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.