Category: Niederwimmer 1998

Brief Conclusions - the Didache

10/25/2024

Friday Scholarly Notes
10/25/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "Afterword." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (pp. 228-229). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

Niederwimmer draws a number of brief conclusions from his study of the Didache. He takes it to be a church order intended to help Christians order their lives, probably in or near Syria about the end of the "first or beginning of the second century" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 228). The writing does very little explication of his theological point of view. However, it is clear to Niederwimmer that delivered tradition is an important element, as evidenced by his extensive quotation of existing teaching.

0 Comments

A Picture of the End

10/18/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
10/18/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "IV: Eschatological Conclusion." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (pp. 207-227). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

   Niederwimmer divides Didache chapter 16 into two sections, with paraenesis in verses 1-2 and apocalyptic material in verses 3-8. He considers the abrupt stop at the end of verse 8 to indicate the actual end is missing (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 207). Niederwimmer observes a common view that the material in chapter 16 was originally a conclusion of the Two Ways material from chapters 1-6. However, documentation to defend this view is lacking. There may be dependence on Matthew 24, influence from Luke or Barnabas, or various portions of the Old Testament (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 209). Niederwimmer provides charts for comparison of ideas according to a number of possible theories.
   Didache 16:1-2 rather abruptly calls for vigilance, without any signal of that vigilance being required due to anything previously introduced (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 214). The image of a burning lamp is used, along with that of not relaxing a belt. Both indicate the need to remain prepared for action (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 215).
   The time of the end will be recognized by the presence of false prophets and corruption leading to strife (16.3-4a) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 217). Niederwimmer notes the language used is fairly typical of discussion of the troubles of the last days. Of significance is the change of Christians into non-Christian enemies (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 218).
   Didache 16.4 goes on to describe the coming of an Antichrist, who will do miracles and deceive the world (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 219). He takes over the rule of the world, committing godless works. The result, in verse five, is that humans will endure a time of testing, which will bring destruction on many (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 221). The destruction seems to Niederwimmer to refer to a falling away from the truth. However, the timing and nature of the destruction of some and the preservation of others is not entirely clear (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 222).
   The apocalypse continues as there are signs detailed in Didache 16.6-7. Niederwimmer comments that the first sign, "a spreading out" in heaven is not altogether clear, but may likely refer to a cross (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 223). The second sign, a trumpet call, is more easily understood. The third sign is a resurrection of the dead, but not all of the dead (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 224). Rather, this resurrection, which Niederwimmer notes references Zechariah but repurposes it somewhat, is only of the dead in Christ (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 225). Finally, in verse eight, "the world will see the Lord coming upon the clouds of heaven" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 226). This is a relatively common apocalyptic motif, which Niederwimmer thinks is more similar in its form to that in Matthew than in other sources.

0 Comments

Church Operations

10/11/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
10/11/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "III: The Church Order (11.1-15.4)." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (pp. 169-205). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

   Niederwimmer classifies Didache 11.1-15.4 as a form of a church order, as it provides a series of specific instructions about relationships. He takes the Didachist to have, as in earlier sections, "an ancient text that deals with situations within the Christian community that have significantly (although not entirely) changed" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 169). These instructions are updated by the Didachist's redaction. He sees this particularly in the somewhat complex interactions with apostles, prophets, teachers, elders, and deacons, particularly in their classification as charismatic itinerant individuals and resident leaders. While some commentators consider this segment of the Didache to require two different redactional phases, Niederwimmer finds one to be adequate, assuming that the Didachist not only edits material but also provides fairly extensive expositions (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 170).
   Didache 11.1-2 instructs that those who come to the community with teaching consistent with the earlier portions of the Didache is to be received. However, they are to be evaluated in terms of their teaching and, if the teaching is not sound, they are to be rejected (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 171). Knowledge and righteousness are to be increased by right teaching. Therefore, those teachers whose words and deeds further those qualities are to be received. They are considered as if the Lord himself were present (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 172).
   Niederwimmer considers Didache 11.3 to be added to the source document by the Didachist, serving as a transition to speaking about the apostles and prophets in turn (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 173). 11.4-6 then provides instructions about apostles. Niederwimmer sees this passage as coming from the source document, due to its possibly archaic discussion of apostles and prophets bringing the gospel from place to place (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 175). The group of apostles does not appear to be limited to the Twelve, yet are messengers of the Lord. Niederwimmer describes them as "homeless messengers without property" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 175). Though they are received as the Lord himself, in verse five they may only stay for a very limited period of time. The assumption is that they will continue to be itinerant, proclaiming the gospel to the whole world, not one single community (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 176). A person who attempts to stay a third day is a "false prophet." In verse six the itinerant apostle is to be sent on his way with just what is absolutely necessary to continue a journey for one more day, and not with money, but only food. This is reminiscent of Mark 6:8, Luke 9:3, and Matthew 10:9, in which Jesus directs his servants not to take money with them as they go on a journey for his sake (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 177).
   The discussion shifts from apostles to prophets in Didache 11.7-12. As with the apostles, the prophets are also itinerant. There is a substantial shift of assumptions in Didache 13.1-7, where the text discusses prophets who wish to settle, rather than continue as itinerant workers (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 178). The prophets speak in the spirit. They are not to be tested or judged when speaking in the spirit. Rather than judging the words, in verse eight the prophets are to be evaluated by their manner of life. Their deeds are considered. If the prophet has a lifestyle which is not consistent with that of Jesus, he is to be rejected (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 179). The Didachist provides two examples of inconsistency. The first of those examples, found in verse nine, is difficult to interpret. If he orders a meal and partakes of it, he is to be rejected. Niederwimmer considers that this may well refer to ordering a meal for needy people in the community. Yet he concedes that it is not clear. The second example is easier to judge. If the prophet's actions are not consistent with his teaching, he is a false teacher (Didache 11.10-11).
   Niederwimmer considers Didache 11.11 to be a crux interpretum, as the Coptic and Ethiopic versions may suggest their translators had difficulty understanding the text. The Greek text may well suggest that the prophets in the Didache clarify their witness through symbolic actions (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 180). There is a mention of a "cosmic mystery," which may be the relationship of Christ and the Church. However, it is not entirely clear. Niederwimmer suggests that possibly a prophet would arrive with "a Christian woman with whom he lives in a spiritual marriage" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 181). This would be assumed to be some ascetic union which is intended to reflect the relationship of Christ and Church. Niederwimmer views this as having a typological relationship to the life of Old Testament prophets.
   Didache 11.12, compared to verse 11, is relatively easy to interpret. If a prophet demands money or other goods, he is a false prophet. It is permissible for a prophet to demand money or goods for the needy, but not for himself (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 182).
   Niederwimmer considers there to be a significant change in topic in Didache 12.1, as it speaks of πᾶς δὲ ὁ ἐρχόμενος - everyone coming (to you). He takes this to indicate that, counter to apostles and prophets, who are charismatics, this refers to noncharismatic Christians (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 183). The newcomer is received, but then evaluated. This testing "presumes that there have been bad experiences connected with Christian hospitality" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 184). The Didache gives no criteria for the testing, but rather assumes that the Christians will have insight sufficient to evaluate the newcomer.
   The text continues in 12.2 with another example of a person who would come to the community. This is someone who is traveling and stops on the way somewhere. The traveler is to be assisted generously (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 185). However, the traveler is not to stay for long, two or three days if needed.
   Some people arrive and wish to settle in the community. This is the subject of Didache 12.3-5. Niederwimmer notes that these directives set out three scenarios of a Christian responsibility for others. First, if the newcomer is skilled in some way, he should feel free to practice that skill like anyone else. Minimal assistance is needed. Second, if the newcomer is unskilled, the community should use insight to be sure the person finds work, rather than remaining in idleness. Third, if the person is unwilling to work, that person is trying to profit from the (false) claim of being a Christian. The community is to guard against that (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 186). Niederwimmer has a brief excursus about the term χριστέμπορος, one who makes a living by dealing in Christ's name, seeking personal enrichment (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 187). The term appears to be a neologism of the Didachist. It was subsequently used fairly widely to describe a category of people who must be condemned.
   Didache 13.1-7 discusses both prophets who wish to settle in the community as well as the duty we may have toward teachers. Niederwimmer repeats his point of view that itinerant apostles were no longer expected to come to the community, but prophets and teachers are in the area. (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 188). True prophets and teachers are deserving of support, at least in the form of food. The worker is worthy of his keep. Niederwimmer takes this to indicate that there is a "principle that locally resident Christians are obligated to provide a livelihood for the prophets who desire to settle among them. The office of prophet itself is adequate reason for this obligation of support" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 189). The prophet, and, in 13.2, the teacher, is to be provided for, rather than being sent to work with his hands. Niederwimmer takes the teachers discussed here and in 15.1-2 to have started as itinerant charismatics and to now desire to settle in a community (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 190).
   Didache 13.3-7 speaks in more detail about the nourishment to be given to the "charismatics" - they are to receive firstfruits of agricultural products, as would the high priests in the Old Testament (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 191). Niederwimmer observes that the prophets are only specifically mentioned here, though teachers had been present in verse 2. The prophets are taking on the role which high priests had held in Israel, therefore they should receive the same kind of offerings. Niederwimmer notes that there is some lack of clarity whether the prophets led the community in worship or whether that was the role of the local elders (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 192). If prophets are not present in the community, according to verse 4, the firstfruits should go to the poor. Contributions to the prophets should also include bread, wine, and oil, as well as appropriate clothing (verses 5-7). Whatever is needed is to be provided, "as you think best" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 193).
   Niederwimmer takes Didache 14.1-3 to be redactional in nature. While it begins with mention of a Sunday worship service, it is really about "the particular issue of confession, or reconciliation, as precondition for the purity required for the carrying out of the sacrifice that is brought before God in the meal celebration" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 194). He sees the passage to command the Eucharist on every Lord's day, with the breaking of bread (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 195), and that the expectation is probably, as he found earlier, a meal celebration followed by the sacramental breaking of bread in the Eucharist (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 196). However, Niederwimmer finds the focus of this passage to be on the need for the congregation to confess their sins to one another. This was already called for in 4.14. He notes that the confession is to happen "before" the beginning of the Eucharist. and that the confession is a "precondition for the purity of the sacrifice presented at the meal" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 196). Niederwimmer, speaking of the language of sacrifice, considers that the giving of thanks may be seen as the sacrifice referred to, rather than viewing the bread and wine as the sacrifice, as was done by Justin Martyr (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 197). Regardless, reconciliation is key to moral purity, and is extended to ritual purity as well. Niederwimmer finds it striking that the Didachist refers to Malachi 1:11, 14 rather than Matthew 5:23-24 to support the call to reconciliation.
   The need for reconciliation extends beyond the average member of the congregation. Niederwimmer sees Didache 15.1-2 as a digression seeking resolution between the charismatics and the local leadership (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 200). The people are able to select leaders, in this case, bishops and deacons. These are plural, indicating that the tradition at this point is not to have just one bishop in each community. Niederwimmer notes that there is no mention of πρεσβύτεροι here, but only of ἐπίσκοποι and διάκονοι (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 200). The text gives some very brief qualifications in verse 1b. Of note in 1c-2 is that the local clergy and the itinerant charismatics are to function alongside each other and overcome their friction, as they have similar functions in the community (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 201). Verses 3-4 return to the concepts from 14.1-3, suggesting to Niederwimmer that it is redactional in nature. The community of Christians, not a broader community outside of the church, is to participate in its own correction and reconciliation (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 203). The passage concludes with an appeal to pray and show mercy in all that is done, as we might find in the gospel (though it is not clear what that gospel is) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 204).

0 Comments

Liturgy for Baptism and Eucharist

10/4/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
10/4/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "II: The Liturgy.(7.1-10.7)" In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (125-167). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

   Niederwimmer sees the Didache to engage in a completely different kind of task in 7.1-10.7 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 125). The pre-baptismal catechesis is over. Now there is what we could consider an "agenda." "In it the Didachist apparently makes use of liturgical traditions and probably had a fixed, written set of instructions as his source. To the old tradition (i.e., the source) he adds passages from his own pen" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 125). Niederwimmer divides this material into a section on baptism (ch. 7), and one on the Eucharist (9-10), with instructions about fasting and prayer inserted as an excursus tied to baptism.
   Nitederwimmer takes the transitional statement "having said all this beforehand" in 7.1, as well as the concessions about the method of baptism to be the work of a redactor, not the original source material used by the Didachist (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 125). The introduction, "but about baptism, baptize this way" is likely from the source used by the Didachist (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 126). Niederwimmer considers it uncertain whether there was a recitation of Didache ch. 1-6 before a baptism, even while he considers it certain that additional instruction took place before baptism. There is a three-part ritual formula in Didache 7, which is identical in nature to that in Matthew 28:19 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 126). He considers this agreement to be best explained by both authors depending on the same liturgy (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 127). The water is expected to be "flowing, fresh spring water," which Niederwimmer notes as the normal water used in Jewish purification ceremonies. Though "living water" is the norm, Niederwimmer takes the redactor to have relaxed the standard, allowing other types of water in verse two. The threefold pouring of water on the head is acceptable if other water is not available. Niederwimmer comments that the beginning of the process is trinitarian in nature, as is the end.
   Niederwimmer notes that there were Jewish classifications of water for ceremonial worship. Though "the effect of baptism is unquestioned" it was still preferable to have the pure running water if possible (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 128-129).
   Didache 7.4 speaks of fasting before baptism. Niederwimmer takes this to come from the liturgical source the Didachist used. Again, fasting is a common practice in Jewish and early Christian tradition (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 129). The command to have others join in the fast was possibly more rigorous and declined early. Niederwimmer bases his opinion on this matter on the fact that a community fast is not absolutely required (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 130).
   Didache 8.1 digresses slightly from the pre-baptismal fast to identifying appropriate days for routine practices of fasting. no motive is given for the fast. However, the Christian practice is to differ in some substantive way from the Jewish practices (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 131). Niederwimmer considers the reference to "the hypocrites" as encapsulating all Jews, not just one class, such as Pharisees. This statement does signal that the Christian and Jewish communities are in closer proximity, but are distancing themselves from one another at the time (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 132). The Jewish community may well have had prescribed fast days. The Christians did not have them prescribed, but were urged to make a difference in their fasting (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 132-133).
   Didache 8.2-3 draws us into prayer. Again, Niederwimmer observes the prayer customs of the Christians should differ from those of the Jews (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 134). The reference to praying as the Lord commanded in his gospel strikes Niederwimmer as being a clumsy insertion into the pre-existing liturgical tradition. This "gospel" may have been an oral or a written tradition (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 135). The prayer is almost identical to that used in Matthew. Niederwimmer doubts literary dependence on Matthew, preferring instead a common liturgical tradition. Niederwimmer details the difference between the prayer in the Didache and in Matthew 6 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 136). He also observes that "Adolf Schlatter and Joachim Jeremias have instructed us. . . that the our Father was one of the prayers 'with the "seal," i.e., with a freely formulated conclusion'" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 136). Over a period of time a fixed form of a doxology could become permanently attached to a prayer. The doxology which attached itself to Matthew is distinct from the one in the Didache. While the Matthean prayer gained "kingdom, power, and glory" the Didache has simply "power and glory" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 137). The doxology on the prayer in the Didache (8.2) occurs again at 10.5, and with a slight variation at 9.4 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 138). The prayer is to be used three times daily (8.3) but the specific times of the day are apparently not yet set. At least they are not mentioned in the Didache.
   The eucharistic segment of the Didache goes from 9.1-10.7. Niederwimmer notes this is "the oldest formula for the Christian eucharistic liturgy" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 139). The passage has been studied extensively. There is no clear description of the liturgical elements. However, we have prayers, acclamations, and rubrics. Chapters 9 and 10 have strong parallels to each other, as Niederwimmer illustrates by setting the material in parallel columns. The prayers throughout this section follow the model of Jewish prayers (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 140).
   Niederwimmer observes that the reader expects the eucharist as presented to be the Lord's Supper essentially as it might be practiced today. However, the elements are in the opposite order than normal modern practice would expect. Further, there is no institution narrative. The prayers also contain little, if any, reference to the passion of Christ. Finally, it appears this may be a full meal (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 140). Niederwimmer catalogs proponents of three possible positions: a eucharistic celebration introducing an agape meal, an agape meal with its prayers, or two versions of a eucharist (one with a special circumstance of baptism, one representing a regular Sunday observance) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 141). Another suggestion is that the prayers for the community meal may be followed by a eucharist, or that the eucharist and agape meal had not been distinguished from one another (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 142). Niederwimmer attempts to resolve the difficulty by starting with a view of Didache 10.6 as a text to precede the "sacramental Communion" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 142). This would require that the eating introduced in 10.1 is a community meal, resolving the difference in the order of the elements. If this is the case, the blessing in 9.2-4 can be seen in the same way as that in 10.1 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 143). Niederwimmer's view requires his argument that εὐχαριστία in 9.1 is not yet used as a term for the sacrament but can be applied to other acts of giving thanks (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 143). The omission of the institution narrative has been explained in two ways, which Niederwimmer finds unsatisfying. Either it was entirely well known or it may have been retained unwritten to guard secrecy (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 143). Niederwimmer does not suggest an alternative. Rather, he goes on to specific comments on the content.
   Didache 9.1, like 7.1, is an introductory rubric. Here it signals a move to speak about εὐχαριστία (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 144). Niederwimmer does not take it to refer to the Lord's Supper, as mentioned above. In verse two, Niederwimmer notes the Jewish custom of a meal starting with a cup, over which each participant states a blessing. The structure of the blessing is parallel to common Jewish meal prayers (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 145). Niederwimmer takes the admittedly cryptic giving of thanks for "the holy vine of David" as a metaphor for salvation, revealed through Jesus (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 146). The term παῖς, applied to both David and Jesus in this passage, is routinely interpreted as "servant" rather than "child." Niederwimmer contends (though without proofs in this instance) that the term would not have been interpreted as "child" by this time, but took on the significance later (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 147). The doxology, at the end of 9.2, could well be a response of the community (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 148).
   The reference to bread in Didache 9.3 often draws comment due to its unusual wording. The use of the word κλάσμα rather than ἄρτος is curious. Niederwimmer takes it to be the broken bread, as opposed to a whole loaf (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 148). This may signal a later stage of redaction, as well as possibly indicating an Egyptian emendation, as the word was more common in Egyptian eucharistic usage. The structure of the prayer is parallel to that used earlier over the wine. Niederwimmer considers the reference to "life" and "knowledge" to be forceful, indicating a fullness of life and knowledge (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 149). In Didache 9.4 a second prayer follows, desiring an eschatological unity of Christians, as the bread is a unity of many grains. Niederwimmer again emphasizes that the evidence in the Didache represents the oldest known example of liturgy (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 150).
   Niederwimmer engages the actual text of the prayers in a brief excursus. The eschatological hope is a well established Old Testament concept The structure of the prayers also follows a well established pattern for Jewish prayers. Yet the language used is clearly reflective of a Christian confession, that not only the people of God's covenant with Israel, but the entire Church will be gathered together in the last day (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 151). An appropriate liturgical response to such a prayer is found in the doxology ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δόξα καὶ ἡ δύναμις διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 152).
   Niederwimmer sees Didache 9.5 as a rubrical comment. Those who have not been baptized are not partakers of the meal (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 152). Again, it is not clear to Niederwimmer whether this refers to the entire meal or to simply the particular foods, and whether this meal is considered a sacramental Lord's Supper. He considers the meal in chapter ten to be more clearly a sacramental Lord's supper, and that the rubric here separates the unbaptized from the sacrament (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 153). The prohibition, predicated on a saying of the Lord, uses the exact words of Matthew 7:6, however, in a vastly different context from Matthew's use of the statement. Niederwimmer considers that this usage does not reflect use of Matthew's Gospel, but from some other collection of Jesus' statements due to the very different context (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 153).
   While Niederwimmer considers the material just discussed to contain significant redaction of an original source on the part of the Didachist, at 10.1 he considers the Didachist to have returned to his original source (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 155). The meal in question has been eaten. Now that everyone's hunger has been satisfied, a prayer of thanksgiving follows. Niederwimmer observes that "the prayer consists of three benedictions…, each introduced by an address…, and concluded by a doxology" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 155). The prayer follows the pattern of the Jewish Birkat Ha-Mazon. However, the parts do not correspond with each other. The first part has no parallel in content, while the second part of the Didache prayer shows similarity in content to the first Jewish benediction, and the third part of the Didache prayer resembles the third Jewish benediction (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 156). Niederwimmer notes the element of praise to God who dwells in his people's hearts with his name. In 9.3 God gave gifts of life and knowledge, but here he gives knowledge, faith, and immortality (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 157). He is addressed as the creator of all, and the one who acts in a gracious manner. The giving of "spiritual food (and) drink" is understood by Niederwimmer to look forward to the sacramental meal, which follows the more substantial and filling meal which has been eaten together before the prayer (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 158). Didache 10.5 bears some similarity in content to the third benediction in the post-meal prayers of Jewish tradition. God is present among his people. Rather than recognizing him in Jerusalem and the people of Zion, the prayer in the Didache asks God to remember his church and bring them into his kingdom, a clearly Christian understanding of restoration (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 159). Again there is a doxology, which Niederwimmer sees as the likely congregational response (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 161).
   Niederwimmer finds Didache 10.6 to present difficulties in interpretation. The verse moves from the prayer which precedes it to a ritual acclamation. It presents a number of short and not strongly connected sentences (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 161). The material shows a strong eschatological orientation, and cries out to God in praise. This is more fitting for the introduction of a sacramental meal than for the conclusion of a meal. Niederwimmer, then takes the passage as a dialogue introducing the sacramental eucharist, which follows after chapter 10. The dialogue both invites the Lord's presence and those who are holy to come, but prohibits those who are not holy, calling them to repentance (Niederwimmer 1998, pp. 162-163).
   Didache 10.7 appears to Niederwimmer as a rubric, guiding the community in their reception of prophets, who will act in different ways from the local elders (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 164). The prophets may pray freely in the eucharistic setting. This may apply to their choice to use or not use the earlier specified liturgical prayers, or it may be understood as permission to add prayers to those already used in the liturgy.
   Niederwimmer next considers the brief insertion found in the Coptic version of the Didache. He provides a Greek version of the Coptic text at this point, along with a parallel Greek text of Apostolic Constitutions' corresponding passage (7.27.1-2) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 165). The prayer is a blessing on myron, which is often assumed to be special scented oil. This is variously considered something used in baptism or in anointing of the sick (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 166).

0 Comments

Before Baptism

9/27/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
9/27/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "I. Baptismal Catechesis: The Tractate on the Two Ways: 1.1-6.3." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (59-124). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

   Niederwimmer takes the opening of the Didache's Two Ways tractate as having an abrupt start, and being drawn from an earlier Christianized source. What is of special note to him is that the Two Ways seems repurposed for pre-baptismal catechesis (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 59). The overall theme is expressed in 1.1 as the alternative ways placed before humans: a way of life and a way of death. The moral choice was not a new idea in moral philosophy, as can be shown from various Greek philosophers. Niederwimmer notesthat parallels can be found within Islam and Buddhism as well (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 60). I observe as a matter of course that Islam developed significantly after this time period. Niederwimmer supplies a wealth of references to similar concepts expressed in Judaic writings. He evaluates statements in the Fathers in more depth. In some instances the disparate ways are subject to two spirits or angels. In others, they are broad and narrow ways (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 62). Niederwimmer observes that by Didache 7.1 it becomes clear that the choice also involves a decision to live as a Christian and receive baptism or not (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 63).
   Didache 1.2-4.14 describes the Way of Life. This way is summed up by the command to love God and the neighbor, from 1.2-3a. Niederwimmer compares this statement with Mark 12:30-31, Matthew 22:37-39, and Luke 10:27, but concludes that the phrasing in the Didache does not depend on any of the Synoptic sources. It is significantly shorter, and lacks any narrative framework such as we find in the Gospels (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 64). The statement of the "Golden Rule" which follows in Didache 2c appears in negative terms, which is the more common way to phrase it, in comparison to the positive phrasing in Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 66).
   Niederwimmer considers the source material for the Didache to have continued immediately with the prohibitions found in Didache 2.2-7 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 67). The Didachist may well have inserted the brief explanation of 1.3a and the more particularly Christian interpolation of 1.3b-2.1.
   The material in 1.3b-2.1, in Niederwimmer's view, is clearly an insertion in the overall Two Ways material (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 68). It appears only in the Didache and tractates which were derived from it, and nowhere else. Niederwimmer takes this passage to be original to the Didachist, rather than representing a later interpolation. Niederwimmer evaluates a possible source for the sectio evangelica. He concludes that it was most likely inspired by Luke's Gospel or its source, either in a written or oral tradition (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 72). While Niederwimmer does not specifically say so, his description of the material as allusive strongly suggests the Didachist adopted a thought rather than a text .
   Didache 1.3b introduces the concept of loving one's enemies. Niederwimmer observes the passage is arranged in a series of couplets expressing parallel ideas (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 74). The requirement of repaying love for hatred is distinctly countercultural, yet is considered the norm for Christians. Niederwimmer notes numerous parallels to these ideas as found in the Synoptic gospels. However, the statement that such love for enemies will eliminate enemies is not found in the Gospels (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 75). Niederwimmer proceeds to observe several statements not found in other Two Ways tractates, which he interprets as interpolations in the Didache's use of the source material (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 76).
   From 1.4b-5a, Niederwimmer finds clear parallels in contiguous passages of the Synoptics (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 78). The overriding concept in all these statements is a renunciation of vengeance and retribution. Niederwimmer concludes that the audience consists of "exploited and helpless people who cannot and will not defend themselves" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 80). The change of life which Christians engage in is something fulfilling. The result is becoming τέλειος.
   Didache 1.5b-2.1 turns attention to giving of alms. Niederwimmer notes the ideas are not known from the gospels or other Jesus traditions, but that they do appear in Hermas (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 81). Niederwimmer does not take the similarity to show dependence, rather, to signal a common source (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 82). The emphasis in giving alms is to distribute them as God's gifts, and that they should be used by a person in need. The gifts should be given "according to the commandment," though what specific commandment is not clear (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 83). The person who receives alms is responsible for rightly evaluating his need. Receiving unworthily will have consequences. At v. 6 a proof is given which purports to be from Scripture (meaning the Old Testament). However, Niederwimmer cannot provide a definitive reference. In question is the command to "let your alms sweat into your hands: (personal translation of ἱδρωσάτω ἡ ἐλεημοσύνη σου εἰς τὰς χεῖράς σου) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 84). He does consider a number of possible, but not certain, parallels. The quotation is well known by the time of Augistine, as Niederwimmer demonstrates with numerous citations (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 84-85).
   Didache 2.1 is introduced by a transitional statement, referencing δευτέρα δὲ ἐντολὴ τῆς διδαχὴς (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 86). Niederwimmer takes this as a transition from the sectio evangelica back to the Two Ways material which already existed. Niederwimmer takes the transition and the ordering to show a lack of forethought and finesse, calling it an "emergency construction" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 87).
   Didache 2.2-7 appears to be drawn from the Two Ways source, providing a list of prohibitions (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 88). Niederwimmer, following Audet, considers the basic structure of the passage to be loosely based on "the second table of the Decalogue" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 88), though adapted with considerable freedom. The vices listed in chapter five serve as a parallel, in terms of content (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 88-89). Niederwimmer observes the strong abhorrence held by Jews against Gentile sexual offenses and practice of magical arts. The magical arts prohibition in Didache chapter two departs from the second table of the Commandments (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 89). Niederwimmer further notes that verse two "offers the oldest explicit Christian instance of the prohibition of abortion" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 89-90). However, he considers abortion to have been rejected by Jews and Christians uniformly. While verse two spoke primarily about actions, verses 3-5 speak primarily about words (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 90-91). Verses 6-7 move on to speak about offense against the neighbor, reminiscent of the 9th and 10th commandments (8th-10th) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 92). Verse seven concludes with a strong statement about caring for one's neighbor.
   Didache 3.1-6 moves into a series of statements addressed to the τέκνον, "my child" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 94). Niederwimmer notes that this passage has no parallel in Barnabas (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 94). "The primary intention of the series is to reveal apparently minor vices as, in fact, dangerous temptations, which (if one surrenders to them) lead to serious sins" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 95). The teacher here takes the role of the parent, while the student has the role of the child. Niederwimmer observes that this is a typical style for Jewish teaching (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 96). The warning of Didache 3.1 is to flee from every evil thing and everything like it. While the "evil" could be masculine, implying an evil person, Niederwimmer takes it more likely to be a neuter. The next verse gives an example of an evil thing - anger (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 97). All the evils can be seen to lead to more serious acts, such as murder. Likewise, verse three describes lust leading to acts of sexual immorality (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 97). Verse four describes pagan superstition leading to idolatry (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 98). Lying, in verse five, leads to theft (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 98). Niederwimmer finds this surprising, but takes the logic which follows lying to suggest not merely making false statements but particularly practicing deception or treachery. The final teknon saying is that grumbling can lead to blasphemy (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 99).
   Didache 3.7-10 changes from the brief aphorisms of 3.1-6 and describes a quiet faithfulness. The humble people are to hope in the Lord, rather than grumbling. Niederwimmer ties this to "socioeconomic oppression" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 100). He finds allusions here to Barnabas 19, Matthew 5, and Psalm 36. The piety described here is lived out in the community of the faithful who are eager to hear the word of God (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 101).
   Niederwimmer observes that the ideal of accepting whatever happens has many parallels both in Jewish and Chrsitian traditions as well as in Stoic philosophy (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 102).
   Didache 4.1-11 details rules for living in society. Niederwimmer observes that the structure is clearly the same in Didache and Doctrina, but very different in Barnabas 19 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 103). At the end of the passage there is some structural similarity to the "household codes" but it appears to be incidental in its similarity. Verses 1-2 speak to the relationship of learners to their teachers, who Niederwimmer assumes to be resident in the community, rather than a peripatetic group (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 104). There is an expectation that the pupil and teacher should both be dedicated to piety, and that the teacher would be honored as a master (κύριος, the standard reference to Jesus) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 105). The teaching is to be sought out on a daily basis (v. 2). Not only is this to be a matter of individual dedication, but in verses 3-11 it is to pervade the community. Niederwimmer notes that respect also calls for an impartial application of accountability (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 106). There is no place for doubt or regret about right teachings and decisions (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 107). Verses 5-8 extend the standards to charity and care for the poor, an important commitment in Jewish and Christian traditions. Almsgiving is closely related to forgiveness of sins (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 108).
   Niederwimmer considers whether the commitments to charity in Didache 4.8 represent a community of possessions (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 108). An alternative to this view is a commitment to use possessions, which are still private property, for the benefit of the community. While both views can be defended based on the Old Testament, as well as passages in Acts chapters two and four, Niederwimmer sees no clear point of view in the mind of the Didachist (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 109). He does, however, see that giving in charity is considered a matter of joy, rather than a burden. Verse 8c emphasizes that it is appropriate to share earthly goods since we willshare eternal goods later.
   Verses 9-11 shift the focus slightly from the community to the household (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 109). Parents are to bear responsibility to bring up their children. Niederwimmer observes this is a common commitment expressed in early Christianity, as well as the Jewish world (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 10). Masters are not to be harsh to slaves, especially as they are called to believe on the same God as the master. Both free and slave are called by the same Lord. Niederwimmer notes the language here may not fit in the Jewish source of the tractate but presumably reflects a Christian adaptation (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 110-111). In 4.11, slaves are likewise to respect and honor their masters, as they also have a heavenly master.
   The Way of Life closes with a brief epilogue in Didache 4.12-14. Commands are to be kept, rather than being neglected or departed from. They are not to be changed or falsified (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 112). In verse 14, the person who has failed in the commands is to repent and confess the sin so as to be received back into the fellowship of the way of life (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 113).
   Didache 5.1-2 moves us to the Way of Death (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 114). The transition statement is a parallel to the introduction found in 1.2a. The language is strong, stating clearly that it is evil and accursed. Verses 1b-2 list 23 vices and 19 groups of evildoers. Niederwimmer notes that these lists are not repeated in the same terms in Barnabas or Doctrina (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 115). The sins listed are largely arranged on the same pattern as the mentions of sins to avoid in Didache 2, following the pattern of the second half of the Decalogue (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 116). The list of evildoers, from 5.2, has parallels in Barnabas 20. Niederwimmer notes the structure includes several parallelisms (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 117-118). 5.2 closes with an admonition to avoid evil in the way of death (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 119).
   Didache 6.1-3 may be seen as a brief epilogue and appendix to the Two Ways (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 120). Niederwimmer considers the epilogue to have been longer in the original tractate, similar to that found in Doctrina. He believes the Didachist abbreviated it, then appended a few statements that he had found useful in baptismal catechesis. The "whole yoke of the lord" (6.2) is to be taken up if possible. However, the person who is not able "should concentrate on the part of the commandments that he or she is able to fulfill" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 121). Niederwimmer concedes that we don't know what the "whole yoke" entails. He does review several possibilities, then agrees with Rordorf and Tuilier, who consider it to be "the law of Christ,a s the Didacheist had revealed at the beginning in the sectio christiana sive evangelica" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 122). Further, in verse three, while dietary laws may be relaxed, the Didachist does not make an exception for meat offered to idols (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 123). Distance from idolatry is required.

0 Comments

A Book with Two Titles

9/20/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
9/20/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "The Title." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (56-57. (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

Niederwimmer considers the double title found in the Jerusalem manuscript of the Didache. The short title is set apart above the start of the text, while the longer title is presented on the first line, followed by the start of the main text, also begun on the first line. He considers it "probable . . . that neither title is original" and that the short title without the number "twelve" was original (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 56). This would explain the title as it is referred to in early Christian writings. A remaining problem is that the document has no internal claims to apostolicity. He considers the titles, then, to be superimposed on the document, possibly from an origin as a superscription placed on the Two Ways tractate, therefore not indicative of a way in which the Didache is to be interpreted (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 57).

0 Comments

A Detailed Introduction to Study of the Didache

9/13/2024

0 Comments

Friday Scholarly Notes
9/13/24

Niederwimmer, Kurt. (1998). "Introduction." In The Didache: A Commentary on the Didache. (1-54). (Original German 1989). Fortress Press. (Personal Library).

   In his introduction to the Didache, Niederwimmer first describes the major divisions of the work, in a conventional manner (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 1). He identifies 1.1-6.3 as a "tractate on the two ways;" a liturgical section in 7.1-10.7, divided into material about baptism, fasting and prayer, and eucharist; a church order section from 11.1-15.4; and an eschatological conclusion from 16.1-8. He observes that a variety of genres exist, with each of the major divisions fitting into a different literary genre. He takes the whole to be compiled from different types of materials (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 2). Niederwimmer particularly notes that the work is not a work of theology but rather a handbook "for ecclesiastical praxis" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 2). He takes the work to have sprung from some local situation "in a time of transition and its author is clearly making an effort to harmonize ancient and revered traditions of the church with new ecclesial necessities (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 3).
   The Didache was known by mention in a variety of ancient witnesses (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 4). Eusebius (H.E. 3.25) classifies it among spurious works which are generally well known. Athanasius of Alexandria in 367 listed it among noncanonical works which are good for reading (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 4-5). Niederwimmer goes on to cite a number of later references, giving less detail. Additionally, he considers a few quotations in early church literature to be conclusively genuine citations rather than statements which are similar but not quotations (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 6). The difficulty, as Niederwimmer illustrates using Clement of Alexandria's Stromata 1.20; 100.4, is that while there is close correspondence, in this case, to Didache 3.5, there is no mention of Clement quoting a statement of another work. He may have obtained the wording elsewhere and may have any of a variety of different levels of regard for the statement's source (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 7).
   Liturgical texts may at times show a close resemblance to portions of the Didache, but Niederwimmer takes them to be similar due to a common tradition (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 9). There is a Latin quotation in Pseudo-Cyprian which also states it is "in doctrinis apostolorum." "This quotation is a welcome proof of the existence of a Latin translation of the Didache (and not merely of the tractate on the 'ways') around 300 (in Africa?), as well as of the title it bore: 'doctrinae apostolorum'" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 9).
   Niederwimmer evaluates a number of other Latin texts which may make a reference to the Didache but which may equally be drawing an idea from another source. The references are normally only a few words long (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 10 ff). Significantly, Niederwimmer discusses Augustine's use of the concept of allowing an offering to sweat in your hand (Did. 1.6), though he thinks it may have reached Augustine through a non-literary path (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 12). Niederwimmer additionally finds possible references to the Didache in Syrian witnesses. Niederwimmer considers these quotations may well have been derived from a Syriac version of the Didache (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 13).
   Niederwimmer goes on to evaluate a number of references to the Didache in later church orders (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 13). Proof of actual literary dependence is elusive. A knowledge of a Latin version of the Two Ways, however transmitted, can be documented as recently as the 11th century (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 15). There is a clear connection between the Didache and the Didascalia apostolorum from the third century, both in Syriac and Latin. Niederwimmer illustrates this with a number of quotations from the works, in parallel columns (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 15-16). Niederwimmer's conclusion is that the Didache was known and may have been used for a variety of other works, but that the precise usage is unclear (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 17).
   Niederwimmer finds evidence of knowledge of the Didache among Byzantine authors in the 12th to 14th centuries (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 17). However, the knowledge seems to be based on writings of Athanasius, not on the Didache itself (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 18).
   The identification of the Didache in the 19th century brought to light a document which had been known, but not through clear firsthand evidence for many centuries (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 19). Niederwimmer provides a brief biographical sketch of Bryennios, who found the manuscript in a parchment codex in the "Jerusalem Monastery" in Constantinople. The text is noted as being completed on Tuesday, June 11, 1056, by one "Leon, notary and sinner" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 19). Niederwimmer provides a table of contents for the entire codex, as follows.

"1. Ps. Chrysostom Synopsis Veteris et Novi Testamenti (cf. PG 56.313-86): fol. 1a-38b
2. Epistle of Barnabas: fol. 39a-51b
3. 1 Clement: fol. 70a-76a
5. A list of the ὀνόματα τῶν βιβλίων παρ' ἑβραίοις ("names of the books of the Hebrews"), with the Hebrew and Aramaic titles in Greek transcription, followed by the Greek titles of the respective book: fol. 76a
6. Didache: fol. 76a-80b
7. The letter of Maria of Cassoboloi to Ignatius of Antioch: fol. 81a-82a
8. Twelve letters of Ignatius (recensio longior): fol. 82a-120a; the text of the letters of Ignatius is followed by the colophon (see above)
Finally, there is:
9. a discussion of the genealogy of Jesus: fol. 120a-120b."

Note the colophon is the notice referring to the scribe Leon.

Bryennios' edition of the Didache was published in 1883.

   Niederwimmer mentions the double title at the start of the Didache as well as the abrupt ending followed by seven blank lines ((Niederwimmer 1998, p. 19-20). He considers it "obvious" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 20) that the text is incomplete due to the overall structure of the apocalypse and the conclusions provided in Apostolic Constitutions as well as a Georgian version. Niederwimmer observes that there is scholarly disagreement about the quality of the manuscript, whether it is a late and possibly inaccurate version or a faithful copy from a relatively early period. Without a substantial collection of other manuscripts this challenge cannot be resolved (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 20).
   The two fragmentary leaves of Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1782 from the fourth century include Didache 1.3a-1.4a and 2.7b-3.2a (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 21)). Niederwimmer considers the book to have originally contained the entire Didache, and to have been written by someone who was not highly proficient. The pages are important because they date to "approximately the time when the compiler of the Apostolic Constitutions was copying the Didache into book 7" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 22). Niederwimmer considers the documentation of the passage which some take as a later, specifically Christian, gloss to be important. The alterations in the text also suggest that the work may have had some instability. Niederwimmer illustrates this in parallel columns of the Jerusalem version and the Oxyrhynchus remains (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 22). He describes the significance of the individual variants as well.
   A Coptic fragment was identified in 1923, published subsequently in several editions. After discussing the unusual format and the date in the 5th century Niederwimmer identifies the text as Didache 10.3b-12.2a (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 24). Niederwimmer notes the various debates regarding the provenance of the text and the purpose of its presentation. There are numerous oddities in layout and dialect (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 25).
   An Ethiopic version exists, possibly translated from either Greek or Coptic (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 25). The text of Didache 8.1-2 and 11.3-13.7 exist, not in a copy of the Didache but as an element in a church order (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 26). Niederwimmer does not consider the work helpful in establishing a text, as it appears to be paraphrased.
   Niederwimmer describes a Georgian version of the Didache, copied in 1923 from a manuscript containing Georgian and Armenian texts. The manuscript is said to have been early 19th century, and to have been destroyed since 1923 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 27). This tradition, in Niederwimmer's view, is not reliable and tells us little about the history of the work.
   An indirect witness to the Didache text is found in Apostolic Constitutions when the compiler "copied the whole of the Didache in the first, major part of book 7, making some changes in the text of the source and sometimes paraphrasing. The extent of this dependency is visible in the edition by Funk" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 28, reference to Funk Didascalia 1.386-423). Niederwimmer describes the work's use of the Didache to be essentially a copy with added commentary. Niederwimmer describes a number of the editorializing elements found in Apostolic Constitutions.
   Niederwimmer moves on to consider the relationship between the Didache as a whole and the Two Ways tractate. The tractate, appearing in similar form in a number of other early Christian works, makes up the beginning of the Didache, but appears in different locations in other works (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 30). Literary relationships of these works seem likely, but the direction of the influences is an elusive matter. The material in Barnabas other than the tractate seems unrelated, in Niederwimmer's view (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 31). The tractate as found in Doctrina Apostolorum is more similar. Niederwimmer notes the publication history of Doctrina Apostolorum in some detail (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 31). He considers this work and the Didache to depend on a common source. The Doctrina Apostolorum, like Barnabas, does not contain Didache material other than the tractate. There is a partial instance of the tractate in the Apostolic Church Order (Can. 4.1-13.4 or 14), attributed to various different apostles (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 32). Again, Niederwimmer takes this to have come about through use of common source material (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 33).
   Niederwimmer briefly mentions the Life of Shenoute of Atripe, the Syntagma doctrinae, and Fides patrum, which use some form of the tractate but almost certainly apart from the Didache (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 34).
   Research on the Didache has long been predicated on an hypothesis of a basic source document (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 35). Niederwimmer suggests the Two Ways material is based on a Jewish base document (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 36). He sees this as being adopted, with a variety of modifications, as an early Christian work (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 38). A number of different works could have drawn on different recensions of the two ways tractate. Niederwimmer hypothesizes three different versions leading to the witnesses we have, and presents a chart for the influence of the various forms (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 40).
   Niederwimmer attempts a reconstruction of the Didache's origin. He takes it almost certainly to have originally been Greek, rather than Syriac (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 41). Counter to Audet's hypothesis of a number of phases of redaction and interpolation, Niederwimmer thinks a "model of the evolution of the work in stages at the hand of one and the same author (to whom is added the interpolator)" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 42) is more likely. The Didachist drew from a number of sources, including the two ways material, tradition about baptism and eucharist, tradition about reception of itinerants, and apocalyptic information (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 44). He compiled the material, expanding it as necessary, and interpreted the ideas. Niederwimmer continues by giving a detailed version of the possible steps of assembly and growth. The sources and redaction of materials from Didache 7.1 on is less clear, as we really don't have much information about a possible source. Niederwimmer considers a good deal of it as redactional in nature (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 45). Niederwimmer considers much of 11.4-15.4 to come from a written document, with only brief interventions by the author (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 46). The eschatological conclusion appears to come from a fairly old tradition.
   Niederwimmer questions whether actual New Testament texts are in use in the Didache. He observes that any New Testament allusions or quotations would be found at the end of the redaction process (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 48). It is, however, unclear whether the Didachist actually used the New Testament. Niederwimmer briefly analyzes the four passages which use the term εὐαγγέλιον (8.2, 11.3, 15.3, 15.4) (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 49). The references are all similar in form and express the same idea (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 49). The content given of the gospel in the Didache refers not to christology, but to words of Jesus (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 50). The source may be an oral tradition, though Niederwimmer considers this less definite in 15.4 (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 51). Niederwimmer considers whether the source referenced is the same in all four instances. If so, it is possible the source is a written gospel.
   The time and place of composition for the Didache is challenging, in part because of its apparently composite nature (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 52). The component sources may come from different times and places. Due to the lack of clearly defined distinctions among the different church offices, Niederwimmer thinks we "cannot move too far into the second century" (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 52). He is willing to suggest 110-120 C.E., but as a hypothesis (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 53). The place of composition is less distinct. Egypt, Syria, and Palestine all emerge as plausible locations (Niederwimmer 1998, p. 53).

0 Comments

Brief Conclusions - the Didache

A Picture of the End

Church Operations

Liturgy for Baptism and Eucharist

Before Baptism

A Book with Two Titles

A Detailed Introduction to Study of the Didache

Help Fuel This Ministry by Clicking Here!

About Throwing Inkwells

Blog Feeds

Categories