets theMessiah's suffering and entry into glory in accor-dance with the scriptures (24:25-27); 3) the strangerreveals his identity to the disciples while reclining attable with them (24:28-32); 4) the disciples return toJerusalem and announce to the Eleven how Jesuswas made known to them in the breaking of the bread(24:33-35). The whole story unfolds between the twopoles of blindness and recognition, between Jesus aswayfaring stranger and Jesus as risen Lord." In thefirst scene, the two disciples walked with Jesus onthe road, "but their eyes were kept from recognizinghim" (24:17). In the third scene "their eyes wereopened, and they recognized him; and he vanishedfrom their sight" (24:31). That Jesus disappears atthe very moment of recognition suggests that theclimax of the story is reached when Jesus is madeknown in the breaking of the bread.

While some scholars have questioned theextent to which Luke makes the meal at Emmaus astory about the Lord's Supper, the eucharistic asso-ciations in the passage are obvious. The languageused to describe the actions of Jesus at table in 24:30("took, blessed, broke, gave") is clearly reminiscent ofLuke 22:19 when Jesus, acting as host, institutes theLord's Supper on the evening of the Passover. Thatthe meal occurs on the evening ofthe "first day of theweek" (24:1, 13) following instruction in the OldTestament scriptures (24:25-27) suggests a contextof worship featuring both word and sacrament.

The sacramental significance of the Emmausnarrative is theologically important to Luke: fromnow on Jesus will be present with his disciplesprimarily by means of the Christian interpretation ofscripture and the sharing of the Lord's Supper."Jesus sets the hearts of his disciples aflame byopening up the Old Testament scriptures (24:25-27,32); he opens their eyes in the sharing of a meal(24:29-30). This two-fold means of knowing Christ-in word and supper-is significant for believers to-day for, as Fred B. Craddock insightfully observes, itmakes every Christian a first-generation Christianand every fellowship meal an Emmaus meal. Jesus"appears" to every Christian when the word ispreached and the Lord's Supper is observed."

The presence of Christ mediated in the act ofbreaking the bread must not be lost on churches ofthe "restoration" heritage, which have always em-phasized the uniqueness of the apostolic age and thevalue of the first-generation witness. This emphasis,while important, has led to a diminished apprecia-tion of what happens in our celebration of the Lord's

The Lord's Supper 9

Supper. Ifin baptism we encounter the presence ofthe living Christ, why not in the Lord's Supper? Whyis baptism considered "sacramental" (mediating for-giveness) but the Lord's Supper a "remembrance"only? Such an inconsistent view of the sacraments,it seems, is not in keeping with the Christ of Emmauswho reveals himself in the breaking of the bread.

Remembrance of JesusBut revelation is clearly tied to remembrance

for Luke. The disciples recognize Jesus "in" thebreaking of the bread (24:35), that is, in the distinc-tive way Jesus broke the loaf that made the disciplesrecall their prior occasions of table fellowship withJesus in the course of his earthly ministry. Perhapsit was the hands of Jesus that they recognized, handsthat formerly stretched out in death on a cross butnow stretch out to impart the bread oflife. Whateverthe catalyst of their remembrance, it was divinelygiven: "their eyes were opened," Luke says (24:31).To say "their eyes were opened" is the same as saying"God opened their eyes."? The memory of Jesus attable prompts an even more immediate remembranceof Jesus on the part of the disciples: "Were not ourhearts burning within us while he was talking to uson the road, while he was opening the scriptures tous?" (24:32). The whole experience ofthe disciples inthe house at Emmaus is rich in theological reflection,involving both the immediate and more distant past.

In the meal scene at Emmaus, the wayfaringJesus appears in the dual roles of guest and host attable, both of which are significant to the theme ofremembrance. Jesus first appears in the role ofguest, accepting the disciples' invitation to stay withthem in their home (v 29). Such an appeal recalls aprior series of distinctive table fellowship scenes inwhich Jesus accepts and welcomes hospitality. Sofrequent are these scenes in Luke that Robert J.Karris can remark that "Jesus is either going to ameal, at a meal, or coming from a meal.'?? The laterfellowship meals of the early Christians stem notonly from the institution of the Lord's Supper, butalso from Jesus' widely attested practice of tablefellowship.

The way in which Jesus accepts hospitalityin Luke's Gospel is often radically inclusive, invitingcriticism or providing the occasion for controversy.According to Luke's presentation, it may well be thecase that" Jesus got himself crucified by the way heate."!' Each of the various episodes that pictureJesus receiving hospitality (5:27-32; 7:36-50; 11:37-54; 14:1-24; 19:1-10) involves controversy over Jesus'acceptance of outcasts and sinners. In the world ofJesus' day, to eat together was to belong together."In light of this pervasive theme in Luke, the charge

2

Leaven, Vol. 3 [1995], Iss. 3, Art. 4

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol3/iss3/4

10 Leaven, vol. 3, #3

levelled against Jesus is well-documented: "a glut-ton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and

The New Testament bearsample witness to the factthat the earliest struggles

of the church involvedmatters of table fellowship.

sinners!" (7:34).13If the example of Jesus as guest provides

impetus for the table fellowship practice of the laterchurch, such an example challenges the church to thesame kind of radical openness that characterizedJesus' earthly ministry. And where best to demon-strate this openness than at the Lord's table, whichperpetuates the memory of Jesus' own table fellow-ship practice? The New Testament bears amplewitness to the fact that the earliest struggles of thechurch involved matters of table fellowship (Acts11:3; 15:20,29; Gal 2:11-14). By having Jesus eat ameal with his disciples after his resurrection, Lukeseems to suggest that the post-resurrection commu-nity ofthe Messiah will be a table fellowship commu-nity modeled after the pre-resurrection ministry ofJesus.

As important as the Jesus-as-guest theme isin the Gospel of Luke, and one that can help informa reading of the Emmaus narrative, it does notconstitute the chief point of remembrance for the twocharacters in the story-Cleopas and the unnameddisciple (24:18). Recognition rather comes whenJesus assumes the role of host: "When he was at tablewith them, he took bread, blessed and broke it, andgave it to them. Then their eyes were opened, andthey recognized him" (24:30-31a). This change ofroles, from invited guest to gracious host, is thesecond such shift in the story involving Jesus. Ear-lier he had been instructed by the disciples on theroad (24: 15-24); then he turns to instruct them (24:25-27). That Jesus functions in the dual capacity ofguest and host is not surprising to the reader ofLuke ,for Jesus "lives to extend and receive hospitality."14

The close sequence between the four-foldaction of Jesus at table ("took, blessed, broke, gave")and the moment of recognition on the part of thedisciples ("then their eyes were opened") suggests

that Luke intends to link the two by way of remem-brance: "While they are at table he gives thanks forthe bread spread before them and breaks it, in a waywith which they must have been familiar from previ-ous occasions.t'" The four distinctive gestures ofJesus expressly recall two prior scenes in whichJesus presides at a meal in the course of his earthlyministry-at the feeding of the five thousand (9:16)and at the last supper (22:19). On both these occa-sions Jesus takes bread, blesses it, breaks it anddistributes it (with some variation in the verb forms).As Robert C. Tannehill observes: "The careful repeti-tion of this sequence of actions would not be neces-sary ifit were not significant. It suggests an inten-tion to recall previous occasions on which this oc-curred.'?" Thus, in the events of Emmaus, Jesusimplements his own last supper directive: "do this inremembrance of me" (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor 11:24; omit-ted in Matthew and Mark).

The presence of eucharistic (thanksgiving)language at Luke 9:16 suggests that Luke intendsthe story of the miraculous feeding to pre-figure theLord's Supper (22:19; 24:30). As in the story ofEmmaus, the narrative of the loaves and the fish(Luke 9:10-17) centers on the recognition of Jesus.Luke's placement of this miracle story comes on theheels of a series of questions concerned with "who"Jesus is. Jesus declares a woman's sins forgiven inthe house of Simon the Pharisee and the invitedguests ask: "Who is this who even forgives sins?"(7:49); Jesus stills the windstorm and the disciplesponder: "Who then is this, that he commands eventhe winds and the water, and they obey him?" (8:25);Herod hears about all that Jesus has been doing andwonders: "John I beheaded; but who is this aboutwhom I hear such things?" (9:9). Jesus himself posesthis question to his disciples in this particular sectionof Luke: "Who do the crowds say that I am?" (9:18).The answer finally comes in the form of Peter'sconfession. Jesus is "the Messiah of God" (9:20).Significantly, Peter's confession occurs immediatelyafter Jesus feeds the multitude with the loaves andthe fish. Noticing this connection, John Nollandwrites: "Luke seems to be suggesting that the dis-ciples come to a conviction of Jesus' identity here ina manner analogous to the way that in the eucharistthe Lord Jesus is made known to the believer in thebreaking of the bread (see 24:30-31,35)."17

By having Jesus challenge the disciples tofeed the hungry crowd (9:13: "You give them some-thing to eat"), Luke stresses the social dimensions ofthe supper. The disciples themselves become theagents of feeding, the distributors of the bread thatJesus takes, blesses, and breaks (9:16). The theme ofinclusiveness appears in the note that "all" are satis-

3

Matson: Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at Em

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1995

fied with the bread Jesus provides (9:17; cf. v. 15).Thus, the story reminds us that the Lord's Supper isnot a solitary act, to be taken in isolation from ahungry humanity. In the eucharistic meals of theearly church (where the story of the miraculousfeeding probably first circulated), the Lord's Supperwas part of a larger fellowship meal in which thericher members of the congregation were to sharetheir provisions with the poorer members (see 1 Cor11:17-34). The combination of spiritual recognitionand social responsibility in the supper leads Nollandto offer the followinginterpretation ofthe story oftheloaves:

We recognize who Jesus is through whathe makes possible in our midst. He is theultimate host at our eucharistic meals. Atthe breaking of bread we recognize himfor who he is. There in a wonderful waywe find the nourishment that we need.There also we are challenged to meet theneeds of others and to recognize the re-sources that through Jesus we actuallyhave to meet needs."

Repetition in ActsSo far, we have been con-

cerned primarily to look "back"upon the Gospel of Luke, to seehow the table fellowship practiceofJesus provides a deeper under-standing of the breaking of breadmotif at Emmaus. For the dis-ciples, the recognition of Jesuscomes via the remembrance ofJesus, particularly through hisfamiliar role as host. Now ourconcern is to look"forward"toActs,to see how the experience ofEmmaus anticipates the practiceof the early church. The decision is not an arbitraryone, since Acts can be regarded, at the very least, asa kind of "sequel" to the Third Gospel (Acts 1:1).19

When the disciples on the road to Emmausreturn to Jerusalem, they tell the other disciples howJesus was made known to them in "the breaking ofthe bread" (Luke 24:35). This phrase, which summa-rizes the entire action of Jesus at table (24:30),reappears in Luke's story of the early church. Fivetimes in Acts believers "break bread" after the man-ner of Jesus at Emmaus (2:42,46; 20:7,11; 27:35).These words become Luke's standard way of refer-ring to the Lord's Supper.

The first repetition ofthe phrase appears onthe day ofPentecost as part of a four-folddescription

The Lord's Supper 11

of early congregational life in Jerusalem. Speakingofthese believers, Luke writes: "They devoted them-selves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to thebreaking ofbread and the prayers" (2:42). Unfortu-nately, the translators ofthe NRSV donot render thedefinite article in front of"bread" (lit. "the bread") asthey do in the case of "the prayers" (probably areference to appointed times ofprayer at the temple).Since meals in Jewish households typically beganwith the breaking of bread (cf. Jer 16:7), this versemay have in mind nothing more than a commonmeal, yet the presence of the article suggests that aparticular meal is in view-"the" bread ofthe Lord'sSupper. That Luke lumps the breaking of the breadwith the other "spiritual" activities mentioned (teach-ing, fellowship, and prayer), also lends support to aeucharistic understanding. Upon repentance andbaptism (Acts 2:38), the newly established Jerusa-lem believers break the bread together in a context ofsocial concern (Acts 2:43-45; cf. 4:32-35).

The second reference to breaking bread alsodescribes the activities ofthe early Jerusalem church:"Dayby day, as they spent much time together in thetemple, they broke bread at home and ate their foodwith glad and generous hearts" (2:46). Once again,

an ordinarymeal may be inview, especiallysince this timeno definite ar-ticle appears inconnectionwith"bread." YetLuke's deliber-ate juxtaposi-tion of atten-dance at thetemple serviceswith the break-ing of bread inbelievers'

homes leads one to think of eucharistic meals. AsCharles Lemuel Dibble writes: "The clear meaninghere is that the Christians observed not only theJewish ritual, but a corresponding Christian rite."2O

Paul's rather long-winded sermon at Troas,which puts the young Eutychus to sleep much to hisregret, is the occasion for the third and fourth refer-ences to breaking bread in Acts (20:7-12). Threethings are of particular note in this passage. First,the purpose ofthe Christians gathering at Troas wasin order "to break bread" (v. 7). That Paul both"breaks" and "tastes" this bread (see v. 11where thedefinite article appears) suggests that the Lord'sSupper was eaten in the context of a commonmeal-

Upon repentance andbaptism, the newly

established Jerusalembelievers break the

bread together in a con-text of social concern

4

Leaven, Vol. 3 [1995], Iss. 3, Art. 4

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol3/iss3/4

12 Leaven, vol. 3, #3

perhaps the agape or "Love Feast" mentioned oralluded to elsewhere in the New Testament (see Jude12; 1 Cor 11:20-21; perhaps 2 Pet2:13). Second, Lukeplaces this occasion on the "first day of the week," oneof the earliest references to Christian worship onSunday, "the Lord's day" (see 1 Cor 16:2; Rev 1:10).Whether Luke has Roman or Jewish time in mind isuncertain (probably Roman); more striking is theexplicit linkage of the Lord's Supper to the day ofresurrection, "the first day of the week" (Luke 24:1)when Jesus makes himself known in the breaking ofthe bread. Third, the meal eaten on this occasionaccompanied a lengthy sermon by Paul (20:7, 9,11),thus coupling word and sacrament in the context ofworship.

The fifth reference is the most intriguing ofall, coming in the midst of Paul's shipwreck journeyto Rome. Having gone fourteen days without food,Paul encourages his fellow shipmates to take food(27:33-34). Then 27:35 reads: "And after he had saidthis, he took bread; and giving thanks to God in thepresence of all, he broke it and began to eat." Thelanguage is so strikingly similar to the eucharisticlanguage at Luke 9:16; 22:19; and 24:30 that "it issometimes supposed that this had become a 'com-munion service' for the two or three Christians onboard."?' However, the presence of so many paganGentiles on board the ship has discouraged manyscholars from seeing a possible eucharistic referencehere. Yet in a recent work Philip Francis Eslerpersuasively argues that such a view fails to take intoconsideration the pervasive theme of table fellow-ship between Jews and Gentiles evident elsewhere inActs (10:1-11:18; 16:14-15; 16:25-34; 18:7-11). Ac-cording to Esler, Paul's exhortation to everyone onboard (including Jews) to take food "reinforces Luke'spersistent emphasis on the fact that the old barriersbetween Jew and Gentile have been decisively shat-tered in the eucharistic fellowship of the Christiancommunity and that an era of salvation for all hu-manity has now been inaugurated, even if there aresome who do not yet realize it."22

What, then, can we learn from the variousreferences to breaking bread in the Book of Acts?First, the early Christian communities depicted inActs are table fellowship communities. "When wemeet, we eat" is a humorous slogan used by manychurches today, but it well describes the practice ofearly Christian believers. Breaking bread functionsas a form of recognition in Acts much as it does in thestory of Emmaus: Christians, like the Lord theyserve, are known by the way they eat. We hear ofvarious kinds of churches today-"growing" churches,"seeker-sensitive" churches, "mega" churches. Yethow often do we characterize a church by the way iteats? According to Luke, the way a church breaksbread together is perhaps the most distinctive markof all, perpetuating the memory of Jesus' own tablefellowship practice.

Second, that the fellowship meals of belie v-ers in Acts are not simply ordinary meals is clearfrom their link to Emmaus. As Tannehill observes:

The Emmaus meal, described as "thebreaking of the bread," provides the linkbetween the meals of Jesus with his fol-lowers in Luke and the meals of the be-lievers in Acts. The presence ofthe risenChrist at Emmaus may also suggest thatthe meals in Acts go beyond fellowshipamong the believers to include commun-ion with the risen Lord.P

When we gather together to celebrate theLord's Supper, we must do so with the firm convictionthat the risen Lord is present with us, revealinghimself to us. Like the disciples at Emmaus, ourprayer must always be: "Stay with us, because it isalmost evening and the day is now nearly over." Forwhen we do, we continue to encounter the ever-present one in the breaking of the bread.

David Lertis Matson teaches biblical studiesat Milligan College, Tennessee.

5

Matson: Breaking the Bread, Breaking the Veil: Recognition of Jesus at Em

Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 1995