Vööbus, A. “Regarding the Background of the Liturgical Traditions in the Didache: The Question of Literary Relation between Didache IX, 4 and the Fourth Gospel.” Vigiliae Christianae 23 (1969), 81-87.
Vööbus considers the Didache and alleged dependence on the Fourth Gospel, partly as a response to contentions begun by J.A. Robinson, who considered the liturgical passages especially dependent on the Fourth Gospel. Vööbus asks, “what basis is there for the contention of literary dependence and of what value is it?” (Vööbus 1969, 81). He grants that there is a reference to mountains and fragments. This is not unique to John 6:3. It is also important that the passage in the Didache speaks of scattered grain, while John’s passage has the mountain as a setting for teaching (Vööbus 1969, 82).
The strong connection between John 6:3 and Didache 9:4 is the word κλάσμα. Vööbus asks whether the term was taken from John, which uses the word here in the plural. He considers this a tenuous relationship at best (Vööbus 1969, 82). The prayer, at least as it is found in other resources thought to depend on the Didache, uses ἄρτος rather than κλάσμα. (Vööbus 1969, 83). Vööbus therefore rejects dependence. He further reminds us that the Greek manuscript of 1056 may well have undergone some changes in wording over the centuries.
Because the Didache material is largely taken over into Apostolic Constitutions, Vööbus considers this relationship as well. He sees no reflections of the Fourth Gospel in this passage (Vööbus 1969, 84). The same is true in Serapion and in Athanasius. When there are differences from the Didache text, Vööbus finds them referring to making bread, rather than any reference to John’s Gospel (Vööbus 1969, 85).
Vööbus further considers that the author of the Fourth Gospel was certainly sophisticated enough to use one basket and a gathering together if he had intended to make such a point in the narrative (Vööbus 1969, 85). The idea of the passage, rather, is that preservation of all parts is important to God. Vööbus concludes that John’s Gospel does purposely use the feeding of the multitude to make us remember the eucharist (Vööbus 1969, 86).
Vööbus asks whether the passage in Didache 9:4 also is governed by the idea of a foreshadowed eucharist (Vööbus 1969, 86). The prayer speaks of gathering the scattered people of God, rather than gathering bread. In John, the sacred material of the sacrament is gathered. “In the Didache however the subject matter is not the sacramental substance but the congregation itself” (Vööbus 1969, 87). Therefore, Vööbus concludes that Didache 9:4 and John 6:3 are not dependent on each other in any way.
Vööbus considers the Didache and alleged dependence on the Fourth Gospel, partly as a response to contentions begun by J.A. Robinson, who considered the liturgical passages especially dependent on the Fourth Gospel. Vööbus asks, “what basis is there for the contention of literary dependence and of what value is it?” (Vööbus 1969, 81). He grants that there is a reference to mountains and fragments. This is not unique to John 6:3. It is also important that the passage in the Didache speaks of scattered grain, while John’s passage has the mountain as a setting for teaching (Vööbus 1969, 82).
The strong connection between John 6:3 and Didache 9:4 is the word κλάσμα. Vööbus asks whether the term was taken from John, which uses the word here in the plural. He considers this a tenuous relationship at best (Vööbus 1969, 82). The prayer, at least as it is found in other resources thought to depend on the Didache, uses ἄρτος rather than κλάσμα. (Vööbus 1969, 83). Vööbus therefore rejects dependence. He further reminds us that the Greek manuscript of 1056 may well have undergone some changes in wording over the centuries.
Because the Didache material is largely taken over into Apostolic Constitutions, Vööbus considers this relationship as well. He sees no reflections of the Fourth Gospel in this passage (Vööbus 1969, 84). The same is true in Serapion and in Athanasius. When there are differences from the Didache text, Vööbus finds them referring to making bread, rather than any reference to John’s Gospel (Vööbus 1969, 85).
Vööbus further considers that the author of the Fourth Gospel was certainly sophisticated enough to use one basket and a gathering together if he had intended to make such a point in the narrative (Vööbus 1969, 85). The idea of the passage, rather, is that preservation of all parts is important to God. Vööbus concludes that John’s Gospel does purposely use the feeding of the multitude to make us remember the eucharist (Vööbus 1969, 86).
Vööbus asks whether the passage in Didache 9:4 also is governed by the idea of a foreshadowed eucharist (Vööbus 1969, 86). The prayer speaks of gathering the scattered people of God, rather than gathering bread. In John, the sacred material of the sacrament is gathered. “In the Didache however the subject matter is not the sacramental substance but the congregation itself” (Vööbus 1969, 87). Therefore, Vööbus concludes that Didache 9:4 and John 6:3 are not dependent on each other in any way.
RSS Feed