Category: Voobus 1968 - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

Origins of Eucharistic Prayers

1/27/2023

1/27/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Five: Prehistory of the Eucharistic Prayers." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 159-171.

Voöbus closes his book with an attempt to trace the origins of the eucharistic prayers, which strike him as being "very archaic" in some elements (Voöbus 1968, 159). Terms such as "the vine of David," the reference to "the Name," and the idea of God "tabernacling" with His people are among these. The elements seem to indicate Jewish thought, including that of the earliest Christian groups. Voöbus takes this to be the case especially in the designation "Servant" for Jesus (Voöbus 1968, 160).

Though it is tempting to take the prayers as adapted Jewish table prayers for an agape meal, this is not acceptable to Voöbus. He is not sure we could prove that Christian liturgical needs could be supplied by Hellenistic Judaism, a proposition which has not been well demonstrated (Voöbus 1968, 161). Moreover, the entire proposition is based on drawing material from different sources bit by bit rather than the more natural composition of new material inspired by older material.

Rather than follow this pathway, Voöbus looks for actual conceptual background elements. The prayer over the cup follows the pattern of a traditional Jewish thanksgiving over a cup. However, in the Didache it has been thoroughly re-purposed to reflect on the gift of salvation in Christ (Voöbus 1968, 163). Likewise, the prayer over the bread takes its start from a Jewish thanksgiving. However, here it is so repurposed the bread is not important. Rather, the invisible gifts of God are at the center (Voöbus 1968, 164). The significance of God's dwelling among his people is similarly present in Jewish thought but it has been amplified in Christian thought to the point of God not only dwelling in the temple but in the blievers (Voöbus 1968, 164). Again, the work of God to draw people into unity is clearly a Jewish idea. However, it now takes on a spiritual significance, with the unity being on the spiritual plane rather than the physical (Voöbus 1968, 165).

The prayer of Didache 10.5 has been compared with the Jewish Birkat hamazon, but Voöbus observes in the Didache there is an introductory fomula which is not found in conjunction with the Jewish prayer (Voöbus 1968, 166). He concludes that the prayer is not borrowed, though the schema is familiar from Jewish thought. It bears a resemblance to a zekor from the Hebrew Psalter (Voöbus 1968, 167). The pattern, which would have been a well knwon form, was adapted, but adapted thoroughly to Christian use (Voöbus 1968, 168).

Eucharist as a Gathering

1/26/2023

1/26/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Four: The Source of Didache IX.4." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 137-157.

The history of the liturgical prayer in Didache 9.4 has been a matter of some debate. Voöbus discusses a presumption that there is a relationship between John's Gospel and the Didache, which might help understand the context of the prayer (Voöbus 1968, 137). However, as Voöbus describes, if the concept of gathering the scattered grain in the Didache comes from Jesus' gathering of he bread fragments from feeding the multitude, the entire message is changed. It ecomes no longer a sign of unity but a sign of multiplied provision (Voöbus 1968, 138). To evaluate the passage, Voöbus takes the elements one at a time.

The grain, in Didache 9.4, is viewed as "scattered." The critical argument which associates this with John says that in John 11:52 the people are described as scattered (Voöbus 1968, 139). The word is not in doubt, but its meaning might be. In Matthew 25:24, the same word is used in a sense of "sowing" or "planting." This is a sharply different metaphor, as planting is a purposeful placement of seed. Taking it solely as a destructive dispersal is unwarranted (Voöbus 1968, 140).

Didache 9.4 further says the grain is "gathered" in the bread. Because the term can be used of many stages of the progress from standing grain to having bread, Voöbus is hesitant to declare a clear equivalent with the use in John (Voöbus 1968, 141). In a wide variety of early Christian writings, the gathering into one is not used for picking up fragments to put them in a basket (Voöbus 1968, 142).

Didache 9.4 speaks of the grain scattered "in the mountains." The scholarship which attempts to find parallels with John looks to John 6:3, where the setting is on a mountain (Voöbus 1968, 144). Voöbus observes that the mention of mountains in the two passages serves a completely different function. The image does not create any sort of parallel, a fact which forcefully undermines the argument for dependence (Voöbus 1968, 145).

The word "fragment" used in Didache 9.4 is used to suggest dependence on John. The Didache uses it in the singular, while John describes multiple fragments. Of greater importance to Voöbus is the fact that the parallel in Apostolic Constitutions uses ἄρτος (bread) rather thank κλάσμα (fragment) (Voöbus 1968, 147). This move suggests that any influence of John didn't seem strong over time. In fact, "bread" is typically used rather than "fragment." Voöbus concludes that the Didache reading is the secondary use, rather than a primary (Voöbus 1968, 148).

In conclusion, Voöbus finds that the gathering in John is looked at from a completely different orientation than that in Didache 9. He does not think there is adequate evidence for dependence (Voöbus 1968, 149). The subjects are not the same.

Voöbus concedes that there are significant "affinities" between the Didache ajd John's Gospel (Voöbus 1968, 152). There are many characteristic terms in common. Yet Voöbus maintains the terms and even metaphors which are used to describe early Christianity will rather naturally appear in multiple works (Voöbus 1968, 153). Their roots likely exist throughout the underlying concepts of Christianity which antedate all these documents. Voöbus takes the concepts of the Lord's Supper to be among these early liturgical drivers of metaphor and vocabulary (Voöbus 1968, 156).

Images in the Eucharist

1/25/2023

1/25/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Three: Eucharistic Imagery." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 113-135.

Voöbus finds a number of interesting themes within the eucharistic portions of the Didache. In this chapter he explores seven of them. First, 10.1 speaks of God's name tabernacled in our hearts. Voöbus takes the concept to already be archaic, based on the way it is referred to (Voöbus 1968, 113). Voöbus understands reference to the "Name" as a claim of Christ, who here is the world's creator (Voöbus 1968, 114). Interestingly, Voöbus does not connect the concept of "Name" with the Trinitarian formula, as many have done in an analysis of baptism. On the contrary, he urges caution in interpretation. It may be an instance of eisegesis to read additional concepts into the prayer (Voöbus 1968, 116). Rather, we may need to be content with a simple understanding of the Name o God as His self revelation. We are not told what aspect of His self-revelation is to be our focus, but we know He is present (Voöbus 1968, 117). Voöbus further concludes that God's presence is in us, as well as in the rest of creation (Voöbus 1968, 119). In practical terms, then, God's presence in His people draws them to unity in their hope of eternal life.

In addition to the gift of life, the thanksgiving over the loaf acknowledges knowledge as a gift (Voöbus 1968, 120). This is a concept fraught with problems, as Voöbus acknowledges. While we embrace the value of knowledge, the term became a catchword which described the Gnostic heresies (Voöbus 1968, 121). Yet in the Didache there is no hint of Gnosticism. The knowledge is mediated by the presence of the Messiah, not by our special enlightenment.

A third concept is that of life, also acknowledged in the first thanksgiving over bread as a gift from the Father (Voöbus 1968, 122). Life here is eternal, bringing us immortality. Voöbus notes that eternal life is not a concept found in Jewish prayers. However, it is clearly associated with the eucharist. Voöbus even associates it "as a catchword for all that the Christian religion embodies" (Voöbus 1968, 123). Of importance is that the life is not pictured as future, but as already present.

Fourth, Voöbus discusses the concept of "the vine of David," which he considers "very archaic" (Voöbus 1968, 124). The term, which is relatively obscure, may refer to the Messianic role of Jesus, the son of David. Yet, Voöbus does not take it to refer to Jesus (Voöbus 1968, 125). It rather seems to be a gift brought or manifested by Him, but distinct from Him. The vine typically served as an image of Israel or the process of the history of salvation. Voöbus finds this as a common symbol in Judaism (Voöbus 1968, 125). The imagery in early Christianity was of the Christian community replacing Judaism (Voöbus 1968, 126). This is applied to the eucharist in the passage.

A fifth concept is that of perfection, as the prayer is that God would perfect His people in His love (Voöbus 1968, 126). Voöbus considers this text to require us to consider "perfection" in biblical and Semitic terms rather than through Greek philosophy. "[I]t is a purely religious term for total devotion to the way of God" (Voöbus 1968, 127). As God purifies His people, they grow as a community which is obedient to Him. The concepts of holiness, perfection, and God's love are clearly linked not only in the Didache but also in the Fourth Gospel, which is of interest to Voöbus (Voöbus 1968, 128).

Sixth, Voöbus notes the centrality of unity in the eucharist. Within the whole prayer, the unity of the church is a recurring theme (Voöbus 1968, 129). Gathering people as the grain of many hills is gathered in bread is a striking image. Voöbus sees this not in the Gnostic view of scattered souls being enlightened but rather in the view of the remnant of Israel dispersed and then gathered (Voöbus 1968, 130). The whole community of the church is gathered as God's remnant.

Voöbus finally directs us to consider the overall profile of the eucharistic passages (Voöbus 1968, 132). Of note, the rite seems to have no focus on the body and blood of Jesus, but rather on the unity of His people. The sacrifice of Jesus is absent (Voöbus 1968, 133). As eucharistic liturgy developed, this apparent oversight was quickly brought in. At the time of the Didache, the thanksgiving was for being together in Christ, receiving His gifs (Voöbus 1968, 134).

Eucharistic Celebration in the Didache

1/24/2023

1/24/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter Two: Celebration of the Eucharist." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 85-112.

In this chapter Voöbus reviews the Didache's description of the eucharist in detail. He considers the document "priceless" because it "is unique in granting us a more complete idea of the celebration of the Lord's Supper than any of the most ancient documents at our disposal" (Voöbus 1968, 85).

The material opens with a thanksgiving for the cup. While Voöbus would like to trace any materials from which this grew, he cannot identify any means to do so (Voöbus 1968, 86). He then moves on to a rubric and prayer pertaining to the loaf. The themes of "life and knowledge" may have been substituted for one theme, "resurrection." "Knowledge" is absent from the Apostolic Constitutions and may have been added to the Didache text later. While "resurrection" may have been present where "life" now appears is a matter of speculation, as "life" is represented both in the Didache and Apostolic Constitutions (Voöbus 1968, 86) The third prayer asks that God's people would be gathered together as the scatterd κλάσμα was gathered from fields (Voöbus 1968, 87). The term is surprising as it was not the typical description of bread, but rather as a fragment of a consecrated wafer used in liturgy (Voöbus 1968, 88). Further, it is rare in antiquity to refer to a gathering "into the kingdom" using the term βασιλεία. Voöbus considers this a challenging problem (Voöbus 1968, 89).

After the actual meal the liturgy concludes witha threefold prayer, each part ending with a doxology (Voöbus 1968, 90). Voöbus notes that a thanksgiving for knowledge may be an insertion, as it is not present in Apostolic Constitutions. There is some question whether the concept in the second petition should be that of God giving food to "man" or to "men" (Voöbus 1968, 91). This usage may reflect an Aramaic background. It is not plural in the Coptic fragment. The third petition is not strongly parallel with the first two. Voöbus finds a similarity to Greek liturgies but does not htink they influenced this prayer. He thinks, rather, the idea is of an older origin (Voöbus 1968, 92). The extent of an explanation he gives is a reference to Peterson, Probleme der Didache-überlieferung, p. 172.

Again, Voöbus notes a distinction between use of the word βασιλεία as opposed to ἐκκλησία in prayers for the church (Voöbus 1968, 93). He considers it a matter of later adjustment to the text.

The eucharistic liturgy in the Didache has a number of details which Voöbus considers important. First is the absence of any Words of Institution (Voöbus 1968, 94). He considers this an indicator of a very early form of liturgy. A second feature Voöbus notes is the centrality of the bread in the liturgy (Voöbus 1968, 95). Third, the ritual begins with the cup. This is not the pattern normally found in antiquity, which begins with the bread. The order in the Didache suggests a period during which there may have been variation in the order. Fourth, the lack of a consecration formula is noteworthy (Voöbus 1968, 96). Voöbus does not necessarily consider this a problem. In his evaluation, the prayers of the epiclesis indicate something central to the eucharist - the presence of Jesus (Voöbus 1968, 97-99). This may be an answer to the practice he sees prevalent of reading significance of a later liturgical development back into an earlier period.

The eucharistic celebration can be identified through the text of the Didache. Voöbus finds in the text a prayer of invocation, one over the cup, and a larger prayer over the loaf (Voöbus 1968, 100). Voöbus observes that in some Jewish meal traditions the bread is mostly distributed but some is set aside for later. This would allow for a scenario in which the bread comes before the cup. The meal is described as satisfying. Voöbus maintains that we can easily conceive of a eucharistic celebration within the confines of a fellowship meal (Voöbus 1968, 101).

There may be evidence in the prayers of a liturgy including congregational response. The three prayers contain doxologies which Voöbus considers may represent a congregational respons (Voöbus 1968, 102). Based on practices which are later described we can expect the prayers and responses may well be rather a thumbnail sketch of what actually happened, includign the possibility of hymnody, chanted Psalms, etc. (Voöbus 1968, 103). The variation of wording among the Greek and Coptic record, as well as variations in the Latin of Apostolic Constitutions suggests some latitude in the understood practice (Voöbus 1968, 104).

Voöbus finds the requirement of holiness for participation to be striking (Voöbus 1968, 106). If one should depart from holiness, that holiness is restored through repentance. Voöbus takes this to be a factor of the unified nature of the church. The people have been called into unity. If that unity is broken it is a problem for the entire community (Voöbus 1968, 107). Within an understanding of a unified Christian community, the concept of "sacrifice" is applied to both the eucharist and to the overall sacrifice for sins. Damaging the purity which is present in the sacrificial life is tantamount to harming the whole body (Voöbus 1968, 108). Confession and purification restores the unity of the community. This explains the concept of holiness being placed parallel to confession of sins, also a prerequisite for participation in the eucharist (Voöbus 1968, 109).

We are given little information abotu the actual administration of the Eucharist. The most clear rule is that prophets could pray however they wanted (Voöbus 1968, 110). Bishops, however, were togoven the liturgy, though Voöbus considers this to still have an element of congregational preference (Voöbus 1968, 111). The eucharist is on the Lord's day, but possibly on other occasions as well. All in all, the directions are not terribly specific.

Source of Eucharist in the Didache

1/23/2023

1/23/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 2: On the Rite of the Eucharist." "Chapter One: The Character of the Source." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 63-83.

Voöbus questions what is actually represented in the Didache's eucharistic passages. It is clearly a ritual meal. Is it the eucharist proper or rather an agape meal (Voöbus 1968, 63)? Some analysis which has been done has reached conclusions without adequate evidence. Voöbus therefore attempts to evaluate the actual material evidence in the text.

In Voöbus' analysis, both of the Didache's eucharistic prayers are constructed the same and have extensive parallelism. He takes them to be essentially identical (Voöbus 1968, 65). If they have to do with an agape meal, then, the question must be raised. Why is there no teaching about the rite of communion (Voöbus 1968, 66)? For this reason, Voöbus concludes they must be related to communion.

The language describes something which is clearly to be considered sacred. The imagery of the bread of life suggests the eucharist rather clearly (Voöbus 1968, 67). Voöbus further sees the placement of this material after baptism to reflect not only the logical place in the life of the Christian, but also the typical liturgical order. The second prayer specifically speaks of food and drink leading to eternal life (Voöbus 1968, 68). It is a holy meal of great importance.

Voöbus observes that the importance extends to the point of the exclusion of outsiders, including catechumens. Those who are not baptized are not a part of this meal (Voöbus 1968, 69). This further suggests the communion, rather than a fellowship meal. Though there are elements of what is apparently a physically satisfying meal, Voöbus sees no reason to insist that the meal proper and the sacramental rite of communion were necessarily separated muych earlier than the mid second century (Voöbus 1968, 70). To do so is arbitrary and unnecessary based on the data.

Voöbus observes that some scholars impose later practice upon Didache 10.6, and relocate it to be prior to 10.5, as an instruction for the congregation to approach the altar and receive communion (Voöbus 1968, 71). Of importance is our understanding of "let him come." Voöbus sees the move to treat it as a direction for reception as an unnecessary confusion (Voöbus 1968, 72). He takes it to refer rather to a coming together around the whole eucharistic act. Those who come are called to be repentant. It is a matter of preparation to receive the sacrament (Voöbus 1968, 73).

Didache XIV may make reference to the eucharist, in that it mentions a breaking of bread (Voöbus 1968, 75). In chapter 14 it is clear that a confession of sins must be present. The participant is to be holy. This does not differ from the materials in chapters 9-10 in essence, but it is spelled out differently. Here the event is called a sacrifice (θυσία), while it is not so called earlier (Voöbus 1968, 76). Yet it is common for prayers or observance of a holy life to be considered a sacrifice. This term does not necessarily set chapter 14 apart.

Voöbus concludes, then, that the language in chapters 9-10 and 14 refer to a rite of commnion, and that there is no compelling reason to drive a possibly arbitrary distinction between the different descriptions (Voöbus 1968, 77). The existence of chapter 14 and its position in the work remains a significant question, but not a quest for a different ritual. Voöbus finds a possible reason for the location of the chapter 14 material to be the author's tendency to touch on a theme, depart to a seemingly tangential theme, then return to the original one (Voöbus 1968, 78). This could well explain the structure of this material also.

The redaction history of the Didache prayers may also shed light on the purpose. Voöbus notes that the apparent later insertion of the prayer concernying myron is significant. Its location with these prayers of thanksgiving and its content indicates an understanding of a ritual eucharist as opposed to a fellowship meal (Voöbus 1968, 79). This understanding in the Apostolic Constitutions signals continuity with the earlier understanding. The liturgical tradition also ties the prayers to the eucharist, as they appear in the consecration in Serapion's anaphora (Voöbus 1968, 80). Voöbus finds additional eucharistic prayers which maintain the same structure. Amid this evidence there is one instance in Pseudo-Athanasius where the structure is used for a table prayer (Voöbus 1968, 81). However, Voöbus considers it possible that a eucharistic prayer could be modified for this use.

While liturgy tends to resist change, Voöbus does observe that changes occur. A eucharistic prayer could certainly become a table prayer. Yet, in general, the prayers from Didache 9, 10, and 14 retain their force as eucharistic prayers in use over time (Voöbus 1968, 82). This is further consistent with a view that eucharist and an agape meal were once together and gradually became distinct from one another.

Baptismal Anointing Prayer

1/20/2023

1/20/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 1: On the Rite of Baptism." "Chapter Four: Prehistory of the Ointment Prayer." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 51-60.

In this chapter Voöbus asks whether it is possible to trace an older form of the ointment prayer in the Coptic fragment of the Didache. E. Peterson proposed a reconstruction, strongly influenced by the Apostolic Constitutions. Voöbus considers the dependence proposed by Peterson to be too great Voöbus51). The Coptic papyrus itself is deserving of consideration. Voöbus thinks the recension of the Apostolic Constitutions represents an explication of the Coptic prayer (Voöbus 1968, 52). Yet this does not necessarily confirm that the Coptic version is the original. Nor does it confirm that the prayer was originally part of the Didache.

If the ointment prayer is an original part of the Didache, Voöbus considers how it would fit in (Voöbus 1968, 54). The form is very like a eucharistic prayer. Omission itself seems surprising. Some have suggested it was antiquated and no longer served a liturgical purpose. This could result in its suppression (Voöbus 1968, 55). Yet it would have made more sense for a redactor to simply edit the prayer to be in harmony with current practice.

Voöbus notesthat the prayer is introduced with, "thus as we say" (Voöbus 1968, 56). This suggests the prayer, already in existence, was inserted here. The wording of the prayer is relatively awkward. Yet in its words it clearly states the availability of a number of sacramental gifts. These gifts are given to the people of early Christianity as something precious (Voöbus 1968, 57). The prayer is located in a group of topically related prayers identified as eucharistia (Voöbus 1968, 58). This, to Voöbus, does not seem entirely consistent with the pattern of the rest of the Didache. He considers it may not have been original, or that it could have been moved for some reason in the editorial process. This process is largely invisible to us. However, Voöbus considers the various statements about baptism, from chapter seven, to be evidence of layers of editorial work (Voöbus 1968, 59). In Voöbus' view, as the rituals grew and changed, statements which acknowledged those practices were added. He sees this as following different patterns in different locations (Voöbus 1968, 60).

Prayer for Baptismal Anointing

1/19/2023

1/19/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 1: On the Rite of Baptism." "Chapter Three: The Ointment Prayer." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 41-50.

Voöbus observes that, in conjunction with the baptismal ritual, an anointing with oil appears in the Apostolic Constitutions (Voöbus 1968, 41). This is also reflected in a Coptic papyrus fragment of the Didache, where a prayer for anointing appears appended to chapters 9-10. In both instances the prayer is associated with allowing prophets to pray as they wish.

The prayer is associated with an aromatic ointment or a perfume (Voöbus 1968, 42). The interpretation is not clear, according to Voöbus, expect that the text of the Apostolic Constitutions identifies it as a prayer associated with the aroma. The question of what specific use of ointment is meant is more difficult (Voöbus 1968, 43). Voöbus discusses the common use of anointing and praying for the sick. This would not intuitively be connected with the Eucharist, where the passage appears. However, ointment was also associated with baptism. Voöbus finds such an association in Jewish baptismal practice, as well as in Jewish ceremonial meal practices (Voöbus 1968, 44). Unfortunately, this fails to create clarity in the view.

A search for the function of the anointing is not immediately rewarding. Voöbus finds that the Apostolic Constitutions makes mention of "the immortal eon" (Voöbus 1968, 45). This does suggest the dichotomy between the present, fallen age and that of immortality. From this foundation, Voöbus is able to move to the concept of baptism, where one moves from the former to the latter (Voöbus 1968, 46). When asking about a reason for the choice of a word related to fragrance, Voöbus finds more associations. A Syriac version of Acts describes a fragrance along with the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Voöbus 1968, 46). Paradise is regularly described in terms of aromatic plants. Voöbus thus finds good smells as related to moving into the heavenly realms as one does in baptism (Voöbus 1968, 47). Fragrance therefore can be well seen as a concomitant with baptism. Voöbus notes that the ointment prayer was grouped with various prayers of thanksgiving, the meaning of εὐχαριστία (Voöbus 1968, 49). When used in later documents, "oil of the eucharistia" is descriptive of anointing at baptism.

Baptismal Ritual

1/18/2023

1/18/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 1: On the Rite of Baptism." "Chapter Two: Prehistory of the Tradition." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 29-39.

Voöbus opens this chapter with the question of a Jewish origin for Didache chapter seven. He calls in the view of E. Peterson, who "contends that the discussion on various kinds of water has nothing to do with baptism at all but with the washings for purification" (Voöbus 1968, 29). It is possible that the formulaic patterns for ceremonial washings could be borrowed from Judaism. The case may further be made for a relationship to Jewish baptism of proselytes (Voöbus 1968, 30). On the other hand, Voöbus does suggest that making the compiler of the Didache dependent on sources for all his specific wording is an insult to his abilities as an author.

Peterson had further suggested that Didache chapter seven was a revision instilling a particular dogmatic change, by which an anointing with oil was removed from the chapter (Voöbus 1968, 31). Voöbus observes that Peterson considered the concession of baptism by affusion to be introduced in an illogical way. In comparison with the Apostolic Constitutions, we see the Constitutions speaking of two different ointments. This is in contrast to the Didache's use of two types of water for baptism. Yet Voöbus does not consider it necessary to make a claim that Apostolic Constitutions contains everything that the Didache once held (Voöbus 1968, 32). The simple fact is that we don't have adequate information to make such a claim.

Because redaction history is arelatively controversial topic, Voöbus proposes further study, but in the realm of comparative analysis of the process in similar documents for which some of the redactional details can be identified (Voöbus 1968, 33). This would allow scholars to evaluate existing texts without calling them into undue question. In particular, Voöbus considers it unlikely that additions or omissions would be carried on in a haphazard manner. Redactors should be assumed to be competent and thoughtful.

Even as we question the type of redaction which may have taken place, it is necessary to recognize that the very nature of a liturgical manual suggests redaction. Voöbus does not in any way suggest the materials were invented for use in the Didache (Voöbus 1968, 34). The problem he sees is application of adequate tools to identify various layers. The concession of baptism by affusion may or may no tbe a later interpolation.

The Trinitarian formula of baptism may shed light on the redaction history. Voöbus note that outside of Matthew's Gospel, the New Testament does not reflect a specific instance of the Trinitarian formula in use for baptism (Voöbus 1968, 35). Evidence of the Didache's dependence on Matthew for the formula is inconclusive. Voöbus would prefer to view the record in the Didache as influenced by actual ritual practice rather than Scriptural statements (Voöbus 1968, 36). Underlying the formulaic wording Voöbus finds an alternate wording which is well represented in Scripture. Didache 9.5 identifies people as "baptized into the name of the Lord" (Voöbus 1968, 38). Voöbus recognizes that the statement of 9.5 is likely older and is certainly simpler. It describes the exact same action. Further, it appears in Paul and in Acts. The Lord is identified clearly with Jesus, and, provided the understanding of a Trinity is present, the natural conclusion one would make is that the referent is identical (Voöbus 1968, 39). This fits with our understanding of the liturgucal practice and the theology it represents. An addition of a Trinitarian statement would represent a clarification, not a theological change.

Baptismal Tradition and the Didache

1/17/2023

1/17/23
Scholarly Reflections

Voöbus, Arthur. "Part 1: On the Rite of Baptism." "Chapter One: Tradition Regarding Baptism." Liturgical Traditions in the Didache. Stockholm: ETSE, 1968, 17-27.

Voöbus notes that the Didache's chapter pertaining to baptism (chapter seven) is relatively short, and, further, it gives relatively little indication of the nature of catechesis preparatory for baptism (Voöbus 1968, 17). While there is a statement about speaking the materials from chapters 1-6, it is unclear whether that is a part of the baptismal ceremony or an outline for prior catechesis. Voöbus takes the command as an indication of catechetical instruction (Voöbus 1968, 18). This would be consistent with what we know from other sources about catechesis in Jewish proselyte baptism or Jewish Christianity. Of note to Voöbus is that the material content of the catechesis is moral in nature, not dealing with Christ and the atonement or other highly theological elements (Voöbus 1968, 19).

The purpose of a fast prior to baptism is not made clear, but the duration of one or two days is, as well as the call for as many involved in the baptism as can participate in the fast. This is more clear guidance than is found in other sources(Voöbus 1968, 20-21).

In the baptism itself, the candidate is baptized "into the name" of the Lord. Voöbus sees this as indicating a transfer into the service of the Lord (Voöbus 1968, 21). If possible, the baptism is to use "living water." Voöbus interprets this as being either water from a stream or from a well (Voöbus 1968, 22). If living water is not available, it is possible to use other water, whether cold or warm. Voöbus notes that some scholarship suggests it is warmed for children or the sick (Voöbus 1968, 23). However, he finds a prevailing pattern within Judaism to refer to water which has lost its original temperature as "warm." This would apply to water in a reservoir or a cistern (Voöbus 1968, 24). A mode of baptism, such as immersion, is not specified. However, if no adequate supply of water is present, water may be poured over the head three times (Voöbus 1968, 26).

Voöbus observes that we are not told who would perform a baptism, or whether there was a consecration of the water (Voöbus 1968, 26). We are also not told what to expect as far as the meaning of baptism. Though it is a prerequisite for communion, we are not given any additional expectations (Voöbus 1968, 27).