5/22/20
Connolly, R.H. “Didache and Diatessaron” Journal of Theological Studies 34 (1933),346-347.
Connolly here reviews an article by Dix, making a comparison of Isaac of Nineveh, the Apostolic Constitituions, and the Didache. Connolly concludes that Dix failed to “see what is surely so evident, viz. that Isaac was using the Apost. Const. and, for all that appears, knew the Didache only in the greatly altered form which it has there” (Connolly 1933, 346). Connolly illustrates this dependence by showing, briefly, that in places where Apostolic Constitutions removes some of the language used in the Didache and expands it using other language, Isaac never uses the didache wording. In instances where the wording of the Didache is retained, it is also the wording used in the canonical Scripture, which could well influence many more texts (Connolly 1933, 347).
Connolly, R.H. “Didache and Diatessaron” Journal of Theological Studies 34 (1933),346-347.
Connolly here reviews an article by Dix, making a comparison of Isaac of Nineveh, the Apostolic Constitituions, and the Didache. Connolly concludes that Dix failed to “see what is surely so evident, viz. that Isaac was using the Apost. Const. and, for all that appears, knew the Didache only in the greatly altered form which it has there” (Connolly 1933, 346). Connolly illustrates this dependence by showing, briefly, that in places where Apostolic Constitutions removes some of the language used in the Didache and expands it using other language, Isaac never uses the didache wording. In instances where the wording of the Didache is retained, it is also the wording used in the canonical Scripture, which could well influence many more texts (Connolly 1933, 347).
RSS Feed