Did Judas take communion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter emily47017
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s interesting that the moment after Judas took and ate the bread Satan entered him.

There seems to be something spiritual happening.

Judas would not have taken the bread if he had changed his mind about the betrayal.

He would have confessed.

Paradoxically, imo, taking the bread was a sign that he meant to keep his agenda hidden.

Even in the light of exposure he denied Truth thinking his sinfull desires would remain hidden.

Perhaps in that moment Judas had been offered the Grace required to not betray Jesus but consented to Satan’s will in spite of it.

Even though God knows what we will do, I think He sometimes finds it a good to make the grace to not do it available even if He knows we will not recieve it.
 
Yes, as prophecy tells us:

“Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.” (Psalm 41:9)

Thank you,
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk
 
Judas did not take communion. If you look at the different gospel accounts it becomes clear. In Matthew 26 the apostles are eating the seder meal:

" 20 When it was evening, he sat at table with the twelve disciples; 21 and as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” 22 And they were very sorrowful, and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” 23 He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me. 24 The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” 25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”

Then in verse 26 it says:

"26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

So Matthew has the betrayal BEFORE the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14 we gain no additional information on the timoing of the two events. Luke 19 seems to reverse the events as recorded in Matthew and Mark. John’s account does not mention the institution of the Eucharist. But it does say that Jesus gave a morsel of bread that he dipped to Judas and then it says about Judas:

“30 So, after receiving the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night.”
[John 13:30]

If Judas left immediately after eating the morsel and both Matthew and Mark say the event with the morsel and the dipping into the dish occurred before the Eucharist then Judas is not around for the initiation of the Eucharist. It is this plus the fact that Judas then commits suicide before Jesus resurrects and thus misses the granting of the authority to forgive sins as well as the subsequent sending forth in the great commission that lead me to believe Judas cannot be considered an Apostle as are the others.
 
Just last week I heard a quote from St. John Chrysostom on EWTN that Judas took the first sacrilegious communion. In today’s (May 19, 2011) Gospel - John 13:16-20 - Jesus says, ‘The one who ate my food has raised his heel against me.’ Our priest said that Jesus is referring to Judas who was in mortal sin, and so, was the first to receive Holy Communion unworthily. Praised be to our most humble Jesus Christ!
 
Cheri_Allen said:
Just last week I heard a quote from St. John Chrysostom on EWTN that Judas took the first sacrilegious communion. In today’s (May 19, 2011) Gospel - John 13:16-20 - Jesus says, ‘The one who ate my food has raised his heel against me.’ Our priest said that Jesus is referring to Judas who was in mortal sin, and so, was the first to receive Holy Communion unworthily. Praised be to our most humble Jesus Christ!
Click to expand...
See post 19, I’ll stick with scripture on this one. Judas was no Apostle He was never empowered to consecrate the Eucharist nor was he empowered to forgive sin. Furthermore he was never sent by Jesus as were the other eleven. Judas’ replacement, Matthias was also no Apostle as He was never sent by Jesus either. Matthias took over Judas’s office and that was the office of bishop. Furthermore Peter in Acts says Judas’ house [habitation] would be desolate. He is referring to Judas’ line of succession. No bishop ever claimed to be succeeded from Judas. The twelth Apostle is Paul who is called by and sent by Jesus.
 
How do you KNOW that Jesus never sent Matthias?

Are you going to tell me that you were present every single second of Matthias’ life?
 
inkaneer said:
See post 19, I’ll stick with scripture on this one. Judas was no Apostle …
Click to expand...
Sticking with Scripture:
2 The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; * 4 Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
Click to expand...
Matthew 10:2
 
Originally Posted by inkaneer
See post 19, I’ll stick with scripture on this one. Judas was no Apostle …
Joe_Kelley said:
Quote:
Sticking with Scripture:
Quote:
2 The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3 Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; * 4 Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

Matthew 10:2
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know, that is the verse everyone uses but this verse comes early in Matthew’s gospel. These are the twelve men who are called to be [future tense] apostles. They are not apostles yet and won’t be until they are sent apostolos one who is sent]. That does not occur until Ascencion Thursday when Jesus tells the eleven:

"16 Now the **eleven disciples **went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 And when they saw him they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.” [Mt 28:16-20 RSV]

Notice Matthew calls them now disciples not Apostles and there are only eleven who are given the command to “Go…” Judas is dead. And consider this, exactly what kind of apostle would he have been? He left the Last Supper before the institution of the Eucharist and was not empowered to celebrate it. He committed suicide before the apostles were given the power to forgive sin. So without the authority to consecrate the Eucahrist or to forgive sin you want to call him an Apostle?

In Acts 1 Peter speaks of Judas and says that his house will be desolate and no one will live therein and also another will take his office. The Greek word for office is episkope which is the same word that is translated as “overseer” or bishop. Matthias is consecrated a bishop and replaces Judas in that capacity. As for Judas’ house being desolate Peter is referring to Judas’ line of succession. Recall that Joseph [as well as Jesus] was said to be of the house of David. And know this. No bishop ever, in 2,000 years, ever claimed to be succeeded from Judas. His house was indeed desolate.

The 12th Apostle is Paul. He was called by Christ and sent by Christ. In addition scripture calls Paul an Apostle no less than ten times. So there in a nutshell is the case against Judas.
 
The real truth is you don’t know who Jesus might have sent after the Ascension. Just because there is no record of something in the bible does not in itself make such a thing false.

Just because Jesus SENT Paul does not mean that He didn’t send anyone else.

Are you going to tell me that Jesus wasn’t SENDING Matthias after his selection? Are you going to tell me that Peter came up with that idea all on his own and that Jesus didn’t want that selection made? If you’re saying that then you’re saying that Peter wasn’t guided by Jesus.

Matthias was SENT! As far as I can tell he didn’t stay put until the day he died.

And as far as apostleship goes Matthias spent more time with Jesus than Paul did,

I’m not saying that Paul wasn’t indeed an apostle and SENT by Jesus–i’m just saying that Matthias was SENT, too.

For that matter Barnabas was also an apostle.
 
Jerry-Jet said:
The real truth is you don’t know who Jesus might have sent after the Ascension. Just because there is no record of something in the bible does not in itself make such a thing false.

Just because Jesus SENT Paul does not mean that He didn’t send anyone else.

Are you going to tell me that Jesus wasn’t SENDING Matthias after his selection? Are you going to tell me that Peter came up with that idea all on his own and that Jesus didn’t want that selection made? If you’re saying that then you’re saying that Peter wasn’t guided by Jesus.

Matthias was SENT! As far as I can tell he didn’t stay put until the day he died.

And as far as apostleship goes Matthias spent more time with Jesus than Paul did,

I’m not saying that Paul wasn’t indeed an apostle and SENT by Jesus–i’m just saying that Matthias was SENT, too.

For that matter Barnabas was also an apostle.
Click to expand...
First of all don’t put words in my mouth. Matthias was elected to fill the office of bishop that Judas vacated by his death. Scripture is clear on that. He was never sent by Jesus. Scripture is clear that only the eleven were sent in Mt 28:16-20. Scripture never calls Matthias an Apostle. The only thing it says is that Matthias was numbered [counted or enrolled] with the eleven Apostles [Acts 1:26]. So let’s see now there were eleven apostles before Matthias was selected and eleven apostles after he was selected. So how could he be an Apostle. But here is a question for you to answer. If Matthias succeeds to Judas’ Apostleship, then you have established Apostolic Succession as one apostle succeeding another. So then, pray tell us which Apostle succeeded Peter??? The election of Matthias to the office of bishop establishes in scripture the Apostolic Succession of bishops. Like I said before scripture is abundantly clear that he was selected to take the office [the episcopal office] vacated by Judas. The KJV even translates the verse in Acts 1:20 thusly:

“20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.” They use the term bishoprick for the Greek episkope. This word, episkope, occurs elsewhere in the NT as in 1Ti 3:1, 1Ti 32, Tit 1:7 and 1Pe 2:25. Everytime it is translated as bishop.

By the way if you consult the Catechism you woill find that the Church teaches that there were only twelve Apostles, no more. Paul is definitely an Apostle. He is the twelth one. If you got more … well it just doesn’t seem like you are in line with church teaching.

Judas was called to be an Apostle but he was never sent. Matthias was never called to be an Apostle and he also was never sent. Paul was called by Jesus to be an Apostle and he was sent also.
 
inkaneer said:
See post 19, I’ll stick with scripture on this one. Judas was no Apostle He was never empowered to consecrate the Eucharist nor was he empowered to forgive sin. Furthermore he was never sent by Jesus as were the other eleven. Judas’ replacement, Matthias was also no Apostle as He was never sent by Jesus either. Matthias took over Judas’s office and that was the office of bishop. Furthermore Peter in Acts says Judas’ house [habitation] would be desolate. He is referring to Judas’ line of succession. No bishop ever claimed to be succeeded from Judas. The twelth Apostle is Paul who is called by and sent by Jesus.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with whether or not Judas received Holy Communion, which is the original question. Jesus was reaching out to Judas even as Judas was ‘leaving Mass early’ to betray Him. To me it shows the incredible love that Jesus has for us, and His incredible humility! He is always reaching out to even the most horrible sinners! Jesus would have forgiven, even Judas, if Judas would have asked!
May the Lord richly bless you!
Praised be our Lord Jesus Christ!
 
Cheri_Allen said:
This has nothing to do with whether or not Judas received Holy Communion, which is the original question. Jesus was reaching out to Judas even as Judas was ‘leaving Mass early’ to betray Him. To me it shows the incredible love that Jesus has for us, and His incredible humility! He is always reaching out to even the most horrible sinners! Jesus would have forgiven, even Judas, if Judas would have asked!
May the Lord richly bless you!
Praised be our Lord Jesus Christ!
Click to expand...
Please see my post #19 wherein I gave my answer to the question posed by the OP as to whether Judas received the Eucharist.
 
inkaneer said:
." 25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”
Then in verse 26 it says:

"26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Click to expand...
Am I misunderstanding you?

Are you arguing that verse 25 indicates that the betrayal had been complete before the breaking of bread at verse 26?

Isn’t the author using the past tense in verse 25 because at the time he was writing, the event was in the past?
Click to expand...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
." 25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”

Then in verse 26 it says:

"26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Benadam said:
Am I misunderstanding you?

Are you arguing that verse 25 indicates that the betrayal had been complete before the breaking of bread at verse 26?

Isn’t the author using the past tense in verse 25 because at the time he was writing, the event was in the past?
Click to expand...
Please read my entire post. Especially this part:

"…Matthew has the betrayal BEFORE the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14 we gain no additional information on the timing of the two events. Luke 19 seems to reverse the events as recorded in Matthew and Mark. John’s account does not mention the institution of the Eucharist. But it does say that Jesus gave a morsel of bread that he dipped to Judas and then it says about Judas:

“30 So, after receiving the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night.”
[John 13:30]

If Judas left immediately after eating the morsel and both Matthew and Mark say the event with the morsel and the dipping into the dish occurred before the Eucharist then Judas is not around for the initiation of the Eucharist…"

Jesus knew what was in Judas’ heart. If he gave him the Eucharist knowing full well that Judas already committed a serious sin then isn’t Jesus also guilty of sin? And if Jesus is guilty of sin here or anywhere, then forget the whole thing because the Lamb to be sacrificed is blemished and the sacrifice is in vain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top