John 13: 21-32
I want to start off by saying that I have a deep admiration for the gospel of John. This gospel is unlike the other gospels included in the Bible in a lot of ways. So many so, it is not considered to be one of the synoptic gospels along with Mark, Matthew, and Luke. John’s gospel takes a lot more interpretative liberties than these others do in telling the story of Jesus. This gospel is a testament to us of how the Bible speaks to us and inspires each of us in different ways, and that goes for the writers of these gospels and other books of the Bible as well. That being said, while John’s interpretations regularly speak to my heart, this is not one of those times. Well, sort of. But I’ll get to that later.
It is only in this interpretation of the story of the Last Supper that Jesus doesn’t institute the sacrament of communion. Celebrating communion is something that unites all traditions of Christianity, and according to the synoptic gospels, it’s a sacrament that was given to us the night before Jesus was arrested. John, taking interpretative liberty, chooses not to highlight this in his account. While the author chooses to emphasize other aspects of the Last Supper like Jesus washing the disciple’s feet and giving them the new commandment, I cannot get past the absence of the celebration of communion from this narrative. Perhaps I wouldn’t be so bothered by this choice if it didn’t seem like the author chose to instead fixate on Judas’ betrayal of Jesus in its place.
In this scripture text, Jesus announces to his disciples that one of them who are with him at the Last Supper will betray him. When the disciples ask who it is who will betray him, Jesus responds by saying, “It is the one to whom I give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.” (John 13:26, NRSV). He then proceeds to dip the piece of bread and give it to Judas. This gospel is the only one where Jesus is said to have indicated to his disciples who it is who will betray him. Not only does he tell the group it is Judas who will betray him, but after Judas takes the bread Jesus tells him to, “Do quickly what you are going to do.” (John 13:27, NRSV). After Jesus says this Judas stands up and leaves, leaving the rest of the disciples extremely confused. Therefore, upon revealing Judas’ intentions to the group, Jesus suggests that he leave to go and get this betrayal over with.
While I understand why John may have written his gospel in this way, it sits heavy with my heart. I understand that John may have felt that since Judas betrayed Jesus, Judas should not have been present with the rest of the disciples during this intimate occasion. I also recognize that by John not highlighting Lord’s Supper, it doesn’t necessarily imply that he believed it never occurred that evening and could have just chosen to focus on other aspects of the evening instead. However, if this is the case I have to wonder, did John remove Judas from this story in order to imply that he was not worthy to receive communion? In the other gospels in the Bible, it is either directly before or directly after communion is taken that Jesus announces that someone will betray him. In both Mark’s and Matthew’s gospel, Jesus announces that there will be a betrayal and then initiates communion with his disciples. In Luke’s gospel communion is offered first and then Jesus announces his betrayal. In every other gospel in the Bible, it is implied that Judas was present and therefore was offered communion. Yet in John’s gospel, Jesus announces that Judas will betray him and then tells him to leave the supper.
While some Christian denominations require you to take classes or for you to be of a certain age before you can receive communion, The United Methodist Church does not. The UMC celebrates communion with an open table. Theoretically, this means that all persons are welcome to partake in the holy mystery of communion. (This isn’t to say that this has always been adhered to throughout the history of Methodism across the globe) Among other things, we believe that the act of partaking in the sacrament of communion is accepting the invitation to acknowledge and receive God’s grace in our lives. United Methodists believe that the communion table is God’s table, not the Church’s. We never know what God might be up to in the life of someone else, so the opportunity for someone to receive an outward expression of God’s grace should never be denied to someone who wants to receive it. My issue with this story in John’s gospel is that Judas is never given the chance to make that choice to experience God’s grace for himself because the author removes both the sacrament as well as Judas from the Last Supper narrative.
Earlier I mentioned that I appreciate this gospel as it serves for me as an example of how scripture speaks to our hearts in different and unique ways. Upon taking some time to reflect on this text, I’ve actually come to see this story as an overwhelming display of God’s grace. Despite this text not speaking to me in the way perhaps the author intended it to, it certainly did speak to my heart. I realized that Judas did receive communion, it just wasn’t in the way that we might readily recognize it. After Jesus admits to his disciples that what Judas chooses to do is up to him, Jesus takes a piece of bread, dips it the dish, and hands it to him to take with him as he leaves. Jesus acknowledges that Judas is choosing to bring harm to him, and yet, Jesus still chooses to break bread with Judas. If that isn’t a testament of God’s unfathomable love for us then I don’t know what it is.
Ultimately, John’s exclusion of communion, as well as Judas from the Last Supper in this narrative, illustrates for me what it means to be in the presence of God’s grace. No matter what it is we do or don’t do, it’s there. It’s being freely offered to every one of us, even to those who we may not think are worthy to receive it. God’s grace is present and surrounds each of us. Even when there are some who disagree or try to say otherwise. Even when they’re a gospel writer.