Identifying Breaking of Bread as Lord's Supper in Acts
The identification of "Breaking of Bread" in Acts as the Lord's Supper is a contested topic among Christian traditions. The phrase appears in Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7, and 27:35, sparking debate about its meaning.
The Debate
The disagreement centers on whether "Breaking of Bread" refers specifically to the Lord's Supper or to a more general practice of communal meals. Some traditions interpret "Breaking of Bread" as a reference to the Lord's Supper, citing the early Christian practice of observing the Supper regularly [1]. Others argue that it refers to a common meal or fellowship, with the Lord's Supper being a part of it.
Position 1: "Breaking of Bread" as Lord's Supper
The Reformed tradition, represented by John Calvin, understands "Breaking of Bread" as a reference to the Lord's Supper. Calvin argues that the Supper is a sacrament of our redemption by Christ's death, where the bread and cup are a partaking of Christ's body and blood [2, 4]. This view is supported by the fact that the early Christian Church observed the Lord's Supper regularly, as seen in Acts 20:7, where Paul breaks bread on the first day of the week [1].
Position 2: "Breaking of Bread" as Communal Meal
In contrast, some traditions, such as the Presbyterian interpretation represented by Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, understand "Breaking of Bread" as a reference to a communal meal or fellowship, with the Lord's Supper being a part of it. They argue that the phrase is not exclusively a reference to the Lord's Supper, but rather to the early Christian practice of sharing meals together [3]. This view is supported by the fact that the early Christian Church often gathered for communal meals, as seen in Acts 2:46, where the disciples are said to have broken bread in their homes.
Shared Ground
Despite the differences in interpretation, all positions agree that the "Breaking of Bread" is an important aspect of early Christian worship and community life. The practice is rooted in the Jewish tradition of sharing meals, as seen in the Babylonian Talmud, where the breaking of bread is an essential part of the meal [6].
Why Traditions Diverge
The divergence in interpretation stems from differing hermeneutical commitments and historical contexts. Some traditions emphasize the sacramental nature of the Lord's Supper, while others focus on the communal aspect of early Christian worship. The Reformed tradition, for example, places a strong emphasis on the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, while the Presbyterian interpretation highlights the importance of communal meals in early Christian practice [2, 3].
The early Church Fathers, such as Augustine, also played a significant role in shaping the interpretation of "Breaking of Bread." Augustine's writings on the topic demonstrate the complexity of the issue, as he discusses the various ways in which the phrase is used in Scripture [5].
Sources
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Communion of the Lord's Supper — Prefigured -- Ex 12:21-28; 1Co 5:7,8. Instituted -- Mt 26:26; 1Co 11:23. Object of -- Lu 22:19; 1Co 11:24,26. Is the communion of the body and blood of Christ -- 1Co 10:16. Both bread and wine are necessary to be received in -- Mt 26:27; 1Co 11:26. Self-examination commanded before partaking of -- 1Co 11:28,31. Newness of heart and life necessary to the worthy partaking of -- 1Co 5:7,8. Partakers of, be wholly separate to God -- 1Co 10:21. Was continually partaken of, by the Church -- Ac 2:42; 20:7. Unworthy partakers of Are guilty of”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 100: faithful according to the command of the Lord. Entrance has been given to private masses, which more resemble a kind of excommunication than that communion ordained by the Lord, when the priestling, about to devour his victim apart, separates himself from the whole body of the faithful. That there may be no mistake, I call it a private mass whenever there is no partaking of the Lord’s Supper among believers, though, at the same time, a great multitude of persons may be present. 8. The origin of the name of Mass I have never been a”
- Acts (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Acts 2:42: continued steadfastly in--"attended constantly upon." the apostles' doctrine--"teaching"; giving themselves up to the instructions which, in their raw state, would be indispensable to the consolidation of the immense multitude suddenly admitted to visible discipleship. fellowship--in its largest sense. breaking of bread--not certainly in the Lord's Supper alone, but rather in frugal repasts taken together, with which the Lord's Supper was probably conjoined until abuses and persecution led to the discontinuance of the common meal. prayers--probab”
- Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion (Anglican) “Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion (Anglican, 1571), Section 271: The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death: insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is a partaking of the Blood of Christ.”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 1: Augustine — Confessions, Letters — CHAP. XII. -- 27. AS to the seventh day of the week there is less difficulty in acting on the rule above quoted, because both the Roman Church and some other churches, though few, near to it or remote (part 1): 28. Be not moved by that which the Priscillianists6 (a sect very like the Manichaeans) are wont to quote as an argument from the Acts of the Apostles, concerning what was done by the Apostle Paul in Troas. The passage is as follows: "Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, r”
- Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 37b.1: one out of each offering for a gift to the Lord; it shall belong to the priest who sprinkles the blood of the peace-offerings” (Leviticus 7:14), and the word “one” indicates that it must be a whole loaf, i.e., that one should not take a broken piece, and here the bread has not been properly baked, it might therefore have been thought that it is considered as though it were broken. Consequently, the baraita teaches us that this is nevertheless classified as bread.”