Near Emmaus

Tag Archives: The Didache


by 1 Comment

Notes on the Didache (Part 3)

Read Part 1 here.

Read Part 2 here.

Hospitality is a central Christian virtue, but it is mixed with reason: “Welcome anyone coming in the name of the Lord. Receive everyone who comes in the name of the Lord, but then, test them and use your discretion.” Then the following instructions are given: (1) Assist a traveler as you are able, but do not let them stay longer than two or three days. (2) If the person stays longer, that person must use their craft to earn a living. (3) If it happens that a person has no trade, then the host must use their own common sense to determine what to do. (4) If the person complains with the arrangement, be suspect, this person is “Christ-Peddler” or “Christ-Monger” (χριστέμπρός, 12:1-5).

Prophets were addressed earlier, but the subject arises again in 13:1-7. This section seems to address local prophets, rather than itinerate prophets. There is a sense that these prophets should be supported–a “tithe” if you will. If there are no prophets to support, the same items–first fruits, first loaves of bread, first portions of wine–should be given to the poor.

“The Lord’s Day” consist of confessing sins to one another, breaking bread, giving thanks (εὐχαριστήσατε, 14:1). If a person is contentious being at odds with another “brother” in the church, that person cannot participate. It appears that this is a early argument for the Eucharist event being one that promotes unity or “communion” of the saints (14:2).

Bishops are to be appointed, seemingly by the community. In other words, a Bishop is chosen from within the local assembly, rather than by an outside governing hierarchy. The same is true of deacons. Qualifications include being “worthy of the Lord” (a echo of Colossians 1:10?), meek, unattached to money, truthful, and proven (15:1). Bishops are categorized alongside Teachers and Prophets (15:2). Contention in the community is to be addressed. People should be reproved, though not in anger. If the reproved doesn’t change, s/he is to be isolated until this attitude changes (15:3).

The document begins to end with a series of warnings/edifications: Do not let your lamps be quenched (witness?); do not let your loins be loosed (sexuality?); be prepared for the imminent return of Christ; gather together often. The eschatology of the author(s) is as follows: you can fall away if not perfected in life; there will be false prophets/teachers in the last days (ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις); sinfulness and lawlessness will increase; a world-deceiver will come as the Son of God (ὁ κοσμοπλανὴς ὡς υἱὸσ θεοῦ); there will be a time of trial for humanity; then the “signs of truth” appear (τὰ σημεῖα τῆς ἀληθείας): Sign 1: the heavens open. Sign 2: a trumpet sound. Sign 3: the resurrection of the dead. Then the appearance of the Lord with his saints. Then there will be judgment.

About these ads


by 11 Comments

False prophets in early Christianity

For some reason it seemed like Benny Hinn's picture would fit here. (Courtesy of the Washington Post)

For some reason it seemed like Benny Hinn’s picture would fit here. (Courtesy of the Washington Post)

I have been reading through the Didache slowly while taking notes. Last week I mentioned how itinerant Apostles and Prophets were rejected as impostors if they stayed for more than a few days and asked for anything more than food and water (see “Notes on the Didache”, Part 2″). Also, if someone teaches something, but doesn’t live it, then this person is to be rejected as an imposture. These are the words from 11:1-12 regarding itinerate Apostles and Prophets (taken from here):

Welcome the teacher when he comes to instruct you in all that has been said.

But if he turns and trains you in another tradition to the destruction of this teaching, do not listen. If he teaches so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.

Act according to the precepts of the gospel concerning all apostles and prophets:

Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord.

But he must not remain more than one day, or two, if there’s a need. If he stays three days, he is a false prophet.

And when the apostle goes away, let him take nothing but bread to last him until his next night of lodging. If he asks for money, he is a false prophet.

In addition, if any prophet speaks in the Spirit, you shall not try or judge him; for every sin will be forgiven, but this sin cannot be forgiven.

But not everyone who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet; only he is a prophet who has the ways of the Lord about him. By their ways will the false prophet and the prophet be known.

Any prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it; if he does, he is indeed a false prophet.

And any prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do what he teaches, is a false prophet.

When a prophet, proved true, works for the mystery of the church in the world but does not teach others to do what he himself does, he will not be judged among you, for his judgment is already before God. The ancient prophets acted in this way, also.

But whoever says in the Spirit, “Give me money,”or something else like this, you must not listen to him. But if he tells you to give for the sake of others who are in need, let no one judge him.

Some of the restrictions seemed a bit harsh. Paul may have been willing to earn his own wages, but he supported the idea that those who preach the Gospel should be supported in doing that as their work. The Didache seems to be a reaction against those who are abusing the “right”. In other words, it was apparent that Christians were generous, and if one could pretend to be a traveling Apostle or Prophet one could make good money.

Then I was reading Irenaeus of Lyons’ Against Heresies and I was provided with the example of a gnostic “prophet” in the tradition of the Valentinians who Irenaeus accuses of gross immortality. He says this in 1.13.1-7 that this Marcus was very charismatic and he seduced women into having sex with him as part of his religious teachings. He deceived the wife of a deacon who traveled with him for some time before being brought to her senses and Irenaeus writes, “At last, when, with no small difficulty, the brethren had converted her, she spent her whole time in the exercise of public confession, weeping over and lamenting the defilement which she had received from this magician.” Many other women faced the scorn of their mistakes with Marcus and similar teachers in the region where he was a Bishop. Irenaeus writes of their current state-of-being:

“…they have deluded many women, who have their consciences seared as with a hot iron. Some of them, indeed, make a public confession of their sins; but others of them are ashamed to do this, and in a tacit kind of way, despairing of [attaining to] the life of God, have, some of them, apostatized altogether; while others hesitate between the two courses, and incur that which is implied in the proverb, “neither without nor within;” possessing this as the fruit from the seed of the children of knowledge.”

From Irenaeus’ writings it is evident that not all itinerate religious leaders were able to be put into a place of accountability and it wreaked havoc on the lives of many. I wonder if this is something foreseen by the author(s) of the Didache?


by 2 Comments

Notes on the Didache (Part 2)

Read Part 1 here.

The Eucharist is central to worship in early Christianity. Over the last month or so I have read the writings of personalities like Clement of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch, and Justin Martyr. Each one of them speak of the Eucharist as something that is indispensable. The name “Eucharist” (εὐχαριστίας) means “Thanksgiving”, and the author(s) of the Didache use this word thematically says, “Now, concerning the Thanksgiving (εὐχαριστίας), thus give thanks (εὐχαριστήσατε).” Then God the Father is given thanks (Εὐχαριστοῦμεν) for the wine. Then for the bread God the Father is given thanks (Εὐχαριστοῦμέν).

The meaning of the elements are as follows. The wine is traditionally symbolic of the blood of Jesus. It is a reminder that Jesus is part of the same “holy vine” of King David in the Didache. The bread is traditionally symbolic of the broken body of Jesus. It is a reminder that “life and knowledge” (ζωῆς καὶ γνώσεως) come through Jesus in the Didache. The prayer of thanksgiving is directed toward God the Father and Jesus is called “your servant”. The author(s) emphasize that glory belongs to God the Father because of the death of Jesus (9:1-3).

The author writes, “Even as the broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom.” This language may echo the story of the Feeding of the Five Thousand, or something similar, and it contains exile language familiar in the prophets where the diaspora people of God wait for the day when God will collect them from around the world (9:4).

The final words on the Eucharist are important: one who has not been baptized is not to partake, because Jesus said the “the dogs” should not have the “holy things” (interestingly, the Gentile women to whom this was said retorted that dogs do receive crumbs from the table providing a touché moment leading Jesus to answer her request). This statement does not mention the authority of a Bishop like some of the others that I have read recently. It does critique those who would allow the non-baptized to participate (9:5).

The Didache provides instruction for the prayer following the reception of the Eucharist (“when you are filled, give thanks this way”, 10:1). It is a prayer of thanksgiving to God the Father (once again, notably God the Father receives all the direct addresses as concerns the Eucharist) because of the “name enshrined in our hearts” as well as knowledge, faith, and immortality received. God is given thanksgiving for his creation of all things, including food and drink, and now “spiritual” (πνευματικὴν) food and drink. The prayer emphasizes God’s worthiness. Then it transitions to a petition for God to remember his Church (ἐκκλησίας). Some words echo the Lord’s Prayer: “Deliver us from evil” and “For yours is the power and glory forever”. Some of the words are unique, like the petitions to make the Church perfect in love and a restated prayer to gather the Church from around the world.

The final eschatological statement, “Let grace come, and let this world pass away” has interesting eschatological implications. Does παρελθέτω ὁ κόσμος οὗτος mean that the author of the Didache foresaw a day when the time-space continumm would come to an end? What does it mean to ask Jesus to return (μαρὰν ἀθά) if the cosmos are destined for destruction? Or does the author have an eschatological vision more like that of the end of the Book of Revelation where the old cosmos gives way to a new emerging cosmos (explained in Romans 8 as Creation being set free) (10:1-6).

Itinerate teachers are discussed. The instructions given are as follows: First, one should receive a teacher. Second, if the teaching doesn’t fit the tradition received the teacher should be ignored. If the teaching does fit the tradition received then he should be received. Third, the criteria is “the precepts of the gospel concerning all Apostles and Prophets”. Fourth, the author says to accept all Apostles, which is a unique statement because most of the writers I have read from the early church discuss Bishops as if Bishops have replaced Apostles. Either this document is early enough to be speaking of Apostles who exist still, or it is written to portray itself as older than it is, or the author affirmed the continuation of the apostolic office (11:1-4).

Apostles can stay for a few days at a time, lest it appear that these Apostles are mooching from the community, proving the falsity of their Apostleship. This is quite contrary to Paul’s words to the Corinthians that he could receive pay for his work. This must be a situational response to a trend in the early church for people to drain the resources of local communities by pretending to be an Apostle. So the author(s) claim that if an Apostle asks for money, or if an Apostle stays for three days, then this person is not an Apostle at all! All the Apostle can receive is bread and lodging (11:4-6).

There is criteria for true and false Prophets as well. If a prophet speaks in the Spirit (λαλοῦντα ἐν πνεύματι) he shouldn’t be critiqued or judged. Whatever it means to “speak in the Spirit”, this isn’t a pure qualification for being a Prophet. Someone could “speak in the Spirit” and not be a Prophet. The Prophet must accompany his/her speech with “the ways of the Lord” (τοὺς τρόπους κυρίου). This is likely the Way of Life described earlier in the document. In other words, true prophets are the most upright morally. Finally, true prophets do not eat a meal “ordered in the Spirit” (), whatever this means?! False prophets are known by their actions. False prophets do not “practice what they preach”. False prophets may eat of this meal “ordered in the Spirit”. The true Prophet does what he does, doesn’t teach how he does it, and doesn’t act for money while false prophets are the opposite (11:7-12).

In my next post on the Didache I will post noted on the rest of the document.

Read the Didache in English or Greek.