# The Didache



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 12, 2009)

I just read the _Didache_ and I was sort of struck by how "one-sided" the aphorisms are. Whereas the NT Epistles, and even the Gospels, speak of Christ's Work as the basis for our own, the Didache is almost devoid of any mention of Christ. It appears devoid of any need of grace whatsoever and I don't understand in what sense Christ "saves" in it except that the person obey to the best of their ability.

Why do these "list of rules" get so much traction in the early Church? Don't get me wrong, it's not that the things it enjoins are bad in themselves but the vibe it puts off is "do this and live."


> CHAPTER 1
> 
> 1:1 There are two paths, one of life and one of death, and the difference is great between the two paths.
> 
> ...


----------



## LawrenceU (Jan 12, 2009)

That's one reason it is not canonical. When I hear folks referring to the Didache to prove a point they are grasping at straws.


----------



## PresbyDane (Jan 12, 2009)




----------



## Archlute (Jan 12, 2009)

I don't see much of a problem with the _Didache_ when the genre of the document is taken into account. It was not meant to be a Gospel treatise, but functions somewhere between being a handbook of casuistry in the first half, and a book of church order in the second half. I would think that we could accuse our own BCOs of lacking a Christ-centeredness if care was not taken by the reader to understand the purpose for which they had been written. Although its compilation of rules for Christian living may seem moralistic when taken on their face, many of these statements are just lifted straight out of the Apostolic writings. 

The reason that it is not canonical has nothing to do with its content, but with the fact that it was not written by an apostle or an apostolic associate (e.g Luke the Evangelist). The _First Epistle of Clement_ is a fabulous, Gospel centered document, but it is not considered canonical for the same reason as the _Didache_ - it was not written by an apostle or apostolic associate.


----------



## GTMOPC (Jan 12, 2009)

I like _Didache_. I think it's intent, that it is a 'teaching' and its obvious content being instructions or 'rules' shows us that it is meant to be used in an active sense. In other words things the reader 'ought to do' or imperatives. Its weakness as mentioned is the lack of Christ-centered-ness. It seems out of place to put something like that in the NT. Because of this weakness it's always seemed od to me that it appears so much at least in the peripheral Christian thought. Perhaps its only around because of historicity, who knows. I still think its cool reading though. I like some of the Apocrypha to, but I would never put any authority in it much less appeal to it to support some theological claim.

Perhaps the early church utilized them in order to give new converts a guide book on how to live daily life, something simple without the need of exegesis. That's my best guess.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jan 13, 2009)

Archlute said:


> I don't see much of a problem with the _Didache_ when the genre of the document is taken into account. It was not meant to be a Gospel treatise, but functions somewhere between being a handbook of casuistry in the first half, and a book of church order in the second half. I would think that we could accuse our own BCOs of lacking a Christ-centeredness if care was not taken by the reader to understand the purpose for which they had been written. Although its compilation of rules for Christian living may seem moralistic when taken on their face, many of these statements are just lifted straight out of the Apostolic writings.
> 
> The reason that it is not canonical has nothing to do with its content, but with the fact that it was not written by an apostle or an apostolic associate (e.g Luke the Evangelist). The _First Epistle of Clement_ is a fabulous, Gospel centered document, but it is not considered canonical for the same reason as the _Didache_ - it was not written by an apostle or apostolic associate.



Adam,

I'm not looking to trash it but I wonder how it was used. If it sort of functioned as a "catechism" then it might be problematic. It's not that I disagree with the point you're making about its function in causistry but even the causistry in the WSC or other catechisms is grounded in a "because". Perhaps this functioned in a backdrop where the "because" was already well understood but it certainly leaves the "why" of it all to the reader's mind, which is evidenced by the fact that the Roman Catholic Church places it as Apostolic tradition.


----------



## discipulo (Jan 13, 2009)

I was picking my copy, a Penguin Edition of Early Church Fathers, and I was 
amazed that the manuscript bears Two Titles: The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and the Lord’s teaching to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles 

(twelfth being Matthias? I actually believe, a very personal opinion, that this was another impulsivity of Peter, with throwing dices and so on, as the twelfth apostle is really Paul)

But the text itself is so far from making honour to any of such Titles, let alone the Two.


----------



## CharlieJ (Jan 13, 2009)

It has been suggested that Chapters 1-6 of the Didache serve as pre-baptismal catechetical instruction. Chapter 7 begins with the words (roughly translated), "Concerning baptism, after having spoken these things, baptize thus:" The first 6 chapters are commonly referred to as the "Two Ways tract" and call upon the hearer to choose which way to follow. (Remember, baptism in the early Church was very much centered on the person's profession.)


There is a fantastic book on the Didache by William Varner, Greek professor at Masters. He does translation, structural analysis, and commentary on it. The book grew out of his own usage of the Didache for Greek classes and is appropriate for someone with an intermediate knowledge of Greek.

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Way-Didache-First-Christian-Handbook/dp/0761837140/ref=pd_bbs_sr_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231859326&sr=8-4]Amazon.com: The Way of the Didache: The First Christian Handbook: William Varner: Books[/ame]


----------

