Then they sat down; Jesus spoke of the traitor; Peter feared lest it should be himself; Judas received from our Lord the piece of bread dipped, which was the sign that it was he; preparations were made for the washing of the feet; Peter strove against his feet being washed; then came the institution of the Holy Eucharist: Judas communicated, and afterwards left the apartment; the oils were consecrated, and instructions given concerning them; Peter and the other Apostles received ordination; our Lord made his final discourse; Peter protested that he would never abandon him; and then the Supper concluded.

By adopting this order, it appears, at first, as though it were in contradiction to the passages of St.Matthew (31:29), and of St.Mark (14:26), in which the words: I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, etc., come after the consecration, but in St.Luke, they come before.

On the contrary, all that concerns the traitor Judas comes here, as in St.Matthew and St.Mark, before the consecration; whereas in St.Luke, it does not come till afterwards.

St.John, who does not relate the history of the institution of the Holy Eucharist, gives us to understand that Judas went out immediately after Jesus had given him the bread; but it appears most probable, from the accounts of the other Evangelists, that Judas received the Holy Communion under both forms, and several of the fathers--St.Augustine, St.Gregory the Great, and St.
Leo the Great--as well as the tradition of the Catholic Church, tell us expressly that such was the case.

Besides, were the order in which St.
John presents events taken literally, he would contradict, not only St.
Matthew and St.Mark, but himself, for it must follow, from verse 10, chap.