Sr. Mary Karita Ivancic, S.N.D.
February 22, 2000
CRITICAL REVIEW of Arthur A. Just, Jr., The Ongoing Feast: Table Fellowship and Eschatology at Emmaus

Arthur A. Just's The Ongoing Feast (Collegeville: Pueblo, 1993) is an in-depth study of the Emmaus pericope in Luke 24. His interest in this episode was stimulated by three studies: Paul Schubert's Structure and Significance, which presents story at center literary development (xiii); Minear Some Glimpses: Sacramental Theology surveys Lukan table fellowship as revelatory eschatological kingdom; Geoffrey Wainwright Eucharist and Eschatology which discusses two main themes further developed by Just.

As a unique contribution to the discussion of table fellowship and eschatology manifested in the Emmaus narrative, the author has attempted to "trace Luke's development of the table fellowship matrix in the Gospel without consulting Acts, a departure fro^m most current Lukan scholarship" (xiv, author's emphasis). Just concentrated on a literary critical analysis, since other types of criticism (especially redaction and tradition criticisms) have already been done. The main thesis which serves as the backbone of Just's work is that the "breaking of the bread" in the Emmaus narrative is the climactic meal in the Third Gospel, since it brings to fulfillment all the meals of the historical Jesus (including the Last Supper) and inaugurates the ongoing eucharistic celebration of a new age.

Just begins his discussion by citing Robert Karris' observation that the theme of food occurs in all significant contexts in the Gospel of Luke: infancy narrative, Galilean ministry, journey to Jerusalem, last days of Jerusalem, and Resurrection narrative (1). Just posits that from a literary perspective the climax of Luke 24 is in the revelatory meal at Emmaus. Indeed, he seems to suggest that a synthesis of the entire Third Gospel is contained in this specific pericope:

If one sees the Emmaus meal as the climax of Luke's Gospel, then it is possible to recognize at the end that the table fellowship of Jesus with his people was from the first a a manifestation of the eschatological kingdom. For if one looks carefully at the evangelist's references to food, one may perceive in them an eschatological significance. This suggests that the first Christian meals were an anamnesis, not just of Jesus' Last Supper with his disciples, but of the entire table fellowship that Jesus engaged in from his baptism to his ascension.

The author contextualizes the Emmaus event within Luke 24, which contains four distinct passion statements. Just hypothesizes that the theological purpose of this pivotal chapter may be to explain "the political embarrassment that the suffering and death of Jesus the Messiah caused the church as it sought acceptance in the Roman world as a licit religion" (2). Following a detailed literary-critical discussion of each passion reference in Lk. 24, the author then situates this "watershed chapter" within the entire Third Gospel. The prophecies contained in 1-9, the three passion predictions in Lk. 9 and 18, and the feeding of five thousand in Lk. 9 are "pre-echoes" of motifs found within the Emmaus story. "The themes of Luke 24, the resurrection-as the vindication of the crucifixion and the fulfillment of the Scriptures as the accomplishment of the divine plan, are developed in Luke's Gospel in anticipation of their climax in Luke 24" (25).

In order to focus on his intended goal of literary criticism, Just establishes the genre of the Emmaus appearance-story as a circumstantial narrative (following Dodd), "where the concern is more for the development of a plot with a dramatic climax that is anticipated throughout the narrative" (29). He then launches into a detailed structural analysis consisting of three frameworks (time, place, and persons) and five concentric circles. The "outer circles" (fifth through second) illustrate the chiastic structure of the passage:

Circle 5: v. 13 and v. 33 Focus on departure of travelers from Jerusalem and return to Jerusalem

Circle 4: v. 14 and v. 32 Focus on disciples' talking to each other

Circle 3: v. 15 and v. 31b Focus on Jesus' approaching travelers and vanishing from their sight

Circle 2: v. 16 and v.31a Focus on not recognizing stranger and then recognizing Jesus

Center circle: vv. 17-30 The colloquium and breaking of the bread

Conclusion: vv. 34-35 Mutual sharing of experiences between Emmaus travelers and the Jerusalem assembly

Three detailed chapters are devoted at this point to the center circle, concentrating respectively on the dialogue setting (narrative as dialogue, dialogue participants, and dialogue content), the Christology of the Emmaus travelers (Jesus of Nazareth, a prophet mighty in deed and word, before God and all the people), and the opponents of Jesus (chief priests and rulers in Luke-Acts, judgment and death).

At this point Just interrupts his '!center circle" development to consider the place of the Emmaus meal within the entire scope of table fellowship of Jesus with his disciples and to argue "that Jesus' table fellowship is one of the reasons he is put to death by the chief priests" (128). Lukan meals and meal metaphors within both Jesus' Galilean ministry and his great journey to Jerusalem are developed in the succeeding two chapters. Interestingly, not all the meals in Luke's Gospel are discussed. The feast with Levi, the meal at the home of a Pharisee (sinful woman pericope), the feeding of five thousand, and the meal with Zaccheus are treated in detail. Each of these meals is seen as table fellowship exemplifying three significant elements: welcoming sinners (i.e. an inclusive event), providing Jesus with an opportunity to teach about the kingdom, and table fellowship itself as an expression of the new age. -In addition to analyzing these actual historical meals at which Jesus is present, the author also takes an in-depth look at "fictitious" meals in Luke's Gospel. The parables of the great banquet, the prodigal son (with its welcome-home feast), and the bridegroom and the ascetic, as well as various other meal metaphors, are also discussed. In all of this, it is Jesus' table-talk that antagonizes his opponents: "Jesus is rejected for his teaching at the table that he is God's anointed Messiah, present in the world to fulfill the Old Testament promises of salvation in the forgiveness of sins" (195).

Following this rather exhaustive development of Lukan meals and meal metaphors, Just returns once more to the "center circle" and addresses the teaching of Jesus and the meal of Jesus, both of which constitute the heart of the Emmaus account. His teaching is truly the Christian kerygma; and the breaking of the bread is truly the Christian Eucharist. Thus, the Emmaus meal with the risen Lord inaugurates a new age in which witness and worship are ongoing faith-expressions of Jesus' disciples. The Emmaus encounter is the first time Jesus is recognized by faith as the crucified and risen Messiah. This is achieved "on the road" through his Scriptural demonstration that "the Messiah must suffer and so enter into his glory;" it is also achieved "in the breaking of the bread," by which his fellow travelers recognize him as the risen Lord. For this reason, Emmaus becomes the climactic meal in Luke's gospel and marks the transition between the historical meals of Jesus (including the Last Supper) and the eschatological meals of Christian worship. It also sets the pattern of word and meal as constitutive of Christian eucharistic celebration,

By way of summary, Just concludes:

Table fellowship is one of the means by which the evangelist proclaims the arrival of the eschatological kingdom, the dawn of a new era. Table fellowship in Luke demonstrates that Christianity is a religion embracing both sinners and righteous, both Jews and Gentiles Table fellowship reveals the most intimate nature of the kingdom of God, namely that God and humans have fellowship with each other through teaching and eating together (253).

The Ongoing Feast is certainly a fine work of detailed scholarship. The author's basic thesis on the centrality of the Emmaus meal is a truly creative insight, with which I tend to agree as a liturgist. In the year following the publication of Just's work, Eugene LaVerdiere published Dining in the Kingdom of God, a similar volume in which he presented the Last Supper as the climactic meal in Luke's Gospel. LaVerdiere sees the Last Supper also as the Lord's Supper, that is, as both fulfilling the seven preceding meals and anticipating the Emmaus and Jerusalem meals. This difference in assigning two different meals the "climactic role" in Luke's Gospel highlights the unique perspective of each of these authors: While LaVerdiere focuses on the historical origins of the Eucharist (traditionally "instituted" at the Last Supper), Just is concerned with the eschatological dimension of Eucharist (the banquet of a new age already inaugurated by the risen Lord). Like LaVerdiere, his arguments supporting the centrality of the Emmaus a/re cogent and clear. I feel he would have had an even stronger basis for his argumentation had he viewed Emmaus as the "nexus meal" between Luke's Gospel and Acts (building on the work of R. Dillon, whose Eye-Witnesses he amply cites). The author's stated purpose, however, was merely to look at the Third Gospel without reference to Acts, although he includes numerous references to Acts within his total discussion.

The author's treatment of the Emmaus episode and Lukan table fellowship in general is quite comprehensive, although a significant lacuna is his failure to include all the meals presented in the Third Gospel, especially those involving women (i.e. Martha and Mary). Moreover, Just further downplays the role of women by not even mentioning the possibility that Cleopas' companion on the Emmaus road could have been his wife. Rather, he develops at some length the possibility that Cleopas was Jesus' uncle, the brother of Joseph (Jesus' foster-father) and the father of Simeon, the second bishop of Jerusalem.

The Ongoing Feast is a revision of the author's doctoral dissertation; hence, it is an academic rather than pastoral work. Although a readable text, this book tends to build slowly and almost too deliberately. It is definitely geared to the biblical specialist. It is certainly well documented, drawing on the scholarship of such eminent Lukan writers as Joseph Fitzmyer, Jerome Neyrey, R. Dillon, and Charles Talbert. However, while providing stimulating insights into the Christian Eucharist, it may be far too detailed for general readers to appreciate.