(30) He took bread, and blessed it.--Had the two travellers been of the number of the Twelve, we might have thought of the words and acts as reminding them of their last Supper with their Lord. As it was, we must think of those words and acts as meant to teach them, and, through them, others, the same lesson that had then been taught to the Twelve, that it would be in the "breaking of bread" that they would hereafter come to recognise their Master's presence. And they, too, we must remember, whether they were of the Seventy, or among the wider company of disciples, must have had memories, it may be of multitudes fed with the scanty provision of a few barley loaves, it may be of quiet evenings without a multitude, when they had looked on the same act, and heard the same words of blessing. This meal, too, became so full of spiritual significance that we may well anticipate the technical language of theology and say that it was to them "sacramental."
Verse 30. - And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. There was a deep significance in the concluding act of this memorable appearance of the risen Lord. This taking the bread, and blessing it, and breaking it, and then giving it to them, was no ordinary act of courtesy, or welcome, or friendship, which, from a master or teacher might be shown to his disciples. It resembles too closely the great sacramental act in the upper room, when Jesus was alone with his apostles, for us to mistake its solemn sacramental character. The great teachers of the Church in different ages have generally so understood it. So Chrysostom in the Eastern, and Augustine in the Western Church; so Theophylact, and later Beza the Reformer all affirm that this meal was the sacrament. It taught men generally, even more plainly than did the first sacred institution teach the twelve, that in this solemn breaking of bread the Church would recognize their Master's presence. So generally, in fact, has this Emmaus "breaking of bread" been recognized by the Catholic Church as the sacrament, that later Romanist divines have even pressed it as a scriptural demonstration for the abuse which administered the elements under one form (compare, for instance, the 'Refutation of the Confession of Angsberg,' quoted by Stier, in his comment on this passage of Luke, 'Words of the Lord Jesus'). How unnecessary and forced such a construction is, Bishop Wordsworth points out in his note on Luke 24:30, "It may be remembered that bread (ἄρτος)was to the Jews a general name for food, including drink as well as meat Thus bread became spiritually an expressive term for all the blessings received from communion in Christ's body and blood, and the κλάσις ἄρτου, or ' breaking of bread,' was suggestive of the source from which these blessings flow, (viz.) Christ's body (κλώμενον) broken (1 Corinthians 11:24); hence κλάσις ἄρτου in Acts 2:42 is a general term for the Holy Eucharist."
24:28-35 If we would have Christ dwell with us, we must be earnest with him. Those that have experienced the pleasure and profit of communion with him, cannot but desire more of his company. He took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. This he did with his usual authority and affection, with the same manner, perhaps with the same words. He here teaches us to crave a blessing on every meal. See how Christ by his Spirit and grace makes himself known to the souls of his people. He opens the Scriptures to them. He meets them at his table, in the ordinance of the Lord's supper; is known to them in breaking of bread. But the work is completed by the opening of the eyes of their mind; yet it is but short views we have of Christ in this world, but when we enter heaven, we shall see him for ever. They had found the preaching powerful, even when they knew not the preacher. Those Scriptures which speak of Christ, will warm the hearts of his true disciples. That is likely to do most good, which affects us with the love of Jesus in dying for us. It is the duty of those to whom he has shown himself, to let others know what he has done for their souls. It is of great use for the disciples of Christ to compare their experiences, and tell them to each other.
And it came to pass as he sat at meat with them,.... When they were sat down at table with the provisions before them:
he took bread and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them; as if he was the master of the house, when he was both a guest, and a stranger, and as he used to do at common meals, when he ate with his disciples; and thus he did, when he fed five thousand at one time, and four at another, Matthew 14:19 see the notes there. See Gill on Matthew 14:19. See Gill on Matthew 15:26. Whether only Christ, and the two disciples, sat down together, or whether others that belonged to the house sat down with them, is not certain: if they were only three, they were a proper company to bless the bread together; that is, one in the name of the rest, they joining with him: if there were but two, they blessed, or said grace for themselves separately; but if three, the rules were these, according to the Jews (y):
"three that eat together, they are obliged to call a blessing (or for one) --and how do they call a blessing among three? one says, let us bless: if there are three besides himself, he says, bless ye. --Three that eat together have no power to divide;''
that is, to make a separate blessing, but are obliged to it conjunctly: thus here, being three at least, Christ blessed bread for them all.
he took bread and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them; as if he was the master of the house, when he was both a guest, and a stranger, and as he used to do at common meals, when he ate with his disciples; and thus he did, when he fed five thousand at one time, and four at another, Matthew 14:19 see the notes there. See Gill on Matthew 14:19. See Gill on Matthew 15:26. Whether only Christ, and the two disciples, sat down together, or whether others that belonged to the house sat down with them, is not certain: if they were only three, they were a proper company to bless the bread together; that is, one in the name of the rest, they joining with him: if there were but two, they blessed, or said grace for themselves separately; but if three, the rules were these, according to the Jews (y):
"three that eat together, they are obliged to call a blessing (or for one) --and how do they call a blessing among three? one says, let us bless: if there are three besides himself, he says, bless ye. --Three that eat together have no power to divide;''
that is, to make a separate blessing, but are obliged to it conjunctly: thus here, being three at least, Christ blessed bread for them all.
(y) Misn. Betasot, c. 7. sect. 4, 3, 4.