
It’s Maundy Thursday. It’s an important day for the Church. It is the day our Lord instituted His Holy Supper, establishing and giving His very body and blood for the forgiveness of sins. It is the night He stooped to wash His disciples’ feet, demonstrating an immeasurable love for sinners. It’s also the beginning of His Passion—the night of betrayal, sorrow, and the deep descent into suffering for the sake of the world.
Unfortunately, on this day every year, I notice that folks on social media lean into the premise that Judas was present at the Lord’s Supper. They do this for various reasons, one of which is support for the practice of open communion. Essentially, their point is that everyone is welcome at the Lord’s table, even unbelievers.
Not only does Saint Paul speak rather crisply to this issue in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11, but my sense is that the premise actually arises from more of the pop-spiritual mushy Jesus perspective than the Jesus who demands order among the holy things (1 Corinthians 14:33). The mushy Jesus lets everything slip by, preferring your comfortability. He’s always friendly. He certainly doesn’t accuse or offend. He doesn’t draw lines and say, “Whoever is not with me is against me” (Matthew 12:30). He doesn’t overturn tables (Luke 19:45-46). He doesn’t rebuke anyone for approaching sacred things in an unworthy manner (Matthew 7:6, 23:16-22).
In truth, the mushy Jesus is more mascot than Messiah—an ever-smiling accessory to whatever people already believe. Unfortunately, faith in that particular Jesus isn’t going to end well (Matthew 7:21-23).
The real Jesus is the Lord of the Church. Even as He loves us as no one ever could, He still mandates reverence. He establishes objectively true things, instituting with clarity and consequence (1 Corinthians 11:27-29). He draws sharp lines between belief and betrayal, between holy and profane (Matthew 10:33). That’s the Jesus who is present on Maundy Thursday. That Jesus doesn’t accommodate disorder among the holy things. If anything, He exposes and names it, even though the observing disciples may not have fully understood what was happening.
Back in 2017, I worked the controversial topic of Judas’ presence at the Lord’s Supper into a whisky review at AngelsPortion.com. I just reread what I wrote. I’d say it was sufficient for that moment’s task. Still, there’s more I could’ve said. I want to take some time to lay it out in a fuller way.
For starters, the open/closed communion debate is vast. Here, I’m simply addressing the “Judas was there” premise. The simple truth is, he wasn’t. Judas left before the institution of the Lord’s Supper. The Gospel writers, when read together, give a coherent timeline. With that, relative to the open communion debate, the premise falls flat.
In John 13:18–30, Judas is identified as the betrayer and then leaves. That happens before the Supper is instituted in Matthew 26:26–30 and Mark 14:22–26. But what about Luke? I’ll get to that in a second. But again, the sequence is pretty straightforward: John 13—Jesus identifies Judas; Judas departs. Matthew 26 and Mark 14—Jesus institutes the Supper after Judas is already gone.
Now, before going any further, there are four things we should keep in mind. First, it’s important to distinguish between the Passover meal and the Lord’s Supper. Yes, Judas was there at the start of the Passover meal. That’s when Jesus handed him the dipped morsel of bread (John 13:26–27). But after Judas left, Jesus transitioned from the Old Covenant Passover to the New Covenant meal—the Lord’s Supper.
Next, the dipped morsel is not proof that the Lord’s Supper had already begun. In context, the dipped morsel is a symbolic gesture that occurred during the Passover meal. In this instance, Jesus did it to signal who the betrayer would be. Interestingly, the action wasn’t an unusual one. It was a familiar gesture during a shared meal, typically meant as a motion of kindness. Reading the other accounts, that’s how the observing disciples appear to have interpreted it. For us, knowing what’s about to happen, the fact that Jesus does this to Judas shows the depth of the Lord’s profound heartbreak at that moment.
Third, some folks might point to Luke 22:14-23, where the Supper and the betrayer are mentioned together (“But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table” v. 21). Folks might single this verse out as supporting Judas’ attendance during the institution. However, not only does this not fit the order, but as most students of the Bible know, Luke tends to arrange material by theme rather than sequence. This mention is a reflective comment, not a timestamp, and it by no means contradicts John’s incredibly detailed chronology. Luke’s inspired literary point emphasizes betrayal as central to the night’s dreadful events.
Fourth, logistics matter. Judas wasn’t a supervillain with superspeed or teleportation powers. If he had stayed through the entire meal and then followed Jesus and the disciples to Gethsemane, he would have had to backtrack into the city, find and organize the temple guard, and return to the garden, all without being seen and without any Gospel writer thinking to mention it. That defies both common sense and the plain reading of the text.
In the end, I think John 13:30 settles it: “So, after receiving the morsel of bread, he immediately went out. And it was night.” Judas left immediately. He did not stick around for the institution of the Lord’s Supper. Any suggestion that he was present is in error.
To close, I hope this brief survey helps you. I had some time this afternoon to tap it out, and so I thought, “Why not?” even if only to equip you for conversations that might turn in this direction. As you might expect, it does happen to me on occasion. Of course, that goes with the pastoral territory. Pastors are called to be “stewards of the mysteries [sacramentum] of God” (1 Corinthians 4:1).
Holy Week is upon us. God’s plan has been exacted.