What part in particular? Dazzle me with some theology.
First, I don't believe you are an honest broker in this discussion, and you are only here to ridicule which the exact point I have made. Second, the Lord's Supper has significant biblical foundations in its understanding and there is no way that I could possibly pretend to fully develop those underpinnings in this forum. Third, if we were all to agree that a certain presentation was indeed mocking of a particular religion, what would it look like? Now compare that to what we saw in the opening ceremony. How far off would we all be? I would suggest not very far.
Now specifically to your question I will attempt to raise a few brief points regarding the last supper which all surround the exclusivity of the meal itself.
1. The last supper was the final meal that Jesus shared with his apostles before his crucifixion. An exclusive meal between Jesus and those who believed him to be the Son of Man. He would later be declared innocent by the political leaders, Pilate and Herrod, only to be put to death. The actions and meaning of the last supper are all rooted in the Jesus said and did on that last night. Jesus commanded that it be continued.
2. The continued celebration of the Lord's supper is an act for those who believe in Jesus. The act is a proclamation of the Lord's death and what his death on the cross means for believers, namely that our sins are paid through the shed blood of Jesus, because God is just. The Catholic church restricts the taking of communion to only Catholics. Most protestants restrict to believers only. It is so sacred, as we learn in 1 Corinthians, that anyone that partakes in an unworthy manner will bring judgement on himself.
3. There was a deep connection to the Passover seder, a meal that was a memorial day to the Lord and remembrance of the 10th plague. The 10th plague was when the Lord killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt, ironically of a people that hardened their hearts to God. Now the Passover meal was to be celebrated by followers of God, in which no foreigner should partake.
Now in all three instances, the actual Last Supper (Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22), the later practice of the act (1 Corinthians 11), and the act in which was repurposed (Exodus 12), these were exclusive acts. There is no Biblical support to substantiate the participation of people who reject God. So, when we say that all are invited, and all are welcome to the Lord's table. That is true, but there are requirements that you come through faith in Jesus Christ.
The Heidelberg Catechism helpfully summarizes all of this for us: “Who should come to the Lord’s table?” The answer is this: “Those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins, but who nevertheless trust that their sins are pardoned and that their remaining weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to lead a better life. Hypocrites and those who are unrepentant, however, eat and drink judgment on themselves.”